Misplaced Pages

:Requests for adminship/Navou 3: 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 14:24, 30 August 2007 editPerfect Proposal (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers2,598 edits →Discussion← Previous edit Revision as of 15:06, 30 August 2007 edit undoTimidGuy (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers11,259 edits →Discussion: strong supportNext edit →
Line 66: Line 66:
#'''Support''', because as far as I can tell, Navou seems to make decisions based on consensus and is fair in that regard. Best of luck! :) Sincerely, --<font face="Times New Roman">]</font><sup>'']''</sup> 14:19, 30 August 2007 (UTC) #'''Support''', because as far as I can tell, Navou seems to make decisions based on consensus and is fair in that regard. Best of luck! :) Sincerely, --<font face="Times New Roman">]</font><sup>'']''</sup> 14:19, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
#'''Support''' Per nom. We've had a lot of good candidates this week havem't we? <font face="Impact">] <sup>]</sup></font> 14:24, 30 August 2007 (UTC) #'''Support''' Per nom. We've had a lot of good candidates this week havem't we? <font face="Impact">] <sup>]</sup></font> 14:24, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
====Discussion====

*

'''Support'''
# '''Support''' I'll beat the nom and the other nom on this one. Good editor, should be a good admin. ] ]</sup> ]</sub> 05:54, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
# Yep. --] <sup>]</sup> 05:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
#'''Strong support''' Excellent contributions, great work on the unblock mailing list, sufficiently reputable nominators :) I ask that this RfA not degrade into a discussion about the merits of CSN, though. I personally think Navou's involvement with CSN is a good thing - admins who discuss are much preferable to admins who don't. ~ ] 06:00, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
#'''Beat the noms edit conflict support''', I was considering offering to nominate Navou myself when I saw it was already being done. I've seen him around quite a bit and have always been highly impressed. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 06:01, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
#'''Strong Support''' I thought this user already was. Seems more than qualified, could do great things with the tools, and I see no reason to be uneasy about them having the mop --<span style="font-variant:small-caps">''']'''</span> 06:07, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
#Yep. Seems quite good. -- <strong>]</strong>] 06:11, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
#'''Support''' Looks to be an ideal candidate for the mop --''']'''<sup>]</sup> 06:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
#'''Support''' I trust the user, as well as the nom. ]]] 07:34, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
#Support. ''']''' 07:40, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
#'''Support''' - 三度目の正直 (The success (or the truth) on the third time). Absolutely no concerns. --] <strong><sup>]</sup></strong> 07:44, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
#Good fella. ] <sup> ]</sup> 08:17, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
# –] 08:19, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
#'''Support''' - Seems like a great user, and could do with the tools. <span style="border:2px solid #483C32;">]</span> 09:25, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
#'''Support''' I'm a bit concerned over the relatively low number of mainspace edits, but not enough to withhold support. Appears to be a fine user who would improve WP if entrusted with the admin tools. ] ] 09:31, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
#'''Strong support''', most definitely. And if this doesn't make ], I shall be flummoxed. ]&nbsp;] 09:41, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
#—''']''' 11:12, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
#'''Support''' No problems here!!!! ] 12:21, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
#'''Support.''' I normally don't bother with uncontroversial nominations, but Navou is an excellent user who deserves a resounding endorsement from this community. The admin corps will only be improved. ]<small>]</small> 12:52, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
#'''Support''' - Good candidate. Experienced in all the right areas. I don't think the tools would be abused. Good luck! <span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS,sans-serif">]]</span> 12:56, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
#'''Support''' Now qualified to be admin concerns raised earlier cleared. ] 13:34, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
#'''Support''' as nom.--<strong><font style="color: #082567">]</font>]<font style="color: #082567">]</font></strong> 13:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
#'''Support''' - From my experience a great editor. I also trust husonds judgement so I beleive this editor would make a great addition as an admin. ] ] 13:59, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
#'''Support''', because as far as I can tell, Navou seems to make decisions based on consensus and is fair in that regard. Best of luck! :) Sincerely, --<font face="Times New Roman">]</font><sup>'']''</sup> 14:19, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
#'''Support''' Was just looking over his contributions for the last month. Very very impressed. He's clearly already playing an Admin role. Strong support. ] 15:06, 30 August 2007 (UTC)


'''Oppose''' '''Oppose'''

Revision as of 15:06, 30 August 2007

Navou

Voice your opinion (talk page) (21/0/0); Scheduled to end 04:52, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Navou (talk · contribs) - It is with pleasure that I submit Navou for your consideration. Navou already requested adminship twice but fell short of the necessary support in the previous requests for adminship. He paid due attention to the concerns raised therein, took the advices on board and worked hard to meet all the expected requirements to become a great administrator. Navou has been a steady contributor for the past nine months, participating in a vast array of different areas throughout Misplaced Pages (particularly WP:CSN, WP:ANI, WP:RFPP, WP:AIV and WP:AFD, areas of typical admin intervention). Such versatility and dedication indicate that Navou is ready for a new level of responsibilities within Misplaced Pages brought by access to the admin tools, and therefore I ask my fellow Wikipedians to carefully analyze his potential and finally give him the rightful support his hard work has earned him by now. Húsönd 01:42, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Conomination from Durova

When Navou hinted he was considering another bid at adminship I told him I'd be very disappointed if it went live before I had the chance to nominate. For most of this summer he's been pretty much running the experimental Misplaced Pages:Community enforceable mediation program singlehandedly. No matter how that program eventually works out, he's earned my unreserved praise for putting himself forward there. Community enforceable mediation is designed to be very near to arbitration because the participants have the option to impose blockable restrictions upon themselves. Naturally enough, some of the toughest disputes on Misplaced Pages have gone there and Navou has handled the responsibility with flying colors. He conferred with me at all the appropriate points and recently referred a case to arbitration. I think I can fairly say he's performed well under tough field conditions because neither party to that bitter dispute has criticized his objectivity. Navou also enjoys RC patrol, which is always a good reason for mopification. In previous bids for adminship it was his shortage of well rounded experience that came in for criticism. He's spent more time in mainspace now, has over a year of experience with more than 5500 total edits, and has earned some DYK nods. I've always been impressed with his talent for Misplaced Pages namespace work, but field experience in article namespace matters in the long run. He's well rounded now and I'll vouch for him: let's give this man a mop. Durova 05:38, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept, and thank you for the well written nom. Navou 05:51, 30 August 2007 (UTC)


Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Misplaced Pages as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?
A: I'll use these tools in a wide array of areas. I intend to protect and unprotect pages per requests at WP:RFPP and as needed, both in accordance with our page protection policy. I will block vandals reported to WP:AIV. I'll also continue to close AFD and MFD according to the consensus generated at those discussions. I'll also evaluate those usernames reported to WP:UAA. I also intend to clear the CAT:CSD. This is an area where I tend to see some backlog. I already help somewhat at WP:AN and WP:ANI, I think I'll continue to do that as well.
2. What are your best contributions to Misplaced Pages, and why?
A: My best contributions to Misplaced Pages, or the articles I contribute to. I've started some stubs, and I've started some start-class articles. There is a certain excitement I feel when I get the DYK template on my user talk, so my favorite contributions so far include Amygdalohippocampectomy and Lymphocytic interstitial pneumonia, both of which were featured on T:DYK.
3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
A:I think the most conflict I have experienced is with the Shawn Hornbeck article. An article I nominated for discussion at WP:AFD. I also informally mediated a dispute over there after the article was kept. Honestly, I'll prefer to take a neutral stance and mediate. If I have a dispute over content, I'm always open to discussion, and if consensus disagrees with me, I'll agree with consensus if that makes sense.

Optional question by Onnaghar

4. - You seem to have made over 236 edits on ANI and 68 edits on AIV, which is impressive, if you ever did mistakingly identify a user as a rogue editor, what would you do to reolve the situation? Many thanks. Onnaghar 12:57, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

General comments

RfAs for this user:

Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Navou before commenting.

Discussion

Support

  1. Support I'll beat the nom and the other nom on this one. Good editor, should be a good admin. Flyguy649 contribs 05:54, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  2. Yep. --DarkFalls 05:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  3. Strong support Excellent contributions, great work on the unblock mailing list, sufficiently reputable nominators :) I ask that this RfA not degrade into a discussion about the merits of CSN, though. I personally think Navou's involvement with CSN is a good thing - admins who discuss are much preferable to admins who don't. ~ Riana ⁂ 06:00, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  4. Beat the noms edit conflict support, I was considering offering to nominate Navou myself when I saw it was already being done. I've seen him around quite a bit and have always been highly impressed. Seraphimblade 06:01, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  5. Strong Support I thought this user already was. Seems more than qualified, could do great things with the tools, and I see no reason to be uneasy about them having the mop --lucid 06:07, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  6. Yep. Seems quite good. -- Anonymous Dissident 06:11, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  7. Support Looks to be an ideal candidate for the mop --Ben 06:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  8. Support I trust the user, as well as the nom. Jmlk17 07:34, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  9. Support. Daniel 07:40, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  10. Support - 三度目の正直 (The success (or the truth) on the third time). Absolutely no concerns. --Hirohisat 07:44, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  11. Good fella. Moreschi 08:17, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  12. –sebi 08:19, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  13. Support - Seems like a great user, and could do with the tools. Tiddly-Tom 09:25, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  14. Support I'm a bit concerned over the relatively low number of mainspace edits, but not enough to withhold support. Appears to be a fine user who would improve WP if entrusted with the admin tools. faithless () 09:31, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  15. Strong support, most definitely. And if this doesn't make WP:100, I shall be flummoxed. Neil ム 09:41, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  16. —AldeBaer 11:12, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  17. Support No problems here!!!! Politics rule 12:21, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  18. Support. I normally don't bother with uncontroversial nominations, but Navou is an excellent user who deserves a resounding endorsement from this community. The admin corps will only be improved. RyanGerbil10(C-Town) 12:52, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  19. Support - Good candidate. Experienced in all the right areas. I don't think the tools would be abused. Good luck! Lradrama 12:56, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  20. Support Now qualified to be admin concerns raised earlier cleared. Harlowraman 13:34, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  21. Support as nom.--Húsönd 13:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  22. Support - From my experience a great editor. I also trust husonds judgement so I beleive this editor would make a great addition as an admin. Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 13:59, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  23. Support, because as far as I can tell, Navou seems to make decisions based on consensus and is fair in that regard. Best of luck! :) Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles 14:19, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  24. Support Per nom. We've had a lot of good candidates this week havem't we? Perfect Proposal 14:24, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

Support

  1. Support I'll beat the nom and the other nom on this one. Good editor, should be a good admin. Flyguy649 contribs 05:54, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  2. Yep. --DarkFalls 05:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  3. Strong support Excellent contributions, great work on the unblock mailing list, sufficiently reputable nominators :) I ask that this RfA not degrade into a discussion about the merits of CSN, though. I personally think Navou's involvement with CSN is a good thing - admins who discuss are much preferable to admins who don't. ~ Riana ⁂ 06:00, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  4. Beat the noms edit conflict support, I was considering offering to nominate Navou myself when I saw it was already being done. I've seen him around quite a bit and have always been highly impressed. Seraphimblade 06:01, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  5. Strong Support I thought this user already was. Seems more than qualified, could do great things with the tools, and I see no reason to be uneasy about them having the mop --lucid 06:07, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  6. Yep. Seems quite good. -- Anonymous Dissident 06:11, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  7. Support Looks to be an ideal candidate for the mop --Ben 06:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  8. Support I trust the user, as well as the nom. Jmlk17 07:34, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  9. Support. Daniel 07:40, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  10. Support - 三度目の正直 (The success (or the truth) on the third time). Absolutely no concerns. --Hirohisat 07:44, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  11. Good fella. Moreschi 08:17, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  12. –sebi 08:19, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  13. Support - Seems like a great user, and could do with the tools. Tiddly-Tom 09:25, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  14. Support I'm a bit concerned over the relatively low number of mainspace edits, but not enough to withhold support. Appears to be a fine user who would improve WP if entrusted with the admin tools. faithless () 09:31, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  15. Strong support, most definitely. And if this doesn't make WP:100, I shall be flummoxed. Neil ム 09:41, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  16. —AldeBaer 11:12, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  17. Support No problems here!!!! Politics rule 12:21, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  18. Support. I normally don't bother with uncontroversial nominations, but Navou is an excellent user who deserves a resounding endorsement from this community. The admin corps will only be improved. RyanGerbil10(C-Town) 12:52, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  19. Support - Good candidate. Experienced in all the right areas. I don't think the tools would be abused. Good luck! Lradrama 12:56, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  20. Support Now qualified to be admin concerns raised earlier cleared. Harlowraman 13:34, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  21. Support as nom.--Húsönd 13:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  22. Support - From my experience a great editor. I also trust husonds judgement so I beleive this editor would make a great addition as an admin. Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 13:59, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  23. Support, because as far as I can tell, Navou seems to make decisions based on consensus and is fair in that regard. Best of luck! :) Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles 14:19, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  24. Support Was just looking over his contributions for the last month. Very very impressed. He's clearly already playing an Admin role. Strong support. TimidGuy 15:06, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

Neutral