Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Alastor Moody

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a permissions request that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.

Alastor Moody

Closed at user's request - 3 support/5 oppose/1 neutral.

I would like to candidate myself to be an administrator. I have been an active contributor here since early July 2006 and have over 1000 edits to the simplewiki. I've been reverting vandalism, expanding and creating several core articles along with helping other users when in need. My purpose to be an admin is to stop random vandals from vandalizing articles (and block them if necessary) and to delete articles that are considered to be nonsense or dosen't help the simplewiki. I promise to work under the rules of the wiki and help other admins improve the simplewiki. Thank you:) --§ Alastor Moody _{(T + C)} 22:44, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate's acceptance: (self nomination)

Support

Support I do not think he would abuse the tools so why not?--Sir James Paul, La gloria è a dio 06:05, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I have to disagree on this one I think. Looking at the RfC, it was some time ago, and it didn't seem that serious, and easily resolvable. Two users have removed their 'certifications' because the behaviour has not recurred. About Chacor/NSLE, I've lost my temper a few times before and I think it would be unfair to expect absolutely spotless behaviour from everyone. I'm confident that the behaviour is in the past. Archer7 - talk 10:03, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support- I know how hard it is to become an admin (my first request failed because of discussions about my editing accuracy), and i think we should not hold the past against him. The edits I have seen of him on this Wiki are good ones. Sure, he could be a little more active, but who couldn't? --Eptalon 12:15, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

*Very weak oppose. You know, Alastor is helpful, BUT, I'm quite concerned over these:

~~An RFC on EN~~
~~Chasing Chacor, or NSLE, away~~

I'm not trying to discourage you Alastor, but I'm unsure if you can handle all that stress given to you. Try next time and I'll be backing you. Not for now, I'm afraid. -- Tdxi a n g 09:07, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that I had a RfC back at EN, and also for blowing up at Chacor, but now I decided to change my personality and be more generous to other users. Also my social history with Chacor was been very rough, which often made me get mad quickly at him. While it is sort-of a long story, I felt that he's been paying too much attention on me while sometimes critizing my contrinutions to the en wiki as well as critizing my sig at en (although that issue was later settled). While at first I tried to ignore him, which did not seem to change anything, I eventually got mad at him and was forced to leave the en wiki to cool down from my stress back at the wiki although I seldomly go back to en and do a few edits. --§ Alastor Moody _{(T + C)} ^Adminship 01:16, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- Alright, I've decided to change my vote to neutral. I know how hard it is when good users' RFAs get opposed due to things they did in the past.-- Tdxi a n g 09:13, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Same reasons as Tdxiang, sorry. Billz (Talk) 09:13, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I have a question about his understanding of policy in a couple areas, some major and some not. Looking over his more recent edits I found problems with the deletion policy (QD request with a non valid reason, article tagged as Non which while short, made total sense), no knowledge of problems with articles written in the second person. These were just located looking briefly at the edit summaries for this month. No idea if it gets worse from there or if checking the deleted pages would show other case where pages were QD on dubious reasons (deleting could be accidental/instinctive, but it takes thought to tag it for delete and come up with a reason why).

His own nomination states "delete articles that are considered to be nonsense or doesn't help the simplewiki", but his recent edits about what is nonsense is questionable. Also, by Doesn't help the simplewiki, would that mean QD of articles such as S.T.A.L.K.E.R.:_Shadow_of_Chernobyl which he feels should be deleted because they are complex and not core articles even though that decision should be made with a RfD?

Learning minor policy as you go is to be expected, but something as important as the deletion policy should be well known. If he is having issues now with it, what is likely to happen when he has the tools? If there are issues with deletion, are there also ones with other major policies such as blocking? Too many questions at this time for me to feel that this is a good thing. -- Creol(talk) 13:39, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Oppose per above. I'd probably be netural if the netural votes counted against the majority needed of total votes. - BrownE34 talk contribs
Oppose. I also have the same concerns that Creol voiced. Unfortunately, I would not feel comfortable supporting at this time. · Tygartl1^·talk· 19:44, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Creol's comment. Although, I think there is still need for new sysops on this wiki. - Huji ^reply 21:57, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

Vote changed from Oppose to neutral, citing reasons stated above.-- Tdxi a n g 09:13, 20 June 2007 (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.