Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Diez2

User:diez2 run at Sat Jul 28 18:35:44 2007 GMT Category talk:	6 Category:	11 Image:	4 Mainspace	1000 Talk:	429 Template talk:	6 Template:	194 User talk:	1290 User:	76 Wikipedia talk:	90 Wikipedia:	1314 avg edits per page	 1.67 earliest	02:29, 25 August 2006 number of unique pages	2645 total	4420 2006/8	3	 2006/9	83	 2006/10	432	 2006/11	970	 2006/12	504	 2007/1	857	 2007/2	621	 2007/3	114	 2007/4	173	 2007/5	319	 2007/6	113	 2007/7	231

Deletion warnings
I trawled Diez's deleted edits and compiled some data on deletion tagging (speedy, prod, and AFD nominations). These are from the last 100 deleted edits, going back to this February:


 * 1) User:Gosswriter, another editor created a userpage for someone; no warning.
 * 2) Tom wimpelman, valid A7, no warning.
 * 3) Abbasieh, Israeli village, no warning
 * 4) The highest minster in power, nonsense, warned
 * 5) Shawn neldon, attack page, warned
 * 6) Myke walker, valid a7, warned
 * 7) Idris Jusoh, revert to replace a speedy tag, editor already warned
 * 8) Sadhvi Ritambhara, prod, created by an IP in 2005 in its only two edits, no warning or clear candidate for a warning
 * 9) George Fairholme, prod, similar situation with an IP, this one belong to a university
 * 10) Geoff Follin, prod, editor who created in 2005 is still active now, no warning
 * 11) Vitron, valid A7, warned
 * 12) Don Alhart, news anchor tagged as A7, warned
 * 13) BULLDOG BAR, valid G11 (spam), warned
 * 14) Howard burkons, valid g7, author blanked page, notified
 * 15) Adrian pittorino, attack page, warned
 * 16) Kovoism, initially prodded, later deleted through AFD, warned
 * 17) Colony (CMS), via AFD, created by IP in 2005, no clear candidate for warning
 * 18) Cook International, prod in Feb, '07, no warning, but no edits by creator except article creation in January, '06
 * 19) Bradley Turcotte, AFD, again no warning, but no edits since one to that article last September

I'm happy to do more if people want me to go back further.--Chaser - T 04:41, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Chaser, as ever you dilligent research is valued. Thank you so much. As the above evidences about a 50% level of warning my oppose in the discussion still stands. I know the warning are not mandatory, but they are recommended and IMHO it is a courtesy to advise the creator of the article on theit talk page of the tag, rather than awaiting a bot to advise them the article has gone. Pedro | Chat  11:54, 29 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I respect the painstaking research you did, Chaser, but if you do look at my CSD tagging from November 2006 (and before, since this is what Pedro's oppose vote is about), then you will see that I warned almost everyone about their about-to-be-deleted pages. Please take a look, thank you. Diez2 18:42, 29 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, if you want me to go spend more time doing this, why don't you tell me first why you changed the regularity with which you warned people? --Chaser - T 18:56, 29 July 2007 (UTC) Nevermind. I offered. I'll do it.--Chaser - T 22:08, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

OK, these are from 2 & 3 November 2006:


 * 1) Morzh, no warning
 * 2) Meech, warned
 * 3) Aaron Dunmire, warned
 * 4) Aquietmind, AFD listing, no warning
 * 5) South Division High School, no warning
 * 6) Mat Chamberlain, warned
 * 7) The Tigers and Bears, warned
 * 8) Faunacide, warned
 * 9) A list of Japanese trains, warned
 * 10) Flamboyant willbo, warned at User talk:Willbo140, now deleted
 * 11) Mark Thomas : Editor, warned
 * 12) I-Television, no warning
 * 13) Microworlds JR, warned
 * 14) Paly Robotics, warned
 * 15) Lamfung, warned
 * 16) Jessica Mata!!!!!, warned
 * 17) Eric Kam, warned
 * 18) We must overthrow, warned

I'm not doing any more.--Chaser - T 04:21, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

IAR in opposes
Some of the opposes that talk about IAR bother me. If asked when they would ignore the rules, and someone responds by talking about situations where flexibility and judgment are required, this is a reasonable answer IMO. Contrast this with a few of the opposers, who talk about IAR as though it were a rule to be invoked. These opposes carry little weight in my opinion. Friday (talk) 14:17, 5 August 2007 (UTC)