Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Shanel

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

Shanel

Final (13/8/1) ending 09:05 28 October 2005

Shanel (talk · contribs) – A competent user, who I was kinda monitoring, but then he seemed to be doing OK, and then exceeded me. Does lots of rving and rfding, and has helped me with one of my pet projects, translating stuff from Category:Breton nationalism. Will be a decent admin. Wonderfool 09:05, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Support seems competent and level-headed. freestylefrappe 22:13, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support Has been friendly & helpful with the Wikipedia 1.0 project. Walkerma 22:27, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Merovingian (t) (c) (e) 23:59, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support. Excellent answers to the questions, and seems very level-headed and trustworthy. Good on edit summaries. Highly unlikely to abuse the admin powers. Seems like they would be very useful to her. And, all in all, a quality contributor. I see no reason to oppose. --BorgHunter (talk) 04:53, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support Edit count is low but sufficiently diverse to my mind. Not a lot on WikiTalk but enough on Wiki itself. Particularly impressed by 1.19 average edits per page and the number of article edits relative to over-all amount. Shows she gets things right and that she hits a diverse number of pages. Nice answers to questions. Marskell 08:52, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support, no qualms. Christopher Parham (talk) 16:04, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support. Discussion edits are kinda low, but adminship is no big deal, right? ~~ N (t/c) 23:49, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  8. FireFox 13:07, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  9. As nominator, vote of support. --Wonderfool 10:05, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support - where has the problem with talk namespace suddenly leapt from? That was certainly not a hoop I had to jump through when I became an admin... -- Francs2000 21:18, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support - I see Shanel very active with her mop w/o injuring or leaving any wet liquid on the floor or any victim behind her. Applies WP rules gently! -- Svest 22:29, 24 October 2005 (UTC)  Wiki me up™[reply]
  12. Support --Kefalonia 08:08, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support lack of experience with conflict doesn't mean she's not ready to be an admin, she doesn't have to get involved in conflicts if not comfortable wtih them - give her the tools to be a more effective editor, which is what she wants to be Tedernst 18:50, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. --Boothy443 | comhrá 21:04, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose Not much interaction in the talk spaces. Will support if you become more active in the community. Jobe6 21:38, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oppose, insufficient interaction with the community for me to have confidence in her. It doesn't help that the nomination comes from a user whose behavior has been extremely erratic. I would reconsider if she was being endorsed by people I know and trust. --Michael Snow 23:03, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Try again in a few months - you need more experience in Talk and such. Andre (talk) 02:16, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Oppose Not enough interaction with the community via talk pages. I need more proof that you can actually handle negotiation and mediation while maintaining WP:CIVIL at all times. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 06:11, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Weak Oppose per ZZyzx11. I need more of a record to have confidence in this user. Xoloz 19:11, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Oppose. Needs more time, experience, and interaction with others on Wikipedia first. Silensor 20:56, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Oppose Sorry, too soon. Jonathunder 22:16, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

  1. Neutral. Based on what the supporters and opposers say, and by my own judgement, I've been unable to come to a conclusion. Cannot wholeheartedly support, but can't wholeheartedly oppose either. -- NSLE (Communicate!) <Contribs> 01:25, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

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.If I become a sysop, I anticipate that I would help with most sysop chores. I already do reverting, so I would still be doing that, and since do NP and RC patrol I would probably be deleting pages, protecting pages, and blocking and unblocking IP addresses. I wouldn't feel too confident about database queries, enforcing ArmCom rulings, or changing the interface, but I know that a janitor sometimes has to do unpleasant work. :P--Shanel 20:18, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. I would say that I am most proud of my translations in Breton nationalism. I get to use all my french skills, and the challenge of translating makes very rewarding when I do finish one. They are not perfect, but they still make me proud. General tasks like reverting vandalism and wikifying articles also make me feel satisfied. I like doing them, and I like helping to keep Wikipedia clean.--Shanel 20:18, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
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 haven't been in any editing conflicts, or had any disputes with any user yet, but I probably will someday. When that happens the first thing I will do is take a few hours off to clear my head. Then I'd try to solve the problem with the user(s) through negotiation, mediation, or ArbCom if necessary. I think I am good at compromising and listening to the other side (or sides). I'm also not very confrontational, so I think I will be able to handle any disputes that come my way.--Shanel 20:18, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. According to Kate's, you have 1162 edits at this point. How would you respond to those who generally require 1500-2000 edits to be entirely comfortable with a candidate? (Not saying that's me, but I'd like to see the answer.) And, with only 16 edits to the talk namespace, how much experience do you have in handling disputes over pages -- for example, edit/revert wars, NPOV-related arguments, and the like? If made an admin, do you think you'd get more involved in this? --BorgHunter (talk) 12:12, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
A. I would respond by saying that quantity of edits shouldn't matter as much as what I've done. I've dabbled in a little bit of everything. I've helped Wonderfool with Breton nationalism, done cleanup and copyediting, some image tagging, recent pages and new pages patrol, stub sorting, and some work with the Version 1.0 Editorial Team. I have made some mistakes, especially with tagging articles, but I've learned from those mistakes. Overall, I think my edits have been constructive and not destructive.
As for handling disputes, I can't really say anything other than I will learn in time. As I mentioned above, I haven't gotten into any disputes yet, but I do think I am capable of handling them. If I become an admin, I don't think I'd get any more involved in these disputes, but I would be willing to help settle them if needed.--Shanel 20:18, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
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/Shanel&oldid=1142573174"