Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/BU Rob13: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
Line 173:
#'''Very strong support''' I participated in the long and frustrating dispute at [[carnism]], and found that Rob was always a fair-minded voice of sanity and policy (including when disagreeing with me): [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ACarnism&type=revision&diff=673954351&oldid=673950980] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Carnism&diff=next&oldid=673716517] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ACarnism&type=revision&diff=673532986&oldid=673531003]. I quickly came to admire his temperament and clue. Since then, I've seen his work around WP and always found the same thoughtful, well-informed, and patient contributions. He would be a wonderful admin. [[User:FourViolas|FourViolas]] ([[User talk:FourViolas|talk]]) 03:28, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
#'''Support''', based on review. [[User:Kierzek|Kierzek]] ([[User talk:Kierzek|talk]]) 03:29, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
#'''Support'''. [[WP:NETPOSITIVE|Net positive]]. He knows what he's doing. '''<font face="Papyrus">[[User:Anarchyte|<font color="#3ab628">Anarchyte</font>]] <
#'''Support''', clearly a levelheaded editor who is an unambiguous net positive. The only concern I might have is his quickness to go to arbcom over the nikita socks, but this is relatively minor. Happy to support.[[User:Tazerdadog|Tazerdadog]] ([[User talk:Tazerdadog|talk]]) 04:05, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
#'''Support''' - Barring evidence to the contrary, I am willing to trust that Rob has nothing but the best of intentions and will do well as an administrator. [[User:Kurtis|Kurtis]] [[User talk:Kurtis|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 04:32, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
Line 296:
#'''Support''' – Mature, balanced and courteous, while firm when necessary. In policy debates, Rob effortlessly cuts to the essentials, a plus against overzealous [[WP:LAWYER|wikilawyers]]. — [[User:JFG|JFG]] <sup>[[User talk:JFG|talk]]</sup> 16:33, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
#'''Support''' ~ having spent a bit of time on it, i cannot find a reason not to: Candidate appears to meet my criteria, none of the opposes are completely convincing. Happy days, '''[[User:LindsayH|Lindsay]]'''<sup>[[User_talk:LindsayH|Hello]]</sup> 17:32, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
#'''Support'''. Most of the opposes are either unconvincing or too controversial. Also, we need more admins working in deletion areas, so I don't see why he can't be one too. [[User:Minimac|<font color="#0645AD">Minima</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Minimac|<font color="#0645AD">©</font>]]
#'''Support''' - I have nothing but praise for Rob's work on the encyclopedia. I first saw him at the GAN page and read an article that he nominated. I was very impressed by the efforts he had put into developing it. Going through his contributions, I do not see any red flags that would make me second guess his abilities. As far as the concerns with the RfC closure goes, {{u|Newyorkbrad}} has done a great job explaining Rob's rationale and in my understanding he acted fairly enough. This might be one of the few rare cases with the perfect application of the [[WP:IAR|fifth fundamental principle of Wikipedia]]. '''''<span style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC">[[User:Yash!|<span style="color:black">Ya</span>]][[User talk:Yash!|<span style="color:black">sh</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Yash!|<span style="color:black">!</span>]]</span>''''' 18:53, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
#'''Support'''. I've run across Rob quite a few times, and he strikes me as someone who tries to do the right thing. Sure he makes mistakes, but this is a Request for Adminship, not Sainthood. Reasonably clueful, won't delete the main page, seems likely to be a net positive. The mop is no big deal, and Rob seems qualified to me. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">[[User:The Wordsmith|'''The Wordsmith''']]</span><sup>[[User talk:The Wordsmith|Talk to me]]</sup> 18:58, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
| |||