Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Jamesofur

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

Jamesofur

Jamesofur (talk · contribs)

End date: 16:56, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello everyone! I'm here (again) to present to you Jamesofur for adminship. He's been here for about 2 months (!) and had 600+ edits including 100 deleted edits. While this will fail the general criteria for adminship, James is someone who has really helped the wiki and will be a very good admin (if he is promoted). He's a Global Rollbacker; which shows that he is a trusted user. Also, 100 QDs in 2 months show that he needs the Deletion tool. He is a very capable user, and I'm sure that he can help us with the admin work to do here. Thanks, Pmlineditor ∞ 16:54, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Also, I'd like to mention the timezone factor; he edits at a time when there are no admins and so he can help dealing with vandalism on these occasions. Pmlineditor ∞ 16:56, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Candidate's acceptance: Thank you for the nomination and of course I accept. I know that I fail most peoples criteria for this and if you think that is to much to get over then I'm ok with that and its nothing personal. I know the biggest place where I fall short is main space article work, and that's a fair argument. I am working on 2 articles now but the honest fact is that it tends to be a smaller thing for me, I usually only fix article problems as I come across them rather then searching something out (the one I'm working on at the moment was because I saw a red link after some vandalism). My main focus is and always has been vandalism, spam and abuse as well as trying to keep everything looking good and working well. If the community were to give me the tools I think they would help me with the work that I already do the most including not only vandalism work (deletion/blocking) but also my more recent work on templates and the MediaWiki interface. I'll be happy to provide examples of some of the things I've worked on recently. I think I'll stop here for now rather then write to much (we all know I can) but I'll be happy to answer questions in depth. Jamesofur (talk) 17:04, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Support

1. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:06, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
2.  (change conflict)  Strong support As nom. Pmlineditor ∞ 17:07, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
3. Support Has covered a long road very fast Purplebackpack89 (talk) 19:24, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
4. Support - While he hasn't been here quite 3 months and doesn't meet the editcountisis requirement of having 1K edits, I believe he has a very good head on his shoulders and I have a lot of trust and respect for him, and believe he will do fine as an addition to the admin team. Kind regards, Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 19:35, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
5. Most certainly not. He hasn't been here three months, hasn't got 1k edits and therefore has no idea what he has doing. You don't meet the criteria. Goblin 19:39, 21 October 2009 (UTC) I ♥ Kennedy! Yes, this is a comment in support of Jamesofur. I'm basically saying that while he doesn't meet the outlined criteria he does know what he is doing and therefore is a worthy candidate. People opposing on the basis of not meeting the criteria are prunes.
6. – Katerenka (talk • contribs) 21:16, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
7. Support Yes please. I trust this one. NonvocalScream (talk) 23:53, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
8. Support - Trusted user with plenty of experience. Tiptoety ^talk 07:03, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
9. Support In my experience Jamesofur has done an excellent job, and he has enough experience to make me feel comfortable supporting. PeterSymonds (talk) 19:39, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
10. Support good user --vector ^_^ (talk) 08:03, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
11. Support A user much like myself. The general WP symbol for an admin is the mop, not pen and paper. Editors should not need to be excellent authors to become admins. I feel that people who spend time working in maintenance of the pedia are often better admins than people who spend all their time writing about a subject. Seems like a great editor.--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 22:06, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
12. Support based on positive interactions at other projects - and on contributions here as well. Can be trusted not to abuse the tools, and seems to have enough experience to use them well. Tempodivalse 23:15, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
13. Support per others. Razorflame 04:00, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
14. --Yotcmdr ^{=talk to the commander=} 11:44, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
15. -Tweet Tweet Tweet, give him the mop. FR^{Sign Here} 23:11, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
16. 一定要支持！ I mean, support. Yes.-- Tdxiang 06:09, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
17. Support A good candidate, he'll make a good admin. He also has prior experience of being an admin, and has done many quick deletion requests. --Bsadowski1 06:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
18. Support King OF ZE Ravenz!!! (talk) 14:37, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Comments

• Your contributions thus far have been impeccable and positive but please remember this is Simple English Wikipedia. Your comments, while detailed and interesting, do edge on the side of verbose and could become too challenging for our regular readers to understand. I know (as you do) that you often express your opinions using a larger number of words than most of us. So, regardless of the outcome of this RFA, do note that we have to respond to Simple English and even non-English speakers - your massive prose is often too much for most SEWP-ers. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:49, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

...and most of it contains spelling and grammatical errors, even in your acceptance statement here. Please dedicate a bit more time before saving something you write? -- Mentifisto 20:10, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I have a tendency to write what I am thinking and press enter too soon :( That is definitely something I should do better with.Jamesofur (talk) 22:30, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

• Could you show me a few examples of your understanding that we're a simplified version of English Wikipedia? How much mainspace work have you done here? How much do you understand that we need to appeal to all-comers? By the way, please don't answer with KB of prose - be succinct and simple, okay? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:19, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Of course, I know that I sometimes have an issue being simple. I have tended to ignore it outside of main space which is probably not the best way to attract other people to get involved in the running of the Wiki. I will try to simplify a lot more everywhere for everyones benefit. For things I have already done I think the best example is talking to people, I know I try very hard to simplify if I don't know their skills [here], [here],and here are examples. You can also see some of my attempts at simple Wiktionary [[1]] and [[2]] are examples though they are not perfect. I will admit I worry that I will sound like I am talking down to someone and that sometimes holds me back. Jamesofur (talk) 22:30, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Oops, I realized I only focused on one part of the question, to be honest I have done VERY little article work with only small changes as I found them. I am trying to work on a fairly large article for en:Amherst College though it is taking longer then expected and I am writing Microblogging right now by request. Actually the thing I like most about simple is that it can do multiple things more then any other wiki. It helps people learn English as they learn other subjects through the encyclopedia. The other wikipedias focus solely on encyclopedic information. My tendency to be verbose does not help much with the teaching part and I should definitely focus on it.Jamesofur (talk) 22:48, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

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.