Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kurt Shaped Box

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

Kurt Shaped Box

Final (42/0/1); Ended Thu, 13 Dec 2007 23:10:40 (UTC)

Kurt Shaped Box (talk · contribs) - Kurt Shaped Box has been editing Wikipedia for over three years, and has made over 7,600 edits, including 4,000 to mainspace. He has vast experience in admin related work, with 276 reports to WP:AIV, 68 requests for page protection, and over a dozen posts to XfD, WP:AN/I, Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets and Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention. His other activities include answering and asking questions at WP:Reference desk, and editing articles on rock and pop music; he is one of the main contributers to the Avril Lavigne article. In my opinion, Kurt Shaped Box is clearly ready for the mop. Epbr123 (talk) 20:30, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

Thank you. I accept your nomination and would be honoured to serve as an admin here. Replies to the questions to follow... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 21:54, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

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 admin work do you intend to take part in?

A: As well as fighting simple vandalism, I have noticed that huge amounts of misinformation are inserted into music-related articles on a daily basis. For some reason, in this particular area of the encyclopedia, these questionable edits are allowed to remain for extended periods of time. Hoax entries on supposed new albums, fake album covers created in Photoshop (or similar), fabricated tracklistings, huge lists of songwriters and producers being added to articles on albums which may or may not even exist, etc. If promoted to admin, I intend to make an effort to clean up some of this, as and when I come across it. I also intend to perform CSD work (help to keep the backlogs down!), help with page protection/unprotection, *FD, pagemove stuff and newpage patrolling - areas I already have some experience in as a regular user. I'll probably be steering clear of anything too controversial/contentious until I have learned the ropes. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:45, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

A: While I don't consider myself to have been massively productive in terms of creating articles and adding large volumes of text, I do feel that I have contributed usefully to the project by virtue of making numerous small corrections to articles (e.g. wikifying, dab work, spelling and grammar fixes), finding and/or fixing references, locating free images for use on WP, article naming, formatting, categorization and removal of copyright/BLP-violations. In reference to the question above, I have also worked towards preventing sockpuppets of a certain very prolific vandal from introducing subtle misinformation to various music-related articles (before I got involved, the editor in question had been 'at it' for many months, mostly unnoticed). In addition to this, I also help out regularly at the reference desks. I hope that at least some of my answers there have been helpful. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:45, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

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: To be honest, I've never really been involved with what I would consider to be a 'conflict' - I've had to remind a few users of WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA in the past but nothing major at all. I try my best to keep a cool head whilst editing and try to talk through any content issues I have with other users in a polite and civil manner whilst assuming good faith. If an editor (often a newbie) is editing against policy (e.g. by inserting numerous copyvio images due to a lack of understanding of WP's image use policy), I think that I'm pretty good at explaining the relevant issues to him/her and reaching a satisfactory resolution without biting anyone. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:45, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

4. You mention that you would be "honoured to serve as an admin here." In what way do you view adminship to be an honour? What is your opinion on the proper role of administrators in the community? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chardish (talk • contribs) 21:14, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

A: I consider adminship to be an honour in that members of the WP community have deemed me to be a reliable and editor and worthy of the community's trust and the extra responsibility/powers that come with the role - can't deny that it's a nice feeling. My view on admins in the community? It's always been my opinion that admins are first and foremost WP editors, albeit with extra abilities provided by the software - it should never be a power trip-WikiCop-"wave my badge/use my magic banhammer attack to get my own way in an argument with this guy!"-type situation. Unless obvious vandalism/trolling/socking/disruptive editing is taking place, an admin should behave no differently towards other users than your average 'user in the street' would behave in the same situation. Hope that answers your question satisfactorily. :) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 21:35, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

General comments

• See Kurt Shaped Box's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

• Links for Kurt Shaped Box: Kurt Shaped Box (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)

---

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

Discussion

• I have to mention that in the acceptance, Kurt Shaped Box did say that "Replies to the questions to follow...", which means the answers will come soon. Plus, I remind people that the questions are optional, and Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ragesoss is proof of this. Acalamari 22:42, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Struck the above: it's now out of date. :) Acalamari 22:51, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
• Why did you label a picture CC-BY, when in fact the uploader chose CC-BY-SA for this picture? Miranda 00:30, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
  • My apologies. A simple error - thanks very much for pointing it out to me. I have now corrected it. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 03:57, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Support

1. Support - Valuable editor.--NAHID 20:33, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
2. Support as nom. Epbr123 (talk) 22:22, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
3. Excellent user: I have mainly encountered them when they've been dealing with JJonathan socks. It'll save the time of many administrators, myself included, if Kurt Shaped Box could block the the socks himself. Acalamari 22:25, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
4. Support. Good answers. — Rudget _speak.work 22:48, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
5. Given the amount of vandalism to his userpage [1], I'd say he's doing a good job of vandal fighting. You've reported a ton of user to AIV, which is really good. Plus, you finally answered the question. Therefore, I support your candidacy. ~Sasha Callahan _(Talk) 22:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
6. Support. IMO, user has been here long enough and made enough edits, as well as having been involved in admin-related activities enough, to be ready for adminship. Also, great helper as well as question-asker on the reference desk, even if it's usually about seagulls :-) . User has done a lot more work than I have. Thanks. ~AH1^(TCU) 23:18, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
7. Support. We need more seagull proponents. bibliomaniac15 23:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
8. Support - Hooah. No doubt in my mind that this user is ready for the extra buttons. I also find your username rather witty. Scarian^Talk 23:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
9. Support - Per comments from AstroHurricane001 and Sasha Callahan PookeyMaster (talk) 23:53, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

   Yea, that's two in 6 minutes. ~Sasha Callahan _(Talk) 23:57, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

10. Support This editor does excellent work, is very active, and is trustworthy. I would like better edit summary usage, but his work outweighs that detail. Useight (talk) 23:59, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
11. Support. Per all above, good luck. Malinaccier (talk • contribs) 00:27, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
12. Oh sure. We need more people who focus on the cleanup & housekeeping side of things. See you at CFD... — iridescent 01:10, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
13. What!? This user is not an admin? I thought he was. In this case, I would oppose support this RfA. NHRHS2010 talk 03:11, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
14. Support A valuable contributor to this project. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 03:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
15. Support An experienced, trustworthy editor. Also, any fan of Nirvana is a friend of mine. ;) Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 03:33, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
16. Support. Nothing concerns me here, good answers. Good luck, Kurt Shaped Box. Jack?! 03:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
17. Goodness Yes Uhm, I would have the standard "Thought you were one already", but that gets old. ;) Jmlk17 04:32, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
18. Support Like your answer to question 3. Shows that you don't bite the newbies. --WriterListener (talk) 06:55, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
19. Support Nice name. Although I'm supporting because I think he can be trusted with the tools. James086^{Talk | Email} 12:20, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
20. Support - For realz. - eo (talk) 12:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
21. Support Give 'em the tools! Dustihowe (talk) 19:02, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
22. Support, good editor. Everyking (talk) 22:00, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
23. Support - Seems well-rounded and capable enough to me. I don't see any reason this user shouldn't be given the mop. The oppose votes just don't hold any weight with me IMHO. Cheers, Spawn Man ^{Review Me!}.

    Er, there aren't any. Is this a template comment? Something to remember. Johnbod (talk) 19:10, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

    Lol, I know - It was meant as a light hearted joke. :) More a statement about the lack of opposes. Cheers, Spawn Man ^{Review Me!} 03:14, 9 December 2007 (UTC) P.S. No, I don't use templates... :)

24. The fact that you spend so much time at the Reference Desk is encouraging and suggests your willingness to help others. I also appreciated the answer above regarding feeling honored to be an admin. Your edits to project space are considerable and useful. -JodyB _talk 13:52, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
25. Support Seems useful & reliable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnbod (talk • contribs)
26. Support --A. B. ^(talk) 20:09, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
27. Support No more AIV reports for JJonathan socks now! Nishkid64 (talk) 21:50, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
28. Support; per the non-existent opposers, I simply don't find their arguments compelling :) Redrocketboy 22:47, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
29. Support More than qualified. --Sharkface217 04:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
30. Support A simple yup will suffice. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 06:10, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
31. Support Great editor! Midorihana_{(talk)(contribs)} 07:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
32. Support. Kafziel ^Talk 07:43, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
33. Support. looks good. ▪◦▪≡ЅiREX≡^Talk 00:07, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

    Support - per all comments above. PookeyMaster (talk) 01:41, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

    I'm sure Kurt appreciates the support, but you already expressed it at #9... WjBscribe 02:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

34. Support. Recent contribs demonstrate a sound understanding of BLP, always a difficult area which involves the application of tact and good judgment. Plus, I have to say that he has the best damn username I've ever seen. Walton^One 12:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
35. Support. Yep. Neıl ☎ 14:08, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
36. Support. Funny, but I've not encountered this user, although we've both worked on music articles. He has a fine record, meets all possible standards, answered questions very well, and could be a useful vandal-fighter. Bearian (talk) 17:42, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
37. Support - good contribs and satisfactory answer to my question above. - Chardish (talk) 21:04, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
38. Support - looks an excellent editor, good answers. BLACKKITE 01:32, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
39. Support - even if he does prefer 'parakeet' over 'conure'....cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:08, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
40. Support will be a good admin. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:47, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
41. Support - fine, civil editor. No issues here - Alison ^❤ 00:11, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
42. Support, per nom and answer to Question 1. Cirt (talk) 03:03, 12 December 2007 (UTC).

Neutral

Answers to questions? — Rudget _speak.work 22:32, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Done. Sorry, I was just typing them up... :) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:45, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

1. Not enough substantial talk/user talk interaction for me to support. Mr.Z-man 19:08, 7 December 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.