Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Mtmelendez

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

Mtmelendez

Final (54/0/0); Ended 4:28,

• For me it is a privilege to co-nominiate User:Mtmelendez for adminship. Mtmelendez has been with us since May 3, 2006. During this time he has become a very dedicated editor whose excellent contributions are now part of our project. The thing that most impresses me about Mtmelendez is not so much his dedication and edit count but, the way he handles himself with others. He is a courteous well mannered people-person who is calm under fire while interacting with others. This trait is especially useful when he deals with newcomers. Instead of discouraging a person, he encourages them. Mtmelendez is an excellent wikipedian and an asset to the Pedia. I truly believe that he will make a great administrator. Tony the Marine 22:13, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept the nomination. - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 04:08, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?

A: I tend to visit the various XfD projects daily, particularly

WP:PROD

, reading the pages and either confirming or contesting the proposals, so I'll also dedicate time for those pages.

As for non-article cleanup, I dedicate time to add fair-use rationales to non-free images when I encounter them, unless they're a clear infringement. I have some experience on tagging for CSD because of this, and like I stated before, I always read its history and contact their uploader, usually in non-boilerplate messages, to figure out a solution.

I'm not a full-time vandal fighter, although I do tend to keep a significant amount of articles in my watchlist. In my time in Wikipedia (around 16 months), I've only submitted 1 AIV report, which was just 2 days ago. I've found that unless you encounter a frequent and abusive vandal, most users easily understand the real purpose of Wikipedia with a conversation at their talk page.

2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

A: I've written quite a few articles, including some which, I was surprised to find, hadn't been created yet. Specifically, in Puerto Rico and Accounting and Auditing subjects. However, my proudest contributions are as follows:

1. My image contributions. I've visited various places around Puerto Rico just to take a picture and upload in Wikipedia.
2. Portal:Puerto Rico. I've dedicated almost 1 1/2 months to this page, adding significant content to bring it up to its current state. It took a lot of edits, including many frustrating trial-and-errors, but I think it turned up OK.
3. But by far, my proudest contribution has to be my first true contribution to Wikipedia, a compete rewrite of
   Cerro Maravilla Incident
   article. It's about one of the most controversial moments in Puerto Rico's political history. When I stumbled upon it there were serious disagreements between its previous editors, so I went bold, without knowing it, and started researching and adding references. In about 6 hours, I had written a reasonably neutral and comprehensive article, which was subsequently promoted to GA. After that, I decided to join Wikipedia full-time and never looked back.

3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?

A: Actually, I don't think I've been in a serious conflict before (any users are fully welcome to correct me on this, if I have, I seriously can't remember). That doesn't mean I haven't encountered disagreements, but I've resolved them by talking it out. I did stop a tense discussion between various editors once ([1]), and the biggest conflict I've faced was about assessing articles for the

a lot of it

.

General comments

• See Mtmelendez's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

• Links for Mtmelendez: Mtmelendez (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)

Please keep criticism constructive and polite. Remain civil at all times. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Mtmelendez before commenting.

Discussion

Support

1. Support looks good. T Rex | talk 03:17, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Support as co-nominator. Tony the Marine 03:42, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Support - He single handely worked Puerto Rico's portal to FP quality, we just worked with 'this and that' but Marcos provided a huge chunk of the work, this and his job getting some articles to Good Article and FA as well as having great interaction with him in the past leave me with no reason in my mind to oppose such a great candidate. - Caribbean~H.Q. 04:07, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Support good work at Rfd and can always use more multilingual admins. Buena suerte. Carlossuarez46 05:12, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Strong support Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:24, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. Support. Even tho I haven't been lucky enough to directly interact with him, I've seen his dedication and efforts for a long time, and I've been seriously impressed by them. Plus, anyone with a recommendation from Tony has immediately a plus in my eyes! ;) Phaedriel - 06:26, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
7. Support. I always trust Tony the Marine's judgement.
   Antonio Martin 07:40, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply
   ]
8. AfD - Good. RfD - Good. AIV - It'll get there :) MfD - Good. Articles (not that an admin needs them) - Good. An all round big Y
   H₂O) 07:52, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply
   ]
9. Support It is time to give this user the mop. --
   Siva1979^{Talk to me} 09:04, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply
   ]
10. Support, very good contributions, experience and trustworthy. I do not see reasons to not support. Good luck. Carlosguitar 09:45, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
11. Support, no concerns.
    ム 11:02, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
12. Support. The candidate has a solid track record of creating and improving articles and appears to work well with others. Majoreditor 12:25, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
13. Support looks good. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 13:12, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
14. Support - just about ready to become an admin I think. Lradrama 14:12, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Support No problems here. Hiberniantears 14:29, 25 September 2007 (UTC) Strike this, and go with my new support vote below. Must have spaced out when thinking this through and filed a support vote before I was ready! :-) Hiberniantears 15:40, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

15. Support → Sounds good. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 15:01, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
16. I'm
    Mailer Diablo and I approve this message! - 15:32, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
17. Support - solid candidate. @pple complain 15:49, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
18. Support - Onnaghar ^{talk ! ctrb} 15:51, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
19. Support I don't think I've ever noticed you before (unsurprising, since what I know about Puerto Rico could be written on the back of a stamp) but all the contribs I've dip-sampled look good. Is the sea in Puerto Rico really
    iridescent (talk to me!) 16:26, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Puerto Rico's harbors usually have blue-green waters, but not as blue as those of Willemstad, Curaçao. :) - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 17:48, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

20. As well as being a good user, the candidate has decent nominators. No problems here. Acalamari 17:18, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
21. SupportAs per Caribbean H.Q. and while the edits show Puerto Rico bias they are really outstanding and shows a good editor. Track with over 6000 edits is very good.Pharaoh of the Wizards 19:29, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Well, since I've spent most of my life in Puerto Rico, I go with what I know. It's just easier for me and people like Caribbean H.Q. and Tony to find information and reliable sources about our country's topics, a fact that also applies to many users in respect to their own nationalities, or their profession, or their hobbies, etc. :) - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 19:55, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    "Puerto Rico bias"? I think you're a bit confused. We edit articles about our country because we're (probably) the most knowledgeable about it and the ones can help others understand it best. How is that a bias? What are we going to say next: "Doctors shouldn't edit Medicine-related articles 'cause they're biased"? --

    eybaná 20:36, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply

    ]

22. Support - Creo que es un usuario bueno. Su participación en el Wikiproyecto de Puerto Rico demuestra que el candidato sabe como colaborar con otros usuarios. Sorry about the poor Spanish, I'm a little out of practice. Extensive (and sensible) contribs to AfD and RfD discussions, as well as a variety of article contributions. Walton^One 20:11, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
23. I can't believe I'm #24 :-) Support, per the co-nominators' excellent descriptions of this user and his work :-) --
    eybaná 21:07, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
24. Thoroughly impressed with Mtm. ~ 
    [talk] 22:13, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
25. Support No problems. -Lemonflash_{(do something)} 22:24, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
26. Support - everything looks fine... WjBscribe 22:35, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
27. Support Need I give a reason? —[[Animum | talk]] 23:04, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
28. Support. More than qualified. --Sharkface217 23:59, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
29. Support - Per Animum ;) . Cheers! IT'S DA...Ανέκδοτο 02:37, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
30. Support - per noms. nat^tang 05:58, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
31. Support Jmlk17 06:07, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Strong Support Hopeshopes 17:39, 26 September 2007 (UTC) Note from EVula: User has been indefinitely blocked for vandalizing various RfAs. Striking comment. EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:55, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

32. Support. While I've not encountered this user before, I am impressed by the sheer number of edits, and his creation of good articles. Bearian 17:49, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
33. Support Very strong, good edits. No reason for objection. Crassic^(talk) 21:39, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
34. Support. Fully qualified candidate, no concerns. Newyorkbrad 03:03, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
35. Support - Took me a little while to review this editor, as I am previously unfamiliar with your work. Everything looks good to me, and I think you'll make a fine admin. Hiberniantears 14:55, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
36. Support - Well duh. --Тhε Rαnδom Eδιτor 22:20, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
37. Support, per the usual. — xDanielx ^T/_C 03:01, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
38. Support I've not interacted with this editor but a review of your last 1,500 contributions showed sheer commitment to the encyclopedia, policy knowledge and civility. Talk page looks fine, edit summary usage all okay, basically ticks the boxes and then some. Husond - another mop over here please! Pedro :  Chat  07:37, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
39. Support per above. Murcielago 15:26, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
40. Support - yup! Everything looks just fine - Alison ^❤ 21:15, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
41. Support - Looks fine.--Sandahl 02:43, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
42. Support - Why should I oppose? --Hirohisat ^Kiwi 17:37, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
43. Support - While I haven't encountered this editor before, after a review of 2000 or so of their contributions, I feel that they are a solid candidate with good edits and is more than qualified to be an admin. -- AngelOfSadness talk 18:57, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
44. Pile-on support. I will support anyone with a minimum level of experience unless shown significant detractors. Stifle (talk) 12:08, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
45. Support - good experience and will be fine with a few extra buttons. Ryan Postlethwaite 16:59, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
46. Support - although I kind of have reservations about the images, since they can be transferred to
     Mirandargh  20:15, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    (ec) You're right. I uploaded many images to Wikipedia during my first months in 2006 because I didn't know it existed. I've since uploaded all subsequent images to Commons. As for my first contributions, it's on my to-do list to transfer them. Thanks for the reminder. - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 20:30, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

47. Support - Strong editor, will do good with the tools.
    Love 02:41, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Support - Process of elimination. :) — xDanielx ^T/_C 04:03, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Indenting as you've commented twice. See support number 37. WODUP 06:07, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Oops, thanks for catching that. — xDanielx ^T/_C 15:25, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

48. Support. Zaxem 05:27, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
49. Support. Excellent candidate. Axl 07:14, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
50. Support Per all of the above. Phgao 16:13, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
51. Support per above comments. --A. B. ^(talk) 16:28, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
52. Support Better than many of the current admins. Uncle uncle uncle 23:55, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
53. Support per above and obvious strengths. Pig^man 01:02, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
54. Support- Everything looks good to me. Dureo 02:00, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]