Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Robchurch 2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.

Robchurch

[edit]

final (60/0/0) ending 00:20 Monday 17th October (UTC)

Robchurch (talk · contribs) – I have known Rob Church for some time now, both here on Wikipedia and on IRC; I have always been impressed with the quality of his work, his dedication to the project, and his civility and politeness. He has, amongst many other things, co-founded of the Featured Article Drive, and done a lot of vandal fighting. With 2,608 edits, across 1,438 pages, I feel that even the editcountitis sufferers should be suitably satisfied with this user's abilities as a Wikipedian. I wholeheartedly recommend this excellent fellow for adminship, and I look to the community to recognise his value as a prospective administrator. NicholasTurnbull | (talk) (e-mail) (cabal) 00:20, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I accept this nomination with pleasure, and would like to thank Nicholas for making it. I would appreciate this opportunity to garner feedback about how I do things, and to begin correcting myself even as the discussion progresses. Rob Church Talk | FAD 00:48, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Why, of course. --NicholasTurnbull | (talk) (e-mail) (cabal) 00:21, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support, I'm supporting, hopefully user will accept the nomination. Private Butcher 00:24, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support again. Good user, good person, goodgasell! Ral315 WS 00:54, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support Promised myself that I wasn't going to vote until my RfA was over, but Rob deserves my early support. --Sebastian Kessel Talk 01:20, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support --Rogerd 01:25, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support Good egg. Good luck! Hamster Sandwich 01:37, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support exactly as before: "Going by previous interaction I expect he'll treat admin rights carefully and thoughtfully." Mindspillage (spill yours?) 01:49, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support; eminently trustworthy. Should be an excellent admin. Antandrus (talk) 01:56, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support. Kirill Lokshin 02:08, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Supp Ort. I keep seeing him around. ~~ N (t/c) 02:20, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support Goes without saying. Dlyons493 Talk 02:23, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support he isn't one? -Greg Asche (talk) 02:38, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support, good editor. Robert 02:57, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support CambridgeBayWeather 03:04, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support After reading what others have posted and looking through some of the user contributions I feel this would be a fine admin. Qaz (talk) 04:44, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support Good User --JAranda | yeah 04:45, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Andre (talk) 04:56, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support --Ryan Delaney talk 05:10, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Rob Church isn't an admin? You gotta be kidding me. --Merovingian (t) (c) 08:14, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support --GraemeL (talk) 11:16, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  21. S'port certainly --Doc (?) 11:20, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support Seen him around countless times, and he's left a very positive impression. --JoanneB 12:29, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support. And why not, eh? --fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 16:22, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support, same as last time. Rje 17:40, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support. He wants to delete unused fair use images, so I say let him.  Denelson83  20:12, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support, per nominator. Christopher Parham (talk) 20:26, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support, per nom.  BD2412 talk 20:49, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Extreme Chav Support! Administator Rob in da house! Acetic'Acid 21:09, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support. Have bumped into him on RC Patrol and he was doing what I was doing so must be good ;-). >: Roby Wayne Talk • Hist• E@ 21:30, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Oppose, gawd dammit! Nahh, just kidding, Support! I know him mostly from IRC where he is one of the coolest people around gkhan 22:29, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support even though I normally don't like supporting per nom, per nom. Jtkiefer T | @ | C ----- 22:59, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support, RFA cliché No. 1. Titoxd(?!?) 00:55, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support you actually notified redwolf and company of that RfAr... LOL :).Ryan Norton T | @ | C 02:38, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support. We've gotten on each other's nerves more than once...but when all is said and done, Robchurch is a well-meaning, great guy. He truly is. :-) --WikiFanaticTalk Contribs 21:03, 10 October 2005 (CDT)
  35. Support a good pick for sure.--MONGO 03:09, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support dedicated editor. --Cyberjunkie | Talk 06:36, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Cool. --JuntungWu 07:14, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Was suitable for admin last time already! Kim Bruning 10:06, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  39. You beat me to nominating him! - David Gerard 15:53, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Phroziac(talk) 20:46, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | WS 22:24, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Oh my, of course That's a support from this Bratschetalk | Esperanza 00:01, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Support again! :-) FreplySpang (talk) 00:11, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  44. support. Another good candidate. Grutness...wha? 00:13, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    He feels dedicated to Wikipedia as far as I know. Support.  Denelson83  02:58, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    You have voted twice. I've indented your second vote so that it doesn't mess up the numbering. — JIP | Talk 10:03, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Fools! Your comments are useless against us... me! We... I cannot be harmed! Erm, I mean support. — JIP | Talk 07:52, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support Ive seen this user around. →Journalist >>talk<< 15:26, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Furry Alien Support no doubt about it. Alf melmac 15:41, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Support. -Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 23:54, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Support Zzyzx11 (Talk) 01:53, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Support. El_C 03:27, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  51. -- (drini's page|☎) 03:33, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Support. the wub "?!" 11:53, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Support. --Fire Star 02:41, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  54. Support- --Bhadani 09:10, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  55. Support keep up the good work mate.  ALKIVAR™ 10:40, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  56. "Support. $user is not an admin?" – ABCD✉ 04:16, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  57. Support! -- BMIComp (talk, HOWS MY DRIVING) 20:27, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  58. Support. I could have sworn that I had voted, but apparently not. This one is a no-brainer. Here ya go, Linuxbeak | Talk 22:40, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  59. Very strong support, a very fine editor -- Francs2000 23:44, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  60. Support death to unqualified Fair Use! Alphax τεχ 23:57, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Neutral

Comments

Questions for the candidate
A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? (Please read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.)
A. I already do a considerable amount of recent changes patrol, specialising in new pages patrol. I also vote to keep useful articles on the various "for deletion" debates rampaging around. I'm also somewhat interested in cleaning our our copyright violations, especially the massive backlog of images with no source or licensing information. One of my most important roles, I feel, is in welcoming new users; people are our best asset, and I have customised templates to make them feel welcome. Mentoring new users is always an option, if they request it.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. A tricky one; to narrow them all down. Well, my first major edit was to Federal Firearms License - it was the first article I really felt proud of afterwards. Since then, I've dipped my toes into a lot of things; many of which are articles I wouldn't necessarily have taken an interest in, but which I have been drawn to through new pages patrol; articles such as Wyatt Eaton, Mick Manning, etc. I am also the main organiser of the Featured Article Drive, which is now a helpdesk for those who'd like to see an article promoted to Featured Article status.
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. Well, I'm notorious in some ways for being one of the initiators of the Ed Poor arbitration case earlier this year. Myself, and two of the other initiators were able to reach a resolution with Ed, and I feel we all came out of that learning some lessons about consensus; something which really can never be underestimated. I generally avoid making edits to really controversial articles such as abortion and the like, but that is probably from a lack of interest in those subjects. I am firmly against edit wars, wheel wars and abuses of power, and always work to maintain consensus, keep the quality of articles up, and make sure everyone is happy with things.
The above 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 article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Robchurch_2&oldid=1258001656"