Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Rhobite

Rhobite
Rhobite's been doing a great job the past few days dealing with the edit warring on Libertarian-related articles. As Func put it, he's "a model of NPOV and consensus building". Contribs say he's been here since June, with about 1500 total edits (lots of them very good, e.g. Dick Morris). RadicalSubversiv E 00:21, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * I thank you for your kind words and accept the nomination. Rhobite 01:34, Oct 17, 2004 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) RadicalSubversiv E 00:21, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 2) Absolutely. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (hopefully!)]] 00:37, Oct 17, 2004 (UTC)
 * Yes, user may have opinions but is not blinded by them, Glad to compromise. Progress orientated. Sam [Spade] 00:55, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 1) Hard worker and knows how to work collaboratively. --Slowking Man 01:39, Oct 17, 2004 (UTC)
 * 2) Definite support. p.s. Dick Morris looks just fantastic, hard to believe its only been touched by one editor so far. &mdash;Stormie 02:03, Oct 17, 2004 (UTC)
 * 3) Such incredibly strong support. In fact, if I may quote myself, Rhobite is "a model of NPOV and consensus building", and you may quote me on that. :) func(talk) 03:00, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 4) Definitely. A valuable contributor and I believe he'll take adminship very seriously. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:06, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 5) Conscientious, hard working. Duk 04:34, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 6) Sarge Baldy 05:31, Oct 17, 2004 (UTC)
 * 7) Lst27 15:52, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 8) Theresa Knott (The torn steak) 18:11, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 9) Tuf-Kat 20:51, Oct 17, 2004 (UTC)
 * 10) Any admin-nominated contributor who is described as a model of consensus building gets my unqualified support. ffirehorse 21:41, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 11) Strikes me as being good admin material. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 21:48, 2004 Oct 17 (UTC)
 * 12) *Good idea, very active in editing impartially. -- ReithySockPuppet 22:52, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC) Sockpuppet and proud, indeed. ReithySockPuppet 07:07, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Err. Obvious sockpuppet; user has 7 edits. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 02:20, 2004 Oct 18 (UTC)
 * 1) **I like when they self-identify, (not all of them do, of course....) func(talk) 14:19, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 2) ** Prejudice against SockPuppets must end in our lifetime. I have spoken. ReithySockPuppet 03:18, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 3) Andre ( talk )A| 23:23, Oct 17, 2004 (UTC)
 * 4) Michael Snow 01:20, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 5) {&Alpha;&nu;&#940;&rho;&iota;&omicron;&nu;} 07:40, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 6) On second thought, yes: support. --fvw 03:36, 2004 Oct 19 (UTC)
 * 7) Fire Star 20:57, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 8) Helpull person!, protects users from abuseChuck F 13:04, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 9)  &#8475; yan! |  Talk  16:41, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * 10) I and my sockpuppets give unswerving support. - Lucky 6.9 23:22, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 11) Support. A model of NPOV editing. If he can watch so many controversial articles for POV without going nuts, he's unflappable.   &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 20:11, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 12) Support. As it says above "a model of NPOV and consensus building". Ruy Lopez 01:19, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 13) Jayjg 17:34, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 14) Strong support. Cool Hand Luke (Communicate!)  18:50, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Oppose Neutral
 * 1) Too few edits. Passw0rd 12:48, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 2) * User has less than 100 (questionable) edits. Probable sock puppet. -- Netoholic @ 04:51, 2004 Oct 24 (UTC)
 * 3) Short on total edits (I prefer 2000+).  Also, some unresolved accusations of sock puppet use in the Request for mediation that involves this user. It can't hurt to wait some more time to see the outcome. -- Netoholic @ 04:51, 2004 Oct 24 (UTC)
 * #Lots of wonderful maintanence, I'd like to see a little more contribution of original material though (I haven't reviewed the entire contrib history, if I've just missed a large cache of original contribs point me to it here on or on my talk page please). Even though I don't endorse the sysop nomination per se I do greatly admire your good work, please keep it up! --fvw 06:31, 2004 Oct 17 (UTC)

Comments

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.)


 * I'm drawn to controversial topics here, and I've put in effort on mediating disputes between users on several "lightning rod" pages. While it's not the first step, the ability to do a quick revert or block an anonymous vandal would be helpful. I currently watch many controversial articles such as Circumcision, Libertarianism, Fahrenheit 9/11, and I've reverted vandalism and POV injection on all of these articles in the past. As a sysop I'd keep an eye on recent changes, and continue participating in VfD. Rhobite 01:34, Oct 17, 2004 (UTC)


 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?


 * I just wrote Dick Morris for Danny's contest, and I'm pleased with the result. Writing from scratch is hard work but I recommend it. It's an opportunity to structure an article in the way you feel best presents the information. I think more people should write from scratch, and use their experience to be bold in restructuring existing articles they come across. I helped rewrite the criticism section in Windows XP, and I'm happy with how that turned out. I wrote Cross-Bronx Expressway and worked on several US Interstate articles, recently I've been interested in "road" topics. Probably the most enjoyable activity for me is submitting original photography. These are my contributions, not much yet but I plan to do more. Rhobite 01:34, Oct 17, 2004 (UTC)


 * 3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress?


 * I'd be lying if I said no. I have been involved in disputes over article content, and I have written an RFC regarding a user's conduct. I tried to help people work towards NPOV in the circumcision edit war from a month or two ago. Each side accused me, along with other editors, of helping the other side. I respect people who try to steer clear of conflicts, but that's not my style. Recently I've been trying to keep activists at bay in the libertarianism-related edit wars and vandalism sprees. As I said, I want to work on controversial topics and help ensure that facts are presented fairly. I've found that some editors who start out as POV edit warriors can quickly mature into valuable contributors, and it's important for us to work with them instead of push them away. Rhobite 01:34, Oct 17, 2004 (UTC)