Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Little Mountain 5


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

Little Mountain 5
Final (97/0/1); Closed as successful by – xeno''' talk at 00:38, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Nominations

 * Note: This editor's username is "Little Mountain 5". It is not their fifth RfA.

Co-nomination from The ed17

– After [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Little_Mountain_5&oldid=371714748#Congratulations several years] of my gentle prodding, I am extremely proud to present Little Mountain 5 as a candidate for adminship. Little Mountain has been a Wikipedian since early 2008. In that time, he's become a well-rounded editor. You want content creation? He's written seven featured articles, including the excellent Roxy Ann Peak. Anti-vandal work? He's used Huggle and taken on the thankless chores of AIV. Worried about his edit count? He has over 20,000. He's also uploaded a plethora of images to the Wikimedia Commons. While real life forced him to cut back on editing in 2012 and 2013, Little Mountain has continued his excellent work since returning, so there's a lot to like here. I firmly believe that Little Mountain has the experience and temperament to be an administrator, and I can't be happier to be nominating him. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:09, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Co-nomination from Acalamari

It is my honor to co-nominate Little Mountain 5 for adminship. As with The ed17 above, I have known Little Mountain 5 for many years (since 2008) and I also offered to nominate him a long time ago, but he politely declined. I'm pleased that he has now decided to accept.

Why do I think that Little Mountain 5 would make a good administrator? For starters, he’s proved himself capable of doing a fine job with his existing toolset. He is an effective vandal-fighter and is proficient in article clean-up work. Beyond small edits and anti-vandalism, Little Mountain 5 is also an incredibly strong content contributor, with one GA, seven FAs, twenty-seven DYKs and multiple new pages to his name. In regards to his personality, in my experience and many interactions with him, Little Mountain 5 has always been a friendly, helpful, sensible and trustworthy editor and person; he has never behaved in a less-than-cordial manner.

I am fully confident that Little Mountain 5 would make an excellent and low-controversy administrator; I have no doubts whatsoever about him and again, it’s an honor to co-nominate. Acalamari 09:02, 6 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Thank you both for your kind words and continued support. I gratefully accept.  Little Mountain  5  18:19, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:
 * 1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
 * A: I intend to work in the areas where I have the most experience, namely at AIV and CAT:EP. I've been active in the anti-vandalism field for nearly six years now, and have been answering protected edit requests since I received template editor rights last October. Also, I would like to help out by performing uncontroversial speedy deletions occasionally, specifically those listed under criterions G6, G7/U1, G8, and F8. If I ever decide to work elsewhere, I will take the utmost care to ensure that I understand the processes fully before using the tools.


 * 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A: I am most pleased with my content creation work, particularly the eight articles I brought up to good or featured status: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. (I must note that most of the credit for #7 goes to .) Many of the articles I've worked on are about local geographic features that I became interested in after visiting. It's always a learning experience, one that I find to be enjoyable, challenging, and satisfying. I take pride in the fact that I have made small improvements to this very large encyclopedia.


 * 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've managed to avoid major conflicts and stressful situations for the most part. In general, I try to be friendly and constructive when communicating with other editors. After all, most of us have the same goal, to improve Wikipedia, but just have differing opinions on how that might be achieved. If I find myself entangled in a major conflict, I will make sure to remain calm (or take a break if I can't; posting angrily will only inflame the conflict), assess the situation, consider each person's rationales, and attempt to come up with a viable solution or compromise, or at least facilitate a move in that direction.


 * Additional question from Bbb23
 * 4. You say you have been in no major conflicts. A search indicates that you've never posted at any of the more conflict-ridden noticeboards (ANI, AN, and (less so) AN3). Most administrators encounter major conflicts in the job. I know I do. Sometimes such conflicts aren't best resolved by being nice. What would you do if you had to be less nice, more blunt, etc.? --Bbb23 (talk) 22:02, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * A: Thanks for the question! While I don't plan on performing controversial actions or spending much time at the listed noticeboards, I realize that there may be times when I will have to be sterner in order to get my point across and resolve conflicts. However, stern posts should never be rude or condescending towards other editors, because that simply worsens the conflict and leads to a poor environment to work in. Rather, they should be written in a way that maintains civility. For example, Wikipedia's warning templates are very blunt, straightforward messages that still remain civil; I would try to write my posts in a similar style. I hope that answers your question.  Little Mountain  5  23:43, 6 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Additional question from FreeRangeFrog
 * 5. You become aware of a situation where an IP with no prior contributions has repeatedly blanked the contents of a biography of a living person, and they have been reverted several times already by an inexperienced editor who doesn't know what to do other than to also keep reverting. Both are now over 3RR. The IP has three warnings in their talk page, and refuses to respond to questions about their behavior. They have not used summaries at all when blanking. You examine the contents of the article and see that it is largely unsourced, but does not contain any immediately apparent libelous, defamatory or otherwise problematic information. You are the one admin that needs to deal with this. What steps do you take to resolve the issue, and why?
 * A: Interesting question. In most articles, the IP's edits would constitute vandalism, the editor would be exempted from the three-revert rule, and if the IP continued to blank the page without explanation, I would give it a final warning and block it temporarily if necessary. However, since the article is a largely unsourced BLP and I have little experience with BLP-related issues, I would take the situation to BLPN for discussion immediately and would implement whatever consensus is reached there. Regarding my own opinion, my thought process is this: First, I would leave a stern note on the IP's talk page (below the three warnings it already received), asking it to explain its actions or risk being blocked for vandalism. I would also leave a note on the editor's talk page detailing the situation and my planned course of action. Hopefully that would get the IP to either explain itself or stop, but if it continued, I think the most effective way to force discussion would be to semi-protect the article for a day or so. After that time, if the IP still blanked the page without explanation, I would block it temporarily for vandalism. But again, that is only my opinion, and I would adhere to the consensus achieved among more experienced editors at BLPN.  Little Mountain  5  18:40, 7 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Additional question from K6ka
 * 6. I apologize if you were already asked this, but do you know the difference between a block and a ban?
 * A: Nope, no one asked me that yet, so thanks for the question. Yes, I do know the difference: Basically, a block is a technical measure that removes a user's ability to edit. They are often used to prevent vandalism or disruption and are imposed by a single admin. On the other hand, a ban is a "formal prohibition" forbidding a user from editing either a specific page (page ban), any page in a specific topic (topic ban), or anywhere on Wikipedia at all (site ban). There are also interaction bans which forbid any interaction between two or more users. Bans are used to stop persistent, wide-scale disruption. They are usually long-term, and are imposed by community consensus, ArbCom, Jimbo, or the Foundation. A user can still edit while banned, but will be blocked if they violate the terms of the ban.  Little Mountain  5  03:18, 8 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Additional question from Anupmehra
 * 7. Hello and best of luck for your RfA. Please explain the significance of a "vote" at AfD.
 * A: Thank you. A "vote" at AfD carries little weight by itself, because the outcome is determined by consensus, not tallies or percentages. In other words, AfD is a "!vote", not a "vote" (explained below). Participants must provide rationales to support their positions in order for their "!votes" to receive any consideration.  Little Mountain  5  22:00, 8 April 2014 (UTC)


 * 7 (b). Do you know the difference between a "vote" and a "!vote"?
 * B: Yes, I do. In a straight "vote", participants select a desired outcome and the final result is determined by a tally or percentage. However, in a "!vote" (or "not-vote"), participants select a desired outcome and provide rationales to support their positions. The final result of the discussion is determined by consensus, which is based on the strength of the rationales, not the numbers alone. Many processes on Wikipedia operate by "!voting", including this RfA to some extent.  Little Mountain  5  22:00, 8 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Additional question from Atama
 * 8. You've shown a lot of interest and aptitude in stopping vandalism, do you have any interest in sockpuppet investigations (which seems eternally backlogged)?
 * A: Unfortunately no, I don't have any intention to work at SPI at this point, simply because I have no experience there. I certainly won't preclude myself from ever helping out, but if I become interested, I would have to observe and familiarize myself with the process extensively first. That's probably not the answer you wanted to hear, sorry!  Little Mountain  5 </b> 00:51, 9 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Additional questions from Carrite (Tim Davenport, Corvallis, OR, USA, 52, OSU BA 1983):
 * 9. Have you ever edited Wikipedia using another user name? If so, what name or names did you edit under?
 * A: Thank you for the questions. This account is the first one I ever created, and I've made nearly all of my edits from it. The few exceptions are edits from my public account, (rare), and edits while accidentally logged out (very rare). <b style="font-variant:small-caps;"> Little  Mountain  5 </b> 00:04, 11 April 2014 (UTC)


 * 10. Will you tell us a few details about yourself such as your real name, the city or country in which you live, your age, and your educational background? If revealing is uncomfortable to you, please let us know why you think maintaining anonymity is important for contributors to what is regarded by many visitors as a trusted and scholarly resource. Thanks. /// Carrite (talk) 13:19, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
 * A: Wow, small world! I'm practically your neighbor. Beyond that, I don't want to disclose any more personal information than I already have. I would honestly prefer to be more open in that respect, but doing so would create a much greater potential for off-wiki harassment (especially when dealing with irate vandals), something I wish to avoid. <b style="font-variant:small-caps;"> Little Mountain  5 </b> 00:04, 11 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your answers. Drop me an email off list if you ever want to meet up for a beer sometime... Carrite (talk) 13:04, 11 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Additional question from Ottawahitech
 * 10. Many editors complain they are hounded by others on Wikipedia. What can they do about it?
 * A: If Editor A feels that they are being hounded by Editor B, I think the best course of action would be for them to start a polite discussion on Editor B's talk page in an attempt to resolve the issue. This gives Editor A a chance to express their feelings, and gives Editor B a chance to explain their actions. For instance, Editor B may not be intentionally irritating Editor A, or may have a valid reason why they are following them, such as "fixing unambiguous errors or violations of Wikipedia policy, or correcting related problems on multiple articles." Alternatively, Editor B may be legitimately hounding Editor A, and if the problem persists, Editor A should ask an uninvolved editor to weigh in. If none of that works, the last resort would be to take the issue to ANI for resolution. <b style="font-variant:small-caps;"> Little Mountain  5 </b> 18:28, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

General comments

 * Links for Little Mountain 5:
 * Edit summary usage for Little Mountain 5 can be found here.
 * Edit stats on talk page. <b style="font-variant:small-caps;"> Little Mountain  5 </b> 18:19, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

''Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review his contributions before commenting.''

Support

 * 1) Support. Per the nominators, I feel Little Mountain would be a perfect admin. buffbills7701 18:34, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 2) Support per Acalamari and Ed. If they trust you, so do I. Though for one second I thought this was your fifth RfA!  → Call me  Hahc  21  18:38, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Same for me! buffbills7701 18:42, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Uh-oh, I hadn't thought about that. Hopefully it won't confuse too many people. <b style="font-variant:small-caps;"> Little Mountain  5 </b> 18:44, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * It will (I jumped to the same conclusion). On a positive note, it will give editors something non-controversial to talk about, always a good thing at an RfA.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:14, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Like the candidate's username... § FreeRangeFrog croak 03:19, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) Support. I've worked with Little Mountain for years and he will be great with the tools. He is one of the kindest and most level-headed Wikipedians I have had the pleasure of interacting with and will definitely stay cool when the editing gets hot. And I'm always happy to see an admin who does great content work. Valfontis (talk) 18:41, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 2) Support Great candidate, No issues!, Good luck :) - →Davey 2010→ →Talk to me!→  19:28, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 3) Support per the nominators, as I have no problem with anything that the editor has done. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:53, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 4) Support impresses as reasonable, should be net positive. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:11, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 5) Support per above. Northern Antarctica (₵) 20:12, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 6) Support Having worked with him for years at WP:FOUR, I find him to be dependable and clear-headed. He would make a great admin.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:42, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 7) Support Two nominators I have a lot of respect for and a quick look around says you can be trusted to do good things with the mop. Like the others, I thought this was your 5th RfA when I first saw the title, and that brought me here out of curiosity.  Glad I came.  Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124;  WER  20:57, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 8) Support – Experienced content contributor. Looking through various talk pages I see someone who appears sensible and communicative. Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 21:16, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 9) Support Looks good. I am One of Many (talk) 21:44, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 10) Secret account 23:06, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 11) Support. Yes, please! — Status  ( talk  ·  contribs ) 23:25, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 12) Support Welcome to your fifth RfA ;-). This could be a record total of !votes by the time the week is up! On a serious note, I see no problems here.  Ron h jones  (Talk) 23:33, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 13) Support An excellent editor with just the right temperament to be an excellent administrator. LM5 has my full support. Finetooth (talk) 23:50, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 14) Support Hard-pressed to think of a better candidate. :) &mdash;  La Pianista  ♫ ♪ 00:08, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 15) Strong Support -- Tawker (talk) 00:31, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 16) Support. Long-term editor, solid content contributions, no red flags that I could find. Espresso Addict (talk) 00:33, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 17) Support. I'm very impressed with this candidate and everything they're doing to help Wikipedia (and this is my first decision on a RfA :) -Newyorkadam (talk) 00:36, 7 April 2014 (UTC)Newyoradam
 * 18) Support. The fifth RFA seems to be doing the trick, as I can find no fault in this candidate. Quality nominators, good body of work, and a long history of reasonableness make this an easy support. Good luck. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 00:55, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * This isn't their fifth RFA, as they just have a name that looks like they are on their fifth. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:10, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I believe that Ultra's [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Little_Mountain_5&diff=603082639&oldid=603080659 aware] of this. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:05, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * It's been a long day, don't judge. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:07, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) How this editor would need more than one RfA is beyond me =p ... great candidate.  Go  Phightins  !  01:54, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 2) Support – Sure, why not? <font face ="Tahoma" color="blue">T <font face ="Tahoma" color="red">C <font face="Tahoma" color="gray">N7 <font face="Tahoma" color="black">JM 02:09, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 3) Support ///Euro Car  GT  02:30, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 4) Support It looks like fifth first time's the charm. Good luck! MJ94 (talk) 04:13, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 5) Support as outlined by many above. Aboutmovies (talk) 04:37, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 6) Support Solid all round. No issues. <span style="color:#646464; font-weight:bold; font-size:11px; border:2px solid #FFCC33;background-color:#cde0fc; padding: 2px 10px;">► Philg88 ◄ ♦talk 06:02, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 7) Support. I've never come across LM5 before, but looks like a sensible choice for adminship: lots of experience, great contributions, no drama etc. Good luck! — sparklism hey! 06:47, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 8) Support Happy to support - "mop please"! <font color="#000888">Brookie :) { - he's in the building somewhere!}  (Whisper...) 08:42, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 9) Support Great all-rounder, who will make good use of the tools. Trusted nominators. Thank you to whoever added the note above that this isn't the user's 5th RFA, as like others that was my initial impression! It's certainly a good way of driving traffic to this request! Pedro : <font style="color:#accC10;background:#0000fa;"> Chat 09:07, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank goodness it wasn't their 2nd...it would have looked like their 52nd... Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; WER  12:36, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * On the other hand, it gave me a good laugh. Epicgenius (talk) 20:30, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * BTW, @Dennis Brown, it would be "Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Little Mountain 5 2", not "Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Little Mountain 52". Epicgenius (talk) 00:43, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * This is nothing, I remember when 7's second RfA... --  At am a  頭 23:31, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Holy crap, that was almost four years ago now... Kurtis (talk) 07:12, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) Support - no issues at all, good luck! GiantSnowman 12:18, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 2) Support - from all I can find, not just a "net positive", but an unconditional positive. So let's make sure it doesn't get to the 52nd, then --Stfg (talk) 12:56, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 3) Support Seems a no-brainer. Dougweller (talk) 13:23, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 4) Support No concerns. Widr (talk) 15:55, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 5) Support, a good candidate. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  16:50, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 6) Support Epicgenius (talk) 20:24, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 7) Support Good personal interactions with the candidate; has my full trust.  Spencer T♦ C 21:59, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 8) Stephen 23:24, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 9) Support Per the candidate's answer to my question. § FreeRangeFrog croak 23:28, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 10) As the co-nominator! Acalamari 23:34, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Lol, I was about to say that your vote is like the longest time between the nom goes live and the nominator supporting (in a while) and then I saw that has yet to vote!  → Call me   Hahc  21  02:59, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Uh. I completely forgot. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:59, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) Support Good answers, solid contributor, well rounded, should be a good administrator. Areas of interest always need help. Recent editing history alleviates any concern about lowered edit counts in 2012 and 2013. Donner60 (talk) 23:35, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 2) Support No question. We haven't collaborated a lot, but I'm well aware of, and have learned a lot, from his great work and know of his reasoned temperament around the wiki. ---Esprqii (talk) 00:09, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 3) Ok. WorldNewsKid (talk) 01:08, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 4) A panicked, oh my goodness I forgot to support as the co-nom. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:59, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 5) Support Obvoiusly a great editor worthy of the wet mop. I also thought this is your 5th RfA! Japanese Rail Fan (talk) 07:56, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 6) Support. I'm convinced that this user can be trusted with the uniform, the keys, and the mop and pail. He is very competent and a friendly editor to work with, as far as I can see. Good luck on your adminship! --k6ka (talk &#124; contribs) 11:57, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 7) Support Trustworthy nom and good answers to questions. Will be fine with the mop.  Mini  apolis  13:35, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 8) Support--Need you as a sysop. <font style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0em 0em 0.8em,#FF4500 -0.8em -0.8em 0.9em,#90EE90 0.7em 0.7em 0.8em;color:#696969"> The Herald 14:09, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 9) Support to avoid the user having to run a new RfA which would be confusingly titled Little Mountain 5 2.  Snowolf How can I help? 14:49, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 10) Support - Kraxler (talk) 15:29, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 11) Support Nom is certainly worth of becoming an admin, my best wishes for your adminship. Andromedabluesphere440 (talk) 15:31, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 12) Support - Though it does seem a little troubling that Ed took so long to decide whether he should support or not. Parsecboy (talk) 15:33, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 13) Support Familiar with this editor's work - high quality. Review of talk page posts shows good communication style.  Experienced enough to have a good grasp of policy.  Price of this vote - Little Mountain 5 must work on at least one British Columbia watercourse article in the next six months ;)  The Interior  (Talk) 15:39, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 14) all of my yes Cloudchased (talk) 16:05, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 15) I'll add one more to the Support !votes that are Mountain up here. Newyorkbrad (talk) 17:10, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * High-5 for that comment. I didn't think it was possible, but I found a worse pun. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:12, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Perhaps we'd all better run for the hills. Newyorkbrad (talk) 14:42, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) Absolutely, yes. Surprised this hasn't happened years ago. Kurtis (talk) 18:49, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 2) Support. Although I share to some extant Axl's concerns, I think that the thoughtful answers to questions and edit history give enough assurance that this editor will not do anything overly hasty with the mop. --Randykitty (talk) 20:43, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 3) Support. Looks good.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:40, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 4) Good candidate.  Take your time once you have the tools.  Risker (talk) 23:11, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 5) Support -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 23:21, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 6) Support - Pile-up till it reaches 100. Anupmehra  - Let's talk!  23:26, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 7) Support My question hasn't been answered yet (I just posted it) but I'm ready to support now. The editor shows a great amount of knowledge in policy and guidelines, has a good attitude, has a focus on what areas of adminship to start out in, and has a great body of work in article space. If there was anything else I'd hope for, it was more experience in dispute resolution, but I can't fault someone for avoiding conflicts. --  At am a  頭 23:27, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 8) Support No concerns. Mkdw talk 23:39, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 9) Support. I can't forsee any problems here - Little Mountain 5 should make a fine admin. — <span style="color: #194D00; font-family: Palatino, Times, serif">Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 06:13, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 10) Support - Great candidate.  J i m Carter  ( talk ) 08:19, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 11) Support - Solid nomination for a trustworthy editor with very good experience. Best of luck! - <font face="Verdana" color="#522C1B"><font size="+1"> t u <font color="#417DC1">coxn \ talk 09:47, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 12) Support per nom. --John (talk) 10:38, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 13) Support Content creators need the tools. Hawkeye7 (talk) 12:05, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 14) Support <font color="#0E0">Jianhui67 T ★ C 14:00, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 15) Support – No concerns. EdJohnston (talk) 15:29, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 16) Support - just a good ol'fashioned pile-on.  78.26  (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 16:19, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 17) Support As strong a candidate as any other I've seen, I'm sure they'll be a masterful wielder of the mop. -<span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS,sans-serif;font-weight:bold;"> Iago Qnsi  16:21, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 18) Support I can't see LM5 rushing into CSD and nuking the lot. I've not seen him around that I can remember, which sometimes is a good thing... I am impressed by the answers and the support. Peridon (talk) 18:32, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 19) Support Looks like a solid candidate and, most importantly, level-headed and likely to use available tools with discretion. Liz  <sup style="font-family:Times New Roman;"><b style="color:#006400;">Read!</b> <b style="color:#006400;">Talk!</b> 19:03, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 20) Support --<font color="#E0115F">Amaryllis <font color="#74C365">Gardener talk 20:24, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 21) Support – I'm all for it! Although not a deciding factor, I especially like the candidate's name and dedication to their WikiProjects. Impressive work, and fine administrator they shall be &mdash; <b style="color:black;">MusikAnimal</b> <sup style="color:green;">talk 22:55, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 22) Support - Humbleness and quality, something I like. bpage (talk) 01:20, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 23) Support I like the answers, and have seen no red flags on my review of contributions. --kelapstick(bainuu) 12:52, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 24) Support This all looks very encouraging. Thank you for making yourself available as a candidate for adminship. And Adoil Descended (talk) 15:29, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 25) Support - Looking about. everything looks great. DocTree (ʞlɐʇ·ʇuoɔ) Join WER 17:09, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 26) Support. -- Another Believer  ( Talk ) 23:53, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 27) Support. I think LM 5 is too nice to become an administrator, but perhaps it will offset those of us (like me) who aren't as tactful. More seriously, but along the same lines, I don't agree with LM 5's answer to Q5. If there is actionable vandalism or BLP violations, an uninvolved administrator doesn't require a consensus to block the editor. In addition, BLPN is sometimes used as a springboard for a block, but it is not the same as ANI, AN, or AN3 in that regard. Nor is a consensus at BLPN required if an administrator believes there are clear BLP violations. LM 5's answer is too deferential, in my view.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:21, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 28) Oppose because I want to see everyone get confused by the title of the next one, Requests for adminship/Little Mountain 5 2 :-)  In all seriousness, I support this request because LM 5 has gone way past the point of "you should probably be trustworthy".  Longtime user, no blocks, extensive contributions, and you're definitely not the tendentious type.  I ran a search for "little mountain" in the WP:AN-and-subpages archives, and I got exactly three results: Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive90, where someone was reported because he was 8RR-ing against several people, including you; Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive809, where someone mentioned you in passing; and Administrators' noticeboard/Archive185, where people discussed secret pages.  If you were the tendentious, easily-offended or easily-causing-offense type of person, you'd appear in lots more of these pages.  Nyttend (talk) 00:56, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 29) Support - Per above really. <font color="Blue">Sports <font color="Orange">guy17  (<font color="Blue">T • <font color="Orange">C ) 00:59, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 30) Support Very good --<b style="color:#00B">cyrfaw</b><b style="color:#010"></b> ( talk ) 03:09, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 31) Support fully, Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 03:22, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 32) Support - Everything looks good to me, and the answers to the questions are satisfactory. Inks.LWC (talk) 05:12, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 33) Support - Adequate tenure, sufficient edit count, no indications of assholery. Nice spread of content work. Carrite (talk) 13:06, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 34) Support We haven't crossed paths, but I'm more than happy to offer my support. Jamesx12345 16:32, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 35) Support - With this level of pile-on, I admit to reflexively looking for trouble. I checked the content contributions, one or two of which reflect areas I've worked in as a photographer, and was both impressed and learned some things.  I looked for interactions with another editor I respect in the geography biz, and saw this editor had a barnstar from them. I looked for drama, couldn't find it. I looked for clue, could easily find that. What took you so long to RfA?  ;-)  --j⚛e deckertalk 17:02, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 36) Support Although I've never before interacted with this editor, the experience and temperament seem excellent, as does that featured article about a little mountain. I hope that the editor will consider writing an article or two about big mountains, as well as using the administrative toolset wisely.  Cullen <sup style="color:purple;">328  Let's discuss it  05:10, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 37) Support - haven't had much to do with the candidate (from my best recollection) but I have no concerns. Stalwart 111  13:12, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 38) Support - Clear answers to questions. Temperament seems right for the task. ```<em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:black">Buster Seven  <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:black"> Talk  15:50, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 39) Support. I don't have that much familiarity with the candidate, but everything that I have read here looks like a clear net positive. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:19, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 40) Support --<font face="Comic Sans MS" color="black">Rzuwig ► 20:28, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 41) Support. A name I've seen around always associated with somebody rational and sensible. By the looks of it, this is long overdue. HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  14:37, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 42)  Wizardman  22:49, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 43) Support, happy to do so. SlimVirgin (talk) 00:12, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Neutral

 * 1) Neutral. Little Mountain 5 is a good editor, with many helpful contributions. However I am concerned about his intention to work with CSD. Even with "uncontroversial" CSDs, some understanding of deletion criteria is necessary. Little Mountain 5 has not !voted at AfD for over five years, nor does he have a history of CSD tagging. There is potential for harmful deletion of CSDs.  Axl  ¤  [Talk]  11:56, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 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.