Hosta

by | Mar 16, 2018 | Hosta

How Can We Help?
You are here:
< Back
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.

Christopherlin

Final (22/11/8) ending 06:07 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Christopherlin (talk · contribs) – Christopher Lin has been actively contributing to Wikipedia since April 2004 and has accumulated over 5500 edits during that time. He founded Wikiproject Cycling and started the Cycling Portal. Christopher is an excellent contributor who deserves to be trusted with the mop and bucket. -SCEhardT 01:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
I accept SCEhardt's nomination. --Christopherlin 06:06, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Support as nominator -SCEhardT 06:16, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support for strong article-space contributions. David | Talk 10:24, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support per Dbiv. Mackensen (talk) 13:41, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support per Dbiv. --Siva1979Talk to me 14:16, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support, yep. Proto||type 16:35, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support opposers' bar is too high (but I respect their opinions) Good enough.Gator (talk) 20:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support Great user, excellent potential for the adminship. gidonb 23:06, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. support: Excellent contributor dedicated to building an encyclopedia; good answers to the questions below, especially the line about improving the signal to noise ratio. Ombudsman 07:37, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support. Awesome candidate, ticks every box. Waggers 10:48, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Strong support. Thoughtful, dedicated contributor; can be trusted to enforce community standards. Good answers. +sj + 19:45, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. SupportAxiomm 04:51, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    To the closing 'crat. Axiomm only has a handful of edits, none in the article space and also removed a vote. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 00:13, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support. I also think the opposers' bars are set too high. Maybe a stem with a different angle would help. Cycling puns aside, he looks like a solid contributor and looks experienced enough with Wikipedia. --Elkman - (talk) 05:21, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support. A good editor; will be a good admin. --Cymsdale 22:52, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support--Jusjih 01:01, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Suppport. This person has an excellent track record which dates back to 2004. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 03:01, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Weak support user appears to be a good editor, would like to see more involvement on talk pages, lotta article, image, category, template edits... minimal on their talk spaces.  ALKIVAR™ 22:20, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support FeedthePigeos
      • Note -suspected irregularity. The preceding comment was added by 205.188.116.65, who signed him/herself as FeedthePigeos, whose account does not exist.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 02:11, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support per nom. Aucaman 2:01, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
  17. Support. Good editor. Gflores Talk 05:27, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. SupportdoN't belieVe in CensOrshIp 18:25, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support Mjal 21:19, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support-a-gogo JIP | Talk 21:10, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support Good user, will make a fine admin. I think there are plenty of admins discussing policy; I don't see why this has to be a focus for everyone with a mop. – Doug Bell talk•contrib 03:01, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support on the basis of good contributions to the 'pedia itself. Seemingly cautious attitude to process suggests user is not at all likely to abuse tools, or charge headlong into controversial closures and the like, so I'm not greatly worried on that score. Alai 05:49, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. Weak Oppose. User mentioned that s/he would like to handle WP:CfD but has only participated in a handful of votes which is concerning to me. User also mentioned partipication in reverting vandalism, but I wasn't able to find any warning on user talk pages or any usage of WP:AIV. Overall Christopherlin doesn't yet seem to be familiar enough with admin related duties in my opinion. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 06:43, 27 February 2006 (UTC) Restored deleted vote that Axiomm removed. [1]--PS2pcGAMER (talk) 21:03, 1 March 2006 (UTC) [reply]
  2. Strong oppose for lack of project space edits. NSLE (T+C) at 07:35 UTC (2006-02-27)
  3. Oppose for now because of lack of wiki namespace edits --Jaranda wat's sup 20:47, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Oppose per PS2pcGAMER and NSLE above, heavy editor, but needs more process related participation. -- xaosflux Talk/CVU 03:02, 28 February 2006 (UTC
  5. Oppose More Project namespace edits needed. DaGizzaChat © 07:28, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've clarified my answers to questions 1 and 2 below. Please see the 28 February additions. --Christopherlin 19:35, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Oppose a above.Zaheer89 02:00, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Oppose lack of wiki namespace edits --Kash 03:58, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Oppose per NSLE. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 20:12, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Oppose due lack of wiki namespace edits Prodego talk 15:09, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Oppose Lack of project-space participation suggests unfamiliarity with wiki-process. Xoloz 20:39, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Weak oppose because I don't know how he would react in a stressful situation, since as he states he has never been in one :) In other words, needs a bit more experience. Ashibaka tock 05:51, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

  1. Neutral. Excellent record of commitment, but needs more project space experience. pschemp | talk 08:26, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Neutral per Pschemp. Essexmutant 10:42, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Neutral per above. --ZsinjTalk 14:32, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Neutral 1xx edits in project space in over a year and a half just isn't enough. Apart from that, very good, hence neutral. --kingboyk 21:15, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Neutral per Kingboyk. Stifle 23:19, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've clarified my answers to questions 1 and 2 below. Please see the 28 February additions. --Christopherlin 19:35, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • I've read over what you've posted, and for now I'm afraid I have to stay the way I am. An admin needs expert knowledge of WP policies, but if you haven't been doing much in Wikipedia namespace I can't see that you have that knowledge. Stifle 17:35, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Neutral per above. Naconkantari e|t||c|m 21:19, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Neutral, may support later. - Mailer Diablo 13:39, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Neutral. I can't be sure when you don't have mich non-mainspace experience I'm afraid. Raven4x4x 00:20, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • Edit summary usage: 99% for major edits and 100% for minor edits. Based on the last 150 major and 150 minor edits in the article namespace. Mathbot 06:15, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • See Christopherlin's edit count and contribution tree with Interiot's tool.

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
A. I like increasing the signal-to-noise ratio of Wikipedia. As a regular user, I have cleaned up after vandalism and poorly-done good faith edits, brought new and lonely articles to a basic minimum standard, and dropped welcome messages on new users' talk pages. Making information easier to find and edit is one of my aims in editing.
I've also been applying categorization and naming conventions where I can. I anticipate primarily helping with CfD and RM. I've tagged articles as CSD and had them done so very speedily, so I want to return the favor, where CSD apply.
Other chores I can think of for short term include cut-and-paste move repair and merging edit histories. Once I better understand the policies, I anticipate executing the deletion and protection processes.
Added 06.20, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
I'd like to be able to update, clean up, dab, etc. the protected Main Page features, particularly links to dab pages and changes on TFA not reflected in the blurb.
Added 19.33, 28 February 2006 (UTC), response to issues raised by oppose and neutral votes
First, thanks for your concerns. Short answer about being inexperienced with the process: "Not much experience, willing to learn."
"Reverting vandalism" for me mostly means keeping an eye on suspicious edits via the articles on my watchlist, and checking history for articles I read or random across. One recent example is The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants, which had deletions that went unnoticed for a while.
I don't RC patrol because it generally seems to have enough users there, admin and non-admin alike. I haven't voted in AfD/CfD because I find the consensus typically agrees with my intepretation of policies and guidelines. (Somewhere I read that if you agree with consensus, it's not necessary to vote, WP:NOT a democracy and all.)
"Executing the deletion ... processes" for me means keeping the speedies speedy (minimizing backlog), and (once I better understand the process) closing debates.
I hope this clarifies things. --Christopherlin (fixed errors --Christopherlin 17:06, 2 March 2006 (UTC))[reply]
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. SCEhardt already pointed out WikiProject Cycling and Portal:Cycling. I'm glad the project has caught a lot of support. Through this, I found quite a few cycling articles from de: and fr: and linked these from the en: versions. This was complicated by my total lack of German ability.
As for non-cycling articles, Louisiana State University, like many Louisiana-related articles, lacked attention. The original, before Xj14y fixed it, had major POV and accuracy issues.
Does this question include Wikinews contributions? I've got one, if it does.
Added 19.33, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
I was very pleased with wikinews:Colleges offering admission to displaced New Orleans students. It started as a simple list, much like several others popping up. I found a few that individual LiveJournal users were maintaining there. Decentralizing editing seemed like a perfect job for Wiki. What I did was make it much easier for dedicated users like Amvhoward and Ziasudra to grow this list. Anons added their own schools. I was pretty amazed at how quickly it grew to needing to be split into so many subpages.
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 can't recall any conflicts or stressful situations on Wikipedia. The closest I can think of is keeping some fan speculation out of Dead Like Me for being original research, backed up only by "discussion on IMDb boards. I moved the passages to talk (twice) and explained why. That was pretty much it.
If you can think of a conflict I've had, ask me about it here.
Any other questions?


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 talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.
Categories
Table of Contents