Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Northenglish

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

Northenglish

Final(3/14/3) Ended 05:44, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Northenglish (talk · contribs) – Recently, I've been taking the "be bold" philosophy to heart, and I figure, what better way to be bold than to request for adminship? In all seriousness though, I joined Wikipedia in February, and since then have contributed as much as possible. (I am generally on every day.) I have participated in the Washington State Highways WikiProject, and have recently taken over as leader of that project during Rschen7754's absence. More recently, I have started a new (admittedly related) WikiProject for New Jersey routes (WP:NJSCR). I realize it appears that I have a single focus on Wikipedia, and for the most part this is true; however, when browsing pages outside the domain of transportation, I always keep an eye out for copyedits to be made or vandalism to be corrected. I also frequently peruse XFD discussions. I look forward to playing a bigger role in Wikipedia, although I understand if it's thought that it's not my time yet. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 20:33, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept my own nomination. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 21:17, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support

SupportMeets my criteria and a quick check of contribs doesn't reveal any red flags but does show consistent participation in xfD's. Eluchil404 21:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support participates in deletion discussions. Polonium 21:49, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. ugen64 00:38, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Oppose: A bit light on experience, but my main concern is this edit which is a bit uncivil. Continue your good work, and stay civil and you'll do ok on the next RfA. --Durin 21:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, lack of experience. Only been around for less than three months and less than 1000 edits. Roy A.A. 22:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Durin and Royboycrashfan. SushiGeek 22:11, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose less than 1k edits total, regardless of xFD activity and with due scepticism of editcountitis, I think more experience is in order. (unconcerned by diff provided by Durin, but not endorsing such language in all cases). Pete.Hurd 22:31, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Durin. 2 months too early. This Fire Burns.....Always 22:29, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not enough experience. TigerShark 22:39, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Please don't take this the wrong way, but you really do not have enough experience. 1000 edits is definitely somewhat of a minimum. Alphachimp ^talk 22:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not enough experience for an administrator, though the "be bold" line was very thoughtful and I think Northenglish is wise. Maybe after a few more months at this Northenglish will be ready. --Will Mak 050389 00:33, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lack of wiki-space edits suggests an unfamiliarity with wiki-process; also, minor civility concerns per Durin. Xoloz 01:04, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Simply not enough experience in many areas, per my criteria. You're on the right track though. And I admire your use of the word "swimmingly". Grand master ka 01:51, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose more exp required.--Andeh 02:15, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not enough experience. Besides, you don't need to be a sysop to write good articles. --Emc² (CONTACT ME) 02:17, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not enough experience. Try again in about 3 months time. --S iva1979^{Talk to me} 02:28, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose more experience. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 04:14, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

Neutral. Not quite enough experience. DarthVad e r 22:57, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - I trust that this user would do the right thing, but I'd like to see him on Wikipedia for a bit longer. Nice application of the Be Bold guideline, by the way. —this is messedr͏̈ocker (talk) 01:40, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral maybe too early. But pretty good-looking right now. --M1ss1ontom a rs2k4 ^{(T | C | @)} 04:43, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

All user's edit (looked over manually as well).Voice-of-All 22:36, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

--Viewing contribution data for user Northenglish (over the 837 edit(s) shown on this page)--  (FAQ)
Time range: 76 approximate day(s) of edits on this page
Most recent edit on: 22hr (UTC) -- 06, Jul, 2006 || Oldest edit on: 22hr (UTC) -- 21, April, 2006
Overall edit summary use (last 837 edits): Major edits: 88% Minor edits: 95.62%
Average edits per day: 23.24 (for last 500 edit(s))
Article edit summary use (last 390 edits) : Major article edits: 94.67% Minor article edits: 97.78%
Analysis of edits (out of all 837 edits shown of this page):
Notable article edits (creation/expansion/rewrites/sourcing): 0.36% (3)
Small article edits (small content/info/reference additions): 3.94% (33)
Superficial article edits (grammar/spelling/wikify/links/tagging): 35.96% (301)
Minor article edits marked as minor: 25.72%
Breakdown of all edits:
Unique pages edited: 374 | Average edits per page: 2.24 | Edits on top: 34.05%
Edits marked as major (non-minor/reverts): 68.46% (573 edit(s))
Edits marked as minor (non-reverts): 14.1% (118 edit(s))
Marked reverts (reversions/text removal): 6.69% (56 edit(s))
Unmarked edits: 10.04% (84 edit(s))
Edits by Wikipedia namespace:
Article: 46.59% (390) | Article talk: 9.2% (77)
User: 1.79% (15) | User talk: 5.02% (42)
Wikipedia: 21.86% (183) | Wikipedia talk: 12.66% (106)
Image: 0.24% (2)
Template: 1.43% (12)
Category: 1.08% (9)
Portal: 0.12% (1)
Help: 0% (0)
MediaWiki: 0% (0)
Other talk pages: 0% (0)

See Northenglish's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool
See Northenglish's edit counts from Interoit's Tool 2

Username	Northenglish
Total edits	832
Distinct pages edited	411
Average edits/page	2.024
First edit	22:10, April 21, 2006
	
(main)	390
Talk	77
User	15
User talk	40
Image	2
Template	12
Category	9
Wikipedia	180
Wikipedia talk	106
Portal	1

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: My personal preference is monitoring/participating in/closing XFD debates. I don't know why, I simply enjoy participating in them given my current status, and would enjoy playing a different role in these debates. I am also already active in keeping a watch out for vandalism, and will of course continue to do so.

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

A: My recent merge of List of 500-series county routes in New Jersey and List of 600-series county routes in New Jersey into County routes in New Jersey, followed by my creation of the New Jersey State and County Routes WikiProject have gone swimmingly. When I left two lines out of the merge, SPUI was there to pick up the slack, and was adapted {{infobox_road}} for use in the WikiProject.

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: Shortly after I became involved in the Washington WikiProject, a move war that had started in another WikiProject spread to Washington. I became involved in the debate, but refrained from participating in any edit warring. I then voluntarily added myself as a party to the resulting Arbcom case in order to continue to play an active role in the debate. Towards the end of the debate, I gave SPUI an olive branch in the form of a smile in an effort to patch up the bad blood that had brewed in the community as a result of the Arbcom case.

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.