Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/ScottDavis and User talk:Susvolans: Difference between pages

Revision as of 14:33, 27 October 2005

Revision as of 16:10, 22 November 2005

Line 1:

{{add|Add a new comment here}}

===[[User:ScottDavis|ScottDavis]]===

'''[{{SERVER}}{{localurl:{{NAMESPACE}}:<nowiki>Requests_for_adminship/ScottDavis</nowiki>|action=edit}} Vote here] '''

'''(3/0/0) ending <nowiki>13:37</nowiki> 3rd November, 2005 (UTC)'''

== Archives ==

{{User|ScottDavis}} – ScottDavis is a committed contributor who has done much good work over his 10 months at Wikipedia. With over [http://kohl.wikimedia.org/~kate/cgi-bin/count_edits?hash=9bae33852333a6c3462ba936402dcf698a2f03a0&user=ScottDavis&dbname=enwiki 5,300 edits] in every namespace, users can be assured of his dedication and extensive interaction. Scott's work on Australia-related articles has been invaluable, and he has taken the [[Wikipedia:Australian Collaboration of the Fortnight|Australian Collaboration of the Fortnight]] under his wing -- in fact, he revived it. He is frequently seen combating vandalism, so extending admin capabilities to Scott would be very worthwhile in that regard. I can attest to his integrity; in his time here, I have never seen him be anything other than polite and constructive. This clearly is a case of ''he should have been one months ago''. [[User:Cyberjunkie|Cyberjunkie]] | [[User_talk:Cyberjunkie|Talk]] 09:49, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

[[User talk:Susvolans/Archive 1|August 2004 to September 2005]]

== Thank you ==

:''Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:''

::I '''Accept''' the nomination. --[[User:ScottDavis|Scott Davis]] ^{[[User talk:ScottDavis|Talk]]} 13:37, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for speaking up on the behalf of a user you did not even know. I appreciate your efforts for justice. Should you have any lingering concerns, I encourage you to come to my talk page and join the dialog there on what has occured. Discussion is the best way to calm stormy waters. [[User:TheChief|<font color=#0000ff>The</font><font color=#ff7f00>Chief</font>]] [[User_talk:TheChief|(<font color=#0000ff>Pow</font><font color=#ff7f00>Wow</font>)]] 17:30, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

'''Support'''

#'''Strong Support''' as nominator.--[[User:Cyberjunkie|Cyberjunkie]] | [[User_talk:Cyberjunkie|Talk]] 09:50, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

#'''Strong Support''' as seconder(!)--[[User:Vcxlor|vcxlor]] 10:07, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

#'''Support''' per nomination. [[User:JPD|JPD]] [[User talk:JPD|(talk)]] 12:43, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

#'''Support''' [[User:Bluemoose|<font color=darkgreen>'''''Martin'''''</font>]] 14:15, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

#'''Support''' --[[User:Aranda56|JAranda]]'' | [[User talk:Aranda56|watz sup]] 14:33, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

'''Oppose'''

#

==Ignore all rules==

'''Neutral'''

First, obviously, if rule 5 were deleted, it would become four pillars rather than five. I think that any change to the four/five pillars should be well discussed on its talk page first. Failure to do so would be to ignore all rules, which could be seen as [[WP:POINT]].

#

I personally think that the five pillars document is fine, because it says that there are no rules other than those listed, and the writers' rules of engagement are one of the pillars. The real problem is that Ignore All Rules is the wrong summary of the guideline, and is sufficiently wrong as to be a destructive title, because it can easily be read as meaning that one can ignore civility. [[User:Robert McClenon|Robert McClenon]] 18:16, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

'''Comments'''

*

Thanks Susvolans - I'm just taking baby steps for now [[User:Redkaty|Redkaty]] 14:38, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

'''Questions for the candidate'''<br />

''A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:''

:'''1.''' What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? (Please read the page about [[Wikipedia:administrators|administrators]] and the [[Wikipedia:administrators' reading list|administrators' reading list]].)

::A. Certainly combatting vandalism. While I rarely monitor Recent Changes, I do keep a wide range of articles on my watchlist (every page I edit gets at least a few days on my watchlist, most get quite a bit longer), and frequently find vandalism on less well-known articles as well as the high-profile articles. I will help other users with whatever problems they have, particularly where moving articles to better names is blocked by non-null histories in a redirect at the proper name. I expect I will also become involved in [[WP:CFD|Categories for deletion/renaming]], as I consider accurately categorising all articles to be important.

==Final decision==

:'''2.''' Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?

The arbitration committee has reached a final decision in the [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Louis Epstein]] case [[User:Raul654|&rarr;Raul654]] 02:12, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

::A.

::*[[Murray River crossings]] is an article I researched and created from scratch. I also wrote most of [[Rail transport in South Australia]]. I ensured that all [[Governors of South Australia]] have articles, and intend to do the same for [[Premiers of South Australia]].

::*As my nominator said, I've revived the [[WP:ACOTF|Australian Collaboration]], mostly as I was sick of seeing the same article stated as collaboration of the '''fortnight''' for several months! I'm pleased to see that editors are responding to the collaboration changing regularly.

::*In general, I tend to make sure articles meet some minimal standard for naming and basic information, particularly for country towns in Australia. This is because I enjoy travelling around the country and visiting the places I have read or written about.

== [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view]] ==

:'''3.''' Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?

::A. I don't stress easily, and tend to back off rather than let myself feel stressed. One conflict I have been involved with started from a new contributor adding anti-immigration bias in the [[Australia]] article. He/she found strong opposition, and was encouraged to leave it out of the main article (which was on the point of becoming featured at the time), and consider contributing to [[Immigration to Australia]] instead. This immediately reduced the level of the conflict between that editor and other more experienced editors. The next stage was that I tended to act as mediator and rather than revert each contribution, I tried to find something valuable, and massage it to a more NPOV perspective. By interacting with the user, I encouraged him/her to provide references for their claims. I believe the outcome is reasonably neutral, but still allows the other contributor to present their main point that immigration may increase the cost of housing. The article could still do with a better writer than me going through it and tidying up the prose though. I have also been in other lower-level conflicts and found that assisting contributors to find the right article to add a particular view to may be the difference between a revert war and all parties being satisfied.

Regarding the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view&curid=39805&diff=28415528&oldid=28413773 revert; the claim that all five pillars are unchangeable has no foundation in policy], why is it there then? Is the [[Wikipedia:Five pillars]], wrong? -- [[User:Zondor|Zondor]] 17:42, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

== Updated poll ==

I have completely changed the poll. Please see [[Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (years in titles)/Poll]] --[[User:AllyUnion|AllyUnion]] [[User talk:AllyUnion|(talk)]] 02:39, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

== curly quotes ==

May I ask why you moved [["—All You Zombies—"]] to [[“—All You Zombies—”]]? &mdash; [[User:Flamingspinach|flamingspinach]] | [[User_talk:Flamingspinach|(talk)]] 06:13, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

== class="wikitable" ==

I wouldn't know how, but why would you want to anyway? [[User:Bluemoose|Martin]] 14:32, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

:Aha, so you mean find occurances where it was expanded when it used [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Prettytable&oldid=23029079 this] revision of the prettytable. In which case the only way I think you could find them would be to get someone to use an SQL query on the database dump, but I don't know how successful that would be. At the moment I am not capable of doing this, but plently of other people are. [[User:Bluemoose|Martin]] 16:10, 22 November 2005 (UTC)