Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Rschen7754


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

Rschen7754
final (24/1/1) ending 05:02 December 16, 2005 (UTC)

– I would like to nominate Rschen7754 for adminship. He/she has been here since March and is a excellent road contributor who has created the U.S. Roads and U.S Highways wikiproject. She does heavy grunt work in templates and categories and does good cleanup in general. He/she is also kind and civil who respect POV and also has a decent amount on wiki namespace. I think Rschen7754 would make a good admin. Jaranda wat's sup 04:01, 9 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept (once I finish answering the questions of course) . BTW, it's "he." --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 04:32, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) "Nominator was late" support Keep constructing those highway and road articles. -- a.n.o.n.y.m  t 05:15, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Support I see no reason to not trust this editor with admin tools.--MONGO 08:02, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Although I find most highway articles inherently boring, that's no reason not to support this user. Should be fine. [[Image:Flag_of_Europe_and_Austria.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 08:16, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Support Very good contributor. Tintin 13:25, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Support looks fine to me.Gator (talk) 14:51, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Support, unlikely to abuse administrator tools. Christopher Parham (talk) 17:39, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Support, oh, what the hey. &mdash; J I P  | Talk 19:21, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) Support This user has participated in delete discussions, and talk pages in addition to article space. So what if most of it was related to highways?  As per MONGO and Christopher Parham, this user is unlikely to abuse administrator tools. --rogerd 15:06, December 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * 9) Late nominator support as nom --Jaranda wat's sup 20:37, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 10)  Oran   e    (t)   (c)   (e-mail)  20:53, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 11) Merovingian 01:25, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 12) Support. &mdash;Kirill Lokshin 03:16, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 13) Support - Has made strong, encyclopedic contributions and has done nothing to indicate he would abuse administrative powers. FCYTravis 03:45, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 14) Suppport - very good contributor. atanamir 18:40, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 15) Support Martin 00:06, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 16) Support - I stumbled into something I didn't like that had been going on in the California State Route Project, and found Rschen7754 willing to work with me despite the fact that it required major rework on 200+ articles. It's true he works mainly in a specialized area, but admins are needed everywhere -- Mwanner | Talk 00:26, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 17) Support As several editors said above, this editor is not likely to mis-use the admin tools, which is most of the ball game. Rx StrangeLove 02:20, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 18) You know what? I'm sold. Support as above. Lord Bob 02:32, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 19) Support. El_C 04:39, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 20) Support. In my interactions with Rschen7754, I've found him to be knowledgeable about Wikipedia policies and conventions. howcheng   [ t &#149; c &#149; w &#149;  e  ] 23:15, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 21) Support, HGB 01:50, 13 December 2005 (UTC).
 * 22) Support, Scott5114 02:11, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 23) Support Izehar (talk) 19:50, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 24) Support, -- PRueda29 Ptalk29 07:02, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Oppose
 * Oppose. I freely admit that I am an un-fan of most road and highway articles. So, with that fair disclosure out of the way...the contributor's edits seem extremely specialized to road and highway stuff, and on top of only being a member since April, he leaves me a little bit cold. But I gotta say, I could be talked out of this one. Lord Bob 07:18, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Only been here since April? I have only been here since April! 8 months is sufficient! R  e  dwolf24  (talk)  Attention Washingtonians!  08:44, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * If you poke around a little with Interiot's tool, you see that many admins currently being accepted have only been really active for a couple months. At an average of 500 edits a month (16 edits a day, a pretty easy pace), it only takes 4 months to hit 2000 edits.  And even User:BD2412, who was accepted with a record-breaking number of Support votes, had only been here since February '05.  --Interiot 20:15, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * You're right. That was dumb of me. I stand by the vote because of not being a well-rounded editor, but that whole only-been-around-since-April thing was fatigue-induced moronity. Lord Bob 21:37, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I revoke my own vote. Lord Bob 02:32, 12 December 2005 (UTC)


 * 1) Oppose. For now, although Rschen7754 is doing hard work on state roads and highways, I do not think that they would make a good admin. Blank Verse 09:32, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Neutral
 * 1) Weak Oppose users' response to question #1 leaves me feeling they are either unsure of what an admins duties are (RC patrolling doesnt really require adminship), or would be sticking mostly to content creation. I just dont get the feeling this user needs the mop and bucket for what they are doing. You can probably persuade me to change my vote, if you gave a more specific reasoning for why you want admin powers.   ALKIVAR &trade;Radioactivity symbol.png 10:10, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
 * changed to Neutral.  ALKIVAR &trade;Radioactivity symbol.png 05:57, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Comments
 * I would just recommend that you use edit summaries more and make longer edit summaries. Otherwise good work. -- a.n.o.n.y.m  t 05:27, 9 December 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 check out Category:Wikipedia backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
 * A. I anticipate doing whatever needs to be done... if I see a need I'll go over to that page and fix things. However, I'll probably focus on RC patrol and vandalism because there is no end to it! I tend to do most of my Wikipedia work on Friday nights and over the weekend and summer, and during these times I would be doing administrative tasks on Wikipedia. However, I would put on my watchlist the pages where non-administrators can report cases of urgent vandalism and page protects to ensure the integrity of the encyclopedia and to ensure that there is not much lag between the time that someone sends an SOS and when someone responds to it.

(added a few days later) There are areas on Wikipedia that need someone to work on... like today I noticed Category:Candidates for speedy deletion. There are quite a few items there that should be deleted (including inappropriate images) that have been tagged but need an administrator. I'd look for areas like that and take care of them.


 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * A. It's not so much a specific article that I'm pleased about, although I am satisfied with my contributions California State Route 76 and California State Route 78. I started the WikiProjects WikiProject Washington State Highways, WikiProject U.S. Interstate Highways, WikiProject U.S. Highways, WikiProject U.S. Roads. I also helped another user start WikiProject New Hampshire State Highways. As well as the above I am a major contributor to WikiProject California State Highways, and I do help out WikiProject Kentucky State Highways, WikiProject Missouri State Highways, and WikiProject California County Routes.


 * 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. Inevitably, when you are involved in editing highway articles you do get involved in disputes. I have had a few in the past, and I have remained civil while defending a controversial position. While I have made my share of mistakes before, I believe that I have remained civil during debates. I plan to remain civil in the future and to offer compromises when nothing else seems to be working. I would never use my administrative privileges to gain an unfair advantage during a conflict, however (unless a rule of Wikipedia was clearly being broken).


 * 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.