Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Changlc

Changlc
final (17/1/0) ending 07:06 August 15, 2005 (UTC) - This user has been with us since 29 July 2004 and has 2524 edits. Changlc has written a good number of quality articles and shows amazing patience in dealing with problem users. More importantly, Changlc has reverted a great deal of vandalism and posted frequently on the Vandalism in progress. As with User:MarkSweep recently, I only realized that Changlc was not already an admin when I saw this user reverting the various purported GrandCru socks manually on a large scale. Wikipedia would really benefit if Changlc had the power to rollback and block vandals. --Jiang 07:06, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
 * Thank you, I accept. -Loren 08:47, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) nominator --Jiang 07:44, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Suppory--Exir KamalabadiCriticism is welcomed! 03:52, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Support Just read her talk page and it was pretty impressive how potential conflicts on the Taiwan page were not only averted, but the people who had the comments actually complimented Chang after her edits. I don't even need to see the edits, that says it all for me, the work against the sockpuppets is just icing on the cake. As for not being incredibly involved in the community side of Wiki, that's fine. There are alot of specialists on here. As long as Chang contributes, she definately deserves the admin job. I apologize in advance if I got the gender pronoun wrong, Loren sounds female ...;-) Karmafist 13:20, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Support. Excellent contributor, fast vandal fighter. And oh what a fight it's been recently. --MarkSweep 16:13, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Support. I have seen her edits, and have been impressed by her attitude to vandalism. --Phronima 21:23, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Support - excellent vandal whacker and does wikifying and external link/category fixing. However, there were only 130 Wikipedia namespace edits and she participated very little in VfD processes. But I'll support because I trust Changlc will wisely use the rollback feature and whack vandals with it. &mdash; Stevey7788 (talk) 22:56, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Merovingian (t) (c) 00:39, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) Support. FeloniousMonk 01:37, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 9) Support; an excellent user I have bumped into on vandal patrol; I expect she will be an excellent admin. Antandrus (talk) 01:56, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 10) Support. El_C 02:16, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 11) Support. Briangotts (talk) 21:00, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 12) Support. Bobbybuilder 05:42, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 13) Support. Experienced wikipedian--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91  ($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|)  04:20, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 14) Support. Could use Adminship.  Redux 00:03, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 15) Support. Mop, please... Bratsche talk  5 pillars 02:40, August 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * 16) BRIAN 0918  &bull; 2005-08-14 16:13
 * 17) Neutral, I will wait for the process to unfold before casting my vote, but I see very little community interaction, which is not a plus. Dual fluency is a plus, though. --Sn0wflake 23:42, 8 August 2005 (UTC) Support. --Sn0wflake 21:02, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 04:16, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) *see Requests for comment/Boothy443 --Jiang

Neutral

Comments
 * Changlc's user page had this: 大家好! 我是台灣台北人. It means in Chinese: "Hi everyone! I am a Taiwanese from Taipei".

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.)
 * I would probably continue working on the RC patrol as well as tracking and reverting persistant vandals. I have also tried in the past to act as a mediating force between users with rival POVs and would probably continue with that.
 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * I've worked on quite a few articles that I'm proud of, however I'd have to say that two I am particularly pleased with would be 228 Incident and (ironically enough) Flying Spaghetti Monster. 228 Incident started out as a very short incomplete article which I expanded on and continued to work on with other users with various other POVs, I believe the article it is an example of a contraversial subject (see Talk:228 Incident) where people with various rival POVs were able to work together (in a mostly civil manner) to create a more fair and complete article. Flying Spaghetti Monster is a fairly recent contribution that I actually ran into while going over recent additions to Wikipedia. The article started as a cut and paste of the article posted on Uncyclopedia. I helped to clean up the article and wikify it into what I believe is a decent article on what is a very new phenomenon. On a slightly negative note, I do feel however that my edits to the article were a little spread out, a problem of mine that I have been trying to address.
 * 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?
 * In general I have been able to work well with other users since starting on Wikipedia. Starting out I made plenty of mistakes myself so often times I try to reason with new users still unfamiliar with Wikipedia policy. I initially became involved in the GrandCru vandal incident when I tried to reason with what turned out to be an imposter making inflammatory statements on several Taiwan-related pages. Subsequently, I became involved in reverting vandal and spamming sttacks on several articles and user pages by GrandCru after he/she went rouge as well as tracking the subject's sockpuppets, a task which still seems to be ongoing. I feel rather sad about the incident as it is an example of something that I generally try to prevent if I can. I feel that when dealing with vandals who enjoy making personal attacks like this the only logical recourse is to remain calm and levelheaded. As cliche as it sounds, if they can make you lose your temper and lash out irrationally then they've won. I don't intend to give them the pleasure of that.