Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Fir0002

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


Fir0002

Final (65/3/3) ended 07:10, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Fir0002 (talk · contribs) – Fir0002 has a hell of a lot of featured pictures, as well as a hell of a lot of edits. He's an asset to the community and would do well as an admin. SushiGeek 06:27, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Thanks a lot for the nomination, I humbly accept. --Fir0002 www 07:03, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Obviously. However, I'd like other people not to vote until he accepts, so that we don't get another CSCWEM debacle again if he doesn't accept right away. SushiGeek 06:27, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Strong support. --Rory096 07:20, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Weak Strong Support. It's somewhat concerning that you have notes on your talk page for untagged images from one month ago. Are you unfamiliar with our Copyright policy?Concerns addressed Werdna (talk) 01:48, 7 June 2006 (UTC) Otherwise, a nice editcount, good history of interaction, and exceptional contribution to the area of pictures Werdna (talk) 07:24, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    He forgot to tag 2 out of about 450- I'd say that's not too bad, especially because he immediately corrected them. And I'm sure he's familiar with the copyright policy. 450 images! --Rory096 07:37, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    It's actually closer to about 1500 - I upload to the commons now. And I think you'll find those images were actually just part of my userpage. I realize that's no excuse but I thought I'd mention it. --Fir0002 www 07:38, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for your prompt response. My concerns have been alleviated. One more thing, would you please consider enabling email? Werdna (talk) 01:47, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Done. --Rory096 16:07, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks very much for responding to my concerns, Changed to strong support. Werdna (talk) 01:58, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support. -- excellent contributor of photography, many of featured status. Administrative tools will not be abused by this user. - Longhair 07:28, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. I've never seen so many image edits Support Be good to have admins with more variety of edit history like this. -Goldom (t) (Review) 07:38, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support. I've seen Fir0002 on FPC quite a bit over the past few months (since I started being a regular there, he was active there long before that) and Fir0002 has always been levelheaded and quite a benefit to that sub-community. I am not sure that Fir0002 has really explained why he wants to be admin as well as I would normally like to see, but it comes down to if I trust this user with the mop. And the answer is that I do, completely. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 07:52, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support. I'm most aware of Fir0002 from his photography, but he's clearly a major asset to Wikipedia.-gadfium 09:18, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support, good user. --Terence Ong 09:19, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support. A long-term committed user. Zaxem 09:24, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support. See User_talk:Fir0002#Questions. Petros471 09:26, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support. Fir plans to use admin tools when dealin with images and he's an expert there. --Tone 09:43, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support - Very active at WP:FPC, don't see any reason to oppose. --Scott 10:34, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support Lots of photographic contributions and very active. Hohohob 10:49, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support. DarthVader 12:52, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support ForestH2
  16. Support, 47 FPs?! More than enough to equate 1FA as a substitute! - Mailer Diablo 13:51, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support - a rare SushiGeek nom + its pretty easy to rack up some project editcounts if one wants adminship but lots of null edits really don't tell us anything at all. Great photographic contribs and we always need more people to clean out old images / moved to commons etc (and this gets to be my longest vote of the day)-- Tawker 15:19, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Strong support. [ælfəks] 15:52, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support. Looks like a good specialist admin. --HughCharlesParker (talk - contribs) 16:48, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support. A bit low in the Talk namespace, but otherwise qualified! Kalani [talk] 17:05, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support. I'm impressed by the long list of images. Royboycrashfan 17:47, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support I have absolutely no doubt Fir understands the main encyclopedia body, and a serious image admin could be a big boon. Staxringold talkcontribs 18:19, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support - I cannot belive that all this time, since seeing Fir0002 around WP:FPC, that I sincerely thought he was already an administrator, *sigh*. Kilo-Lima|(talk) 18:39, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support No problems here. --Siva1979Talk to me 18:56, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Strong support - asset to Wikipedia. Everyone loves pretty pictures. — Celestianpower háblame 19:06, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support.  Grue  19:11, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support a must have for adminship because of his work with images. Jaranda wat's sup 19:17, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support very good editor in my experience.--Alhutch 19:21, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Strong Support a VERY talented photographer. I love the photographs he has taken. Anonymous_anonymous_Have a Nice Day 20:02, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support. He goes out of his way to help others' FPCs too.--ragesoss 21:22, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support, I doubt he's going to abuse the tools (and he takes some of the best pictures I've ever seen). —Khoikhoi 22:01, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support seems like a great candidate (great pictures, also) hoopydinkConas tá tú? 22:32, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Merovingian {T C @} 22:46, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support. No reason to suggest they'd abuse admin mop. If a picture is like a thousand words... this user has contributed many many thousands. Nephron  T|C 23:31, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Support Yanksox 23:42, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Weak Support, should really get that email enabled first --K a s h Talk | email 23:51, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support, kept his cool in a debate with Canberra wikipedians (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Canberra/Archive02#Image additions) and we all learnt something--A Y Arktos\talk 00:53, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Weak Support despite the linkspam - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 02:40, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Weak support. Good photography related work, but would appreciate more main space edits apart from photographic work.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91(review me!) 07:50, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Support. He has been doing good work on photography and images and has made valuable contributions over that time. Capitalistroadster 07:52, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support always good to have admins with specialty skills, such as exceptional photography. He has proven that he can be trusted with admin powers -- Samir धर्म 09:16, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Support. Well-known user here. Australia is far far away from my country but thanks to his photos I would like to go there in future. - Darwinek 10:10, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Support; works well with others and is a valuable contributor. The tools should be useful for all of those image edits. --Spangineer[es] (háblame) 14:05, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Support someone with photography experience is also a handy addition to his valuable contributions. --Arnzy (whats up?) 14:37, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support. Looks good from here.--Kungfu Adam (talk) 20:27, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support, and about time too! Sango123 20:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Support. He improves other people's photos. I think that speaks for itself. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 22:20, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Support I definitely feel he would make a good admin, he has shown himself as a responsible editor for quite a long time and would definitely use the tools well. Pegasus1138Talk | Contribs | Email ---- 01:36, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Support. Changed from neutral after the user enabled email. G.He 03:38, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Support -- from The King of Kings 18:48, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Support - RFA cliche 4 --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 19:48, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    What's number 4? I only know about no.1... Petros471 19:53, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Support - Very responsible editor. --HappyCamper 22:37, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Support Joe I 08:33, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  54. Strong Support. Experienced, I'm sure wikipedia will benefit from his service. I also love his pictures, great contribs in that area. -- Banes 09:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  55. Very strong support. Fir, I always thougt you WERE an admin already. Great work, looking forward for more FP from you -- Chris 73 | Talk 21:09, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  56. Support Extremely good contributor. With around 4,000 + valuable edits under his belt, I am sure he will make a good admin.Jordy 12:00, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  57. Support Sarah Ewart (Talk) 06:56, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  58. Support. --Avenue 12:37, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  59. Support --Jay(Reply) 17:46, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  60. Support. We could use more people who know something about pictures, and the admin tools are helpful in maintenance tasks related to images. Don't see any reason this user will abuse the new tools, especially as it appears their use will be mostly limited to images (at least at first.) Grandmasterka 03:24, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  61. Support - You give this community, and the world, so much in your photographs. Enjoy the mop you're about to be given. michael talk 12:03, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  62. Support per above. Nevermind2 19:39, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  63. Support. Better late than never. --tomf688 (talk - email) 22:28, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  64. Support. Fir0002 has taken many excellent photographs and definetely cares about the visual quality of our articles. There is one thing about Wikipedia articles that I know for a fact - an article here is not good without good pictures in them. His images give a crystal clear example of what something looks like. He definetely deserves the "mop." --Evan Robidoux 23:13, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  65. Support -Blnguyen | Have your say!!!.

Oppose

  1. Two things, the signature spam and the voting templates (User:Fir0002/Discussion_on_templates). Reasons were presented in lengthy discussions to discourage both. Fir just ignored/dismissed them. An admin should be open to discussion and be able to admit to own wrongdoings. --Dschwen 09:04, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I except I was fully in the wrong with my sig but I can't say that "reasons and lengthy discussions" had been involved in notifying me. I recieved one comment on my userpage about it (and I didn't realize it wasn't just to do with aesthitic considerations). As soon as I was notified about WP:SPAM#How_not_to_be_a_spammer (about 2 mins ago) I removed the link from my sig. I would like to point out that User:Fir0002/Discussion_on_templates occured a year ago, and I'm certainly not hiding it, as I feel I put up many valid comments which were never addressed. However you are free to take your own view on them. But just out of interest, did you read the entire discussion? --Fir0002 09:21, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I actually did, and had a couple of good laughs (crushed by elephant :-) ), but it still concerns me that you dismissed all points as flawed logic. Why stage a vote if you are not ready to accept the outcome? It doesn't matter whether it is was year ago. People tried to remove the images but were reverted. I guess most just have given up. --Dschwen 11:45, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. I'm very glad for your photography contributions but I see practically no project space edits and in general very few edits that don't have to do with photography. This doesn't really signify to me that the user is ready for adminship. I also share Dschwen's concerns. — GT 09:14, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Erm, the user seems to have over 1300 project edits. As for not doing anything except photography-related stuff, I don't see how that's bad. He'll just focus on the image-related parts of adminship. --Rory096 16:05, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd estimate that less than 2 dozen of them are to pages not dealing with images. Feel free to peruse them yourself to see what I mean. Adminship should not be considered a reward for good editing though pretty much every support vote above is treating it as one. I know it's nice for everyone here to imagine he will be an image-specialist admin but there's no way of restricting his powers in such a way. — GT 19:48, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    True, but neither is there anything in the candidate's history here to suggest that he would ever seek to insinuate himself inappropriately into areas with which he is unfamiliar; one can, I think, be confident that he doesn't seek adminship in order to abuse the admin powers and is sufficiently responsible to know that whereof he is insufficently knowledgable to use the mop, etc., thereof ought he to remain uninvolved. Joe 04:40, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Weak oppose Great editor, pictures are superb, nothing in his answers to the questions makes me think he really needs the admin tools though. "I'd certainly brush up on it" should really come before accepting a nomination for adminship, in my opinion. I also don't like the hesitation about email, or the many typos. I'm sure, on the other hand, that he would not abuse admin tools if given them. I just don't think he is ready for it yet. --Guinnog 21:46, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Oppose so long as your signature contains spam. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:00, 9 June 2006 (UTC) Removing my oppose vote. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:07, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    The external link was removed as soon as I pointed it out at the start of this RFA. See User_talk:Fir0002#Questions. Petros471 21:03, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

Neutral. Please first enable email, and then I may reconsider. G.He 21:09, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to Support - Email's now enabled. G.He 03:40, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Neutral. Please first enable email.--Jusjih 23:51, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Neutral E-mail is not enabled. Otherwise a little bit low on edits, but could be a great specialist-administrator abakharev 01:01, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment I now have enabled my email. --Fir0002 12:08, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Neutral I have to be honest here - Fir0002 is a great editor, and I absolutely love his contributions to Wikipedia. But giving him admin privileges would be like giving a ceremonial degree to someone, and discredits the whole process. Nothing to me suggests that he needs them - the only task he's intended at needing them for is deleting old edits of images. I'm pretty wary of handing out such powerful tools to people who have only vague notions of what an administrator does or can do. At the same time, it's clear that fir0002 is not a major risk - the worst that is likely to happen is that he makes a minor gaffe like unblocking someone upon request or does something without understanding all the ramifications or conventions that go with it. If this was anyone else, I'd be voting oppose...but I won't, simply out of recognition and respect. Stevage 14:08, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments 

Username Fir0002
Total edits 4244
Distinct pages edited 1950
Average edits/page 2.176
First edit 09:27, August 31, 2004

(main) 1195
Talk 39
User 294
User talk 452
Image 816
Image talk 1
Template 18
Wikipedia 1359
Wikipedia talk 70


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'm not entirely sure as to the full extent of the uses of adminship, so I guess I'll just see what I can do and gradually build up my sysop chores. One thing in particular I can see myself doing is helping with the closing of the nominations of FPC and possibly deleting edits of images which are no longer needed (many images get "edits" which aim at improving aspects of the image - I'm not sure how many of these are now just hanging around doing nothing).
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I'm very proud of the number of FP's I've managed to accumulate obviously, but In particular I'm proud of Image:Bee mid air.jpg. Article wise I guess I've got to say Swifts Creek, Victoria, although I gotta give most of the credit for the text on that page to jjron
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 know about stress (I sometimes actually enjoy them), but I've certainly had some lively debates with users. I guess this argument was probably when I got most involved (which is why I've kept a record of it). I don't think I've been very offensive in any of my remarks, but I've certainly started being more tolerant and less defensive.

Question from Yanksox (optional)

4. What is your understanding of admin duties? Also, why do you want to be an admin? Yanksox 13:37, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A:Admin duties, as I udnerstand them, are a combination of a janitor, judge (or adjudicator) and (whats something beggining with j that means take action? :-). If you are referring to the actual theory behind it, I might not be word perfect but I've got the general idea and I'd certainly brush up on it if I am successfull in this rfa. Reasons for wanting adminship? Right now the main reasons are image related, specifically in working arouund FPC - closing noms, deleting temporary "edits", blocking the odd sockpuppet where necessary. With time though I hope to expand into further duties. Thanks for the question! --Fir0002 22:47, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question from GHe

5. I see that your email is current not set or disabled. Emails (along with Talk pages) are an important method of communication, especially for admins, for they may be faster and better for certain situations. Will you enable email now? G.He 23:00, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A: I think I will, but before my decision I'll wait for Petros' reply to this comment I left on his talk page. --Fir0002 08:25, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Update OK I've gone ahead and added my email address. --Fir0002 12:08, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Fir0002&oldid=1146640669"