User:Johntex/Nmajdan

– It is my pleasure and honor to nominate Nmajdan for Adminship. I have worked with him on several articles and I find his edits and attitude to both be of the highest quality. He has been editing on Wikipedia for about one year, and he has over 12,000 edits, including more than 3,000 to the main article space. He modestly states that this count is "inflated" because he uses AWB, but that does not mean those changes are any less valuable.

He contributes to a wide range of articles and collaborations, including WikiProject College football. He is very good with Wiki-syntax, templates and formatting, as a look at his user page will reveal. He has started and improved numerous articles, including being the prime factor in getting University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma Memorial Stadium and Oklahoma Sooners football to GA quality. He was blocked for a total of 20 minutes once due to some confusion over whether or not he was running an unauthorized script. The situation was resolved amicably, showing me that Nmajdan is a great member of the community even when encountering a rough patch in the road.

He is an active member in community discussions such as Media copyright questions and Possibly unfree images. He makes important contributions to image uploading as well such as finding this image and taking this one. He has been recognized with several barnstars by fellow editors. He practices good use of edit summaries (Mathbot says Edit summary usage for Nmajdan: 100% for major edits and 99% for minor edits. Based on the last 150 major and 150 minor edits in the article namespace.), and he has set his e-mail. Giving him the admin tools will help him build and protect more great articles for Wikipedia. Johntex\talk 15:52, 15 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

Support

Oppose

Neutral

Comments

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.


 * Image maintenance has been my primary administrative focal point on Wikipedia. If approved, I'll probably begin by focusing on IFDs, Images with the same name on Wikimedia Commons (and All images on Wikimedia Commons), Orphaned fairuse images, Replaceable fair use images, Images with no fair use rationale and other image backlogs. Of course, I would help out in others areas such as the occassional XfD, RFPP, etc but images would be my main focus.


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


 * I am proud of just about every one of my contributions to Wikipedia. Some of my proudest include the two Featured Lists: 2005 NCAA Division I-A football rankings and the 2006 version (and a list current under development that I will eventually nominate for FL). Also my many contributions relating to the University of Oklahoma including that main article which has been greatly improved and is a WP:GA (failed WP:FA), Oklahoma Sooners football, which I started (also a GA that failed FA - I'll get one sooner or later), and 2006 Oklahoma Sooners football team. I have started many articles/stubs on University of Oklahoma football coaches and presidents. I am also very proud of Oklahoma state elections, 2006, which I am just about the sole contributor. In addition to my article space contributions, I've also developed many templates. These include College coach infobox, NCAAFootballSchool, three templates for listing a college football schedule (College Athlete Recruit Start, Entry, and End) and three templates for listing college recruits (College Athlete Recruit Start, Entry, and End). I also assist with the maintenance of several portals including Sports and games, College football, and Oklahoma.


 * 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?


 * No, I have been fortunate enough to not have had any serious, long-lasting conflicts. I have had many editors get upset with me during the course of my image patrolling so I have always tried my hardest to explain to them Wikipedia's image use policy and point them in the direction where they can get more information on my actions. In addition, I recently had an issue with a new editor who got upset that I tagged an article he created for speedy deletion. The issue was brought to the attention of WP:ANI here. The editor ended up being indefinitely blocked. (Actually, I'm still communicating with this user through email to help determine the best course of action - if an indefinite block was the best solution or if it should be shortened.) But, no, I have never been in a situation that caused me stress. If, as an admin, a situation does arise that could become stressful, I would try my best to remain calm and keep an open and efficient communication channel with the other party and work toward a solution that is in the best interest of the project.


 * 4. When would you use &#123;{test1}} to &#123;{test4}}, and when would you use &#123;{bv}}?


 * Well, I am a fan of the new user warning templates, so I would use uw-vandalism1 or the most appropriate tag. I would use the test warning tag when the user is obviously experimenting with a page, such as if they blank a page and insert "Hey! This is really cool!" That, to me, is not vandalism and I would place the first test warning template on the user's talk page and work my up through test4 if they continue to make similar actions. Personally, I rarely use vandalism1 because it is a good faith assumption template. Most vandalism I come across is obvious vandalism, so I personally start off with a no faith assumption, which is the vandalism2 template. bv or uw-vandalism4im would be used very rarely. I would probably use it on a registered user that has a history of vandalism but none recently depending on the severity of the vandalism. I would use it on a new user or anon if the vandalism were especially graphic or vulgar or disparaging. I could also see myself using it if a user vandalizes a heavily used template that effects multiple pages.


 * 5. What would you do if a user reverts an article four times in slightly more than 24 hours? (Thus obeying the letter of WP:3RR.)


 * Whether or not I would report this to WP:3RR and/or take action on it myself would depend on the history of the editor(s) involved. If it is a new user or a reputable editor who may have just never encountered this rule before then I would simply leave them a message on their talk page explaining the 3RR rules and point them to the page where they can get more information. If a user ever gets to the point where they have reverted changes this many times in such a short period, it may not be violating the rules as they are stated, but it is going against many of the ideals of Wikipedia.


 * 6. If you could change one thing about Wikipedia, what would it be and why?


 * Always a tough one. I don't think I can single out one individual thing. Wikipedia has faced many challenges over its short life and the community has adapted to those changes. As the scale of Wikipedia continues to grow, more and more challenges will arise. There will not ever be a magical fix. Wikipedia will have to continue to be guided by the tens of thousands of individuals that make up its core contributor base. So there is not one thing in particular that I would change but if that opinion changes, I trust the community to discuss it and arrive at the best solution.