Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Misterrick


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

Misterrick
[ Vote here]  (2/20/1) ending 06:52 October 22 2005''' (UTC)

– I would like have the opportunity to serve the Wikipedia community on a higher level. I have made many contributions and have proved myself to be reliable, I am on and monitor the Wikipedia site on a regular basis and I get along with other Wikipedia users including many of the admins. In my contributions you will see that I have kept my composure when pages that had contributed to were vandalized, Either I or another Wiki user reverted the page back to it's original text without any outbursts or anger on my part. I have also created a few new Wikipedia article which I thought would be in the interest of the Wiki community. I would also keep my Internet Relay Chat program open and set to the #wikipedia channel on the freenode.net server in the event that a user (including admins and newbies) need to contact me posthaste. Misterrick 06:51, 15 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I hereby accept this nomination.

Support
 * 1) Support, been through the contributions and talk, this user is hardly a threat. If he wants the tools, he may have them. --Bjarki 14:32, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Merovingian (t) (c) ( e ) 21:57, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) Oppose - from his statement at the top and his answer to question 1, he seems to know little of what adminship entails and from his lack of edits to talk namespaces, he seems to have interacted little with the community at large. --Cel e stianpower hablamé 07:59, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * In response, I would like to say I do know what an adminship entails and I strongly disagree with your opinion that I have lacked interaction with the community at large, It is my personal and humble opinion that your post of opposition is nothing more then an attempt to antagonize me into posting an angry response and to make me look like I am not mature enough to handle an administratorship, I'm sorry I won't allow you to try to bring me down. Misterrick 10:16, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I feel I am entitled to oppose on these grounds and see no reason to get hot under the collar. I don't "bait" users (as you would probaly know if you watched RfA) as this is unkind and not very courteous. There is no need to attack my vote and many people below, it would seem, agree with me. --Cel e stianpower hablamé 21:10, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose I rarely oppose, and I think this is only the second or third time I've done so for a non trivial issue. I would like to know why you want to be an administrator? Is is to get the rollback function and block users while working on your favourite article who have conflicting interests? You've been here since 2003, and you have 1300+ edits, and hardly anything in namespaces other than the main namespace. Please explain with a valid reason why you have a diparity in distribution wrt time. Since you contribute in the main namespace I have some questions: I've checked your upload log, but I still need some answers, how well do you know about image copyrights? Do you know the correct formats to use? It seems to me that you don't know anything about Fair use and copyrights. Can you prove me wrong? I also checked out the Mohegan Sun article. Do you know wikipedia's target audience? The article is slightly larger than a stub; why do like the article so much? Are you aware that driving directions are not considered encyclopedic?  =Nichalp   «Talk»=  08:43, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Ok, to answer your first question the main reason is not so I can go around banning people at a whim, I want to seriously work on Wikipedia to look at and help improve the vast number of articles, Only under dire circumstances and with consultation of other admins would I take any serious actions such as blocking a user either temporarily or permanently in response to your second question, Yes I do understand the concept of copyright and fair use, In fact I would like to point out that I am the owner and the co-owner of several registered U.S. Copyrights, Because of the type of business that I work in I need to be knowledgeable on current U.S. and International copyright and trademark laws and yes I am aware that driving directions are not encyclopedic but in the case of the driving distances listed in Mohegan Sun that is more for information purposes then anything else. Misterrick 10:16, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I doubt if Image:Jimboyd-tec.jpg qualifies as Fairold. Looks more like film-screenshot to me. (Plus, you've uploaded mostly static .gif files). I won't stoop to oppose you on such flimsy grounds, but I was just wondering if you knew about licences ,since you work in the article namespace and have been here for quite sometime. Now admins have been granted special tools: the blockuser, delete and protect page. (I won't include rollback here). Well, since you want to help improve the vast number of articles, how do you intend using these tools to actually "improve" articles? I usually like to extend my support to editors in their RFA nom, but I can find numerous problems with Mohegan Sun and Ramada, such as the lack of references. If you have solely worked on a better article, please let me know. Most of your recent edits were marked as minor, and I haven't found any real major contributions going back 100 edits or so in the article namespace. (I may be wrong). You also haven't answered my first question. I have no problems with low edit counts, provided you can give me a satisfactory reason, and those edits are valuable to the encyclopedia. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  20:22, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) weak Oppose well, his reaction to the first oppose makes me wonder if this user can handle disagreement: "I'm sorry I won't allow you to try to bring me down. Misterrick 10:16, 15 October 2005 (UTC)" ??? Besides, adminship isn't needed to improve articles and correct misspellings. -- (drini's page| &#x260E; ) 15:30, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose your edit count and distribution seems okay, but your reasons for wanting adminship are misguided. You have done scant RC patrol, you haven't been active in voting here at RfA at all. You have been active at IFD and AFD, which is good. Your edit summary usage looks fairly high, which is good. Stay active at IFD/AFD, do more RC patrol, vote more in community events such as RfA, and next time, give us a better reason of why you need the admin tools and I will have no problem supporting. -Greg Asche (talk) 16:15, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose per Drini...woops...got a little confused there... freestylefrappe 18:39, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Huh? =Nichalp   «Talk»=  20:22, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I think he meant Drini. &Euml;vilphoenix Burn! 20:34, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * No, I don't think he did. The candidate is going to be hung by his own words. -Splash talk 21:14, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Don't bite. Marskell 22:38, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I didn't. And anyone who comes to RfA is not (or should not be) a newbie. -Splash talk 00:33, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Huh? You mean anyone who noms or is nominated? A newbie can stumble across this page and still contribute usefully. By don't bite, I just meant "hey, he's going to be opposed, no need to rub it in." Marskell 10:55, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose per Drini. &Euml;vilphoenix Burn! 20:34, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose per everyone above&mdash;especially his reaction to Celestianpower's vote. Or an   e    (t)   (c)   (@)  20:59, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose. If that was the intent of Celestianpower's vote, it appears to have worked. Also, the answer to Q1 misunderstands the nature of adminship. It is not the role of admins to monitor Wikipedia's articles any more than other editors. They are not moderators, they are janitors. -Splash talk 21:14, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose, per all those reasons given. Privat  e   Butcher  21:17, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose Don't like the reasons he gave. --JAranda'' | watz sup 00:10, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Strong Oppose His response to Celestianpower showed to me that he's unable to deal with disputes in a constructive way, his edit count is low, the response to answer #1 shows a complete misunderstanding of admin duties(regarding asking for consensus before doing anything, which almost sounds like someone would need to babysit him), and the final nail in the coffin was the self nom per my views on them at User:Karmafist/wikiphilosophies. Karmafist 02:13, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose I've seen Celestianpower here for quite some time, and he neither baits nor bites. The above response seems to assume bad faith. BD2412  talk 05:05, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) Oppose. Sorry to pile on, but he's hung himself.  User:Zoe|(talk) 05:23, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 9) Oppose - agree with Celestianpower and Drini. User seems naive in the ways of Wikipedia. --Scott Davis Talk 07:52, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 10) Oppose for reasons already stated by Drini and others -- Francs2000 [[Image:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg|25px| ]] 22:34, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 11) Oh Dear God No! waaaaaay too green of a user to even ponder the chance of rollback and blocking powers, responses to some of the above opposition votes makes me wonder if this person can take criticism at all without considering it a personal attack.  ALKIVAR &trade;[[Image:Radioactive.svg|18px|]] 00:26, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 12) Oppose, which I don't think I've ever done, as per the response to Celestianpower. Immediately going into a defensive stance and violating WP:AGF because of criticism is a disqualifier in my book. If you become an admin, you'll be faced with vandals with much less scruples than an admin has. Tito xd (?!?) 21:04, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 13) Oppose. Sorry about piling on, but I have to agree with Celestianpower and Drini. Needs more experience first, and we'll see what happens. Sjakkalle (Check!)  14:43, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 14) Oppose. Response to Celestianpower is worrying. the wub  "?!"  16:21, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 15) Support per Bjarki--Rogerd 04:28, 19 October 2005 (UTC) Oppose after reviewing responses, I have changed my mind--Rogerd 00:01, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Neutral
 * 1) Neutral. I oppose this candidate's becoming an admin, but he already hasn't a snowball's chance of succeeding, so I didn't think it was worth the bother to pile up on the oppose votes. &mdash; J I P  | Talk 18:10, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Comments
 * Please fix your ending time. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  07:16, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 1,385 edits per Kate's Tool, although I can't vouch 100% for the link due to the new essay Kate's put on there, and speaking of which, is there any way to just circumvent that essay page? Remind me to ask Kate later if nobody knows. Karmafist 02:13, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Good 'ol Kate is making it hard to access the tool for a reason. Down with editcountitits!Borisblue 02:41, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * A chart showing this user's edits along with a total # of edits line and average edits per day line is available here: Image:Misterrick-edits.png. I offer this not as a more refined version of editcountitis, but as just one tool to help evaluate an admin nominee with a somewhat low edit count on Wikipedia.--Durin 14:24, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Use of edit summaries is virtually 100%. Average edits per day is stable, and less than 2 per day. --Durin 14:24, 17 October 2005 (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. To monitor Wikipedia's articles to find errors and misspellings etc.. in the articles and fix them promptly and to help keep a watch for unscrupulous users and take appropriate action only with a consensus approval of Wikipedia Administrators.


 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * A. I am most pleased with two articles Mohegan Sun and Ramada because with Mohegan Sun I was able to take an article which had almost no information and turn it into a fully functioning page of information and for Ramada I was able to create a brand new article about a subject which has not yet been touched.


 * 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?
 * A. Yes, most recently Mohegan Sun in which an unregistered user kept vandalizing the page I in response left a warning on their talk page asking them not to vandalize the page any further and even after several admins and I reverted the changes this user in turn responded by using threats and foul language I then contacted a Wikipedia Admin on the #Wikipedia IRC chat server and requested that they look into this and if possible to block them from further editing which was done. I remained calm and level headed during this entire time.


 * The above 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 article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.