Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Jmlk17


 * The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it .

Jmlk17
Final: (41/2/0); ended 23:46, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

- Jmlk17 is a polite and capable user who I think would be better off with the admin mop. He's been around since December 2005 and has made a ton of edits, mostly doing good work to articles, but also in administrative areas such as WP:AIV and WP:TFD. With this experience, I think he'll make a fine admin.  Majorly  (talk | meet) 20:37, 31 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept! :) Jmlk  1  7  23:38, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following optional questions to provide guidance for participants:
 * 1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?
 * A:     I don't find myself settling in on any one issue; hence, my watchlist for example contains nearly 300+ articles ranging from fraternal organizations to ice hockey, to even the toilet.  I have found myself broadening my horizons around the project, and, in doing so, have immersed myself in new topics and issues I am finding myself enjoying.  With a deep interest in fraternities, I make quite a few reverts a day, as there seems to always be intense rivalry and a sense of "showing up" a rival.  So while vandalfighting is something I plan on doing, it would not be the main issue.  Backlog is always an issue with many people here, and I dislike the lines that have formed in certain areas at time, such as WP:AIV, CAT:CSD, and just the overall WP:BACKLOG.  I know that as a community we are much better than 24,000+ articles needing cleaning up, 300+ articles tagged for speedy deletion, and others.  I plan on working further into Wikipedia with my knowledge as I learn, and helping with the associated administrative duties.  As I learn more, I can help more, and thus accomplish more.


 * 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A:     My best contributions are not set out as a single page, nor a certain category or anything of that sort.  I have helped in a couple Wikiprojects, such as South Park and Fraternities and Sororities.  I also have a deep love and passion (obsession :) ) for ice hockey, and have kept an increasingly close eye on the 2006-07 NHL Season, 2007 Stanley Cup Playoffs, and of course my team, the Colorado Avalanche.  I take pride in those articles, and thoroughly enjoy the interaction I have had with other editors in regards to the articles.  I believe I have done nothing but contribute to those articles, and have been able to debate and argue (civilly) with others, and have learned from it.


 * 3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
 * A:     I work with young kids quite often, and they almost never stress me out, let alone an issue online.  The only time I get frustrated is when vandalism is running high on the site as a whole, I'm trying to work on an article, and my watchlist is going crazy with new edits, mostly vandalism.  I did get a bit stressed out when I accidentally reverted this entire edit by an anonymous user.  I clicked the wrong button, thought I had not, and was called out on it by another user.  I IMMEDIATELY apologized, recognizing my mistake, thanked the other editor, and tried to right the wrong.  We all make mistakes, and I felt bad, especially seeing how upset the anonymous user was.  But as for a direct conflict, I cannot think, nor recall, nor find anything that really did stress me out.  If I find myself upset with the project, I simply surf away for a little while, or just close my laptop and come back later.


 * 4. In your own words, what is a "free encyclopedia", and of the 8,035 edits you've made, which one(s) do you feel most significantly helped to help build a "free encyclopedia" or make an existing "encyclopedia" more "free"? — CharlotteWebb 22:43, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

General comments

 * See Jmlk17's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.


 * Links for Jmlk17:

''Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Jmlk17 before commenting.''

Discussion

 * Question is there a reason why between June, July, and August 2006 you made only 8 edits, and in November 2006 you made just 9?  Besides that I see no reason why not to support  Black Harry  00:24, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Very much so. I was running quite low on money, trying to save it up for a final semester at school, and had no regular access to the internet, cutting it to save money (hey, 30 bucks is 30 bucks when you're a poor college kid).  The only time I had access was away from home at friend's or relatives' homes, and used it to check and maintain email almost exclusively.  As for this past November, I had something like 150+ pages of writing and research to do, and spent nearly all my waking hours either in class, in the library immersed in books, or at work.  But now I am done with school, and have regular high-speed internet access.  Very reasonable question however.  Jmlk  1  7  00:29, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Seems reasonable. I understand what you mean about needing cash as a fellow student.  And having papers due is definitely a major time constraint.  And You have made 10,000 edits (give or take) since February of this year, so its eviden that you have more regualr access now.  Black Harry  00:49, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I certainly do now. Jmlk  1  7  04:50, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) Support as nominator.  Majorly  (talk | meet) 00:07, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Support Another great find by Majorly. He has a lot TfD contributions, which really jumped at me, since TfD tends to be a bit ignored among the XfD's. Best of all, he contributes to ice hockey articles (not taken into my decision, but something I worth noting, being an active member of the aforementioned Wikiproject. However, remember to not use images in your sig. Good luck! Evilclown93 00:16, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Support Everything looks good to me. Nishkid64 (talk)  00:38, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) (Edit conflicted) Majorly Support as EvilClown said, another great find. TfD contributions, while perhaps not the most important, are an excellent sign that a user is able to reach into the nooks and crannies that admins must so often do. Well, maybe XfD isn't that small, but you get the point... And besides, I haven't known Majorly to be wrong! -- tennis man    sign here!  00:39, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Support after being edit conflicted flippin' twice. Majorly has done it again.  bibliomaniac 1  5  An age old question... 00:40, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Support - as per Majorly's Nom.. -- Cometstyles 00:42, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Support10,000 edits since Feb of this year. Seems to have a wide range of interests, which I think is important.  Black Harry  00:52, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Support - Meets my criteria. -- Tλε Rαnδоm Eδι  τ  оr   00:54, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Support High quality Gutworth 01:08, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) Support a good candidate --Steve (Stephen)talk 01:10, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) Support Answers are good. Yechiel Man 01:15, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) Support Hard working editor and great future admin.  κaτa ʟ aveno  TC 01:35, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 13) Strong Support I've been waiting for this. Very knowledgable and interaction with other editors is outstanding. Would make an excellent admin. Ðysepsion † Speak your mind 01:44, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 14) Support Even thought you opposed me I support you becasue I found your advice very helpful. You obviuosly have experience and would make a very good admin. Mattl2001 04:51, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 15) Support Friendly and helpful to new users, dealing with vandals appropriately, admin tools in his hands could only be a plus for the community. Lipsticked Pig 04:55, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 16) Support. Good user, have seen around TfD before, would make a fine admin. - Zeibura S. Kathau (Info 05:13, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 17) Support. Contribs and answers look good to me, mop should be good in this user's hands.  Ark yan  &#149; (talk) 06:17, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 18) Support Friendly, has a need for the tools and edits like a bandit. Cheers! Dfrg.msc 06:38, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 19) Support re above. Chensiyuan 07:07, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 20) Extremely good editor, will be an asset to Wikipedia, especially if given admin tools. -- Dark Falls   talk 08:03, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 21) Support Excellent answers, but in particular Q3. Best Wishes. Pedro | Chat  08:09, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 22) Support per Majorly. —AldeBaer 08:48, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 23) This user restores my faith in RfA that dedicated contributors are still the best. Over a year's experience indicates that this user has the project's best interests at heart. Experience aplenty.  Daniel  10:46, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 24) +1 --dario vet (talk) 10:48, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 25) Support I'm impressed by the Q1 answer, plenty of exprience and dedication to the Project. The Sunshine Man 10:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 26) Support undoubtedly an excellent candidate (good find Majorly!). Should be an asset. — An as  talk? 14:05, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 27) Strong support in agreement with Anas Salloum. Acalamari 18:42, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 28) Support a fine user who would be extremely good at closing down deletion debates.  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  18:44, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 29) Support good hard worker, interactions have been positive. Riana ⁂  02:31, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 30) Support per nom and answers Peacent 04:50, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 31) I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message! - 08:15, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 32) Support - I have seen this user doing good work in many areas.--Danaman5 16:40, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 33) Support ain't no mountain high enough... --Infrangible 01:01, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 34) Support lots of valuable edits to project-space and main-space. I'm glad you learned the value of the edit summary.  ~a (user • talk • contribs) 15:11, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 35) Merovingian (T-C-E) 03:33, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 36) Support Good candidate. &rArr;    SWAT Jester    Denny Crane.  04:02, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 37) &mdash; Nearly Headless Nick   {C}  04:56, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 38) Support Good user to become an admin. Captain   panda  22:40, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 39) Sure I'd prefer that you have a more consistent edit history to show commitment to the project. 10,000 edits in a few months after few edits in a year.  I'm not one for editcountitis, but it does show predilections.  Anywho, I'll support.   Keegan talk 05:28, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 40)  « Snowolf  How can I help? »  supports this candidate as he's quite sure he won't do anything stupid with the tools
 * 41) Support A great candidate. -- S iva1979 Talk to me 12:01, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) Oppose based on . If this user cannot follow simple, core Wikipedia policies, well... Zzyzx11 (Talk) 06:39, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose Well, indeed. --ST47 Talk 00:59, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Well indeed what?  Majorly  (talk | meet) 14:07, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Neutral
 * The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.
 * The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.