Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Peruvianllama 2


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

Peruvianllama
final (82/1/0) ending 11:39, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

– Peruvianllama is neither a llama nor from Peru. He is, however an exemplary Wikipedian with about 5,100 edits, and has been with us for almost two years. He reverts an awful lot of vandalism and takes the time to issue a warning template on nearly every occasion. He uses edit summaries 100% of the time, often very detailed ones at that, and doesn't push POV or participate in edit wars. The llama has no natural enemies except for the vandals who insult him, including those who parodied him at YTMND.com wikipediaisrunbyvirgins.ytmnd.com/. When he became aware of this, he merely shrugged it off as usual (just see his talk page) and added it to WP:BJAODN. His user page gets anonymously vandalized quite a bit, and I offered to semi-protect it for him, but he declined (I think he enjoys the vandalism, actually). I supported his first nomination, which occurred at about the same time as mine, but he declined that as well, and I'm still trying to figure out why, as I believed, and still do believe, him to be more qualified than myself. So let's give him the mop, eh? &mdash; F REAK OF N URxTURE  ( [ TALK ] )  10:28, Jan. 22, 2006


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I cheerfully accept. --P e ruvianLlama(spit) 11:43, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) Heh-heh-I'm-faster-than-y'all-support &mdash; F REAK OF N URxTURE  ( [ TALK ] )  10:28, Jan. 22, 2006
 * 2) Support. For some reason, I thought he was an admin already. --Woohookitty(cat scratches) 12:15, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Support Definitely. Jacoplane 12:17, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Support and uphold the rights of Peruvians and Llamas everywhere --Deiz 12:36, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 5) Support: --Bhadani 12:41, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 6) Support has plenty of experience across wikipedia, will make a good admin. --pgk( talk ) 12:44, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 7) Support. I think Mr P Llama will make a good one. Tintin Talk 13:05, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 8) Llamas are llovely J I P | Talk 13:06, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 9) Double edit conflicted support. — FireFox • T • 13:07, 22 January 2006 
 * 10) Non-restricted-support for the non-Peruvian non-Llama --Alf melmac 13:19, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 11) Support. jni 14:50, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 12) Support most edits vandalism related, but other ones too. I support the man who thinks he's a llama from Peru. -- a.n.o.n.y.m  t 15:56, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 13) Super Freak Support —Locke Cole • t • c 16:47, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 14) Edit-conflict Support. I'm delighted to cast my first RfA vote to someone who passes all my RfA criteria. Especially for "talk page" and "Mistakes/Errors in judgment" --Petros471 16:52, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 15) Extreme "zOMG!!!111oneeleventy-one" support per cliché. --Cel e stianpower háblame 16:57, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 16) Yes please! Llamas and Alpacas of the world, arise! - Phædriel  ♥ tell me - 17:15, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 17) Support good candidate --rogerd 17:57, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 18) Strong Support --Jaranda wat's sup 18:13, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 19) Support. He will make good use of the tools, as evidenced by his vandal-hunting without them. Rje 18:26, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 20) Support &mdash;Quarl (talk) 2006-01-22 19:21Z 
 * 21) Support Of course - he introduced me to the CVU! (Have any of you ever heard the llama song?) -- M  @  th  wiz  2020  20:36, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 22) Support. --TantalumT e lluride 21:06, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 23) Support Johann Wolfgang 21:08, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 24) Support What lovely creatures llamas are. Xoloz 21:48, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 25) support William M. Connolley 23:12, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 26) Support --Ugur Basak 23:48, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 27) Support  --  A dam1213 Talk http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Adam1213&amp;action=edit&amp;section=new + 00:02, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 28) Support –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 00:15, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 29) 100% LLAMA SUPPORT — M o e   ε  00:19, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 30) King of All the Franks 01:16, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 31) Support, unlikely to abuse admin tools. Christopher Parham (talk) 01:39, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 32) NSL E (T+C) 01:42, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 33) Support Great user. Olorin28 03:00, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 34) Support --NaconKantari (話)|(郵便) 03:01, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 35) Support. —Kirill Lok s hin 03:02, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 36) Support. Impressed by user's activity on user_talk pages (i.e.- understands the importance of warnings), will make a good admin. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 03:03, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 37) Support. UH-OH, IRC CABAL! (Actually, I just can't think of anything to say that hasn't already been said.) Mo0 [ talk ] 03:41, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 38) Support. 04:01, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 39) Support, of course. - Mailer Diablo 04:03, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 40) Baltimora Support A Tarzan Boy llama! Ronabop 05:53, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 41) Support. Blank Verse 06:50, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 42) Support. Good, responsible and sensible contributor. Sjakkalle (Check!)  07:40, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 43) Support --Terence Ong 09:56, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 44) Support this dedicated wikipedian. --Ghirla | talk 12:12, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 45) Support - good guy. --CBD ☎ ✉ 12:51, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 46) Support- Good editor Astrotrain 14:32, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 47) Support. edits look good, interactions have been positive. --Syrthiss 16:07, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 48) Support YTMND would be more than I could handle. You deserve adminship. Ashibaka tock 19:36, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 49) Support Compu  te  r  Jo  e 21:15, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 50) Strong support, multiple interactions with him have always been terrific. - dharmabum (talk) 01:31, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 51) Support - Gladly. Sango  123   (talk)  01:49, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 52) Support. -Rebelguys2 03:14, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 53) Support - seems to be a really nice editor abakharev 03:57, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 54)  Extreme Virgin Support!!!! (oh, wait, that's an old meme already). I would have nominated him myself, as he shows good judgment overall. Tito xd (?!? - help us) 06:28, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 55) Support, I see him around at night and he helps revert vandalism, good user. VegaDark 07:51, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 56) Support of course. I remember he stayed commendably cool over the St Francis High School incident, and I am certain he will make an excellent admin.  --RobertG ♬ talk 10:34, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 57) I seriously cannot believe you're not an admin yet. Johnleemk | Talk 11:14, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 58) Support++. Jonathunder 15:46, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 59) Support. Seems trustworthy; the wikibreak doesn't bother me. -Colin Kimbrell 16:19, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 60) Support. *drew 18:01, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 61) Support. Mihai -talk 22:31, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 62) Extreme Llama support Granted, my interaction with PeruvianLlama has been limited, but when I have come across him, he seems like a curteous and knowledgable guy.--Shanel 22:34, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 63) Support. Thanks for the tips and pointers. And getting me to spend my free time editing. Fireduck | Talk 01:04, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 64) Support We need more virgin admins. :P --Wikiacc (talk) 01:34, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 65) Support --MONGO 01:51, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 66) Big Spitting Camelid Support, An enemy of vandals is a friend of mine and mop worthy.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 01:52, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 67) SupportGood editor and vandal fighter. TMS63112 16:40, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 68) Support  Ban  e  z  16:40, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 69) Support. Ø  tVaughn05 talk<font face="Tahoma, helvetica" color="#007700">contribs 03:34, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 70) support, till the cows come homeBenon 08:01, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 71) support funky username. oh yeh, and he'd make a good admin, too └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 18:00, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 72) Support Great vandal fighter with whom I've had nothing but good experiences with. I trust him with the keys to the janitor's closet.  -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 01:19, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 73) Support. Good contibutions.-- Dakota ~  ε  02:02, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 74) I Support this quadruped. Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  09:07, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 75) Support--Bling-chav 13:24, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * User had < 15 edits at time of posting, all of which were to an RfA page. --P e ruvianLlama(spit) 18:54, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Support, per pgk and many others! --Joann e B 10:13, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Support. Mushroom 11:00, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Support. Why not? User seems great.[[Image:Weather rain.png]] Soothing R  13:16, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Support. Joyous | Talk 19:55, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 5) Support. -- DS1953 <sup style="color:green;">talk 01:56, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 6) Support. Not that I needed to, judging from the above, but pleased to anyway. Staffelde 14:36, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 7) Support. What else can I say about a llama? Ck lostsword 14:46, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) Oppose. Not been around enough. Pschemp | Talk 15:51, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) *You're kidding right? Users first contrib was on <tt>19:11, March 26, 2004</tt>. —Locke Cole • t • c 16:47, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) **No, not kidding, only 14 edits were made in the period from 3/2004 to 7/2005. As far as I'm concerned that means he only started doing anything meaningful in 7/2005. The bulk have been done only in the last four months. Pschemp | Talk 01:17, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) ***Editing seriously since July..seems long enough. — M o e   ε  01:24, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 5) ***And to add to Moe Epsilon's response, it's possible they were reading during that time and/or lurking. Anyways, I just wanted to make sure you didn't misread when their first contrib was. =) —Locke Cole • t • c 01:34, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

Comments


 * Edit summary usage: 100% for major edits and 100% for minor edits. Based on the last 150 major and 150 minor edits outside the Wikipedia, User, Image, and all Talk namespaces. Mathbot 11:45, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * See information about Peruvianllama's edits with tools.wikimedia.de/~interiot/cgi-bin/count_edits?user=Peruvianllama&dbname=enwiki_p Interiot's edit count tool or tools.wikimedia.de/~interiot/cgi-bin/contribution_tree?user=Peruvianllama&dbname=enwiki_p Interiot's edit history tool.



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 check out Category:Wikipedia backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
 * A. The majority of my edits are dealing with vandalism, so I don't expect that to change any time soon, and the benefits of SysOp rights for that are obvious. Historically I've tried to be somewhat active with AfDs, which I could also be closing as the need arose. I'd also like to make sure that articles tagged for speedy deletion are appropriately dealt with on a regular basis.


 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * A. I had a great time researching some content for http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hilbert%27s_thirteenth_problem&diff=26917670&oldid=26824169 an edit to Hilbert's thirteenth problem. I also started a stub for Klára Dobrev, which is almost certainly insignificant in terms of content or filesize, but was nonetheless alot of fun to research since I have no personal knowledge of Hungarian politics. I think one of Wikipedia's biggest strengths is its focus on breadth of content, and so using it to expand my own horizons is always a fun experience.


 * 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. The most stress I experienced as a Wikipedia user was over the Saint Francis High School article (since moved to Saint Francis High School (La Cañada Flintridge)). Being a relatively new user to RC patrol at the time, I was unversed in the ways of #wikipedia-en-vandalism or CDVF, and still used Special:Recentchanges. I encountered a fair amount of http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Saint_Francis_High_School_%28La_Ca%C3%B1ada_Flintridge%29&oldid=24861828 hostility (scroll down) from some anonymous editors who persisted in adding unencyclopaedic "schoolcruft" to the article - but after reporting the situation, some http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Saint_Francis_High_School_%28La_Ca%C3%B1ada_Flintridge%29&diff=24878853&oldid=24877286 very http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Saint_Francis_High_School_%28La_Ca%C3%B1ada_Flintridge%29&diff=24881899&oldid=24881755 kind http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Saint_Francis_High_School_%28La_Ca%C3%B1ada_Flintridge%29&diff=25396398&oldid=25396355 folk stepped in to revert the vandalism with what, at the time, seemed to me to be amazing speed, and also to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Peruvianllama&diff=24882470&oldid=24838202 reassure me that everything would be fine; it would all be taken care of. The whole thing was rather pivotal for my wiki-self since I realized that of course, almost everything on the Wiki can be undone or removed, so vitriol and nonsense is entirely transient.


 * As a relative newbie, I was also impressed by the sense of community as others removed vandalism from my user and talk pages. It was a nice feeling to be new to a group, and yet still be "defended" as one of them; I hope that I can pass the same sense of community on to others who are new to Wikipedia.

The following are some optional questions. There are no correct answers to these questions and I simply want to know your opinions rather than see a correct answer. Thanks! --Deathphoenix 03:22, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 4. When would you use &#123;{test1}}, and when would you use &#123;{bv}}?
 * A. I think the &#123;{bv}} template is a relatively harsh warning that should be reserved for those vandals that are, well, "blatant". The anonymous editor who blanks ten articles in two minutes, replacing them all with WoW or WiC nonsense is probably not simply misguided or uninformed about Wikipedia's policies, but is rather someone out to be disruptive. Someone who changes the user pages of the five admins they hate the most into redirects to asshole is also not doing so out of ignorance but out of intent to be disruptive. These are the users who should be warned quickly and pointedly that useful edits are welcome, but vandalism is not.


 * The &#123;{test1}} template is for the users at the complete opposite end of the spectrum, who are really and truly trying to figure out what this "edit" button really does anyway. At least for registered users, I sometimes prefer to post a &#123;{Welcome}}-style message instead since it partly serves the same purpose (to gently let the user know that their edits do have consequences) and it might seem more friendly and informative than a note about "vandalism" to a clueless newbie.


 * When in doubt, I think it's better to use a lower numbered test template than it is to scare off a potentially valuable editor.


 * 5. What would you do if a user reverts an article four times in slightly more than 24 hours? (Thus obeying the letter of WP:3RR.)
 * A. My understanding of WP:3RR is that it exists to set an upper limit for an action that can easily lead to a disruptive situation, like an edit war. So I think that should be the priority: preventing or limiting an edit war, or similar situation. If such a user was also refusing to engage in discussion or attempt to compromise, then that might warrant a block under WP:3RR. If the user was at least moderately engaged in reaching consensus, but at the same time neglected to measure the time between their edits, then that might not be worth a block.


 * I think the scenario you've outlined is fairly vague and so case-specific, but the user should at least be spoken with to see if there is a potential issue and if so, what its cause might be.


 * 6. In your opinion, when should you speedy delete an article under CSD A7 (unremarkable people or groups) and when should you nominate it for an AFD instead?
 * A. If the article does not make any claim to notability, and if it is apparent that there is no reasonable claim that could be made, then it should be speedily deleted under CSD A7. A biography on an editor's best friend at school would probably meet this requirement.


 * If the article makes a poor claim to notability, or if it seems that a claim could conceivably be made, then it should be taken to AfD instead. Potentially-non-notable musicians would fall into this category. If the article is in the grey area, then I think it's better to err in favour of community consensus through an AfD.


 * 7. How would you apply NPOV to a controversial article that you are editing?
 * A. If it's controversial, then hopefully the talk page will be active, so some consensus can be reached. If it can't be reached, then I could only write as neutrally as I am able, and perhaps leave a note on the talk page inviting others to comment on my edit.


 * 8. What are your greatest frustrations with Wikipedia?
 * A. The amount of discord that occurs because of disagreements over bureaucratic issues is saddening, but not at all surprising when you consider the number of differently opinionated people that Wikipedia brings together. And the amount of vandalism is frustrating, but also not at all surprising since Wikipedia is on this whole "internet" thing, where it's often easier to be destructive than creative.


 * ''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.