Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kansan

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

No opposes. Successful. Barras ^talk 18:20, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kansan

Kansan (talk · contribs)

RfA of Kansan

global contribs · pie chart · edit count · list user · blocklog ·contribs · deleted
Last comment by: ShakespeareFan00.

End date: 18:30, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I spend a lot of time online, and I happen to discover a lot of vandalism, including pages that need quick deletion and repeated IP vandalism, that I feel that I could more efficiently help with if given the tools. I do not seek these tools simply for "power", but I feel that as I am already spending a lot of time contributing to the encyclopedia, I could help even more given the tools.

Self-nomination

Optional questions from Jon@talk:~$

Q Could you explain the difference in a block and ban?

A: A block is a preventative measure for the protection of the site, and is not permanent. It is not meant to be a punitive measure, and the user or IP will be able to return and edit productively when the time expires. A ban is a more serious manner, and rarer than a block. It is the result of a community decision that the user is unlikely to productively edit, and is a permanent matter (but can still be appealed). Kansan (talk) 16:34, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Q Say I block someone for edit warring, and you know my policy is that I permit any admin to undo me without asking me first. Now.... the user I blocked has no negative history, and has apologized profusely on their talk page, admitted the mistake, and promised not to ever do it again. Would you unblock?

A: I would try to contact you first to discuss the situation; if this proved impossible, and given the stipulation that the user has no negative history and seemed sincere, and given that you have this policy, I would be willing to unblock the user but watch their subsequent edits closely. This flows from the principle that a block is a preventative measure, and not a punitive measure. Kansan (talk) 16:34, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Q: What are the effects of protected a page too long, or protected too many pages?

A: This sends a message to users that Wikipedia is not truly open and cannot really be edited by all users. It also encourages "ownership" of pages, which is against the principles of Wikipedia. If it's full protection, it also sends a message that admins are more important and more deserving to edit than regular users, which is completely untrue. If it's semi protection, the message sent instead is that new users are less important and less deserving to edit. This is also untrue, and harmful because it discourages people from being bold and jumping right in. Kansan (talk) 16:34, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Q: Why do you edit, what makes you tick, motivates you?

A: I am an educator, and my passion for education extends to making it available to all. I know that there are some people for whom the English Wikipedia is not as useful, and the Simple English Wikipedia can better serve their needs. I edit for the "silent" readers, whose identity we will never know, and for whom we will never know how the site benefits them. I also enjoy writing, as it is a hobby of mine, and I feel that this is a particularly productive use of my hobby for the above reasons. Kansan (talk) 16:34, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support

Purple backpack89 18:44, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(change conflict) I think that Kansan would make a good admin. PiRSquared1 7 19:02, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
After reviewing your contributions, I have found this user to be an excellent candidate. Razor flame 19:03, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Active user, haven't seen any issues. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:27, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent candidate. Not lazy at all, works all over the wiki. Griffinofwales (talk) 21:22, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Why not. QD's look great. No problems at all.--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 21:31, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely a user who would benefit from the tools, and his use of the tools would benefit us all. Either way (talk) 21:47, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
An active, sensible, clueful, calm, very trustworthy user that people can look up to and respect. Participates in all areas of Wikipedia, deals coolly with provocation, and has experience with cleaning up vandalism. I'm sure he'll do an excellent job with the tools. —Classical Esther^talk 01:21, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Diego Grez ^{let's talk} 01:29, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just don't get leave this project after you become an admin. We'd all fall apart without you. :) ♥ Belinda ♥ 01:40, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely. Lauryn ^{Dirty little secrets} 02:33, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to nom you. :) {{Sonia|talk|en}} 05:34, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously a good choice. Pmlineditor ∞ 13:33, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Great editor. Will definitely benifit from having the extra buttons. Yottie ^=talk= 16:48, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
--I-on/^talk/_book/^sand 20:49, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This user will make a great admin. Megan (^t/_c) 20:50, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
—§ stay (sic)! 16:55, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any problems. Plenty of experience with QDs, mostly active in article space with some edits in wikipedia namespace, and overall a benefit to the project. EhJJ^TALK 00:14, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
From what I've seen in my time here, a great user. Grunny (talk) 00:26, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Reverts when I'm sidetracked off the feed. Nifky^{^} 00:27, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Great work - Since everyone has already mentioned all of the good stuff, there isn't much else that I can say... Great work :) Ajraddatz (talk) 00:28, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 02:05, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per all the comments above. On the main English wikipedia I would oppose per low edit count, but I feel that is to be expected given that there are fewer articles here than on the main Wikipedia. Immunize (talk) 16:00, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
--Chenzw Talk 06:28, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Active user who likes to fight vandalism, edit articles constructively and is friendly. --Bsadowski1^{(Talk/Changes)} 06:32, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good to all three of us--The Three Headed Knight (talk) 05:18, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
+1 --vector ^_^ (talk) 07:37, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Experienced enough. Keep up the good work. --Mercy (talk) 12:14, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Comments

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.