Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Messedrocker 2

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

[edit] Messedrocker

Final (95/1/0) ended 08:17, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

• The Original RFA

Messedrocker (talk · contribs) — MessedRocker has been with us for two years (since November 2004), and has made roughly 3700 edits in that timeframe, most of these edits occurring since May of last year. He's had a low activity ratio, but has given us a consistent effort. He has had major involvement with the articles Acamprosate, Endless Online, Sprite (soft drink), YTMND, and Solar panel. Additionally, a roughly one-month old list of pages and categories he has created is available here. Non-article contributions include the creation of Wikipedia:Last Resort Solution, creating WP:TEA based on the Wikinews version, as well as proposing Approved Article Revisions and its companion process. In addition, Messedrocker occasionally performs maintenance through his AutoWikiBrowser-powered bot MessedRobot, handles countervandalism duties, and writes fair use rationales for images. Messedrocker has proven himself capable of using the mop without any issues, and is not going to abuse the tools. — Werdna talk criticism 07:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Werdna beat me to the nomination, which I was going to do on Friday! Anyway, he is level-headed, likeable, and a good editor. He can be trusted with the tools, partly proven by his activity on Wikinews. 1ne 00:41, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept Werdna's nomination with pride. —this is messedrocker (talk) 08:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

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: Simply put, I'd like to do the simple maintenance tasks, such as dealing with deletion requests (whether they be speedy, PROD, or xFDs). Another thing I'd like to deal with are image issues; as it's been demonstrated, I have a history of dealing with fair use images, particularly writing fair use rationales for them. I haven't done it perfectly (as Meegs can tell you), but I've learned from my mistakes. To that end, I'd make sure the copyvios are deleted as quickly as possible (I've seen quite the backlogs). In addition, I'll always be sure to help out people whenever I can, and will make sure that I stay polite and civil when faced with the most aggravating matters.

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

A: Werdna basically outlined everything above (it's actually based on my user page), however I'd really like to point out the things that I am very pleased with. The YTMND article, prior my major revisions, was mostly unsourced, not written in the best way, and generally could use improvement. Since I started making major contributions, the article is now well-written (in my opinion anyways) and is completely sourced. I also like how I dealt with the Endless Online; used to be one of the worst articles on Wikipedia, but since I essentially wiped everything out of the article, it's now a good-enough article.

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 can't recall ever being in conflict with others, though I have gotten my fair share of things pointed out (particularly earlier in my wikicareer). Luckily, I have decided to assume that they mean the best, and I use the things they point out to improve myself. In the future, should I encounter stressful situations, I should remember to be civil no matter what, and if necessary, I'll take a break to cool down. If anyone ever feels that I'm too stressed, I'll do my best to make sure I get some wikirest (the last thing we want is an admin to turn into a vandal). Luckily, as I said, I haven't had a record of such things so it shouldn't be extremely hard.

Questions from Andeh

4. How do you feel about the 'prodding' of articles, do you agree with it? Why should 'prod' be used in some cases instead of CSD/AfD'ing an article?

A: What I like about PROD is that it helps cut out needless process, while it allows for people to bring it up just in case it is needed. In other words, it's the middle ground. See, we shouldn't be caught up in processes where everyone votes delete, because that'd be a waste of time (I've heard of cases where even the original author endorses deletion). However, PROD-worthy articles shouldn't be speedy deleted because speedy deletion should be reserved for junk. PROD is the settlement between immediate deletion and jumping through hoops and waiting for comments for deletion.

5. Please list several AfD nominations that you created. (they should still be in your watchlist). Thank you.

A: These are almost all of the AFD nominations that I have created: Not cool club, GBTW, Silver-stars.net, You're the man now, dog, "Naked party" (must've ended up getting deleted in a later nomination), and finally, Military history by country. Yes, I know, not such a stellar performance, but I've learned from these and have aimed to use other methods instead.

6. I see that you are a good editor and a rc patroller, but every time I heariabout a roblem with an admin, it involves the way they handled themselves in negotiation, and ability to explain why they performed their admin action. Quite Simply, show me why I can trust you to take care of tricky disputes. Have you mediated before? How about been caught up in a dispute that you had to had to handle calmly, or were forced to negotiate to solve a major problem? Any examples of any step of dispute resolution that I can look at? Thanks, Wikipedia's False Prophet holla at me Improve Me 02:42, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

A: Thank you for asking. Somehow, I manage to evade getting into stressful situations on Wikipedia, although I've had them on Wikinews. Most recently, I banned a certain user there, and while it was supported by most admins, a couple in particular were quite interested in protesting the ban. (Don't worry though; this was the first (and hopefully last) time I've ever banned someone on Wikinews, and if I were to become a Wikipedia admin, I don't intend on doing it often or even at all. This ban which only lasted a few days was on a user who was blocked numerous times and it was basically the final straw that broke the camel's back. Again, very rare situation that I hope won't happen on Wikipedia.) This caused considerable stress, but instead of letting it accumulate, I took a semi-break from Wikinews and stated that I'd be willing to unban him under certain terms. The terms of parole I negotiated were accepted by both sides of the debate and now he is trying to become a better user. I'm not one to judge how I handled the situation, but apparently I did it well enough to be a winning candidate in the ongoing Wikinews ArbCom elections. The discussion in relation to the banning is available here.

Question from --Mcginnly | Natter 15:49, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

7. Could you point me towards either, 1. a Featured article you have written or collaborated on, 2. A featured list you have compiled. 3. A featured portal you have have helped gain featured status? Thanks.

A: - I filed the peer review for the Che Guevara article, and from there I split off Che Guevara's involvement in the Cuban Revolution into its own article.

Comment

• See Messedrocker's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool.
• See Messedrocker's edit count on the talk page

Support

1. As nominator — Werdna talk criticism 07:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
2. Wait, he isn't already one? – Chacor 08:22, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
3. Support. User has always come across well on IRC. Majority of prior opposes were due to lack of experience, if I read them correctly; I don't think that's an issue any longer. We need admins with image experience. Luna Santin 08:24, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
4. Support per Chacor :P Ryūlóng 08:25, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
5. You're kidding, right? He wasn't one? --Golbez 08:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
6. Support, great user and would make a great admin. --Rory096 08:30, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
7. ZOMG Support - as this page has finally finished loading... now I bet as soon as I hit save I will get edit conflicted. Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 08:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
8. Ditto everyone above support - Daniel.Bryant 08:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
9. Support looks good. VegaDark 08:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
10. Support. Conscious 10:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
11. Wholhearted support after flooding up my watchlist with album edits from his bot (your words rocker) ;-) and having come across him on WN where he uses his admin tools well IMO. MR is obviously 'devoted' to the entire WM project. Im suprised he aint an admin already! --Errant Tmorton166^(Talk)(Review me) 10:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
12. Support Does a good job as admin over at Wikinews.--Birdmessenger 11:18, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
13. Support. - Mailer Diablo 13:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
14. Support. Of course! -- That Guy, From That Show! 14:11, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
15. Support, good user. --Terence Ong _{(T | C)} 14:18, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
16. Support a definitive improvement since last time. Rama's arrow 14:24, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
17. Support Looks like a good admin candidate. (aeropagitica) 15:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
18. Support great admin on WN, would be good here :) Computerjoe's talk 18:22, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
19. Support I have no doubts that this user would be a great admin. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 18:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
20. Support - good user. Michael 19:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
21. Moo Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 20:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
22. Support. While I don't recall seeing this editor before, his answers and my review of his talk page and contributions leads me to think that this nominee has vastly improved since his last self-nom and has learned much from that experience. Good job. Agent 86 20:17, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
23. Support. I've seen this user around before. Seems like a very diligent and respected editor. Has improved quite a bit since his first unsuccessful RfA. --Nishkid64 20:40, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
24. Support. A refreshingly easy support. -- RM 21:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
25. Support While I don't envision MessedRocker to be the sort of admin with thousands of entries in his log per month, he's certainly shown quite a dedication to the project. He's been an editor for nearly two years (with pretty consistent editing throughout) and has never been blocked. This, coupled with an overview of his contributions and talk page lead me to believe that he's a trusted member of the community, and as such, would do well to have the extra buttons to help mop up hoopydink^{Conas tá tú?} 22:00, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
26. Support. He might not be an editing-machine, like some, but Messedrocker has more than demonstrated that he is a level-headed editor who can be trusted with the tools. Rje 23:53, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
27. --SB | T 00:00, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
28. Support as co-nominator. 1ne 00:41, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
29. Support per above. —Khoikhoi 00:44, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
30. Support NO NO NO ARE YOU NUTS.....wait I mean YES YES YES. Mike _{(T C)} 01:13, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
31. Merovingian - Talk 01:30, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
32. Support I like the change of pace to a long tenured contributor who is not edit count obsessed.-- danntm ^T _C 02:21, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
33. Solid Support for a solid user. --CableModem 06:59, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
34. Support Absolutely. BaseballBaby 07:59, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
35. Support, meets the expected standard.--Andeh 12:17, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
36. Support per nom and all supports above. Whatever I want to say has already been stated by those above me. - Aksi_great (talk - review me) 12:22, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
37. Support per nom and per answers to questions. Looks like you'd make a good administrator. --Coredesat talk. o_O 13:41, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
38. --Nearly Headless Nick 14:00, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
39. Support --Mike 15:17, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
40. Support per all above, quality user with no issues, already an admin on another Wiki project. Newyorkbrad 16:26, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
41. Support :) Dlohcierekim 18:28, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
42. Support. G.He 19:47, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
43. Support It's always quality edits, not quantity that gets my approval. Good candidate. JungleCat talk/contrib 20:27, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
44. Support per nomination. Yanksox 21:24, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
45. Support and I'd have supported last time too had I been around. ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 23:02, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

    Support. Sensible, experienced user, no issues. Newyorkbrad 23:06, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

    User voted twice, see vote #40. --Rory096 06:35, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

    Completely inadvertent of course, I apologize. Newyorkbrad 20:17, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

46. Support I've seen only the best from this user. Canadian-Bacon ^{t c e} 23:50, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
47. Support He cares. Danny 00:32, 9 September 2006 (UTC).
48. Support. An asset to the project. Zaxem 01:32, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
49. Support --Srikeit ^{(Talk | Email)} 04:00, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
50. Support The user is very experienced and is sane. Therefore, the user can be trusted to not make insane decisions. This is like an easy SAT question. Teke ^(talk) 04:36, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

    Sanity is a criteria for being an admin? Well, I guess that reduces my chance at ever becoming an admin... :'( --TBCTaLk?!? 20:32, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

51. Support Brian | (Talk) 06:40, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
52. Jumping on the bandwagon support --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 19:21, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
53. Support, one of the easier calls, I think. Guy 19:36, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
54. Support, great editor, meets my criteria.--TBCTaLk?!? 20:32, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
55. I already thought he was an admin support. Great user, and really did a good job cleaning up the YTMND article. —Whomp t/c 21:01, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
56. Support - Hahnchen 01:57, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
57. Support. I have seen him spearhead new Wikipedia policies and ideas. We need a thinker like him with us.--Danaman5 04:40, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
58. Seriously, seriously thought he already was one — riana_dzasta _{wreak havoc|damage report} 08:57, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
59. Cliché omitted support of course. haz (talk) e
60. Yes please. --james^(talk) 10:56, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
61. Support. — FireFox ^(talk) _{11:31, 10 September 2006}
62. Support. Quality is much better then quantity, good use of edit summaries (99%/100%m) thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 14:20, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
63. Support per nom. Good contributor Anger22 19:22, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
64. Support good all-round contributions. Oldelpaso 20:14, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
65. Support Seems to be a constructive part of WP which would benefit from the sysop tools. Tewfik^Talk 03:11, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
66. Support per the little voices in my head. Daveydweeb (^chat/_patch) 03:14, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
67. Support; I've seen Messedrocker around here and there, always making thoughtful edits. --Allen 03:59, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
68. Support; Very outgoing and involved user. He was a Wikipedian for a long time and deserves to be an admin. --Ineffable3000 05:41, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
69. - CrazyRussian talk/email 13:15, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
70. Support A quick trip to the archives revealed that I voted against you on your last nomination, but said that I'd probably support you on your next run. This vote is not based on that "promise," but on the fact you you are clearly a hard-working member, and everything else said above. Steveo2 19:21, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
71. Support, without reservations. Sango123 21:08, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
72. Um Support...--Kungfu Adam ^(talk) 22:10, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
73. Support. Cool username. —freak(talk) 22:22, Sep. 11, 2006 (UTC)
74. Full Support. You have my full support. You'd make a great Admin. Implificator 22:34, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
75. Strong Support for a good editor --Ageo020 23:05, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
76. Support as I see a good user, and no valid reason to oppose. Themindset 23:15, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
77. Support - of course. Grutness...wha? 00:05, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
78. Support JoshuaZ 00:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
79. Pepsidrinka supports. 00:52, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
80. support --W.marsh 00:54, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
81. Support. As an admin on Wikinews, Messedrocker has been very active and helpful there. I see no reason why it wouldn't be the same here. Ral315 (talk) 03:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
82. Support. No reson not to!--Irishpunktom\^talk 13:42, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
83. Support per Tmorton166. Wikipedia's False Prophet holla at me Improve Me 16:24, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
84. Support. All the reasons have been already told Doctor BrunoTalk 18:20, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
85. Support All reasons, including this reason, have been told (:P) Hello32020 19:27, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
86. I thought you were an admin already. ~crazytales56297.chasing cars//e 00:57, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
87. Support. He's great on Wikinews, too.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 01:31, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
88. Support, d'oh. Weasel 14:45, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
89. Support, A very good user, wikipedia would benifit from giving him the tools. Thε Halo ^Θ 16:04, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
90. Support. See no issues here. Jayjg ^(talk) 17:27, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
91. Support no brainer. should move forward. Trnj2000 17:31, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
92. Adminship is no big deal Support ++Lar: t/c 21:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
93. Support Messedrocker will be a good admin. Bastique▼^parler _voir 21:11, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
94. Support Messedrocker has experience as admin on other projects, knows his way around after contributing to en-WP for 2 years and is knowledgeable and active in policy discussions on IRC. He will make a fine admin.—WAvegetarian•(talk) 03:18, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
95. Support Walkerma 03:27, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose You seem like a very likeable person, but when asked about FA's you point me to a nomination for a peer review of an article someone else substantially wrote - and the split article Che Guevara's involvement in the Cuban Revolution? Well you only seem to have done the splitting. I'm uncomfortable with this. --Mcginnly | Natter 22:35, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

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.