Misplaced Pages

:Requests for adminship/OwenX: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:07, 30 September 2005 editLexi Marie (talk | contribs)4,261 edits subst my vote template← Previous edit Revision as of 21:13, 30 September 2005 edit undoJossi (talk | contribs)72,880 edits →[]: supportNext edit →
Line 28: Line 28:
#]]] <sup>] ] </sup></font> 20:27, 30 September 2005 (UTC) #]]] <sup>] ] </sup></font> 20:27, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
# -]<small><sup>]</sup></small> 20:30, 30 September 2005 (UTC) # -]<small><sup>]</sup></small> 20:30, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
# '''Support''' - ] 21:13, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
'''Oppose''' '''Oppose'''
#'''Oppose'''. OwenX appears to be a friendly person, from what I can observe, but 1800 edits is just too green for me. I will gladly support him in the future once he has more experience should this first nomination fail. ] 16:54, 30 September 2005 (UTC) #'''Oppose'''. OwenX appears to be a friendly person, from what I can observe, but 1800 edits is just too green for me. I will gladly support him in the future once he has more experience should this first nomination fail. ] 16:54, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:13, 30 September 2005

OwenX

Vote here (13/2/0) ending 01:52 October 7, 2005 (UTC) (UTC)

OwenX (talk · contribs) – OwenX is a great guy that he contributes all around Misplaced Pages. I often see him doing RC patrol, he's an active member in a few WikiProjects, and he has great community involvement. kate's tool has him at ~1800 edits (for those of you who care about editcountis), and his first contrib was in December of 04. He uses edit summaries an overwhelming majority of the time, and has plenty of wikipedia namespace edits. -Greg Asche (talk) 01:52, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
I accept. Thank you for the nomination. Owen× ☎ 02:40, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Support

  1. Support, as nominator. -Greg Asche (talk) 01:54, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
  2. Extreme Phroziac support! -- (☺drini♫|☎) 01:56, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
  3. Support - Even tells me the time when he'll be on RC patrol to help out! --HappyCamper 02:46, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
  4. Support. →Journalist >>talk<< 02:56, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
  5. Most certainly. -- Essjay · Talk 03:28, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
  6. Support. Friday (talk) 03:56, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
  7. Support CambridgeBayWeather 04:52, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
  8. Support, good editor. Christopher Parham (talk) 05:58, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
  9. Support, although the low number of edits given the amount of time he's been here is a little surprising. But I really liked his answer to the question about conflict resolution. --Angr/tɔk tə mi 06:58, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
    Thank you. Yes, I haven't been very active until July. The vast majority my edits are from the last three months. Owen× ☎ 12:35, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
  10. Support, a few contacts, always positive. rvv'd my user page with a rollback-like edit summary, tricking me into thinking he already was one. — brighterorange (talk) 14:36, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
    He probably has one of the fake rollback scripts. --Phroziac 18:14, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
    I wish...Sam's script doesn't work on my machine, for some reason. I use the standard text for the benefit of those using Derk's tool (myself included). CDVF automatically adds vandals reverted with this specific string to its temporary "blacklist". Owen× ☎ 19:09, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
  11. Extreme pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcaniconiosic support! --Phroziac 18:14, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
  12. Support; I see him on RC patrol; he does a great job of it and could benefit from the extra buttons. Everything looks good to me. Antandrus (talk) 19:00, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
  13. Support great RC work, and NPOV AfD contribs. Only request that you review WP:CIVIL due to a few edit summaries like get with the program, buddy!. It's not an issue, per say, just some could find it offensive and become very defensive before they even look at your reasons or comments. Other than that, full support. ∞Who?¿? 19:25, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
  14. Support: OwenX would make a great administrator. I was impressed on how he weighed in on the Synergy/DE Afd debate. On this issue, a particular user working as a marketing rep for a technology company was posting POV articles about her company and then refused to cooporate with other editors on creating an unbiased article. In a letter to the user's talk page, OwenX clearly explained the implications of that article and how it can be rewritten in a form that is acceptable to Wikipedian standards. His actions in this matter have given me confidence that he'll play a fair and consistant role in protecting Misplaced Pages from commercial exploitation. Solarusdude 20:19, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
  15. FireFox 20:27, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
  16. -Splash 20:30, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
  17. Support - ≈ jossi ≈ 21:13, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Oppose. OwenX appears to be a friendly person, from what I can observe, but 1800 edits is just too green for me. I will gladly support him in the future once he has more experience should this first nomination fail. Silensor 16:54, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
    1800? Are you kidding? --Phroziac 18:14, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
  2. Oppose, been here for a long time, but only 1800 edits, that's way too little for being on wikipedia so long. I have over 1000 and I've been here for a few months. Maybe if they worked harder, in a few months I'd actually support. Private Butcher 19:04, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Neutral

Comments

  • A chart showing this user's edits along with a total # of edits line and average edits per day line is available here: Image:OwenX-Edits.png. I offer this not as a more refined version of editcountitis, but as just one tool to help evaluate an admin nominee with a somewhat low edit count on Misplaced Pages. --Durin 14:18, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Average edits per day over last 90 days is 19 per day. Use of edit summaries is 96%, 100% over last 500 edits. 93% of user's edits are over the last 90 days. --Durin 14:17, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Note. I would support, but have an active RfA and don't want to make it look odd. --Lord Voldemort 16:48, 30 September 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. RC patrols would certainly be easier with a Rollback button, and the ability to Vprotect pages and block vandals when needed could come in handy. It will be nice to delete clear-cut Speedy articles rather than load the category. I would also help in trimming down the ever-growing AfD backlog.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Misplaced Pages, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. I didn't write any major articles, but have a handful of smaller ones about various topics from Beer to Israeli companies. Most of my work are small edits: correcting factual errors, improving style or grammar, adding redirects, sorting categories, etc.
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.I have been in a few edit conflicts, but nothing to get stressed about. In one case it was with an editor who was trying to promote a Futures trading system. I was trying to reach a consensus with him on a more general wording, but he chose to create a fork--a set of articles with his own version of things. I haven't seen him for a while here, but I joined a couple of editors working on merging his articles into the mainstream. In two other separate cases (Ethnic cleansing and Diaspora), an editor with an extreme POV was trying to use the article as their soapbox. Along with other regulars, we tried to find a common ground, but in both cases the editor dropped the issue. In one case (Tragedy of the commons) I reverted what I thought was an arbitrary blanking, only to face a rude editor who insisted on getting his way. I figured the change wasn't worth fighting over, and backed off. I wouldn't have done things any differently as an admin; if it's a conflict to which I am a side, I'd involve another admin and let them use their judgment. Generally, I would rather win someone over than defeat them.