Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Mike 7

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

Mike 7

Final (50/3/0) Ended 13:42, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Mike 7 (talk · contribs) – Mike 7 has been around for 5 months, and in that time he has amassed nearly 8500 edits, more than 4000 of which are to the various talk namespaces, including Wikipedia and Portal. He is an extremely kind user, which is demonstrated by his membership in the Esperanza Barnstar Brigade, the Kindness Campaign, the Birthday Committee and the Welcoming Committee. On many of the talk pages I visit, I see that Mike 7 has smiled at somebody. He is active in XfDs and RC Patrol, as well as three wikiprojects and various other Esperanza programs. Mike 7 really deserves the mop.  Jorcoga  05:21, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Thank you. I accept this nomination. Michael 07:26, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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: I understand, of course, that many users set a six month period on admin. promotions, though during my four months as a registered user, I have been active in a plethora of Wikipedia groups and organizations, taking part in many tasks, each of which has taught me about Wikipedia policy, and I have often been faced with problems in which I have desired admin. capabilities so as to make appropriate changes.

It is such tasks that give me faith in my capabilities as an administrator. Now, although it may sound very cliche, the backlogs need help. Regardless of how many administrators we promote, this always remains a constant issue. I have seen vandals listed on the Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism for hours before anyone has gotten to them, in which time, they may have done a large amount of damage to the Wikipedia's integrity through repeated vandalism to various pages. Other prominent backlogs are candidates for speedy deletion, as well as the various xfDs, which I would be willing to close, undertaking appropriate action.

There are also cases in which users may require some type of admin. help, and I would be more than willing to help out in any of those cases, whether it be in pertinence to a page move, a page mistakenly created, a request for page protection, or another type of issue in which I would have discretion to help the user.

Although these edits do not show up in my edit history as the pages have been deleted, I have prodded perhaps a dozen articles, the intent of which have been nothing but pure hatred - usually people creating articles on people they personally know to serve no other but defamatory purposes. These cases open Wikipedia up for libel lawsuits, so we need to ensure that these pages are erased before they cause any serious harm. Likewise, I have speedily reverted instances of vandalism and used appropriate warnings for vandalism on user talk pages ([1][2][3]).

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

A: I would say that my various submissions and involvement in different capacities is what I am most proud of - there is no one key thing. I have had one

Wikipedia:Good Article, Ace Young

, and I am currently working on several others at the present moment, which I plan to submit for consideration in the near future.

I am also quite proud of such tasks I have undertaken as sourcing the inclusions on

List of Italian American politicians by state and other similar lists, as well as categories and articles I have created, a listing of which you may see on my user page

.

Although I know many have questioned this, I have welcomed many users who have later posed questions or asked for help. I have assisted editors in writing articles or merely explaining the functions of Wikipedia [4]. I find this to be very rewarding, because if we do not help new Wikipedians or users in need of help, then we would not be nearly as successful as we are today.

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: I don't believe I have been in any true conflicts. I've done quite a bit of both RC and New Page Patrol, and in that, I have encountered a few vandals who have questioned it on my talk page (i.e. [5]), but I haven't let this deter my editing.

I have, however, had disagreements with other users, but I have always tried to remain calm and civil, despite what might be said ([6][7] This user had raised objections due to his articles AfD on the grounds of

WP:V, yet I found that remaining calm and discussing these reasons was the best course of action to take, thus being thanked by this user in this edit he made to my talk page). I have tried, in each dispute I have had, to present my arguments in a level-headed, logical manner.[8]

Question from Andeh

4. Any reason you didn't warn these IP users for their nasty user page vandalism?[9][10]

A: Oh, that seems very odd. I'm sorry, but I could have sworn I warned both of those IP users when they made these edits last night. I was logged off of the Internet at a certain point while editing, though I thought I had reinstated the information when I got back on, so at worst, it was an honest mistake.

Question from User:Dlohcierekim.

5. Hi, why did you vandal warn for this? :) Dlohcierekim 13:25, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A: The warning I gave for this IP user's inclusion was due to the fact that it appeared to be an experiment, due to the nature of changing "India" to "Ilndia". Because it did not seem to be very vicious or malicious, I thought it wise to post this warning, which also includes mentions to resources he or she may refer to on Wikipedia if he or she needs any help.

Question from --Mcginnly | Natter 15:35, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

6. Could you point me towards either, 1. a Featured article you have written or collaborated on, 2. A featured list you have compiled. 3. A featured portal you have have helped gain featured status? Thanks.

To be honest, no. I tend to prefer behind-the-scenes work, and although I have greatly contributed to a Good Article and am currently working on several other, that has not been my priority. More of my work has been with reverting vandalism and contributing to the XfDs among other things, which are jobs that have a greater requirement for administrative rights. I have also done a great deal of work in sourcing and adding information to articles. Michael 17:17, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would you point me towards the Good article? Thanks. --Mcginnly | Natter 22:45, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Ace Young. Michael 23:32, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• See Mike 7's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool.

Support

1. Strong Support as nominator.  Jorcoga  07:55, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Merovingian - Talk 08:27, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. About time! —
   wreak havoc|damage report 08:51, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply
   ]
4. Support -- a mature editor who I have no reason to suspect anything other than serving the project well. - Longhair 08:53, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Strong Support Mike is a model Wikipedian, keep at it! Highway ^Daytrippers 09:37, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
6. Support I like his style. --
   Guinnog 11:08, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply
   ]
7. Support. Seen him around, would make a great sysop. Good luck! --Alex ^{(talk here)} 11:29, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
8. Support. — 
   talk
   ) _{11:33, 10 September 2006}
9. Support Good user with good aswers to questions. No problems supporting. Thε Halo ^Θ 12:12, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
10. Support, seems fit. But please warn user page vandals in future. Thank you.--Andeh 12:23, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
11. Support. But are you sure you won't burn out and jump off a bridge like a pre-med student taking 23 credits in one semester :) ? RyanGerbil10(Kick 'em in the dishpan!) 14:09, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
12. Support. Good and honest answers, user gets my support. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 14:12, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
13. Support. Good user making a strong contribution who will effectively use and will not misuse the tools. Newyorkbrad 14:19, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
14. Strong support. Mike is a great user. He's kind, well-rounded, trustworthy, and has common sense: the four most important aspects for an admin. In addition, he is very active in deletion discussions and on RC Patrol. We'd be hard-pressed to find a better candidate. Srose (talk) 15:15, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
15. Support per nom and others. Rama's arrow 15:26, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
16. Support. Give this guy the mop, already ! Jcam 16:46, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
17. Support. -
    iablo 17:15, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
18. Support - Just too bad I didn't get to cast the first vote Mad Jack 17:31, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
19. Support. Good enough of an editor for me to waive my six month requirement.-- danntm ^T _C 18:40, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
20. Support Looks like a great admin candidate. Good answers to questions and anti-vandalism work too. (aeropagitica) 19:00, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
21. Support Would be a great admin. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 19:59, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
22. Support.Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 00:39, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
23. Support All around good user with intelligent answers above. Tewfik^Talk 02:53, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
24. Support - Mike is gracious and patient, even in the face of my monumental forgetfulness. Excellent answers to questions, too. CaptainVindaloo ^{t c e} 02:56, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
25. Support, excellent user.
    eeb (^chat/_patch) 03:07, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
26. Support Will do good work with a blue rag-type mop. BaseballBaby 03:50, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
27. Suppa'h Deserved. -- Szvest 14:26, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
28. Support --Ageo020 22:59, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
29. Support A good editor, one doesn't need experience in images to be an admin there are alot more areas they help in. Æon ^{Insanity Now!}_EA! 00:20, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
30. SupportAppears to have alot to offer. Good Luck! Downunda 05:25, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
31. Support Unlikely to abuse tools.
    _Fire! 08:35, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
32. Support.
    Doctor BrunoTalk 18:25, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
33. Strong Support Hello32020 19:20, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
34. Support, no problems over here. BryanG^(talk) 03:19, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
35. Support Mr. ? 05:07, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
36. Support I thought your reaction to the situation presented in Q5 was perfect? Im at a loss to think how one could have responded better truth be told! (tho that isnt my +supp reason - well, not the only ;) - Glen 12:22, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
37. Support. Great user, should do well as a sysop. --Nishkid64 19:25, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
38. Support Great answers to the questions. Vandal fighting you do? May the Force be with you. JungleCat talk/contrib 20:20, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
39. Support per nom. John254 20:37, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
40. Support per JungleCat. —Khoikhoi 04:44, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
41. Strong support per nomination and above comments. Shimmera 18:10, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
42. Weak support I like your list, and I've had a better root through your articles, I hope adminship won't divert you too much from adding content.--Mcginnly | Natter 21:27, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
43. Support - Model Wikipedian. Good answers to Q. Trnj2000 23:13, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
44. Support JoshuaZ 00:17, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
45. Support—Solid & sound judgement. Let's do it. Williamborg (Bill) 03:02, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
46. Support nice answers, seems to be very well-rounded, trustworthy, and a good person to work with. He will be an even more valuable asset to Wikipedia with the extra buttons (although I can safely say that
    AIV is watched a lot more than non-admins think... I thought it was never watched either, but now I get "block conflicted" nearly 25% of the time ;) ) hoopydink^{Conas tá tú?} 13:57, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
47. Support: we require new administrators to balance the "degeneration", and I think he belongs to a school of wikipedians, free from subjectivity and biased opinion. --Bhadani 01:30, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
48. support keep up the good work Mjal 19:26, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
49. Support - What's not to like? --
    Aaron 01:47, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
50. Out-of-time support #50 -
    talk/email 13:34, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]