Wikipedia:Administrator review/Reaper Eternal


 * The following discussion is closed. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Well, I've been an admin for about a half a year now following the success of my RFA. I've been taken to task over a couple things and usually managed to clear the issues up. However, I've never really gotten much feedback at all over how I'm actually doing as an admin, so feel free to post your questions and comments below. I have thick skin, so I can take getting called an asshole, but I'd really appreciate it if you could give me a reason why. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:51, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I always thank administrators for participating here (in fact, I probably am starting to sound repetitive...), so good for you for doing so. I've seen you around, and I cannot think of anything that I would find fault with. --Tryptofish (talk) 00:43, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Good man, great administrator. Relaxed personality, no drama, healthy humor, always a pleasure. Kiefer .Wolfowitz 21:49, 23 January 2012 (UTC) Ditto!  Kiefer  .Wolfowitz  00:24, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * This editor blocked revision to a page (Jamie Comstock) without weighing the evidence and considering the issues. In particular, he has refused to recognize that the revisions I placed in the article are supported by documented sources.  This does little to advance the cause of truth in Wikipeida; in fact, it does just the opposite. — Sanchopanchez (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 18:39, January 24, 2012‎ (UTC).
 * Sanchopanchez's only edits on Wikipedia have involved a BLP. Protecting the page and reversing Sanchopanchez's edits were a necessary consequence of our BLP policy. Dougweller (talk) 10:15, 2 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Good admin, works to solve problems effectively. Personally I have no reservations in asking for help at any time. Calabe1992 01:21, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Has been decisive, concise and efficient in closing reports at AN/I with informative summaries. Good job! Kim Dent-Brown   (Talk)  23:48, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I've been watching this guy when I'd just started on Wikipedia. He is, of course, lately performing as a very active, hardworking and efficient admin and doing a brilliant job here. Regards, Scieberking (talk) 06:08, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Great Admin. He's helped to protect pages that were getting consistenly vanadlised by sock puppets. An all round efficent, decisive and reasonable admin, as far as I am concered. Goltak (talk) 20:43, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Consistently great work. Keep it up! Mr  little  irish  09:50, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I have seen his work and actions since before he became a admin. He takes on vandals and vandalism very quickly and helps keep Wikipedia up to a higher standard. I know he took sometime off and I am glad to see him back in action again. Kierzek (talk) 20:08, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Don't see anything wrong. Keep up the good work! –BuickCenturyDriver 01:09, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Just someone who wants to do it all right, down to earth and relaxed, no drama, with a healthy sense of humor - doing a great admin job. --MisterGugaruz (talk) 19:29, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Banned without considering the evidence or recognizing the edit warring done by the other side to remove well-sourced and reasonable posting. This is now part of an AN/I case here. --98.220.198.49 (talk) 16:47, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Question of filtered to own space refused despite signing today.Julzes (talk) 19:21, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, the best sysop here, and the only sysop (as far as I know) that didn't have a single oppose vote at his RFA. Why not have an RFB? Electriccatfish2 (talk) 16:12, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I believe User:Yunshui had no opposes at his RfA. MIVP - (Can I Help? ◕‿◕) (Maybe a bit of tea for thought?) - (Cakes) 17:19, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * You and I don't cross paths very often, but when I do see you, you always seem to have a common sense / no nonsense approach to problems, which I think is an great asset. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;  16:20, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I did notice that you broke Wikipedia and got sentenced to the Stocks, but other than that, I'm still thinking you are ok in my book. ;) Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 18:23, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I have been laughing my rear off at those stocks for the past 10 minutes. Thanks for pointing them out Den. MIVP - (Can I Help? ◕‿◕) (Maybe a bit of tea for thought?) - (Cakes) 17:19, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Desperately needs clue. And needs to stop trusting 'friends'. Arcandam (talk) 03:20, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
 * A worthy sysop who deserves the tools for the betterment of this encyclopedia. Regards, Secret of success (talk) 03:19, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Good sysop who deserves somes respect.  Zappa  O  Mati   00:52, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Did a good job before becoming an admin. Still seems to be doing a good job. Anyone who does gets complaints sometimes - it shows they're getting into the nitty gritty end of things. Peridon (talk) 15:32, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Great admin. One of the few adminstrators who come to rescue in WP:RPP. In other words, you are just too great in all fields. Torreslfchero (talk) 20:13, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
 * superb always exemplary Dloh cierekim  22:01, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Great work on the edit filter, I'm glad we have admins who know how to do that. Mark Arsten (talk) 23:24, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Reaper was very helpful with me in the chat area the other day, I totally messed up my page by moving my article all over the place and he cleaned it up for me! (Iknowball 10:57, 5 October 2012 (UTC))


 * Outstanding. An example I will try to live up to, if I ever get in enough experience and time to consider the commitment of an RFA. Even in rejecting an application I made at PERM, he was an excellent and cool admin, and explained to me what was up in a totally non-dick manner. Given his track record to date, in a few months I would be pleased to support an RfB for him,if he were to be interested in switching gears to a different level.The Illusive Man(Contact) 22:37, 17 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Based on my experience, I'd say it's even money that you've probably cost Wikipedia a few productive editors these past 18 months. Tim98Seven (talk) 23:56, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

@Reaper Eternal: You deleted the article I submitted for creation and appeared to call it "vandalism". If so I ask that you justify labeling my efforts as "vandalism". The article was a good faith representation of the usage of the term "mangina" in the collection of hundreds of websites called the manosphere which is viewed by millions of users around the world collectively. Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mangina. I'm quite certain I was neutral and represented the manospheres usage without expressing any opinion for or against usage of the term. If you had feedback on the article, providing that would have been more useful and less heavy handed and arbitrary. (Deletion log); 18:51. . Reaper Eternal (talk | contribs) deleted page Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mangina ‎(G3: Vandalism) Ethicalv (talk) 01:38, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ Knows exactly what to do and how to do! --Tito Dutta (talk) 16:27, 10 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry for the disruptive editing, my sister got on while I was eating. It WILL NOT happen again2602:306:CE77:2730:D848:338A:7762:F05E (talk) 16:06, 14 December 2012 (UTC)User 12/14/12 11:06
 * No worries here; keep up the good work!  Miniapolis  ( talk ) 16:01, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Reaper Eternal keeps blocking me and removing truthful comments on talk pages simply because he disagrees with what I'm saying, and that is unacceptable. I'm posting now via another address now because he has blocked me. The campaign of censorship on Wikipedia by users such as this one must end now.220.168.56.66 (talk) 00:59, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Stop Blocking Me
 * Great admin. Good work at WP:PERM. --LlamaAl (talk) 20:28, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * You are a nice admin! Keep it up! Forgot to put name 14:31, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I want to offset some of the other IP comments here. Reaper Eternal is a very calm and level headed admin who often tries to calm things down at the drama boards. RE's greatest strengths are at WP:EF/R and other technical related areas. Before his successful RfA, RE was one of only a handful of non-administrators to become an Edit Filter manager. Our project has very few of these technical users and we are lucky to have their help. I agree with in that an RfB is in the future if RE wants to take on those responsibilities. Personally, I see a lot of parallels between RE and our last successful crat. The technical ability, calmness, wise decisions and helpfulness are all similar. My greatest fear is that the drama that has overtaken our project will have a negative impact on our editors and I hope this doesn't happen with RE as it would be a loss to the community. RE seems to be  immune, but it does take its toll on all of us and it's in our best interest for everybody to stay away from the drama, as we are all here to make a high-quality resource for our readers. 64.40.54.93 (talk) 16:32, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Great admin. Acts to calm things down in heated areas, takes necessary action promptly and on his own initiative. Keep it up. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 00:21, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I've only crossed paths with you once, but I can stated, based on that "path crossing", that you look for applicable ways to do more than what is requested of you by the privilege requests and templates that call administrators to their attention. Keep on doing what you are doing in the same manner in which you are doing it. Steel1943 (talk) 00:39, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Only one interaction. He reverted an edit I made from a blocked editor.  He was incorrect on policy and when he read the actual policy he tried to change it.  When that failed, he justified it based on "Ignore all rules."  He then claimed that all the comments on his talk created drama though all the comments were required because he was unfamiliar with policy.  In fact, he simply favored his content over policy and that is very shaky ground.  As an administrator he should not be choosing actions against policy based on his personal beliefs.  This is a very poor practice for admins.  --DHeyward (talk) 02:49, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I wish there were 1000 more like him. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 08:00, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Reaper Eternal is not someone I've interacted with extensively (if at all), but we have most definitely seen each other's names around on a fairly consistent basis and my general impression thus far has been positive. There have been many occasions where I've read his comments and thought to myself, "I disagree with you on that point, Reaper", but his is an opinion that I can respect as informed and reasoned. The only thing I would suggest to Reaper Eternal is to try and moderate your tone a little more, particularly around RfA. This is a recent example of commentary that I felt was altogether too harsh on someone who is otherwise generally a productive and valuable contributor (and I say this as someone who also opposed that RfA, see oppose #20). Then there's this, which was a very valid reason to oppose, but it also comes across as a bit too blunt in delivery &mdash; especially considering the significant improvements in Ktr101's editing habits since his CCI was first initiated. Other than that, keep up the good work! You are a huge asset to Wikipedia as an administrator. Kurtis (talk) 00:01, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * This admin has a keen eye on taking care of the unusual, as he states, without drama. I think we need more of that at Wikipedia, and think Reaper Eternal is doing a great job!Patriot1010 (talk) 17:00, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I have never encountered Reaper Eternal before today, and it is unfortunate that our first interaction was him blocking me. But, I deserved it, and after I posted a sincere apology for losing my temper and flying off the handle, he unblocked me.  In both cases, he was forthright and direct and honest, which are exactly the qualities I want in an admin.  I hope he remains one for a long time to come. --- The Old Jacobite The '45  02:26, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Not a bad admin at all. He protected an article that was being vandalized by I.P.s; I gave him a barnstar as a result. No complaints here, one of the better administrators on Wikipedia from my experience. Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 07:42, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Cleaned up one of my goofs like a sysop who knows what to do. Definitely going to say I approve this admin. MIVP - (Can I Help? ◕‿◕) (Maybe a bit of tea for thought?) - (Cakes) 17:19, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Since this is still up, I'll give my opinion: Reaper Eternal is an excellent editor and administrator. He's always civil, reasonable and sensible; I have no complaints whatsoever and am glad that he is around. :) Acalamari 09:12, 14 December 2013 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.