Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Yannismarou: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Gzkn (talk | contribs)
8,208 edits
Line 1: Line 1:
===[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Yannismarou|Yannismarou]]===
===[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Yannismarou|Yannismarou]]===
'''[{{fullurl:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Yannismarou|action=edit}} Voice your opinion]'''
'''[{{fullurl:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Yannismarou|action=edit}} Voice your opinion]'''
'''(30/0/0); Scheduled to end 20:16, [[22 January]] [[2007]] (UTC)'''
'''(31/0/0); Scheduled to end 20:16, [[22 January]] [[2007]] (UTC)'''


{{User|Yannismarou}} – Yannismarou is IMO one of the very best quality contributors we have in wikipedia. His work with Greece-related topics is particularly impressive; through his efforts he has brought to featured status five articles, [[Pericles]], [[Aspasia]], [[Alcibiades]], [[Demosthenes]] and [[El Greco]], and is also the founding member of [[Wikipedia:WikiProject History of Greece]]. Not less important has been Yannismarou's constant activity in writing peer reviews, and in participating to [[WP:FAR]] and [[WP:FAC]]. I believe I should also note his extraordinary friendliness and politeness, even when critisized. For all these reasons, I am certain that there is absolutely no risk of him abusing the tools.[[User:Aldux|Aldux]] 01:42, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
{{User|Yannismarou}} – Yannismarou is IMO one of the very best quality contributors we have in wikipedia. His work with Greece-related topics is particularly impressive; through his efforts he has brought to featured status five articles, [[Pericles]], [[Aspasia]], [[Alcibiades]], [[Demosthenes]] and [[El Greco]], and is also the founding member of [[Wikipedia:WikiProject History of Greece]]. Not less important has been Yannismarou's constant activity in writing peer reviews, and in participating to [[WP:FAR]] and [[WP:FAC]]. I believe I should also note his extraordinary friendliness and politeness, even when critisized. For all these reasons, I am certain that there is absolutely no risk of him abusing the tools.[[User:Aldux|Aldux]] 01:42, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Line 65: Line 65:
# '''Support''' per above. ''[[User:Yuser31415|Yuser31415]]'' 03:06, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
# '''Support''' per above. ''[[User:Yuser31415|Yuser31415]]'' 03:06, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
#'''Support''' An amazing editor! [[User:Gzkn|Gzkn]] 03:42, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
#'''Support''' An amazing editor! [[User:Gzkn|Gzkn]] 03:42, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
#'''Support''' looks good -- [[User:Samir_(The_Scope)|'''Samir''' <small>धर्म</small>]] 03:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


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

Revision as of 03:54, 16 January 2007

Yannismarou

Voice your opinion (31/0/0); Scheduled to end 20:16, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou (talk · contribs) – Yannismarou is IMO one of the very best quality contributors we have in wikipedia. His work with Greece-related topics is particularly impressive; through his efforts he has brought to featured status five articles, Pericles, Aspasia, Alcibiades, Demosthenes and El Greco, and is also the founding member of Wikipedia:WikiProject History of Greece. Not less important has been Yannismarou's constant activity in writing peer reviews, and in participating to WP:FAR and WP:FAC. I believe I should also note his extraordinary friendliness and politeness, even when critisized. For all these reasons, I am certain that there is absolutely no risk of him abusing the tools.Aldux 01:42, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept.--Yannismarou 20:01, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog and Category:Administrative backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
A: Although sysop tools are not a prerequisite in order to fight against vandalism and sockpuppetry, they do help; and as an editor with a number of frequently vandalized articles in my watchlist I can realize their usefulness! As an administrator I will keep a close eye on WP:AIV and WP:SSP. I’m also willing to help with page protection in WP:RFPP, and I will check incidents that require the intervention of administrators in WP:ANI. I have participated as a reviewer in WP:AFD, and I think I can help more as an administrator in CAT:SPEEDY, and especially in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Old, where there is a backlog. Frankly, I cannot promise that I will be always conducting systematic sysop work or that I’ll devote myself in a specific area, but I can promise that I’ll be always ready to assist with my admin tools, which I’ll use prudently. I want to stress that sysop tools are useful and of huge importance, but above all we are editors here (Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia; and encyclopaedias with active sysops but inactive editors are destined to perish!) and thus I intend not to neglect my editing work. I believe I can achieve the right balance between editing and sysop work!
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I am particularly pleased for all my FA contributions. If I have to chose, I would say that, although El Greco is probably my most flawless article, Pericles is the article which in particular stands out. Maybe because it was my first major contribution to Wikipedia or maybe because of the second adventurous FAC, I am sentimentally attached to it. In any case, I do believe that despite its flaws, the article of Pericles is livelier than my other FAs, thoroughly researched, and with a prose of high quality, almost poetic in some parts of it. And I am grateful to Robth who copy-edited the article and rewrote some parts of it in a marvelous way, and to Konstable and Druworos who regenerated my interest in the article after a failed FAC and GAC. The story of El Greco and Pericles indicates IMO that, while time passes and we keep editing, we may be able to write "flawless" articles, but we lose our initial "flame", "spark", and "inspiration", when we were "new" and "inexperienced" here; I don’t know what we can do about it, and if this is something inevitable in Wikipedia.
On a different note, I’m also pleased and proud of the History of Greece project that I initiated with the encouragement of Argos'Dad. The project is not perfect, neither works ideally, but it already has 31 members, and I think that its goal, the better Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to the history of Greece, has been to a certain extent (we can get much much better) reached.
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 have participated in a few heated discussions in Wikipedia (two of my recent ones are here and here). I think this is sometimes inevitable. The most important thing for me is to keep a decent behaviour and to avoid personal attacks. Therefore, even when criticized, I try to implement NPOV, not to be offensive and not to hurt other users’ feelings. Of course, I am not infallible and I often defend my beliefs in a strong way, but I think I have the ability to admit my mistakes and to apologize for them as I have done, for instance, here.
General comments

Discussion

Support

  1. Support. Calm, dependable, competent, trustworthy. And it's good to see a candidate with real academic qualification and an unfaltering commitment to article quality. As the old Greek saying goes: Arthro pou dhen éxi Yánni, prokopí poté dhen káni. ("an article without a Yannis will never get featured.") Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:19, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support as nom.--Aldux 20:22, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Unbelievably Strong support, was actually going to nom him myself.--Wizardman 20:35, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. SUPPORT, and yes, this nom is definitely an exception to don't shout! NikoSilver 20:46, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support-Good user and very nice answers. --TeckWizTalk Contribs@ 20:52, 15 January 2007 (UTC)`[reply]
  6. Support. I have always found him to be diligent and considerate, and have no doubt that he'll make an excellent admin. Kirill Lokshin 20:55, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support, exemplary contributions. Christopher Parham (talk) 20:58, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support, valuable contributor and surprised that he is not an administrator already. Hectorian 21:15, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support Has the experience and skills to use the tools. Great answers, great user, great admin. candidate. Ganfon 21:42, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  10. No-cliches-Here Support --tennisman sign here! 21:50, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support - per nom --T-rex 21:56, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support per Hectorian. Noticed him around on several occasions and he has left a good impression each time. Oldelpaso 22:05, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Absolutely. Yannis approaches all his work with an unsurpassed dedication to doing the job thoroughly and correctly, which is exactly the sort of approach we need from administrators. --RobthTalk 22:15, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support, a user that can definetely be trusted with the admin tools. — Tutmosis 23:09, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support per above. :) Cbrown1023 23:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support I see no problems; contributions spread across each of the main spaces. (aeropagitica) 23:24, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support Appears to need the tools, trustworthy, and to know his stuff. Agent 86 23:47, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Strong support If we could clone him, Wiki would be a better place. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:56, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support. —S.D. ¿п? 23:59, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support Sounds solid, with good article writing background. Crum375 00:02, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  21. STRONGLY Support Probably the second most helpful editor I've ever met on here!--Mike Searson 00:23, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support. A good user, definitely is capable of handling the admin tools. Nishkid64 00:30, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Strong Support --Sir James Paul, La gloria è a dio 00:40, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support- Good user--SUIT42 00:41, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support excellent contributions and an excellent attitude toward adminship. Also, what Sandy said. Opabinia regalis 01:13, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support per nom. Alex43223 Talk | Contribs | E-mail | C 01:41, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support looks quite good. Dar-Ape 02:32, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support - I'm happy to see more admins who are editors. Good spread of contributions and some helpful tips on his userpage doesnt hurt. Mkdwtalk 02:56, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support per above. Yuser31415 03:06, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support An amazing editor! Gzkn 03:42, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support looks good -- Samir धर्म 03:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Neutral

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Yannismarou&oldid=101029104"