Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Shanes

Shanes
final (37/3/0) ending 01:34 29 April 2005 (UTC)

Shanes has been around since November 2004, and has accumulated about 2700 edits. Many of those come from his dedicated patrol of the Recent Changes page, where he reverts vandalism on a regular basis. In spite of his mission to eradicate silly edits as soon as they appear, his userpage suggests that he is quite welcoming and sympathetic to newcomers who accidentally make goofy mistakes, as we all have done. I think Shanes would make a fine administrator, and a powerful but kind possessor of the mop and scrub bucket. It is also telling that, in spite of his many reversions of vandalism, his talk page isn't overflowing with angry comments. Joyous 01:37, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)


 * Candidate please indicate acceptance of the nomination here
 * I accept. Shanes 02:02, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) Joyous 01:37, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, yes I'm very familiar with his RC work. He could certainly make use of that rollback button. &mdash; oo64eva (AJ) (U @  01:42, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) Excellent choice for admin. I'm particularly impressed with his cool-headedness in dealing with vandals and trolls. Antandrus 01:48, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Support-JCarriker 02:11, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Support. SWAdair | Talk  02:51, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Support-gadfium 02:54, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Support with both hands. Thanks for dealing with vandals. Pavel Vozenilek 03:08, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Support. Apparently humble and mopworthy. --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 03:48, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Shanes has done excellent work dealing with vandals and trolls. But he does not have access to the admin Rollback feature that would help him even more. Zzyzx11 | Talk 04:08, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I also fear he won't be as effective if he cannot speedy delete articles. Zzyzx11 | Talk 04:11, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) Support Mel Etitis ( &Mu;&epsilon;&lambda; &Epsilon;&tau;&eta;&tau;&eta;&sigmaf; ) 08:51, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Support. jni 12:15, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Support. Rje 13:41, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Support: does good work that would be much-aided by admin abilities, and I look favorably on anyone who deals regularly with reverting vandalism and still believes in treating newcomers kindly and patiently. (OK, I approve of the Erd&#337;s number bit and the not waking up early, too, but that doesn't influence my decision here. :-)) Mindspillage (spill yours?) 15:53, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) M e r o v i n g i a n  (t) (c) 16:02, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Support.Sarge 17:53, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Support. &#9999; Oven Fresh  ²  21:49, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) Support. A good all-round contributor. Sjakkalle 09:10, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 9) Support, not reason not to. --Bjarki 00:29, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 10) Support for reasons listed above. Firebug 07:22, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 11) dab (&#5839;) 18:30, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 12) Support.  JYolkowski // talk 23:17, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 13) Support I like your atitude and I respect the opinion of some of your supporters.  Good luck.  Tony the Marine
 * 14) My rare appearance in this page as Im usually working writing articles. 27 edits in a span of about eight hours says it all. Likes to be nice to newcomers, something that a lot of wikipedians werent to me three years ago, with the exceptionof a few like Mav. Loves to revert vandalism. With all that said Definite Support "Antonio He's got a Ticket to Ride Martin"
 * 15) Support. --Chammy Koala 14:53, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 16) Andre ( talk ) 20:01, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * 17) Support. Appears to be an editor who works well with others. Jonathunder 23:41, 2005 Apr 25 (UTC)
 * 18) Support. Great RC patrol work that could definitely benefit from rollback. And good use of edit summaries. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 08:57, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 19) Support--Jondel 09:51, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 20) Cool. JuntungWu 11:58, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 21) Support. Diligent in vandalism control. -- M P er el ( talk 21:25, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * 22) Support Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd  12:13, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * 23) Kbdank71 13:29, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 24) Support. Jayjg (talk)  17:22, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 25) Support. Kelly Martin 17:38, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * 26) Support. Adam Bishop 06:51, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 27) Support. PedanticallySpeaking 18:29, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * 28) Support. +sj +  01:55, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) Oppose Does not meet my admin criterion, jguk 07:15, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose. No offense meant in this at all. i just feel that shanes needs more experience working in and with the community at large. i imagine i would support at a later date. Kingturtle 17:33, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose. Doesn;t meet the admin criterion of Jguk's. THE KING 08:42, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Neutral

Comments
 * Shanes currently has 2719 total edits: 2177/76 to articles/talk, 29/222 to User/talk, 163/16 to Wikipedia/talk, 18/1 to Image/talk, 8 to Category, 6/1 to Template/talk, and 2 to Help. &mdash;Korath (Talk) 01:47, Apr 22, 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. I'll be continuing doing RC-Patrolling, and the Rollback-feature sounds like something that would make my job simpler. Deleteing obvious speedy-articles would also save me and other admins work, and the same goes for obvious uploaded prank or vandalism pictures (yeah, I know, I'll be carefull with that). My oppinion regarding blocking, is that some admins tend to use it too often, and I'll only use it as a very last resort myself. But there have been many times while doing RC-patrolling that I have missed having that option. So, yes, some blocking, too.


 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * A. No. And I'm abit ashamed of that. I wish I had lots of FA to brag about, but I haven't yet. Maybe some day. I've ansvered that question now, right? If someone wants to know about articles I've contributed significantly to, I can list those (there are a few), but I'm not proud or anything about them. That's why I don't brag about them on my userpage...


 * 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 will deal with it in the future?
 * A. Except from receiving some anger from vandals, I've never been in any serious conflicts. The only time I've done 3 reverts (except vandalism stuff) over content-disputes is on the Asia Carrera article. But it was really nothing serious. Appart from that I've maybe been abit quick to revert on the Karl Rove article and maybe World War II and Jesus, but I think I can defend all my actions everywhere. I try to resolve conflicts the recomended way on talk-pages and by not being stressed up by any insults. Even insults are (believe it or not) usually made in good faith, and people are very different in how they perceive them both when giving and taking. I think it's both a human and culture thing.