Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Cool Hand Luke

User:Cool Hand Luke
(16/3/1) ending 00:48 25 October 2004 (UTC)

I decided to self nominate because I just resolved a week-dead VfD at Votes for deletion/Pauper magic. It occurred to me that I'm not sure whether it's kosher for non-admins to do that. If not, it seems more admins are needed because VfD often takes some time to get resolved after the voting period has expired. For another example see Sega Genesis Screenshot Gallery.

At any rate, I have about 1050 edits, with good variety: added content (see my user page/brag list), copy edits, recategorizations, VfD, talk pages, and the creation of a new Latter Day Saint WikiProject, although the last has yet to prove its worth.

At any rate, I'd like to be an admin for VfD resolution and speedy deletion. VfD and new pages are my hobbies when bored.
 * Cool Hand Luke (Communicate!) 00:48, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) Tuf-Kat 01:23, Oct 18, 2004 (UTC)
 * 2) Fair enough. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 01:25, 2004 Oct 18 (UTC)
 * 3) Anárion 13:14, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 4) OK. Andre ( talk )A| 14:59, Oct 18, 2004 (UTC)
 * 5) Yes. Seems Cool Head Luke and business-like.  Haven't personally seen him under fire Dealt with him amicably on Reformed Egyptian; I imagine he is good at staying cool. Tom - Talk 18:52, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 6) Support. --Lst27 23:12, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 7) Happy to. Even moreso considering the shoddy reasoning for opposing. Ambi 07:52, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 8) *Haha, just curious if you're going to use the same line every time I oppose a nomination... BLANKFAZE | (&#1095;&#1090;&#1086;??) 22:15, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 9) ffirehorse 13:21, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 10) Michael Snow 17:36, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 11) You rock, dude. Wile E. Heresiarch 21:18, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 12) As long as Luke's Cool Hand stays cool when the editing gets hot. JFW |  T@lk  00:00, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 13)  &#8475; yan! |  Talk  16:46, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * 14) ugen64 00:28, Oct 22, 2004 (UTC)
 * 15) I'm extremely happy to support Cool Hand Luke here. He's a great user and has helped out a lot with a whole bunch of topics. Cookiecaper 08:34, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 16) Yup. Adminship is no big deal, and CHL is a valuable contributor. J OHN C OLLISON  [ Ludraman] 10:59, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 17) Support --fvw 12:16, 2004 Oct 24 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) I admire the user and his work, however, he does not currently meet my personal standards for admin candidates. BLANKFAZE | (&#1095;&#1090;&#1086;??</b><b style="font-size:90%;">)</b> 22:47, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 2) Mine either. User is short on edits, very short on edits for a self-nom, and recent edits have been extremely minor – adding categories and image tags, voting on VfD. No, I'd not consider until he performs more significant contributions and that he can convince someone to nominate him. -- Netoholic @ 01:55, 2004 Oct 22 (UTC)
 * 3) Too few edits. Passw0rd 12:51, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 4) * User has less than 100 (questionable) edits. Probable sock puppet. -- Netoholic @ 04:41, 2004 Oct 24 (UTC)

Neutral
 * 1) Geogre 02:01, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC) My "personal standard" is about time on project, rather than edits, and that's mainly so that I can see whether a person has interacted with some of the nasties and, uh, committed people we have on Wikipedia (and some of them are administrators). So far, I've seen Luke to be an even tempered person and a quality editor.  I lean toward support, but I would like to hear about the things that he's seen that have bugged him.  ("We can dress like Minnie Pearl."  I do get them confused with King Missile sometimes.)  ("Sometimes nothing's a pretty cool hand.") Geogre 02:01, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Ask what bugs me, eh? Heh. I think one thing that scares me is when people rapidly create new articles. Although I initially loved the idea of bot creation, and even proposed writing one somewhere in my history (I'm a competent perl scripter, as witnessed by my reports for the Latter Day Saint WikiProject), I dislike mass-created articles because they're unlikely to be on anyone's watchlist. As this is our best tool against vandalism, mass creation&mdash;by bots or humans&mdash;disturbs me. Doubly so when the articles are stubs or worse. Although I have a long-term eventualist outlook and am probably slightly more inclusionist than the current VfD environment, I think awful articles do reflect badly on the project and draw trolls. (Unstated assumption: I dislike trolls.) Cool Hand Luke  03:27, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * For a more concrete example: GNAA drives me nuts, but they have as much right as anyone else to be here. They just don't have the right to own the place through intimidation, and in so far as they don't attempt to, the content of articles can be forged through consensus. I've been fortunate not to cross the paths of anyone so dedicated, but if good faith efforts were to fail, I would certainly hope all wikipedia editors hold their ground against trolling. | Thanks for the insider quotes, by the way! Cool Hand Luke  03:40, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Comments
 * 1055 edits since February 7. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 01:25, 2004 Oct 18 (UTC)
 * Neither support nor oppose for now, but may I point out that he can't be all that bad because he contributed to Dead Milkmen. Thanks. - Ta bu shi da yu 14:03, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Thank you. The original content in Dead Milkmen was my first contribution&mdash;as an anon. I registered and copyedited minutes after.
 * I must also say that I find nothing wrong with Blankfaze's personal standards. Everyone presumably has them, whether they're stated or not. Blankfaze's standards are no more or less arbitrary than any others, and they do have some logic to them. They're at least not obviously shoddy reasons. I also think that Blankfaze in particular opposes good editors in the most encouraging way possible. His compliment inspires me to keep up the good work however this nomination turns out.
 * In the interest of full disclosure, here are some of my recent extremely minor edits:  . Cool Hand Luke <font  size="-2" color="black">(Communicate!)  04:07, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * To directly address Netoholic's concerns, my image tag edits are actually uploads (see some of my uploaded images at User:Cool Hand Luke/Photos). Unlike some wikipedians, I think it's important to document the source of images. This is paramount if we're to have a free encyclopedia. I often improve articles under consideration on VfD (see Rhosnesni High School, Black Lotus, Springville High School, and Incorporation&mdash;which I mostly don't list on my user page because they're not my best work, just fix-ups). I do feel that I have substantive contributions. I've contributed significantly to at least 40 full articles, as listed on my user page. Some are very large (see Father Divine). And this does not count many lesser fix-ups like when I consolidate and expand substubs. In short, I'm unsure why Netoholic characterized me as he has, but it's unsurprising because he apparently took quite a cursory look at my work. He initially claimed I'd done little since my last RfA which is facinating because I've never had an RfA before. Cool Hand Luke <font  size="-2" color="black">(Communicate!)  18:17, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Wow. You could have politely just said that you respectfully disagree with me, and explain the flaw in my reasoning, but instead launched into a tirade against my character? Is this what we can expect from you as an admin?  For your information, in both cases you mentioned above, which were simple errors on my part, I corrected myself (by noting the possible copyright problem with the Einstein image and by removing the mistaken reference to a previous RFA).  Making derisive comments is not a good way to handle yourself, and now I can add incivility to my reasons not to support. -- Netoholic @ 19:17, 2004 Oct 22 (UTC)
 * I honestly didn't mean to assualt your character. I'm sorry. But you certainly know that adding image information is important. One can't simply abandon uploads, and that's why I found your criticism odd. The RfA note doesn't speak to your character, but to your apparent unfamiliarity with my contributions. Cool Hand Luke <font size="-2" color="black">(Communicate!)  22:17, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

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. VfD resolution and speedy deletions are extentions of things I already do.
 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * A. I enjoy adding content which was not previously on the internet. I believe the best example of this is my biography on Father Divine. Typically my contributions are related to the Latter Day Saint movement and/or Salt Lake City. For more characteristic contributions see Book of Commandments, LDS Conference Center, and Salt Lake City and County Building. I feel all of these articles go into more useful consolidated detail than was previously available online.
 * 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 will deal with it in the future?
 * A. I have been in a number of enjoyable talk page resolutions, (see Talk:Reformed Egyptian), and I rarely get stressed over them. However, in at least one discussion I think I was too snippy (see: Talk:Misinformation and rumors about the September 11, 2001 attacks, the bottom one.) &mdash; Cool Hand Luke <font size="-2" color="black">(Communicate!) 00:48, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)