Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Oldelpaso


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

Oldelpaso
[ Final] (37/0/1); Ended Sat, 24 Mar 2007 09:34:14 (UTC)

- It is a pleasure to nominate one of the best editors I've come to know on Wikipedia. Oldelpaso has been a Wikipedian for over two years, since registering in February 2005, and became a more regular editor a few months later that year. He has accumulated in excess of 6,000 edits, distributed amongst the various namespaces, but his best work can be found in the article namespace where he has over 3,000 edits. He has been the main contributor, or one of the main contributors, on nothing less than five featured articles (Manchester City F.C., FIFA World Cup, Football (soccer), Premier League and City of Manchester Stadium) and a featured list (English football champions). You might notice his interrest in football, and I've been working regularly with him on WikiProject Football and various related articles since he signed up for the project in August 2005.

He is willing to learn from his mistakes, and he has shown his level-headedness in many of the conflicts that have passed during these two years. Having a lot of contributions in the article namespace, Wikipedia namespace and user talk namespace, he has a good understanding of policy, and I would fully trust him with the tools. I believe in a fair mix of administrators doing different tasks, some concentrate on mopping backlogs, some are specialists on dispute resolutions, some are great XfD closers, and some are like me, regular editors that mostly contribute to articles, but when an admin is needed, they're there and they solve the problems they are faced with. I admittedly can't speak for Oldelpaso, but I believe he is the later type, and he would be one of the best if trusted with the tools. – Elisson • T • C • 20:46, 16 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept, thank you. Oldelpaso 09:49, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for participants:
 * Questions for the candidate
 * 1. What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Administrative backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
 * A: As a sometime new page patroller, I'm well aware that CAT:CSD frequently reaches hundreds of items, particularly on Sunday mornings, and would welcome the ability to tackle some of it. Another area I feel I could help with is protection and unprotection. Quite a few pages on my watchlist regularly require semi-protection (mostly sports teams and high profile players). Being familiar with the type and levels of vandalism that occur at these pages, I have a good idea of when they need semi-protecting, and conversely when they should be unprotected. I won't be actively hunting for someone to block (my reports to WP:AIV are few in number), but I know my way around the test templates and blocking policy, and know what to do when the need arises. While my primary focus is article writing, I'm certainly not averse to maintenance tasks, for instance, an example of non-admin maintenance I already perform is updating the football article improvement drive each week. Oldelpaso 09:49, 17 March 2007 (UTC)


 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * A: I've contributed to a few featured articles, some collaboratively and some on my own. Each has its own rewarding aspects, but the first one is always the hardest, so Manchester City F.C. is the one I'm most proud of. Going through the stages of getting it to FA probably taught me more about what makes a good article and the relevant policies and guidelines than anything else has done. Also, while I don't think its as strong an FA as some of the others, football (soccer) is an FA standard vital article, and there aren't that many of those. Oldelpaso 09:49, 17 March 2007 (UTC)


 * 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 don't tend to get too stressed about happenings on Wikipedia, I find that doing so is usually a sign that I should so something else for a few hours - there's always tomorrow, and there's very little that needs to be done right this second, not in the context of a content dispute anyway. My most frustrating experience was probably trying to communicate with User:AlexWilkes, a well-meaning user who sometimes struggles to grasp the community aspect of Wikipedia. More recently, my making this AfD nomination resulted in a few heated exchanges, and serves as an example of why mass nominations are often a bad idea. I try to be open about my mistakes, and if I remember I list them in this page. Oldelpaso 09:49, 17 March 2007 (UTC)


 * General comments


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



Please keep criticism constructive and polite.

Discussion



Support Oppose
 * 1) Support Seems fine. Good luck! --Meno25 09:58, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Support. On review of the Wikipedia: namespace contributions, I find no objectionable edits, and many useful and level-headed contributions to XfD and other community processes. All looks good here. Sandstein 10:36, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Support great football contributions, and a good distribution of edits across WP. Good luck! The Rambling Man 10:51, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Support Great user. Good football contribs.--Natl1 (Talk Page) (Contribs) 12:04, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message! - 12:25, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Late support as nominator. – Elisson • T • C • 12:55, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Support The Evil Clown Please review me! 13:36, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Terence 15:46, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Support A good choice indeed for adminship. Captain  panda   In   vino   veritas  16:20, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) Support -- Agεθ020 ( ΔT  •  ФC ) 18:37, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) Support A good and level-headed hard-working editor. He will make a good admin.--Guinnog 19:16, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) Punkmorten 19:35, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 13) Support for all the above reasons. SteveO 20:03, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 14) Support Civil, helpful, productive. An asset to the WikiProject Football and in the other places he pops-up. Wiggy! 20:09, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 15) Support.  bibliomaniac  1  5  21:19, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 16) Support Everything looks fine to me.  Nish kid 64  21:20, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 17) Been waiting for this one, so much so I watchlisted it a while back awaiting its' creation :) Strong support, most certainly.  Daniel Bryant  22:06, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 18) Support, looks good to me. --Coredesat  23:13, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak support - still count it as a full support vote, though. Seventy ... dot ... 02:42, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Vote struck - sockpuppet of blocked user. Orderinchaos78 05:32, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Support The interest in handling speedy deletions from new page patrol is something I share. YechielMan 03:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Support Clichéd, I know, but I thought you already were one :) Orderinchaos78 05:32, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Support Oh, definitely. Great editor and Wikipedian, would certainly make a great admin. - An as Talk? 12:32, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Support, looks good, and ironically I deleted a page earlier called Ol Del Paso. &rArr;  SWAT  Jester    On Belay!  20:37, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Strong support. Yuser31415 21:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Support a good candidate --Steve (Stephen)talk 04:49, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Support looks good.-- danntm T C 13:40, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Jaranda wat's sup 20:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Has learned the Wikipedia Way from the ground up. Excellent researcher. I think he'll prove his worth as an admin. Dudesleeper · Talk 23:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) Support Good work, good answers, all around smiles from me.  Pig mandialogue 04:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) Support. Seems to be an excellent contributor and I see nothing which leads me to believe the mop will be abused. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihon joe 20:15, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) Support. Well qualified and demonstrated trustworthiness brings my support. -- Jreferee 20:29, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 13) Support-Seems good. Good answer to Q1. --TeckWiz Parlate Contribs@ 01:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 14) Support. Michael 19:19, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 15) Support although I don't see "City supporter" on his list of mistakes... ~ trialsanderrors 21:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 16) Support S. Miyano 14:20, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 17) Support One mop comin' up. Please don't abuse it. StayinAnon 19:05, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 18) Support - I have a slight reservation about how much this user really needs admin tools or will use them, but really there's no reason to turn down someone who is trustworthy and won't abuse the tools, even if their use of them is likely to be infrequent. It all helps. Metamagician3000 01:44, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 19) Support per nom, very nice candidate. Good luck with your adminship, Simon. Sarah 04:03, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Neutral
 * 1) I would like to see more indication of experience with conflict resolution from this user before I support. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 02:25, 23 March 2007 (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.