Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/DragonflySixtyseven

< Wikipedia:Requests for adminship
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.

DragonflySixtyseven

edit

Final (51/2/0) ended 16:20 October 9, 2005 (UTC)

DragonflySixtyseven (talk · contribs) – About time DragonflySixtyseven was an admin. He/she has been here for over a year, and is very active in spotting Candidates for Speedy Deletion. I collaborated with him/her during the Red Link Recovery project. He/she has 5145 edits. And I would like to know whether he/she is a man or a woman. — JIP | Talk 16:20, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

oh... uh... is this thing on? tap tap tap Um... Yes. I accept the nomination. Th-thank you. I'll, um, I'll work on my answers over the next day or so. DS 23:58, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Support as nominator. — JIP | Talk 16:21, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support Private Butcher 16:56, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Strong support FireFox 17:09, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Strong support for an excellent editor - but this will be the last nom under the old rules! (see Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship) -- BD2412 talk 18:29, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  5. EXTREME REDWOLF24 SUPPORT. The best Dragon Fly I know. Redwolf24 (talk) 19:13, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Extreme Miami Style Support I thought he was a admin already Great User --JAranda | yeah 19:52, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support. Robert 21:06, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  8. EXTREME DRAGONFLY SUPPORT!!! Ryan Norton T | @ | C 21:26, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Furry Alien Support based on what I've seen from this editor about the place (many times), will make good admin. Alf melmac 21:49, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Bart133 (t) 22:09, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support KHM03 22:49, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support Interactions with this user have been positive. —Lowellian (reply) 23:54, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Merovingian (t) (c) 06:42, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support helped me out with a query in AfD with speed and precision. Mallocks 14:53, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support, edit history looks impressive. Christopher Parham (talk) 18:48, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support. Anyone who drops you a (sincere) thank-you note for reverting their work when they're wrong has the temperment to be a fair and diplomatic admin. kwami 22:12, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support. For sure. SlimVirgin (talk) 23:25, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support. Friday (talk) 23:34, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support. El_C 23:45, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support CambridgeBayWeather 00:20, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support even though Dragonfly is absolutely disorganized (yeah i'm one to talk LOL)  ALKIVAR™ 03:04, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Strong Support I've seen quite a lot of good work from this user. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:08, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support: He would be a ‘nicely perfect’ administrator. --Bhadani 14:11, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support. Ral315 WS 17:04, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support, Hes got a fair ,if heavy, hand, and a sharp mind, what more cfould you ask for?Gimmiet 17:31, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support. Reasonable and knowledgeable. (And frankly if disorganization is a disqualification for adminship, I ought to be desysopped on the spot!) Mindspillage (spill yours?) 18:07, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  27. That's hot. Mike H (Talking is hot) 18:09, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Should've been one a while ago. ~~ N (t/c) 18:16, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support. Good, intelligent editor. --Blackcap | talk 18:26, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Cool. --JuntungWu 11:19, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Disorganized support. Silly admins. Let them get too organized, and next thing you know, they'll be forming a cabal. Unfocused 17:12, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Witty Support. I second the comments of Mindspillage. Bratschetalk | Esperanza 20:45, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support, if only to prevent him adding to the questions section :o) --fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 22:02, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  34. What Mark Gallagher said ;) encephalon 03:50, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  35. S'port absolutely --Doc (?) 10:54, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support. Mmmm, that disorganised thing....., you know. Couldn't be humour, could it? Filiocht | The kettle's on 14:50, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support from college freshman. - Darwinek 20:37, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Support. Good stuff. -Splashtalk 01:03, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support. Carbonite | Talk 13:01, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Support. Could you help me close AFDs and clear out CAT:CSD? Sometimes there is a backlog. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 01:57, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support - a clearly unnecessary vote but just to express my views. Dlyons493 Talk 13:58, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  42. →Journalist >>talk<< 18:39, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Support. Contributions and answers below indicate thoughtfulness and a broad range of interests. Chick Bowen 18:45, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Support. Just noticed his RFA or would have acted sooner =) But he's pretty knowlegable and an all around nice guy (at least on IRC). Glad to support. Sasquatcht|c 19:49, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support cool guy —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 21:30, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support. No probs with this nomination. Physchim62 21:52, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Support --Publunch 23:15, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Support I would welcome his cool head on my team any day. Zach (Sound Off) 23:45, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Support only recently came into contact with this user however he appears to be a level headed user who contributes quite a bit to the wiki as a whole. Jtkiefer T | @ | C ----- 04:34, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Support Woohoo! I'm 50! He's always on IRC, and has seemed very adminlike from on there. I look forward to working with him. Karmafist 13:24, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Support — Pladask 13:28, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. Oppose. As Alkivar says, seems disorganized--look at the replies to the standard questions for another example. PedanticallySpeaking 17:08, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --Boothy443 | comhrá 07:13, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Neutral

Neutral until user posts answers. This user seems very disorganized, even needed two posts to accept! ALKIVAR™ 07:25, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Questions for the candidate
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 administrators and the administrators' reading list.)
A. As an admin.... well, there's closing AFDs, and blipping speedies, of course. Deleting garbage images. Possibly issuing vandal-blocks, although I'd want to consult with other admins at first to make sure of my judgment. Blocking inappropriate usernames. The occasional request for undeletion, which is usually a matter for VfU, but on rare occasions something that can be obvious. 23:57, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. deep breath

What am I particularly proud of? Well, despite not having known much about the struggle for Indian independence,I'm rather pleased with the work I did on Senapati Bapat and Govind Ballabh Pant (which I wrote practically from scratch) and Sardul Singh Caveeshar (and thank you, Bhadani, for an important bit of information). NPOVing Did Six Million Really Die? was quite satisfactory, as was, surprisingly enough, Millie Tant. Jhereg is good, I think, as is Hollywood accounting.

I like my "why we might think you're a sockpuppet so please don't get offended" speech.

There's an interesting little story behind how I came to create the entry for George Robert Vincent, which is on the article's talk page.

Dusky seaside sparrow makes me sad, but I'm proud of it. Musth makes me nervous, but I'm proud of it too. And I've been meaning to incorporate the content of Talk:Metastability in molecules into the article once I get around to creating some proper images. I added some amusing details to Graham Chapman, and I need to go back to Parinya Kiatbusaba and finish rewriting the last few paragraphs. Din-i-Illahi. Birbal. Earth X. De zaak alzheimer.

I'm always quite pleased when I save a valid article from getting deleted, as with Oliver Coipel, Sasha Spesivtsev, Liberty Belle, salary-celery merger, Joseph Ivor Linton. I also enjoy the opportunity to consult with primary sources, such as writing to Norman Spinrad to get details about whether The Iron Dream was banned in Germany, or asking Tobias Wolff if anyone had ever named an asteroid for him.

I resolved a dispute about Stepanakert. A substantial portion of anglerfish is from me, as is almost all of honey guide. Bread and circuses was scarcely more than a dicdef before I got to it. EBaum's World was missing some important information which was rather difficult to convey in a properly neutral fashion, but I think I did a reasonable job. Would you believe that, before I got to it, the article on the sport of bunnock didn't explain what bunnock is? I added the explanation to [[Category:Polish Scouts and Guides]].

At this point, I've still got over a year's worth of edits to pick through in a search for "favorites", but I think that's enough. DS 19:59, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

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. Hm. Let's see, let's see. Edit wars. Hmm. I'm going to assume that anti-vandalism skirmishes, such as on John Byrne, don't count. Hmm. I'm going to have to read through my entire edit history to refresh my memory.

(three hours on Memory Lane later) Well, um, I was in a brief disagreement over the Mister Dressup article - I added a piece of trivia about a parody; User:Thivierr felt it was inappropriate there, and should be in the Radio Free Vestibule article instead; we exchanged... two messages on the topic, and currently I don't think the datum is in either article, because I conceded the point and felt it wasn't worth getting agitated about.

And... okay, the Einar H. Kvaran article, it was created by an anonymous user, I removed a large amount of genealogical information, and then I got a rather distraught note from User:Carptrash. Apparently, he had spent several weeks convincing an octogenarian neighbor of the value of WP, and I had "butchered" the article, thus scaring away the octogenarian, and didn't I know that genealogical information is very important in Icelandic culture, have I never read the Sagas?, and so he had reverted my changes. I spent a while reading up on Icelandic culture, conceded that genealogy is more important in Icelandic culture than I had realized, and then carefully edited the article again, leaving in the information about Einar H. Kvaran's parents, but deleting the information about his sons and nephews (other than their existence) because Wikipedia is not the Sagas, and the article is about Einar, not his sons and nephews. The article summary said "We don't need EVERY detail about his family tree, okay?", and I left an apology for the page creator (which he doesn't seem to have read; sigh). I thought everything was settled, but yesterday I found out that Carptrash had perceived this as an edit war, and had left messages for various Icelandic Wikipedians, asking that they come to his support in this.

Anything else... there were some minor disputes in the Static Shock page, where I twice asked User:Mare-Silverus to stop inserting his own thoughts as to what some of the characters were references to; I resolved this by, quite simply, contacting Static creator Dwayne McDuffie and asking him if Mare's interpretations were correct (answer: no).

There was a very slight dispute at Holy Prepuce - I deleted the reference to Catherine of Siena, it was restored, I deleted it again and left my reasons on the talk page - which was resolved after User:Muriel Gottrop made a helpful suggestion.

Annnnnnnnd.... that's it.

These don't typically cause me stress. If anything on WP causes me stress, it's vandals (well, and edit conflicts, and server problems).

I try to mediate conflicts, to come up with a mutually agreeable solution. Some individuals are resistant to that, and become more and more agitated; for such cases, if they don't storm off in a huff, and instead choose to wreak havoc, the regrettable solution is to issue a temporary block. That's a last resort, of course, following a proper RfC.

If something on WP annoys me, I get up, walk around, read a novel, eat an apple, call my girlfriend, play with the neighbor's dog... if it's something that requires my attention, I take the time to construct a proper response.

DS 22:17, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/DragonflySixtyseven&oldid=1257426162"