Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Canadian-Bacon

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Requests for adminship

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Glen (talk | contribs) at 06:03, 16 December 2006 (fixing tally 18/0/1). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Canadian-Bacon

Voice your opinion (18/0/1); Scheduled to end 03:28, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Canadian-Bacon (talk · contribs) – I'd like to nominate Canadian-Bacon for adminship. He was one of the first users I saw avidly fighting vandalism when I started patrolling recent changes. After a short wikibreak, I was glad to see him back to his previous roles. A very efficient vandalfighter, he is clearly aware of the circumstances under which should a block be applied. Also, good record of participation within the Wikipedia space, such as XfD and RFA. His recent editor review is naturally prompting very positive feedback. 100% edit summary usage, friendly and civil, I can't really see any cons about this user that would surely make a fine admin and use the tools wisely. Húsönd 01:14, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I humbly accept this offer. Canadian-Bacon 03:29, 16 December 2006 (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: At many times of the day, the backlog at WP:AIV can get dangerously long and many vandals are able to run rampant for up to an hour before an admin is able to pay attention to their case, so I don't think it would hurt to have an extra hand to help clear the backlog there. Another problematic backlog can occur at WP:RFP where another pair of hands wouldn't hurt and I feel that I would be able to provide assistance. I'd also anticipate watching WP:AN, most notably WP:ANI and WP:AN3RR and providing what help I could there. As far as deletions go, most of my experience is at WP:AFD and would be able to help in determining concensus and closing deletions there, as well as learning the ropes at the various other XfDs until I'm comfortable closing there as well. I could also provide help at where the backlog can become very long at points and clearing them quickly is important especially with potentially libelous attack pages.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: As far as my article contributions go, I'm very pleased with the work I've done on Jay Peak. The article has gone from a stub to an article that looks at least half-decent. Another article which I'm pleased to have contributed to is YTMND which has been through a few challenges over the last few months. I'm also pleased with my contributions to Barrhaven which I've been editing since I signed up for an account. However, many of the contributions which I'm most pleased of haven't come in article form. I'm very pleased with the anti-vandalism work which I've done during my time here, as it has accounted for the vast majority of time I've put into the encyclopedia. As well, I'm quite proud of the mediation (although a small ammount) which I've done at WP:MEDCAB, in particular, the work regarding the Controversy section on the article for Keith Locke. This was especially important to me as I feel that I am a fairly level-headed individual and being able to play the part of a neutral party is one of the things which I pride myself on
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: As far as edit conflicts have gone I've been fairly lucky in avoiding any major ones to this point. As far as smaller ones go though I was involved in a small conflict on the page for Newgrounds when one user began repeatedly removing sections that he felt didn't deserve mention. I requested that he stop these removals so that we could determine concensus and try and make everyone who edits the page happy, to which he replied that what he was doing was in accordance with policy and that making everyone happy was not important. At this point I decided that it wasn't worth fighting over and stopped making major edits to the article while he trimmed it down to a size that he deemed acceptable. I tend to stay away from articles where POV can play a big factor as I don't believe that fighting with other editors is a constructive way to to contribute to the encyclopedia. In any cases where conflicts do arise I tend to back down and allow things to sort themselves out in the long-term rather than engaging in revert wars. However since I do believe that I can keep a fairly level head in cases of conflict, I've tried to help with a few cases at WP:MEDCAB with moderate success. As far as stresses on Wikipedia have been concerned most of them have come from external sources. I do my best to keep these stresses separate from my editing work, which is the cause for my large Wikibreak in October while I worked through several large projects at university.

Optional Question by Sharkface217 03:41, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

4. Do you believe it is proper to ask a candidate for RFA their age? Would the age of an RFA candidate affect your decision to vote for them? Should age be at all taken into account when voting for a prospective admin or should the user be judged solely on the quality of their contributions to Wikipedia?
A: You had to give me a toughie eh? The real issue about asking candidates their age comes down to two things really. First off is the main issue, which is Privacy Concerns. Though the candidate could easily lie about their age, many candidates may feel their privacy is being invaded, this is especially important when we look at the new WP:CHILD. The second issue at hand is the question of how optional it is to answer the optional questions. Recently it seems that the optional questions have become far more obligatory than they were ever intended to be, and this could leave many young editors feeling as if they have to reveal their ages. So, though I don't have anything against the question in Theory, in practice it seems to be very divisive. That being said I have supported young RFA candidates in the past regardless of their age and will continue to do so in the future, though, I hold nothing against those who would oppose young candidates since everyone has their own reasons and I'm not one to judge what they think, even if it runs contrary to my beliefs.
General comments

Discussion

Support

  1. Strong Support! HA! I beat the nominator here.... anyway, I've seen Canadian Bacon on this place for a while. He is long overdue for Adminship. Sharkface217 03:35, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I see you too much support. Since the edit counter doesn't want to load, I'll assume you don't have something stupid, like no talk edits. -Amarkov blahedits 03:38, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Ugh. I wasn't expecting that to actually be a problem. Changed to neutral. -Amarkov blahedits 04:43, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Strong Support as nom. Beaten again, argh! Good luck. :-) --Húsönd 03:39, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support per nom! Basically you are a very strong user who flat out deserves the tools. Cheers.— Seadog 03:43, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support Just came from WP:AIV where CB (I hope you don't mind me calling you that) is hard at work-- a simply marvelous vandal fighter! Dar-Ape 03:46, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Strong Support per nom and my interactions. Come on, now you can clear out the WP:AIV backlog for once instead of contributing to it. ;) --210physicq (c) 03:50, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Strong-ish Support Has done incredible vandalism reverting! Great job! --lovelaughterlife♥talk? 03:51, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support Good vandal fighter, and seems trustworthy. I am sure he will use the tools well. TSO1D 03:53, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support Strong candidate. - WJBscribe (WJB talk) 03:55, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support - [insert cliche here]. MER-C 04:04, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support the kind of editor of which I have no qualms about giving admin powers.--Jersey Devil 04:05, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support John254 04:12, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Cleared for Adminship Excellent vandalfighter. —Pilotguy (push to talk) 04:17, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support. From my experience, Canadian-Bacon has been nothing but an extremely civil and dedicated user, and should make a fine admin.-- danntm T C 04:31, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support Canadian-Bacon was all over the redirect vandals tonight. Give this man (woman?) a mop!--Kchase T 04:42, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    It's ok, we all forget what gender I am from time to time :P. Canadian-Bacon 05:05, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support A great vandal fighter! Gzkn 05:31, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support - somebody's gotta clean up after the bot :o -- Tawker 05:37, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Strong Support Very dedicated user, would make a great admin. Somitho 05:57, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Absolutely! Glen 06:02, December 16, 2006 (UTC)

Oppose

Neutral

  1. Simply too few talk edits. I'd still go with weak support if you had lots of XfD discussion, but you don't. -Amarkov blahedits 04:47, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Canadian-Bacon&oldid=94658451"