Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Curps

Curps

final (25/1/0) ending 04:55 25 January 2005 (UTC)

I have been on Wikipedia since February 2004 and have a few thousand edits, and have a good understanding of how Wikipedia works.

-- Curps 04:55, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Support

1. gadfium 05:28, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
2. Has done great work adding content and fending off vandals on the Indian Ocean earthquake article. Mark¹ 08:39, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
3. I'll support, primarily because of contributions, and answers to the questions. Jordi·✆ 09:04, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
4. Support. Nice work on Indian Ocean quake. alteripse 15:27, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
5. Carrp 16:04, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
6. Strong support. -- Michael Warren | Talk 16:57, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
7. Strongly, strongly support. He was indisepnsible in combating Plautus. I was considering nominating him myself. →Raul654 00:03, Jan 19, 2005 (UTC)
8. —Charles P. ^(Mirv) 00:18, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
9. Ambi 09:42, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
10. Rmhermen 16:00, Jan 19, 2005 (UTC)
11. Does a lot of good work, resolves disputes amicably. Johnleemk | Talk 17:24, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
12. Support. --Lst27 (talk) 23:26, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
13. Definitely. --fvw* 23:54, 2005 Jan 19 (UTC)
14. SWAdair | Talk 09:15, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
15. Fixed my signature! What a pal, --Ryan! | Talk 14:55, Jan 21, 2005 (UTC)
16. Darwin 18:42, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
17. Rje 02:55, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
18. Noisy | Talk 11:10, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
19. Taco Deposit | Talk-o to Taco 16:14, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
20. Tuf-Kat 03:02, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)
21. Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 06:31, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
22. Slowking Man 07:05, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)
23. CryptoDerk 05:12, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)
24. Support. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 18:34, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)
25. Support.--JuntungWu 02:01, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Oppose

1. BLANKFAZE | (что??) 00:15, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Why? -- Chris 73 Talk 05:43, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC)

I'm not going to go into it. BLANKFAZE | (что??) 17:42, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I don't recall any conflicts with you whatsoever, so I'll assume it's on the basis of the general criteria you outline in User:Blankfaze/admin. Fair enough. -- Curps 20:41, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

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 Vandalism reversion would be a little bit less work with fewer clicks (especially when the site is very slow as it has been lately and every click sometimes takes a long time). Also perhaps occasional blocking. I haven't had much interest in admin stuff (other than routine vandalism reversion which I've been doing anyway), but recently had the unpleasant experience of waiting half an hour for a persistent defacement anon IP vandal to be blocked even after posting to Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress. So it would be nice to do such things myself occasionally without having to seek out an admin.

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

A Most of my edits have been minor edits, but I occasionally create new articles or substantially edit articles. For instance, I have made some contributions to 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake. I have contributed stub biographies of astronomers (see Category:Astronomers and subcategories), for instance William Parsons, 3rd Earl of Rosse. The most recent articles I substantially contributed to were Deep-ocean Assessment and Reporting of Tsunamis and Genrikh Lyushkov.

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 will deal with it in the future?

A Along with several other users, I was involved in a conflict with User:Plautus satire in early 2004; Plautus was eventually blocked for 12 months. Last July, I was involved in one of the lamest edit wars ever over a single phrase in Miss Kitty Fantastico; see Wikipedia talk:Guide to writing better articles/Principle of least astonishment for my reasoning. More recently, I was involved in a 3RR conflict with User:Bobchalk, first getting involved in the edit war only after Bobchalk had already singlehandedly reverted 10 times against consensus and four other users reverting back, but eventually breaking the 3RR rule myself; this was eventually resolved amicably — all of us eventually changed our minds about the change Bobchalk had wanted to make (splitting the article). I was also recently involved (along with a fairly unanimous consensus) in a disagreement with User:Kenkam, see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Asian tsunami : The earthquake.

It's the nature of Wikipedia that disagreements are infrequent though occasionally inevitable but they can usually be resolved and I never get stressed out or emotional. I do not try to force through any changes against consensus, and in most cases have been in agreement with the consensus opinion.