Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/AndyZ

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

AndyZ

edit

Final (67/0/0) ended 21:52, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

AndyZ (talk · contribs) – I would like to nominate AndyZ for adminship. AndyZ has been editing since September of 2005 and has 3724 edits before the edit counter stopped working [1]. I first met AndyZ in the peer review of the now featured History of Miami, Florida article and helped me to the max with it especially with the copyediting. AndyZ is an exceptional editor who wrote two featured articles History of New Jersey and Mount Rushmore, rescued a few others like History of Greenland, People's Republic of China and Crash test dummy from WP:FARC and wrote three Did You Know articles. AndyZ is very active in Peer Review and Featured Articles candidates where he always leaves useful comments [2] [3] [4], reverts vandalism [5] [6] [7] [8] and warns users contently [9] [10] . AndyZ also participates in WP:AFD [11] and welcomes users [12]. I think AndyZ would make a excellent admin Jaranda wat's sup 01:33, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept (and thank you for) this nomination. AndyZ t 21:05, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Strong Support as nominator Jaranda wat's sup 01:43, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support An excellant choice as a admin. Moe ε 22:25, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Strong support well versed in the ways of the Wiki. _-M o P-_ 22:57, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support. I have seen this editor around and like his work. --Danaman5 23:18, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support per nom. DarthVader 00:17, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support - Richardcavell 00:45, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support - good user.ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! - review me 01:27, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support based on nom and answers to the questions. Good luck!--The ikiroid (talk)(Help Me Improve) 01:30, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support - meets my standards -- Tawker 01:38, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support - meets Tawker's standards - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 01:39, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Strong Support - I have seen him around here doing a lot of good work. joturner 02:01, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support good editor. Will make a good admin. FloNight talk 02:15, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support. Looks good to me. Grutness...wha? 02:41, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support His article space edits are of the highest caliber, his work in other areas is great, seems to keep a cool head. I also like his honest, open approach to question 1. It takes either a fool, an honest person or a very confident person to answer that question starting off with "I'm not too sure exactly what chores I plan on helping out with." I don't think Andy's a fool. JoshuaZ 03:47, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support Joe I 03:53, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support Great answers to questions- good candidate for the mop.--Kungfu Adam (talk) 03:58, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support Brilliant contributions -- Samir   (the scope) धर्म 04:00, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support. utcursch | talk 04:19, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support. Good vandal fighter and article contributor. Kimchi.sg | talk 07:00, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support--Jusjih 07:59, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support, of course. - Mailer Diablo 08:01, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support - looks like a good all-rounder. —Whouk (talk) 08:20, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support. Jay and Silent Bob as New Jersey patriots would support you too. - Darwinek 13:22, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support per answers to standard questions. Joelito 14:31, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support Jon Harald Søby 16:08, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support. I've often thought that the best shorthand for "good admin material" is "gets articles featured". The FA process requires a focus on article quality and the ability to take criticism on board and move forward with it in the most public of Wikipedia venues. The vandalism fighting is a bonus. - BanyanTree 16:20, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support No problems here. --Siva1979Talk to me 16:33, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support - Always writes succinct, useful edit summaries and is a keen RC patroller. --Knucmo2 21:44, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support, excellent editor, no worries Deizio 00:52, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support, great asset to the project. Royboycrashfan   01:01, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support per nom. Bucketsofg ✐ 02:39, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support never ran into him before, but looking over diff looks good --Deville (Talk) 04:01, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support, definitely. --Terence Ong 04:06, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support He's proven himself a brilliant editor - Patman2648 06:32, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Support fantastic editor, unlikely to screw things up. Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 07:39, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support If his work at peer review is anything to go by, he's a level-headed editor who should make a great admin. Oldelpaso 09:13, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support Excellent editor, excellent nominator. Xoloz 15:39, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Support per nom. — TKD::Talk 15:50, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support His help has been huge in WP:PR and WP:FAC and, frankly, I thought he was an admin already. :) RadioKirk talk to me 16:13, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Support per nom.--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:45, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support. Excellent editor. Give him a mop. (^'-')^ Covington 22:51, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Support --Jay(Reply) 22:55, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  43.   Support. --Randy Johnston 00:18, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  44. EXTREME SUPPORT excellent editor, even on non-technical topics (which I'm not so good at). Just another star in the night T | @ | C 00:48, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support, he seems to be OK. JIP | Talk 06:14, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support: --Bhadani 12:18, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Support No reason why not. Davewild 17:00, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Support as per Davewild --Mets501talk 17:44, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Strong Support. Good user interactions and outstanding content contributions (both in depth and range). And his answer to question #1 is perhaps the most refreshing I've seen—gold star for honesty. -- MarcoTolo 18:32, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Support. -- Kukini 21:52, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Support. -- ForestH2
  52. Support. --kingboyk 07:28, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Support =Nichalp «Talk»= 11:04, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  54. Support we can always use more RC patrollers who can use SD. --Bachrach44 15:55, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  55. Support, the user is an example for others. -- ReyBrujo 18:00, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  56. Support, excellent contributions, demonstrable understanding of what goes on here. Christopher Parham (talk) 05:19, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  57. Support, no reason why not to. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 06:08, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  58. Support good luck to you. Gryffindor 12:33, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  59. Support Just piling on at this point. --Bachrach44 18:57, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  60. Support. Looks like a good candidate. Jayjg (talk) 21:54, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  61. Support Meets my standards. Jonathan235 22:18, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  62. Support per above. —Khoikhoi 00:00, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  63. Support per nom. Good solid contributor, will be an even bigger asset to the project when he gets the mop. --Cactus.man ✍ 09:47, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  64. Support, looks good to me. --Alan Au 08:11, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  65. Support Good participation in admin-related activities, among other things. Jared W 11:12, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  66. Support Sarah Ewart (Talk) 13:21, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  67. Support almost 4000 edits, incuding template talk pages... how can anyone not support --T-rex 21:00, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Neutral

Comments 

Total edits 4120
Distinct pages edited 1706
Average edits/page 2.415
First edit 22:31, 28 September 2005
 
(main) 2068
Talk 342
User 189
User talk 535
Image 24
Template 49
Template talk 13
Category 8
Wikipedia 866
Wikipedia talk 26

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 too sure exactly what chores I plan on helping out with- I'll probably start with a wide range of sysop chores, including those listed on Category:Administrative backlog, and then narrowing them down to the ones I'm most comfortable with. I plan on helping out doing more recent change patrolling. I am aware that I only have 6 edits to WP:AIV, and if this request does succeed I'll probably still list repeatedly-vandalizing editors on WP:AIV for a while. Even with blocking privelidges, I would like to ensure that I will be fully comfortable with the blocking process before making a block. I might also help out on Did you know? (4 of my new articles were DYKs). Before, I also used to do a lot of new page patrolling, and will probably help out by speedy deleting new articles that fall under one of the Criteria for SD. As I have also begun to do more work on WP:AfD, I can also help out in closing AfDs. Finally (as of now), I might try helping around at Category:Images with no copyright tag, following guidelines at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/Instructions for administrators.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: Yes, I am most particularly pleased with the three featured articles I have significantly contributed to. When I first came to Wikipedia, I began working on articles like crista and Animal Farm, and after joining WP:NJ, I started working on the article History of New Jersey. I first came across the article as a short paragraph with POV statements and slightly irrelevant facts. In about 2 and a half weeks, virtually alone, I heavily expanded the article, adding references and important information. Along with several other WP:NJ members and Cmadler, I was able to bring the article up to featured article status, having done around 294 edits to the article. At around the same time, I helped with History of Miami, Florida by doing more copyediting to the article. As for Mount Rushmore, which I adopted during WP:USCOTW, I added a lot more content to the article, adding necessary inline citations and copyediting.
There were also a couple of unsuccessful featured article candidates that I did a lot of work on, including Native Americans in the United States (I started my work on the article rather late, but still managed to fix several of the objections on WP:FAC) and Photosynthetic reaction centre. Additionally, I have begun to do more work on WP:FARC, alone taking care of the removal comments for Crash test dummy. Along with several other editors like Ryz05, I also helped on PRC in WP:FARC, the site of several heated arguments. By adding over 30 WP:FOOTNOTEs and making other fixes, I took a major role in allowing the FA to retain its status. Among others, I also worked on History of Greenland and Ferdinand Magellan (the latter was removed).
Outside of the article namespace, I am also happy about my edits to Wikipedia namespace articles, like WP:FAC and WP:PR. Lately, I have become very active on WP:FAC and WP:PR, having made comments to around 129 FACs and 112 PRs so far. Additionally, I am the current maintener of WP:USCOTW, which I have maintained for about 3 months, and also unfortunately am the only major participant doing work to the actual USCOTWs. I also am an active member of WP:NJ, and started WP:NJCOTW (which as of now is inactive).
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 have had minor conflicts over the content of articles, but have not let my wikistress level rise over such conflicts. I frankly have never entered any edit wars as far as I can recall. At least as of my last 1,500 contributions, I have not had to make more than 2 reversions to any page over content disputes (not including vandalism, though to PRC one time I had one revert and a partial revert).
To cite an example of an interaction I have had with another user, I was recently reverted on the Washington, D.C. article by Gene Nygaard (see User_talk:AndyZ#Reverted_your_MOSNUM_edit). The comment at first I found slightly strong and accusatory; after reading it again though, I found it as a helpful note, and I reinstated my previous edit, along with the necessary change that Gene Nygaard brought up. (I responded civilly on Gene's talk page.)
In the future, I plan on continuing civility in response to any edit content disputes, and will not abuse administator privelidges on any such conflicts if they do happen.
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 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/AndyZ&oldid=1085560408"