Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/DCEdwards1966

DCEdwards1966
final (11/5/4) ending 03:43 31 December 2004 (UTC)

DCE has been here since September and has made several hundred edits. I think he has been here long enough to know the Wikipedia rules and the expected behavior of admins. Tuf-Kat 03:43, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)


 * I accept the nomination. DCEdwards1966 05:25, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) Three months, lots of edits, and involvement in meta-issues (VFD, etc.). Good enough for me. --Slowking Man 06:44, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)
 * 2) Support. Does some great work. Mgm|(talk) 08:25, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)
 * 3) Of course! He seems like a good user to me. Agree with Slowking Man. --Lst27 ( t a l k )  00:01, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * 4) Support. 172 09:05, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * 5) I dislike bot-phobia. Neutralitytalk 06:47, Dec 27, 2004 (UTC)
 * 6) It's good that he's wanting to become an admin because admins are there to chase any vandals who assail the castle that is Wikipedia. I'm not into vandalism. I congratulate all the nominees, and I envy them. Scott Gall 09:32, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * 7) dab (&#5839;) 11:27, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * 8) Mackensen (talk) 20:26, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * 9) plenty of experience. helpful. agreeable. Kingturtle 05:33, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * 10) Seems to be including more edit summaries. The previous lack of summaries was causing me to lean towards a neutral vote. Carrp 15:41, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * 11) CryptoDerk 03:43, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) All those album edits are generated programatically, not hand-edited, and no source is given for the album cover images.  Almost all of their edits lack edit summaries, which are important for communication.  Very little (any?) time spent doing any routine maintenance.  The communication aspect is most important, because without it, I don't know much about how they'd be as a sysop.  For instance, as of writing, user has only 9 edits on other user talk: pages.  Sorry. -- Netoholic @ 16:26, 2004 Dec 24 (UTC)
 * 2) I'm going to have to agree with Netoholic. Maybe in a few months. Andre ( talk )A| 06:51, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * 3) for no other reason than not here long enough. Xtra 10:53, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose: No edit summaries Páll 09:02, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose. I'm glad he's started using edit summaries, but I'm not so sure 3 months is quite enough for a full understanding of Wikipedia's machinations. I'm perfectly willing to support next time. - Vague | Rant 03:41, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)

Neutral
 * 1) No real "red flags", but never using edit summaries is worrying...  There doesn't seem to be any indication of what kind of sysop this user will make. Three months isn't very long... &#8212;Tkinias 22:11, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * 2) I have to agree with Tkinias. -- &#8475; yan!  |  Talk  04:05, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * 3) Just to point out that, since the above comments were made, he HAS begun using edit summaries and adding lots of cleanup tags and such. Still, 3 months is a bit soon, and it remains to be seen if this behavior will survive the RfA process. I think it will, which is why I'm not voting oppose. --Golbez 11:14, Dec 26, 2004 (UTC)
 * 4) User is showing good signs to improve, which probably means I will support next time. |Anárion|(Pedo!) 08:01, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Comments
 * DCEdwards1966 has 6312 edits; his first was at 21:19 on September 27 2004 (UTC). --Ben Brockert 03:58, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)
 * I don't know if this matters or not, but the program that I use to create album articles formats data that I enter. I still have to do the research and paste the data into the program. It isn't a bot. It's more of a tool, like a word processor. DCEdwards1966 07:21, Dec 27, 2004 (UTC)
 * Until the discussion here, I wasn't aware how important edit summaries were. So, something constructive has come from this. DCEdwards1966 16:04, Dec 30, 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. I would continue to look for and deal with vandalism.
 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * A. Most of my edits have been to *album articles. Being a programmer, I have written a program to format data for creating album infoboxes and articles.
 * 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 only had a few conflicts and they were all quickly reconciled. I try to see the other persons point of view when a conflict arises because I know I'm not always right.
 * 4. Can you please cite a few examples where you've had to deal with vandalism?
 * A. I try to go to the Recent Changes page several times a week to look for vandalism. I have also recently started going to the New Pages page to look for vanity and non-encyclopedic articles to list on Votes for deletion. DCEdwards1966 08:13, Dec 27, 2004 (UTC)
 * A. I try to go to the Recent Changes page several times a week to look for vandalism. I have also recently started going to the New Pages page to look for vanity and non-encyclopedic articles to list on Votes for deletion. DCEdwards1966 08:13, Dec 27, 2004 (UTC)