Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Llama man

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Requests for adminship
This is the current revision of this page, as edited by SheepLinterBot (talk | contribs) at 21:35, 19 February 2023 (→[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Llama man|Llama man]]: [t. 1] fix font tags linter errors). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.

Llama man

[edit]

Final (20/21/8) Withdrawn by candidate 13:41, 3 December 2006 (UTC) ([1])

Llama man (talk · contribs) – Llama Man is an incredible contributor to Wikipedia. He has written an incredible and exhaustive amount. He is in good standing, regularly contributes, and is a member of multiple wikiprojects. It would be a crime for him to go without administrator status simply because he is the most helpful, hard-working wikipedian that I have ever had the pleasure to be acquainted with. King Toadsworth 02:07, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept, as humbly as possible. —The Great Llamamoo? 20:16, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I regretfully withdraw. Seems I don't have enough Wikipedia talk namespace edits yet, and not enough articles I'm working on. I've learned from the comments in the opposes, and will follow them then try again in a few months. —The Great Llamamoo? 18:30, 3 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: I anticipate helping with chores such as blocking and unblocking users. I might edit a few protected pages, too, but that's not a huge priorty for me. I also would like to do work at the administrators' backlog, especially at AIV. I plan do do a lot of work with speedy deletions, too, and closing AfDs. And finally, WP:RfP and occasionally reading WP:AN.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: Though I have no FAs or GAs yet, I have made 100+ edits to the Mario article, which I'm very proud of. [2] [3] [4] (see [5] for all contribs to article). While it's not yet an FA, I have done a lot of work with the article and hopes it becomes one soon. I am also proud of my efforts in vandalfighting; though I have made a few mistakes and haven't been doing it much as of late, I have made hundreds of vandal reversions, and usually leave appropriate warnings. In AfD, I have a lot of participation (Three latest: [6] [7] [8]), and have over 400 project namespace edits. My edit summary usage is very high; all edits after my first 50 or so have edit summaries. I've done a lot of UBM and welcoming users, which is why I have so many user and user talk edits. I (sorry for using "I" all these times) have a clear understanding of all Wikipedia policies.
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: I was blocked in June this year when I blanked the llama article three times and was blocked for it. However, I don't think this was a very fair block, as it was honestly a test and I dodn't get warned at all for it. The reason for my block was "vandalism only account", though I made a few useful edits before the page blanking. The block was indefinite, but I was unblocked in about a week. Some users that caused me stress were Buzawz and AshyLarryMarcySon. The former made a lot of personal attacks on me, which I will admit overreacting to, and the latter vandalized User:Pogogunner, User:Seadog.M.S, and User:Llama man multiple times, creating a sockpuppet every time one of his accounts was blocked. With this one, I got slightly stressed, but not nearly as much as Buzawz had caused. In the future, I plan to stay cool if this happens again, and block the user if it continues, but only after receiving multiple warnings.
4. Have you ever taken a Wikibreak or anything of the likes do to stress or something like that (this wouldn't include camping, homework, etc.) It won't change my desicion any but I'd like to know and I think that this might be important to others. I am the Lord of the Morning!
A: Nope, never taken a Wikibreak, besides for my birthday.
5. Can you explain why your User and User Talk edits more than double your Mainspace/Talk edits? (And User Talk alone is more than Main + Talk + Project + Project Talk) -- Renesis (talk) 21:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A: When I first joined the welcoming committee, I got kind of obsessed with welcoming people (most of whom never made any edits), so that led to several hundred extra user talk edits. I also get a lot of messages on my talk page, so, of course, I have to reply to them. As for the user edits, I do a lot of UBM (which I neglected to mention in the second question—will do right now!), which led to a lot of userpage edits.
6. Are there any particular edits you are unhappy with and why did you "vandalize" the llama article (I already know the last, but some others may not...) Why? the Rebirth of Lews Therin has Come!
A: I'm not really unhappy with any of my edits, besides a few mistakes in vandalfighting that I can't remember, and the blanking of the llama article. I blanked that page because I was doing an experiment to see if it could get reverted, as I was a new user then.
7. If you weren't to become an Admin this time around, would you be willing to go up again? Also, not based off any comments below, how would you improve your chances for the next time to "win"? Once again, I already know the first but others may not. the Car'a'Carn
A: I would defintitely go again 2-3 months afterward. To improve my chances of succeeding, I would improve the Mario article to featured status and get at least 500 project namespace edits.
8. Have you ever started another account to profit by decreasing the amount of test edits, to vandalize and not get in trouble (sound familiar, but I didn't do it!), or to give yourself some kind of reward or something? If yes, why? He Who Comes With The Dawn
A: No.
good answer. —¡Randfan! 23:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it's great.
9. Sorry for sounding like I'm interrogating you, but... What would you say is your worst quality in editing or getting along with others? Why? —¡Randfan! 23:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A: Um, well, I don't really know.
General comments

Discussion

Support

  1. Strong Support Llama man is humorous and has contributed massive amounts to Nintendo-related articles and the Nintendo Wikiproject. He is also on the Welcoming Committee and is extremely knowledgeable about Wikipedia and its primary goals. King Toadsworth 02:09, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support. Wish I could have been the first to do so, but you still have it. llama's Nintendo related articles and and humourous edits have not only greatly helped out Wikipedia but have also lightened the mood and made everything much easier for all of us. He participates regularly (about every day) and is a member of multible Wikiprojects. He is compassoinate (Exempli gratia: E@L) and creative in every aspect. Much more do I have to say in praise for him but I can;t really seperate out the thoughts, but a major one is that he is a great Wikifriend and one of my first (our meeting was rather humourous :)). He's an excellent vandal-fighter and protects the community greatly. A crime for ages to come it would be, if not a sysop he becomes. Cheers, and full support. Good luck! —¡Randfan! 23:28, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually make that a "Strong support". —¡Randfan! 17:19, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I was wrong about two things, 1). I "super strongly support" you -and- 2). That question did influence my disicion, all the more reason for you to become an admin! —¡Randfan! 21:04, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Strong Support, very strong user...funny also. This user is very kind to the newcomers and is willing to help (even when I was one). I have no doubt in my mind that he will be a great admin.__Seadog ♪ 20:26, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support. From what I've seen, he's been great. --Majorly 20:30, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support:I keep on seeing Llama Man on my travels and have nothing but praise. Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 20:34, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support. Cbrown1023 21:00, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support: Though the user's made mistakes in the past, he recognizes them and has decided to improve instead of complain about them. He's also a member of Esperanza - though as of right now, for the most part, I don't think that means anything special, his 'welcome' messages prove that he's a user who believes in Esperanza for what it's supposed to be doing, not what it is. Therefore, I put out my support for Llama, and wish him all the luck in the world. --NomaderTalk 22:49, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support. Ive been monitoring his work since I met Randfan (they do seem to be good friends) and have came to a discussion (or agreement, I'm still teaching anglish). He would make a fine sysop. Well evening everyone! Twisted Rapscallion 23:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    note to crat user has 6 edits the first being December 1st.--Seadog ♪ 23:33, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. weak support. I don't know him very well but I skimmed through his edits and found them good for the most part. A lot of talk page edits and that blocking hurt his chances but I'm here. I see the note above, Seadog, and I know you will put the same here, but the reason why is because I was grounded (still am, I'm just sneeking on, and will be off for a few more months (probably)) so don't blame me for not editing a lot. You should thanks Randfan, he's the one who I learned this from, by obsevation. Okay, gotta go now, good luck! GreatScott! Great Flamin' Cheeseballs From Above 23:39, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Note to crat, this user has few edits (11), also. data found here. —¡Randfan! 23:43, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support This guy has done positive things, he'll make an excellent sysop. --SunStar Net 23:42, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support Llama's contributions have been good on many levels, I think he is quite qualified for adminship.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 23:53, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Support--Húsönd 00:25, 2 December 2006 (UTC) (changed to neutral)[reply]
  12. Support--Agεθ020 (ΔT • ФC) 00:34, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support. I was on the fence until I saw Randfan's questions. Those definitly sealed the deal! ;-). But seriously...great contribs to the project and seems to have a fair grasp of policy. I think Llama man will be an effective admin. Good luck! -- AuburnPilottalk 01:12, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
  14. Support Saw this editor around. A good guy. -- Selmo (talk) 02:42, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support Llama man would make a good sysop indeed. I would trust this user with the mop because I have seen he is a good contributer, and is always very welcoming (in more than one sense). | AndonicO Talk | Sign Here 02:46, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support looks like a good contributor.-- danntm T C 03:29, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support The added tools given to him would only benefit this project further. --Siva1979Talk to me 04:25, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support A great user, he will make a brilliant Admin. Sharkface217 04:33, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support on wheels! on hooves! Dar-Ape 05:40, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. for me it's ok --dario vet ^_^ (talk) 13:18, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. Strongly. I came here in the process of looking at the contribs of the first nominator who is a new user with suspicious behavior; neither nominator is reliable for evaluating admin qualifications ([9], [10]). Evaluating User:Llama man's qualifications independently of that, there are almost no Wikipedia talk edits—the only non-revert or non-trivial such edit is to report a personal attack on WT:NPA in August; the greatest number of his "over 400" Wikipedia-space edits are to the Sandbox and various sandbox games—the latest being a BJAODN, most of the AfD comments are in the last two weeks and many in total were empty votes duplicating what others said. There are an absurdly high number of user talk edits and edits to his own user page. The answer to question 1 seems to come right out of the administrator's handbook (read: "admins can block and unblock users", check; "admins can edit protected pages", check; "admins deal with administrator backlogs", check; "admins deal with AIV", check; speedy deletion, RFP, AFD, check, check, check); the diffs provided in answer to question 2 of what contributions he is "most pleased" with are minor edits; his "100+" edits (awesome edit count) to Mario are a lot of vandal reversions. There are many legitimate fix-up edits and ref additions to this article, but aside from Llama this appears to be almost the only article he has any non-minor contributions to; half of the few Talk edits[11] are vandal reversions and the rest are almost all Mario. That is, the one article he mentions he is "pleased" with is roughly the only article he edits. Considering that most edits to the main namespace are vandalism reverts and nearly all of the many edits to the user talk namespace are vandalism warnings, and in light of the answers to the questions above, this user's involvement and experience with Wikipedia is not sufficient for understanding Wikipedia policy or the activities of an administrator. Vandalism reverting is helpful, but does not demonstrate the understanding, cool-headedness, or trustworthiness necessary. (Note: This RfA was advertised at User:Llama man[12]). —Centrx→talk • 08:44, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose per Centrx. I had already started to build the same impression but had not had the opportunity to research this applicant as thoroughly as Centrx has. My concerns were low article talk edits compared to high user talk edits. This is probably due to vandal fighting rather than article writing and editing. Add this to low Wikipedia talk edits and the overall record starts to raise some questions. Centrx's analysis raises even more. There is reason to believe that Llama man will develop into a good admin candidate some day but he needs more experience as an article editor and with Wikipedia-space edits in particular. --Richard 11:04, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oppose — per Centrx; and this RfA is just not adding up 100% to me. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 13:00, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Concerned about block, and not much Wikispace experience. – Chacor 13:08, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Strong Oppose per Centrx. What is more, user talk edits outnumber mainspace edits. Wikipedia is not a place for social networking, per WP:NOT. 600 userpage edits is also on the high side. Block isn't really important. Admins must also know how to write quality articles: otherwise undesirable friction builds up within the project between those who write such articles and admins who do not and concentrate too much on process. Mario is about a million miles off FA status. The supermassive "Characteristics" section reeks of cruft and non-real-world-perspective. See WP:FICT. WP talk edits are also a worry. Moreschi 14:39, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Oppose for now Needs more experience. Just yesterday was asked not to make cut-and-paste moves. An admin candidate shoud know about preserving page histories. On the other hand, off to a good start with RCPatrol and AfD. Needs to better understand his strengths and weaknesses before tackling the blocking of others. Blanking an article was just a test? Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 15:45, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, oppose per Centrix. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 16:37, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Oppose per Centrx. Nominator has only been editing since November 25? Candidate also broke the 'Voice your opinion' link on this page yesterday when he moved the nomination to the correct title [13] (it left the 'Voice your opinion' link pointing to the edit window for the redirect which was left behind). Cut & paste move also a concern. I can't judge very well how this editor would handle and discuss administrative issues; his only two contributions to WP:AN or any of its subpages are a request to have an erroneously deleted userbox undeleted so he could recover some HTML ([14], [15]). Shows potential, but still needs seasoning at this time. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:04, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Oppose per Centrx and Moreschi, not ready for a whie. Jaranda wat's sup 16:13, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Oppose. Given the above reasons, I don't believe that this candidate is experienced enough or ready for adminship. In my opinion, it is likely that admin tools would be misused (though not necessarily abused). SuperMachine 16:48, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Weak oppose. Answer to question one slightly weak, lack of consensus building on talk pages and poor understanding of Wikipedia procedure shown by cut and paste article moves. Also, insufficient encyclopedia building, no experience of dispute resolution and very poor nomination "it would be a crime for him to go without administrator status". Finally, not sure about wanting to edit protected pages comment. Overall, weak oppose, because good vandal fighter... Addhoc 17:04, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Oppose: per Centrx and Chacor.  Orfen User Talk | Contribs 17:16, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Oppose - per all above concerns. Zaxem 17:45, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Strong Oppose per Centrx and other users concerns. The incidents he had concerns me whether he deserves the admin tools. Overall lack of experience, lacks article writing skills as this is the most important job of an admin, since we are here to build an encyclopedia. I don't see a balance in the number of edits. Terence Ong 18:20, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. At this time, I would not be comfortable giving this user admin privileges. Yes, that's an "oppose". DS 20:00, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Oppose per Centrx. This sounds worrying to pass him the mop and bucket. - Mailer Diablo 20:49, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Strong Oppose per Centrx. Something about this RfA definitely doesn't sit right with me. —Lantoka ( talk | contrib) 21:06, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Oppose- Per Centrx, and I just think you should wait a bit more.--SUIT 23:24, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Oppose per Centrx. From first glance, I thought this user was qualified to be an admin, but from Centrx's elaborations, I'm thinking otherwise. Nishkid64 23:55, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. oppose. please focus on something other than conflict. ... aa:talk 00:41, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Oppose per Centrx who put it succinctly.--Dakota 01:31, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Oppose per above. There's enough about the constituent parts of this that looks slightly odd for the whole to look very odd. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 10:00, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

  1. Neutral He blanked llama, so I really can not vote support, but he has done so many good things, so I really can not vote oppose. --SonicChao talk 21:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    It was very clearly explained that he did this as a new user, and obvious that he now knows better. NauticaShades 14:01, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    That is exactly why I voted neutral. I think new users do hold some responsibility for their actions. It is clearly understandable, even by a new user, that they should not blank pages. --SonicChao talk 17:01, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Neutral. The block is a non-issue, but most mainspace edits seem to be scripty stuff (i.e. popups). Rather low WP talk edits too. -Amarkov blahedits 02:52, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. I like you, honestly I do, and someone who's had their userpage vandalised 29 times must be doing something right, but neutral per Centrx. riana_dzasta 14:19, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Neutral. I don't think that this user would abuse admin tools, so I won't oppose, but I do not feel enough experience has been put forth, and allegations of cut-and paste moves from so recently are also worrying. RyanGerbil10(Упражнение В!) 20:55, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Neutral per SonicChao, Amarkov, RyanGerbil. bibliomaniac15 22:21, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Neutral per Centrx.--Húsönd 02:03, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Neutral per Centrx. I don't think this user is experienced enough. I don't think his admin actions would be malicious but I can't be sure they would be safe?. In other words I'm not sure this user would be ready for the tools. James086Talk | Contribs 06:42, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Neutral - lack of time with the project, would reasses in 3-4 months --T-rex 06:44, 3 December 2006 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Llama_man&oldid=1140384107"