Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Thehelpfulone

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.

Thehelpfulone

Final (112/4/5); Originally scheduled to end 17:04, 25 November 2008 (UTC). Nomination successful. --Deskana (talk) 19:55, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thehelpfulone (talk · contribs) – Colleagues, I am delighted to offer up a joint nomination for Thehelpfulone (THO). With almost exactly a years tenure, over 15,000 edits and some 1,700 deleted edits the number stack up on the face it of. Some detail;

Article Writing
  • Plenty can be seen from THO's user page on his work in creating articles but mostly driving them forward - London, Harry Potter and The Bourne Ultimatum (film) being the most obvious. What's particularly reasurring is that of his major main space work there is a corresponding (rough) ratio of about 10% to article talk pages. This clearly shows the desire to collaborate. For those who like to count 42% of his edits are to the mainspace which seems a healthy balance.
Maintenance
  • Vandal fighting - 349 edits to WP:AIV. Note that a lot of these edits are not just reporting vandals but actually clerking the board - I see a lot of dilligence and caution which can only be a good thing.
  • WP:UAA - always a potential hotspot, but I've reviewed his contributions here (you have to go back some way) and nothing seems amiss.
  • C:CSD - as noted above plenty of deleted edits - I've worked through a number and the tags all look accurate.
  • WP:HELPDESK - clerking work here, living up to his username and showing commitment to helping newbies.
House Keeping
  • Virtually 100% edit summary use since the word go
  • Sensible Signature
  • Not totally garish user page :)
  • E-mail Enabled
  • Clean Block-log
  • Already granted both Account Creator and Rollback and has demonstrated capability with these tools.

Please note the edit surge in October was due to running an AWB script for a wikiproject. In summary Thehelpfulone really does live up to his username, and I can only think that he will be even more helpful with +sysop. I hope that the community agree with this course of action. Pedro :  Chat  08:52, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Co-nomination by Stwalkerster [ talk ]

I want to put User:Thehelpfulone (abbreviated to THO from here on) forward for the mop, as I feel that both he and the community in general can benefit from the extra tools that he will be able to use. THO is a helpful Wikipedian as he is (that much can be guessed from his name!), helping out in both the "Help" areas (WP:HD, CAT:HELPME, etc) and the WP:ACC area ([1]). Here, THO has shown his judgement in whether to create an account or not for a potential new user, or whether not to for various reasons such as a username policy violation. With this, he'd be a great help at WP:UAA, which I have noticed being a bit backlogged recently also. He's also a bit of a vandal fighter, and would find it useful to be able to block users straight away, plus WP:AIV has been getting backlogged recently, so we could use an extra admin there. With blocking comes CAT:UNBLOCK, and THO's good judgement will be useful there also. THO will also find the admin tools useful in new page patrol with the ability to delete some pages immediately, and he will be a help at CAT:CSD also. While I don't help out really at WP:RFPP, I can't really say if it needs some help, but I'm sure that they will benefit from THO's judgement. Finally, while this user is almost guaranteed to make mistakes like the rest of us, I trust this user to admit mistakes, and attempt to fix them if he can. This user has had no civility issues that I know about or have found, so I fully recommend that the community accept THO as an administrator, as I feel that the community will definitely benefit from his access to the extra tools. Regards, and best of luck to you, THO! :) Stwalkerster [ talk ] 17:17, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:I accept. The Helpful One Review 17:04, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
A: If I become an admin, I will use the tools to help me further maintain the wiki, with reverting vandalism, etc. Specifically, the areas that I plan to help out on are WP:AIV, WP:UAA, WP:RFP, WP:CSD and I still look at WP:AN and WP:ANI, but I would probably help out more there with requests. Also, I would help out with WP:RFU, with the requests for unblocks and to revert and delete the GRAWP vandalism which we get every so often (I usually revert, but cannot delete the pages). Of course, I would be happy to help out in any other areas including places like WP:IFD and others on the Category:Administrative_backlog. The Helpful One Review 17:09, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: With articles, I have been working on a few articles, London, is a major one of them – so far I have brought this article up to A-class standard, working hard on improving it and hope to achieve FA with it. Harry Potter is another article that I have worked on, which I have got to GA standard. Also, I’m active on a WikiProject at the moment, Wikipedia:WikiProject Topic outline as well as part of a collaboration group that works on articles, WP:TSQUAD. On top of that, I am also proud of my vandal reversions (I have rollback) to help me do this, and helping all the users and newbies who ask questions at CAT:HELPME. I also help out at WP:ACC, creating accounts for users who are unable to do so, whether it’s because they can’t do it at a certain computer, or that the username they want is too similar to an existing one (therefore, I have the account creator right). I like to help out and welcome newbies as I was also a newbie once, and it’s confusing starting off without any guidance to help you along the way! :) The Helpful One Review 17:20, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
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 haven’t been in any conflicts over editing that I can think of; however, if I was to get into an editing conflict with someone, I would talk to the user(s) on their talk pages and/or the article talk pages regarding the dispute until we would be able to come to a solution that we both agree on. If this is not possible, then I would ask another user to help with the situation. The Helpful One Review 17:25, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Additional "question" from Stwalkerster [ talk ]
4. Does your password meet the strong password guidelines? Answer with only Yes or No (to maintain your password's integrity), and if the answer is no, please change your password to meet these guidelines, so your account is more secure. This is especially important for accounts with elevated privelages, such as Administrators. Stwalkerster [ talk ] 17:26, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A: Yes. The Helpful One Review 17:34, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Additional "question" from The Transhumanist   
5. Why do you hang out at Wikipedia so much? I mean, why is it so important to you?  :) The Transhumanist    18:30, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A: That's a good question! I use Wikipedia to help me with projects, and find out some pretty useful information, so I think it's only right that I should give back to Wikipedia for helping me! I'm probably a bit of a Wiki-holic, and I donate my time to the project, to help it expand. I think it's great that Wikipedia's information can be shared around freely, and is in many languages so want to keep that going, and allow the project to have good quality, vandal free information! The Helpful One Review 19:00, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Additional questions from Flewis
6. Are you planning to become more involved in Afd debates if you become an administrator?
A: Yes, I probably am likely to become more involved in AfD debates if I become an administrator, as I will explore some more new parts of the wiki that I can help out with. I've not participated a lot in AfD as I have been doing other maintenance tasks on the wiki, such as reverting vandals, helping out at WP:ACC, recent changes and new page patrol, helping users at WP:HD and WP:NCHD, so I hope to continue that work and also maintain other parts of the wiki (including AFD)! The Helpful One 18:18, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
7. Would you place yourself up for recall?
A: I think that this category is a good category, as it shows that admins are prepared to face the consequences of their actions, if they misuse the tools. Therefore, I would add myself to this category and if anyone has any problems with my actions (if I become an admin) I would be happy to respond to emails, talk pages messages etc, as I do now to help users and IPs. The Helpful One 18:18, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


8. You've created only 2 articles to date [2]: Miessence and Faerie Wars. Is there are reason behind the low number?
A: I've only created 2 articles because I will admit, I'm more of a maintenance user and so like to maintain articles and keep them in order. However, I have expanded articles such as London and Harry Potter to improve content that is already on Wikipedia, but can be brought to better standards. Hopefully, I plan to write some more articles, and achieve a DYK, which I am yet to improve/create an article to. The Helpful One 18:18, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

General comments

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Thehelpfulone before commenting.

Discussion

Support
  1. Beat the nom support! - I finally did it! I beat the nom! Woohoo! And speaking of this nomination, the nominee's name says it all. He is very helpful. I've worked with him a lot, and as long as I've known him, he's always acted in good faith and for the good of the project. I'm sure he will use the admin tools responsibly. The Transhumanist 17:48, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Beat the nom only counts if you wait until the RfA goes live ;-) ---Balloonman PoppaBalloon 19:06, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, then I cheated! The Transhumanist 19:12, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    have to say it: Cheater!---Balloonman PoppaBalloon 04:15, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support - I recently was looking for some help on some unblock requests, and saw this user (whose work I was aware of) was around. I was stunned to discover that he wasn't an admin already - cliched as that may sound. On review of the contributions at the time, I was convinced that this user should get +sysop and so pushed him to seek better counsel. I am sincerely delighted that he has, and hope the community feels the same. Fritzpoll (talk) 19:05, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support — I'll agree with The Transhumanist. Thehelpfulone is, as his name suggest, a very helpful editor who's willing to work hard at a project. I see no reason not to support. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 19:05, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Absolutely. A great Wikipedian who makes the project a better place. He's got plenty of experience on a number of Wikimedia projects and he'll do just fine with a couple of extra buttons on en.wikipedia. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 19:09, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support - He lives up to his name, and also does a lot of constructive editing. No reasons not to trust here, more than happy to support. — neuro(talk) 19:15, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support — I don't know this user but I recognise the name. No negative experiences and a persuasive argument has been put forward by the noms. Why not? —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 19:24, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  7. SuperStrongSupportInCamelCaseWithExtraOMGWTFBBQ: I thought you were already an administrator - if I'd known, I'd have offered to nominate you! Dendodge TalkContribs 19:28, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Was-away-eating-my-dinner-or-would-have-been-sooner nominator support. :D Stwalkerster [ talk ] 19:30, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Yep. –xeno (talk) 19:38, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support Great Candidate. America69 (talk) 19:42, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support seems like a good candidate: hard working, helpful, and obvious need for the tools. Parsecboy (talk) 19:47, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support. A... helpful one? O_o Or dedicated, maybe. -- Mentisock 19:54, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Strongest support user has my complete trust. PeterSymonds (talk) 19:56, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  14. solid and competent in article space - that's all the matters the rest is a cakewalk besides.--Scott MacDonald (talk) 20:06, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Seen him around. Seems sensible. Spartaz Humbug! 20:33, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  16. I would have supported based on previous positive interactions in Wikipedia space, particularly the help desk and AIV (and also the unlamented old version of WP:ACC, where his edits are now deleted): consistently clueful, good attitude. Had no idea there was a significant content-building side. Impressive. This appears to be a candidate that the two main RFA camps can both agree on. --barneca (talk) 20:42, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I note that the CSD tagging concerns expressed so far in the oppose sections are good points, and shouldn't be overlooked by THO whether there are 67 supports (and counting) or not. We all make mistakes, so I see no reason at all not to continue to support, but those are things that I urge THO to review and take care special with before pressing the delete button. --barneca (talk) 15:12, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support Ok, but I would not object to a rename to User:TheNotSoHelpfulOne. MBisanz talk 20:43, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support Do we need more all-around helpful admins? I'm thinking yes. FlyingToaster 20:44, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support - Clueful user. No red flags. Happy mopping. Tiptoety talk 20:45, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support Hell yes. Sam Blab 21:01, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  21. How-the-hell-is-this-user-not-already-an-admin-I'll-never-know Strong Support All the way. iMatthew 21:13, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Fuck yes. Garden. 21:32, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support Although he would be even more helpful if he could get me a turkey sandwich. -- Scorpion0422 21:49, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  24. I have known Thehelpfulone since he joined Wikipedia, and have only ever seen good things from him. A content editor, vandal fighters, helpful all round (hardly surprising considering the name). I've never once seen him close to being uncivil, and I had planned to nominate him myself a while back but never got round to asking. Very strong support for a great Wikipedian. Al Tally talk 21:52, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Every thing looks good here. Good luck!! SteelersFan94 21:55, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Strong Support - yeah, I think the Thehelplessone will make a good admin, boring but good ^_^...--Cometstyles 23:08, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Grr you and your believable edit summary. iMatthew 23:10, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  27. All looks good, no concerns, trustworthy, seems somewhat overdue - I had thought he was already an administrator. Net positive to promote this editor to adminship. Master&Expert (Talk) 23:30, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support. Good editor. Malinaccier (talk) 00:42, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Wow-I-can-truthfully-say-that-I-actually-thought-he-was-an-admin Support - NuclearWarfare contact meMy work 00:52, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support - definitely. RockManQ (talk) 01:14, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Strong support - clearly exceeds my standards. Bearian (talk) 01:25, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support - it's difficult not to support someone called 'The Helpful One'. - Richard Cavell (talk) 02:11, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support per all above. macy 02:38, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support - Yep! AdjustShift (talk) 03:04, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Support as he lives up to his name. Good article writers are good.  Marlith (Talk)  03:52, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support I was a little disappointed that such a large percentage of your wikispace edits were via tools. This is an area where you can show policy knowledge/expertise, and to see that 2000 of the 2500 or so edits were automated in this area was disappointing. That being said, I reviewed your edits elsewhere and feel that you can be trusted not to delete the main page. Either on purpose or by acceident---Balloonman PoppaBalloon 04:15, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support – I've seen him in multiple places over the last 8 months doing constructive edits. Will do just fine. – RyanCross (talk) 05:17, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Support as nom. Pedro :  Chat  07:37, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support: Really helpful person. I also want to thank Pedro for such a 'clean' look on the nomination; it made it easier (for me anyway) to do some research. Law shoot! 07:57, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Yes! - no concerns, excellent person to work with — Possum (talk) 08:57, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support, nuff said --Chris 09:14, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Ultimate utmost support I think this will be the only time I will use that phrase in an RfA. My encounters with this username has made me think he is an admin... without a mop. It's about time he got one. Leujohn (talk)
  43. Monster Under Your Bed (talk) 10:31, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Support! abf /talk to me/ 13:04, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support - Ready for the tools - solid contributions, civil and patient, high probably of long-term commitment to the project. Why not>--Flewis(talk) 13:22, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Strong Support A trustworthy, hardworking capable candidate. Mister Senseless™ (Speak - Contributions) 15:14, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Strong Support <insert witty comment here about how I thought you already were an admin> :D J.delanoygabsadds 15:23, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Would have nomed support / Strong Support Good user, trustworthy and definatly knows their way around wikipedia policy wise e.t.c ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont 15:46, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Support - seen this user around, definitely a plus and will make a great admin. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 16:19, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Support He will make an excellent admin. Thingg⊕⊗ 17:25, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Support as candidate has never been blocked, is a good article contributor, has been granted rollback rights, works well with and is appreciated by others per User:Thehelpfulone/Awards, and seems helpful (member of welcoming committee and kindness campaign confirm the username's claim!). Best, --A NobodyMy talk 17:47, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Why-are-so-many-supporters-using-hyphens-its-kinda-stupid-hope-Ecoleetage-doesn't-do-his-wrong-queue-joke-with-loads-of-them-cos-that-would-be-annoying support Great candidate, no bad moves or anything. SpecialK(KoЯn flakes) 18:05, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, guess I started it :P Stwalkerster [ talk ] 21:30, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Great user. —Ceran ♦ (talk) 20:17, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  54. I wanted to nom but you didn't tell me Support - Abso-frikin-lutely. Very, very trustworthy. Has done vandal fighting and article work which is great. To me, all I like to see is understanding of policy and trustworthiness, which this candidate has! DavidWS (contribs) 21:26, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  55. Support I had a feeling that this day was coming. He is a great editor and extremely helpful and I definitely support granting the use of the tools. Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 21:37, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  56. Strong support A great editor, should have been an admin before, very helpful, friendly, understands policy better than me anyway! Good luck on this RfA and hopefully as an admin!--Res2216firestar 23:07, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  57. Support - well, duh. // roux   23:09, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  58. Support excellent nomination, although I disagree with you adding yourself to recall (I know, you can't win either way, which is why I won't oppose for it) as the system is like an election promise, good luck enforcing it later on (I would think that generally the ones who end up needing to be recalled are the ones who won't honor their promises). All-in-all, an excellent candiate; per my RfA criteria Foxy Loxy Pounce! 23:29, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  59. Support From my experience of dealing with this user, THO is more than capable of being sysop, and has my unreserved support.--Kerotan-Have a nice day :) 01:08, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  60. Support - User lives up to his name. Since before I became an admin (over a year ago), I've seen TheHelpfulOne working around various areas of the project. Most memorable areas being the help desk and ACC when it was still just a page. In the past year, quite a few times, he's asked me to carry out administrative tasks, which shows me that he has an understanding of them. I think he'll make a great admin. The sole oppose at this time is completely unpersuasive, and from reading the linked page, it seems more to me that the opposer was being an ass in the discussion, while the candidate was making polite arguments. لennavecia 02:15, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  61. Support I like the contributions and seems trustworthy. --Banime (talk) 02:16, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  62. Support; a gem of an editor, and I expect a gem of an admin. — Coren (talk) 03:50, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  63. Support. bibliomaniac15 04:53, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  64. Support. LegoKontribsTalkM 05:34, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  65. Support. Pretty much everything has already been said. Experienced, civil, knowledgeable, all-around good editor. Useight (talk) 06:45, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  66. Support, seems fine. Stifle (talk) 11:43, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  67. Long overdue support - Definitely time for THO to get the mop. Xclamation point 13:12, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  68. Strongest possible support - How's this guy not an admin already!? He's a great person to work with. V D on a public PC (talk) 16:21, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  69. Support Well, some concerns raised in the neutral party were about things past over 6 months. The candidate' general contribution looks good.--Caspian blue 19:48, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  70. Infinately Strong Surpport. Excellent editor who, as in his name has been the helpful one! Andy (talk) 20:04, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  71. Support. Good contributions & good answers. Axl ¤ [Talk] 21:01, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  72. Support. Good candaidate, and also I liked the nomination statement. Dean B (talk) 05:22, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  73. Strong Support. After having a look at this users resent contributions i have changed my mind and decided to Support this user. Good Luck and hope to be hearing from you when you succede. --[ Rhodes416 ] [Talk] 07:34, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  74. Strong Support. Good candidate, can't see any problems. Nick (talk) 09:00, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  75. Support looks good, should be fine. --Kanonkas :  Talk  11:49, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  76. Support Excellent contributor. That just about sums it all up, no need to say any more :) Chamal talk 14:18, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  77. Support After Very deep Consideration .The user track is good and see no concerns there.I was surprised by the fact that a RFA candidate has only 2 articles [4] .But the fact is a user can contribute to the encyclopedia in any form and article writing is only part of it or rather Article writing is not a requirement for adminship.The user has been around since November 2007 .I fully trust the user with the tools after review of track.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:14, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  78. Strong Support I think I'm going to jump in on the bandwagon :) He is a valuable editor who lives up to his name. Parthian Scribe 20:35, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  79. Support I'm too tired to make a joke or some other clever comment here. Erik the Red 2 ~~~~ 20:56, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  80. Support - No problem here. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:35, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  81. Not-!voted-in-a-very-long-time Support - I don't normally !vote in RfA's anymore, but when I saw Thehelpfulone was a candidate, I HAD to come here and support! Great Wikipedian and deserves the tools! :-) Sloan ranger (chat) 22:53, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  82. Support — Realist2 00:24, 22 November 2008 (UTC).[reply]
  83. Support - As the name suggests, he's very helpful. Lots of good article writing, will make a great admin. Sunderland06 (talk) 00:54, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  84. 'Bout bloody time – Thehelpfulone should have been granted this responsibility a long time ago, as far as I'm concerned. —Animum (talk) 03:51, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  85. · AndonicO Engage. 04:36, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  86. Support - Overall, you are an excellent candidate who I have seen around that I am surprised to be honest is not already an admin. Clearly you have a good range of contributions - the amount of articles created does not concern me, I confess I have only created three, some editors are more for maintenance tasks and fixing existing articles. I do have a bit of reservations on the CSD tagging, though you have tagged many pages and a few mistakes are understandable for a task that requires on the spot decision making. I advice you if this RfA passes to stick to the WP:CSD letter and spirit as much as possible when speedy deleting pages. Nothing else brought up really concerns me. Camaron | Chris (talk) 12:09, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  87. Support will be a net positive. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:30, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  88. Very Strong Support Seen him around, and seems excellent to me. Why not? ^^ M.H.ITrue Romace iS Dead 13:34, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  89. OMG-do-I-need-to-have-an-explanation!?!!1! support Definitely! TNP (formerly Jonathan) 16:28, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  90. Support BradV 17:54, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  91. Brad Cabal support per Bradv. Fully qualified candidate. Newyorkbrad (talk) 19:53, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  92. A mensch. Plutonium27 (talk) 20:59, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  93. --cremepuff222 (talk) 21:30, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  94. IRC Cabal support per Synergy 22:10, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  95. Support Username has made me believe that this person will deserve to be an alright sysop. SchfiftyThree (talk!) 22:15, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  96. Support - I have seen this user's good work around the encyclopedia.--Danaman5 (talk) 06:32, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  97. I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message! - 07:41, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  98. Support - Definitely one of those editors that you assume already has the tools. Matt (Talk) 22:48, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  99. Nousernamesleft (talk) 03:51, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  100. Yay, I'm the 100th voter. :) Strong support. Outstanding contributor, and will also be an outstanding admin. Ncmvocalist (talk) 03:57, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Yay, WP:100! :-) –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 04:03, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  101. Support. I remember signing this guy's Guestbook. KensplanetTalkContributions 07:55, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  102. support his name is perfect for the job. GtstrickyTalk or C 15:01, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  103. Support Oh boy. You're not an admin yet? Hmm, I seem to remember you helping me out months back with a formatting issue I was having in an article. Huh, totally surprised you've not been given access to the extra tool set. I have 0 reservations in my support of your candidacy. Good luck. Lazulilasher (talk) 16:09, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  104. Hello, I am Harry Potter, and am looking for some Quiddich materials. I need a broom, a ball-ooh, wrong queue. Support. Ecoleetage (talk) 22:45, 24 November 2008 (UTC) actually ~the editorofthewiki (talk/contribs/editor review)~ in camouflage, shh![reply]
  105. Support Per the two noms, the answers to the first three questions, and positive contributions to this project. Cirt (talk) 05:32, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  106. Support: IMO, THO is helpful for the project. Please work more on non automated or tool assisted edits also. -- Tinu Cherian - 05:35, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  107. Support Graham Colm Talk 15:37, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  108. Support - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:56, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  109. Of course. Acalamari 16:33, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  110. Support—I've seen Thehelpfulone around, and my impression has been uniformly positive. {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 16:49, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  111. Support Obviously a great editor. LittleMountain5 16:53, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  112. Support. Chergles (talk) 17:56, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
  1. Per Q3 (may not be able to handle pressures of adminship) and poor understanding of NFCC, combined with a stubbornness and lack of willingness to listen, as shown at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Harry Potter/archive3. Giggy (talk) 11:59, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    If the editor has not been in an edit conflict, this would surely mean that he has been getting along fine. Anyway, the answer to Q3 was fine in my opinion. Furthermore, although the editor was fairly persistent, it was fairly obvious that he was putting effort in and seemed to listen and respond accordingly in the harry potter article mentioned. Nothing personal but he seems perfect to me! :-) Andy (talk) 20:04, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose along the same lines as Giggy; a poor knowledge of the WP:NFCC, and the answer to Q3. While I hate to sound like I want admins who are garrulous, I think being in a conflict or two is necessary to understanding how to go about conflict resolution; "by the book" knowledge only goes so far. I think THO is a fine person in my interactions, but I'm not sure need of the tools has been demonstrated. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 19:14, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't particulary dispute your general oppose, David, but coming from someone who has made a grand total of 878 admin actions in a year and a half "no need for the the tools" seems to be not only a generally poor argument (c.f. WT:RFA ad nauseum) but also slightly odd coming from an admin who uses them a couple of times a day (on average) at best. Pedro :  Chat  23:13, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I as well never dispute any oppose, however I wonder if this one was needed. It seems like this RfA will pass, and I have to question the point of adding an oppose "for not seeing the need." I'm not sure what to make of it, but Thehelpfulone wouldn't have accepted this nomination and/or answered question 1 if he had no need for the tools... iMatthew 23:19, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree with you iMatthew with one reservation. The oppose is very much needed, as RFA is not a vote and we need all views to form consensus. However this particular oppose ignores long term consensus that need for the tools is not particularly relevant except for very specialist candidates (as an example Foundation issues). Common agreement has been that should an admin make even one action a year with the tools this is a good thing. My response to David is suprise, given that an admin with a relatively low level of use of the tools seems to think that "no demonstrated need" is a good reason to decline. Low activity is not a reason to decline - David's other reasons may well be, but I think he should remove the "need" element of his oppose. Pedro :  Chat  23:29, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm sorry I didn't get around to opposing early enough for all of you. Secondly, I don't really care what sorts of consensus is formed at WT:RFA, because it's a circus show which has had little benefit; I'm voting for my criteria. As for my use (or lack thereof) of the tools, I've been busy improving the encyclopedia and use my tools for that, which I argue is more important than bickering about people's opposes. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 13:12, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oppose per Giggy and per claim that he has no experience of editorial conflict. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 06:39, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Weak Oppose Generally a good editor, but having seen recent problems with administrators who believe "their" articles are exempt from WP:NFCC, the FAC mentioned above makes me more than a little concerned. Black Kite 17:06, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Oppose - Per all of the above. I don't trust this editor. Also Q3 raises concerns. --Coalesce-laugh (talk) 11:26, 25 November 2008 (UTC) User has been blocked for disruption. --Bongwarrior (talk) 11:49, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral
  1. Neutral per some questionable CSD tagging, eg. [5], [6], [7], [8]. Epbr123 (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Neutral per Epbr123, also for saying (s)he wants to work at the drama boards with little experience in those areas and for reporting the username ROCKVILLAINS (talk · contribs), which has yet to edit, to UAA because "We don't like villains on Wikipedia!"([9]). Icewedge (talk) 01:25, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    His user page identifies him as a male. So he's a "he", not a "(s)he", nor an it.  :) The Transhumanist 05:41, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Neutral - can't support somebody with an image upload like this one (will be speedied shortly). Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:26, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment - Wow...both the above incidents occured in March, it's now almost December. — Possum (talk) 10:22, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Present. — CharlotteWebb 20:27, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Neutral. The questionable CSD tagging forces me to be neutral, especially when the candidate plans to work in that specific area. The answer to question three brings concerns as well; the user hasn't been in any conflicts that comes to his memory, so it's hard to tell if the user can appropriate handle a heated situation. DiverseMentality 04:50, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
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.