Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Computerjoe 1

Computerjoe

[{{fullurl:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Computerjoe|action=edit}} Vote here] (3/1/0) ending 20:02, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Computerjoe (talk · contribs) – I'm a somewhat experienced member of the Wikipedia, I registered in December 2004 - however I was mainly inactive until November last year. I'm a vandal fighter - however I still try to edit pages. ComputerJoe 19:47, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

Self nomination. Accept.

Support

1. This guy is desperately needed in the community Mjal 20:18, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
2. Support. Edit count isn't super-high, but the balance of contributions shows a dedicated and well-rounded vandal fighter. (ESkog)^(Talk) 20:24, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
3. Support, but increase those edit summaries. smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 21:24, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry - I will. ComputerJoe 21:30, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose for now. Only really active for 2 months and for vandal reversion not that many edits, so I'm not that convinced of a broad knowledge of policy. Usage of edit summaries could be significantly better. Would probably support in a few more months. --pgk^(talk) 21:06, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

   Thanks for the advice. I shall increase my usage of edit summaries. ComputerJoe 21:11, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

Comments

• Edit summary usage: 58% for major edits and 81% for minor edits. Based on the last 150 major and 150 minor edits outside the Wikipedia, User, Image, and all Talk namespaces. Mathbot 20:15, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
• See Computerjoe's edit count and contribution tree with Interiot's tool.
• No email enabled. --TheParanoidOne 20:57, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Now it is. ComputerJoe 21:09, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
• I personally feel this is a dedicated Wikipedian, who is well balanced - bold yet able to seak and consider advice and POVs. I would have liked to have seen slightly more edit summaries and possibly some reassurance that he will keep up the high-volume editing. Ian13/talk 21:21, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
  • I believe I'll maintain a high edit count, as I've got addicted to the Wikipedia :P . I've maintained my blog since May 2005, on a day-to-day basis, I believe I can do the same with the Wikipedia. ComputerJoe 21:24, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

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, if any, would you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.

A. My main intention would be to help in the constant combat against vandals, I'd try to keep WP:AIV as empty as possible, as well as blockings requested in [1]. However, this would not be the only chore I'd take onboard. I'd clean-up & wifify articles, like I currently do and I'd also try to assist with speedy deletes.

2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?

A. The contributions I'm most pleased about are probably Community Justice, my Wikipedia organisation, and despite a poor launch, I believe we have the right principles. Also, I've created/dramatically edited articles on various websites including Lockergnome, Vault9 and I also made TV.com NPOV and cleaned it up.

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. No, I have not got into any major conflict. The way I'd deal with it when the situation arises is to remain civil to the user, accept his/her opinions while still disagreeing with them. I believe tolerating people is the answer for conflicts - not blocking them or driving them away from the Wikipedia. If I got too stressed, I'd simply walk away and ask for other editor's advise.