Today: Monday 21 June 2021 , 4:13 am


advertisment
search




Requests for adminship Caribbean H.Q.

Last updated 6 Day , 12 hour 61 Views

Advertisement
In this page talks about ( Requests for adminship Caribbean H.Q. ) It was sent to us on 14/06/2021 and was presented on 14/06/2021 and the last update on this page on 14/06/2021

Your Comment


Enter code
 
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Pedro  Chat 
07:01, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - a fine user who will use the tools well. I am unconvinced with Maxim's neutral below that it will effect him as an admin. Ryan Postlethwaite 07:11, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
  • I'm not concerned by the opposes and the neutrals at this time.
    O (说 • 喝)
    21:28, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - Not terribly concerned by the points brought up below. --Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor (tαlk) 23:05, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Nothing worrying here... --DarkFalls talk 23:20, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Support, many quality edits in the mainpace, as well as in places like AFD. Not only do you make quality edits, but your editing is very balanced — a few article edits here, some vandal work, etc... I'm certain you would make a useful admin, Caribbean H.Q! :)
     east.718
    at 02:23, September 8, 2007 
  • Support See nothing to suggest will abuse the tools. Davewild 07:36, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Hey CHQ, where have I seen you around before (probably under your old name)? I remember it somewhere about the VG arena, but where? Dihydrogen Monoxide 01:48, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
  • :I appear around the project's talk page quite often, though it probably was around one of the DMC pages. - Caribbean~H.Q. 22:05, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Support. Quite well balanced. bibliomaniac15 Two years of trouble and general madness 04:19, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Support. No concerns. —AldeBaer 16:56, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Support no reason to think they would abuse the tools or fail to understand policy.
    VanTucky
    (talk) 20:52, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Support We need more people at AIV. Will not abuse tools. --Banana 04:46, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Good contributor. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 00:47, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Support. I see fairness, a strong sense of honor, attention to policy and a willingness to face down bullying attempts: I therefore have full confidence in this candidate's ability to use the tools with integrity, skill and care. Pia 11:47, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Support. Will be a good admin. JACOPLANE • 2007-09-11 14:53
  • Support, as below. – Quadell (talk) (random) 22:12, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose
    Oppose Caribbean H.Q. specified that he wants to close AfD's, and I'm very worrying by a comment he made in this AfD, and as I have seen it previously while skimming through AfD, and it registered in the back of my head. I can't trust C H.Q. to close AfD debates, as he wanted to keep the debated article, which to me says that C H.Q. consequently doesn't understand WP:BIO, WP:N, and especially WP:DIRECTORY, which in point five clearly states "People from ethnic/cultural/religious group X employed by organization Y" is not encyclopedic content. In conclusion, I'm worried about C H.Q. closing similar, and contensted AfD, as this happened on August 26. Maxim(talk) 23:13, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

    Please note that User:Marine 69-71 also wanted to keep the article. Does that make him a bad admin? --Boricuæddie 23:15, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

    :He outright voted, which is quite bad for an admin. Maxim(talk) 23:17, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

    ::He voted? Did you actually see the rest of the discussion? --Boricuæddie 23:18, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

    :::User:SGGH, User:Mtmelendez, User:DavidShankBone, and I also participated in that discussion and wished to keep the article. Does that make us incompetent editors? --Boricuæddie 23:22, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

    :::: Editors no, but I don't want you closing similar debates. C H.Q. clearly states he intends to that as the second of the two admin areas he intends to work in (Other is AIV). As for Tony, his comment on 00:02 August 26, was simply "Strong Keep". If that's not voting, then the definition of the word is wrong. Maxim(talk) 23:27, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

    :::::Yeah, I realize that, but at least he participated in the discussion afterwards, right :-) --Boricuæddie 23:32, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

    ::::::The debate that was ongoing there was that it wasn't concerning any religious or ethnic group, it was about a nationality wich is different, my opinion was influenced by the argument surrounding that debate, and Cerejota's comment was what gained my support, stablishing that the higher figures in the agency had emphazized this was quite convincent to stablish notability, regardless of that I wouldn't close a AfD for an article that I had cooperated to or that is within the scope of any project that I have a mebership with to avoid a WP:COI. I am very familiar with the guidelines you mentioned. - Caribbean~H.Q. 23:34, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

    :::::: As for AFD discussions, the candidate has stated that: I can also help with the closing procedure in those discussions that involve a proven hoax, a obvious case of nonsense or a clear case of consensus per WP:SNOW. If the candidate sticks to these words, I don't foresee a problem with these issues. But that's my opinion. -
    Mtmelendez (TalkUBHome)
    01:18, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

    :::::::Maxim, it's his own opinion.
    Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake)
    04:16, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

    Neutral
    Neutral There's a sour taste in my mouth about this candidacy. My instincts are picking up something that tell me supporting you will be a bad idea, however, no offense is intended. I can't oppose purely on this, and expect me to ask so more questions later on. Maxim(talk) 22:58, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

  • Neutral I think your main space edits are great and that's what we're here to do, but the problems stated by Maxim are troubling. I'm sitting on the fence for now.
    ~ Wikihermit
    00:01, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
  • #So, at the moment, if you become an administrator you will help with the backlogs at AIV and close AFDs... is that all you will be doing? If you'll be helping out in more places than those specified, I'd like to hear about it. Sebi User_talk:Spebitalk 05:36, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

    Naturally I would cooperate in more than two places, WP:AN and WP:COI/N usually get some interesting cases, specially the COI noticeboard wich presents some cases that need some detective skills, attending those conflicts could prove a interesting challenge. Boards such as and WP:AN3RR, WP:RFPP and WP:UFA will receive my attention also, though I will try to get the hang of things before editing within that areas heavily. I have always been a multifacetical editor and I hope to keep up with that. - Caribbean~H.Q. 06:19, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

    :The areas you'll be working in should be specified in your answer to Q1, rather than in a reply to a Neutral. I'd prefer not to be assumed to know the areas you'll work in. Sebi User_talk:Spebitalk 06:31, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

    ::Most admins specialise in one or two areas where they will use the tools. I do quite a lot of username blocks and everything else is sporadic. Simply working at AIV and AfD are very legitimate area's to work in, many admins would concentrate on just one of those. I fail to see how you can withold support from a candidate because they state in Q1 that they will be doing what just about every other admin does. Ryan Postlethwaite 07:09, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

    :::I see your point. Sebi User_talk:Spebitalk 09:28, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

    His upload log reveals some apparent copyright violations less than a month ago. I asked him about this on his talk page. I'll withhold judgment until he replies. – Quadell (talk) (Special:Randomrandom) 16:10, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

    ::Note - this is not a neutral vote. – Quadell (talk) (random) 22:12, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

    It was an accident, I copyed the tag from a image that has since been moved to commons wich had the same status, regardless I was under the imepresion that images on that site were public domain in nature. - Caribbean~H.Q. 00:43, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

    :No, they aren't. They may be used publicly, but the copyrights of some images, including the ones you uploaded, are reserved. Therefore, they are copyvios. They should be deleted. --Boricuaeddie is now Agüeybaná 00:49, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

    ::Yeah I told Quadell to delete them, the confusion arouse from all of the images claiming "public" in their description. - Caribbean~H.Q. 00:51, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

    :::I understand. Anyway, Flickr images should be uploaded to the Commons, not here, so that they can be reviewed by trusted users there, like me. --Boricuaeddie is now Agüeybaná 00:55, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

    Okay, it was just an honest mistake. (I've made that kind of mistake too, especially early on.) I'm a little hesitant about your image history and lack of familiarity with our non-free content policy -- you've uploaded lots of non-free images in the past that turned out to be out-of-policy and had to be deleted, and there are many more that are borderline. But that's certainly no reason to oppose your admin nom, since you seem like an honest guy and a quick learner. So long as you learn the details of our (complex and often misunderstood) non-free content policy before plunging into that area with your new tools, I'm sure you'll be a great admin. – Quadell (talk) (random) 01:17, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

    I'm not really a plentiful image uploader as the log states I upload once in while, a little note the deleted DMC images weren't out of policy they were discarded by consensus because they were replaced when the articles were undergoing PR in the process of getting them to FA, the senzu bean image was deleted when the article was redirected. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:27, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

    The above adminship 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 talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.

     
    Comments

    There are no Comments yet




    last seen
    Most vists