Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Tdxiang

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

Tdxiang

Note: I'm moving this back from the archive. Most people support Tdxiang's adminship and Netohlic had no right to "veto" it. Angela 03:46, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't veto it, but people seem to forget that I opposed promotion in this case (which affected the totals making it only 8/11 votes to support), and could not promote in good conscience due to some recent irregular actions by Tdxiang. -- Netoholic @ 04:39, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to do a self nomination for adminship. Here are my reasons:

I normally work at hours when acitve admins are offline. As such, vandals strike and I would need blocking tools and rollback for efficient anti-vandalism operations.
When Requests for deletion reach a concensus, deletion is necessary for nonsense articles. Also, spamming is a problem here, which makes the tools come in handy.
I have been here for six months, helping out with the cleaning up of articles and wikification.

Thank you. :)-- Tdxi an g @ 03:27, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Just today hit 1000 edits, a fact you made sure to note about 15 minutes before posting this self-nomination. About half are article namespace (not the worst I've seen), but where you've usually edited about 125-175 per month, in October, you've made one big push with over 500 edits. You had two failed RFA requests on EN, but I do not hold it against you. What I am concerned about is that those might have lead you you to believe that edit count alone is the main factor for adminship. What are your thoughts on Wikipedia:Core article, and why you did you create the Anus language page? -- Netoholic @ 04:51, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that "Oppose" statement appeared in 13/11/2003 06.35 UTC revision, people usually count only expressed votes... --M7 10:11, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Answer: Core articles are recommended for Simple as we want people who have little understanding of English to be able to comprehend what we are trying to put through. the reason for creating Anus language is because we already have an article on English Wikipedia. As such, articles explaining different languages, like French language, Italian language and other similar articles should come in handy for people using Simple as well.-- Tdxi an g @ 09:24, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Addenda:Anus language itself is not a nosensical article and it is also notable. :)-- Tdxi an g @ 09:34, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Question: Just how exactly do you plan to handle the sysop tasks concerning about vandalism, articles, and about the wiki systems? And what's your goal when if you do become a admin? Also what time hours (in PDT) will you work on? --§ Alastor Moody _{(T + C)} 06:09, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Answer: Rollback, like I mentioned earlier, is a tool for quick reversion of vandalism. Blocking is also one other way. I am familiar with Wiki markup and I also hope to clear any doubts, as an admin, about existing policies involved in Simple English Wikipedia. As for the timeslot, I cannot assure a definite one. in the event of unforseen circumstances, I will be offline. However, I will still be on when I am available, so you don't have to worry too much about this one. I hope I have cleared any doubts here. :)-- Tdxi an g @ 09:24, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- You cannot possibly expect him to answer that last part of that question. Poeple have lives, we don't spend every waking moment from a certain time to a certain time here. Secondly, you surely cannot expect him to answer in PDT when he's not even in the United States. That is ridiculous. Chacor 08:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support - I think that simple.wikipedia is in deep need for administrators and Tdxiang can be of help, despite his dreadful signature. --M7 16:27, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. We do need more admins, and Tdxiang does know his way around I think now. Archer7 - talk 17:46, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
support --vector ^_^ (talk) 17:48, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support: A great user all around. PullToOpen ^Talk 22:04, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
support --§ Alastor Moody _{(T + C)} 23:57, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A currently active user that is a great asset to the simple wp community. However, an admin should know when it is necessary to post an article tagged for deletion to WP:RFD and when it is not necessary. The article "The Reluctant Dragon" which I tagged for deletion didn't have to be posted at RFD since it was nonsense [1][2]. It was not an unusual circumstance and until now, I cannot imagine a discussion coming out from an RFD of that article or similar to it. It couldn't even pass for a stub. I'll probably support a future RFA, but not yet. zephyr2k 00:54, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ Neutral For much the same reason as Zephyr2k, as I have also tagged nonsense posts for deletion and received comments about RFD. Also while it could be due to the excessive number of recent edits, but there have been some questionable edits (Piping the link [[America|American]] without noticing that the page linked to was a redirect as well as not the correct page as context indicates, tagging a page for immediate delete without checking history and noticing it just needed reverted - did check after the edit and re-edited the revert, his edit of Jose Rizal makes me wonder if he thought that was all he thought the article needed.) The high volume of recent edits, questionable edits, RfD issues all makes me wonder if he is ready for the position at this time and is over extending himself in the goal of quantity over quality to get admin. Creol 01:24, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Changed my vote to neutral as his consistancy has returned to a much better level as the volume of his work decreased somewhat to what appears a level he is more comfortable working with. It appears the issues I had were likely being affected by overworking (which can easily cause errors to happen) -Creol 03:10, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Dear Creol, I understand your concerns over these matters concerning Rfds. However, I would like to assure you that such loopholes in my work were accidental and that I work for the quality, not the quantity. I understand your concerns about consistency in my work. However, take a look at my other edits and you would realise that I have not left out any other things in editing. Yes, there has been a phrase saying "In this life, you're either consistent or you're non-existent." I would assure you that I value time and consistency and that my work to articles is the most important. Thank you.-- Tdxi an g ^Adminship @ 02:10, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you, Creol!-- Tdxi a n g ^Adminship 03:16, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Duffus 17:56, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- 11 edits made, 0 on mainspace.

Comment: Remember, this is no big deal! Everyone makes mistakes. But that's just my opinion on this of course. Archer7 - talk 18:55, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support - is experienced with the Simple English Wikipedia, and unlikely to abuse the sysop tools. - Tangotango (talk) 14:09, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - We do need an active and loyal editor like Tdxiang who is dedicated to this project, especially in the hours when most of us are asleep, and he is the only one here to combat vandalism. We could have used him as an admin on several nights, at least until the other day when he suddenly disappeared, after I reverted a mispelling of his. I hope he comes back and was not put off by my reverting him. Blockinblox 14:19, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, definitely not! The "stronga" word was an accident. I meant to put strong, but accidentally typed an "a" there. Apologies... :)-- Tdxi a n g ^Adminship 02:37, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support I have seen Tdxiang as an active contributor. I think he can be trusted in the use of the administrative tools. I have seen him make many good contributions. I fully support his candidacy. -- Eptalon 22:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Angela 03:46, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terence Ong 07:18, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This user has 5 edit....--vector ^_^ (talk) 08:09, 13 November 2006 (UTC) With 0 on main namespace.-- Tdxi a n g 02:28, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just joined simple today, I'm on en wiki for 22 months. If I cannot be participating in this RFA, then you may like to disqualify my "vote". --Terence Ong 15:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Terence. Sorry.-- Tdxi a n g 10:03, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support - still don't get why wasn't he sysopped the first time. M isza13 16:36, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note:I'll tell you later. ;)-- Tdxi a n g 02:28, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support- nice user, very helpful and unlikely to abuse the sysop tools. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The life of brian (talk • contribs)
Support I asked him questions, he gave friendly answers. He would be good! MoglinFiend 12:22, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly support This editor is very friendly and I know he will be a great editor.--Sir James Paul 21:18, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vote Log: Strong Support: 1, Support: 13,Neutral: 1, Oppose: 2; Support: 82%, Neutral: 7%, Oppose: 11%

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.