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


NCurse[edit]

Final (91/1/4) Ended 14:41, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

NCurse (talk · contribs) – It's my pleasure to nominate NCurse for adminship. In addition to being an admin on the Hungarian Wikipedia and creating the Hungarian Wikiquote, since May he's racked up some 4000 edits on the English Wikipedia. During that time he's taken Portal:Medicine up to featured status, and co-ordinates Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine and Wikipedia:Science collaboration of the month, amongst other things. He helps out new users[1] and reverts vandalism[2] (with appropriate warnings[3]). Being a newpage patroller,[4] he's certainly got a need for the tools. As an admin on another project, he's got experience dealing with difficult users, and can keep his head,[5] even when other editors lose theirs.[6] Let's be realistic here: NCurse has the basic level of trust required (a lot more than that, in fact) and previous experience as an admin. He's demonstrated dedication to this project with his featured portal and willingness and ability to co-ordinate wikiprojects. I can't think of any reason why he wouldn't be an extremely productive administrator.

-- Steel 12:29, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Co-nomination.
I had long hoped to be the one to nominate NCurse, but then he went looking for Admin coaching... darn. Anyway, I met NCurse while nominating Portal:Medicine, and have come to know him as a very gentle, kind and cheerful person. Furthermore, he'd make a great admin because:
  1. He loves to clear backlogs (for real!).
  2. He's very motivated and always willing to help.
  3. He spots ways of making himself useful then boldly kicks into action (e.g. when he redesigned :WikiProject Medicine).
--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 02:16, 1 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
I accept the nomination. NCurse work 12:33, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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 do you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog and Category:Administrative backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
A: I love removing backlogs. I shortpage and newpage patrol already, so CAT:CSD would be an obvious place I could lend a hand. I'd like to help more on Requested moves, stubs (I'm active member of Stub sorting project), WP:CFD and WP:RFI. Several times, I tried to help in debates [8]), as an admin, it'd be much easier to help if needed.
On enwiki, I've participated in about 1-2 dozens of AfDs. I must say as an admin on hungarian Wikipedia (since February), I had time to learn how to handle deletion tasks (you can see this on User:NCurse/Admin coaching). There were times when I had to close every kind of votes regularly (AfD, Speedy deletions, Images and Copyright violations). I know the policies, just after about a half thousand voting processes, I didn't start to participate more seriously here. NCurse work 12:45, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I'm really proud of Medicine portal which became featured after User:Stevenfruitsmaak and me started to work on it hard. I work so much on Medical genetics and Medicine wikiprojects (assessments take time), then coordinating Medicine and Science collaboration of the month means a big deal too.
I've contributed the most to the Melanoma article, mainly when it had a peer review. [9] I've found plenty of references for the article, and uploaded 4 images with the proper tags (see above). I requested permission from the American Academy of Dermatology , and it seems now that I'll get more permissions for other images to upload (I recently got the positive answer from Danita Smith, the coordinator of their webpage). I'd like it to become WP:FA in weeks.
My most respected contribution was awarded with a barnstar [10] for reorganizing Medicine WikiProject from this [11] to this [12] version. NCurse work 12:45, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[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 have one conflict with User:Khaj on Melanoma talk page. Maybe not the best reference, but on the hungarian Wikipedia, I've had the possibility to deal with nearly every kind of vandals and conflict-makers. The community there is small so one bad, evil user can ruin the whole mood. No one can make me nervous or frustrated. No one can make me surprised. Just see my anon warnings, I never talk or answer "loudly". So now, after one year of using Wikipedia I can say honestly, I can deal with any kind of vandals. NCurse work 12:45, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Question from Centrx
4. Can you point to some article contributions?
A: For example I've created Chromosome banding, American College of Medical Genetics or PSN2 gene. Some of my contributions are [13], [14], [15], [16]. NCurse work 20:12, 1 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
General comments

Discussion (for expressing views without numbering)

Support

  1. Support - an excellent and valuable contributor whom I have worked closely with on medical projects. Helpful, courteous, will do a great job as an admin! InvictaHOG 12:55, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Support. I've been impressed with NCurse's dedication to the medical area of the project and have no hesitation in supporting his RfA. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 13:07, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. Support Have full confidence that NCurse would be a great admin, from what I've seen of this user. --Aude (talk) 13:13, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  4. Support per Aude. Addhoc 13:50, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  5. Support per Aude. íslenskur fellibylur #12 (samtal) 13:59, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  6. Support I have nothing to add. Rock on. -- Kicking222 14:39, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  7. Support been a co-admin on huwiki for 6 months now, worked with him 10 months, a perfect admin, sometimes a workaholic editor. Wikipedia will find a new asset in him. --Burumbator 14:45, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  8. Support wholeheartedly, he's an excellent admin on Hungarian Wikipedia & Hungarian Uncyclopedia, always helpful and can keep a cool head; and he is also a valuable contributor both here and on HuWiki. Plus he has a good sense of humour. :) – Alensha  talk 14:44, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  9. Very Strong Support per nom. Rama's arrow 15:00, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  10. Support we've been co-admins for several months and I always wondered his calmness, patience and the workload he is able to cope with. Excellent choice :) - Serinde 15:09, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  11. Support per nom. Michael 15:24, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  12. Support. Being both friendly and technically capable since our first encounter, I have been amazed with the huge amount of work NCurse does for the Wikipedia projects to which he contributes, and had assumed he was an admin on en from the outset. In particular he has been singlehandedly responsible for establishing the medical genetics Wikiproject and I feel his successful adminship would further assist his work on this Wikiproject as well as the Wikiproject medicine. --apers0n 15:25, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  13. Support per nom. Very civil and would use admin tools well. Hello32020 15:52, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  14. Support He's a hard-working, dedicated editor and admin. AttishOculus 15:59, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  15. Support Another excellent candidate for adminship. (aeropagitica) 16:04, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  16. Support per nom; excellent contributor in every respect. Kirill Lokshin 16:21, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  17. Support per nom. Looks incredibly qualified to me. Dina 16:46, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  18. Support - one of the few sane people on huwiki. // Gargaj 17:25, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  19. Support. - Mailer Diablo 17:28, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  20. Support: He is one of the two best admins on Hungarian Wikipedia (and good admin&contributor in other projects, too). No doubt. ♥♥♥: Gubb  ✍    2006. September 30 17:51 (CEST) 17:51, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  21. Awesome Hungarian Support. A very established editor in his own right. He has the capabilities, intelligence and experience to be an excellent administrator on the English Wikipedia. --Nishkid64 17:54, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  22. Support A proven user who is unlikely to abuse admin tools. --Siva1979Talk to me 18:05, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  23. Strong Support I've had nothing but great experiences interacting with NCurse. He'll make a great addition to our admin corps. alphaChimp(talk) 18:12, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  24. Support per above. —Khoikhoi 18:18, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  25. Strong Support - per all the above --T-rex 18:31, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  26. Support --VinceB 19:44, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  27. Support. I've seen plenty of positive contributions from NCurse and no negative or questionable ones.--ragesoss 21:15, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  28. Support, scores 21 on my admin assessment scale. Keep on rollin' -- Lego@lost Rocks Collide! 22:15, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  29. Support great organizer and prolific contributor. Opabinia regalis 21:30, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  30. Support great contributor. I have seen him before and he does a great job as a wikipedian. Also, he has experience as an adminin other wikis. --Esteban F. (contribs) 22:17, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  31. Support Hardworking, knowledgeable, pleasant, will make a great admin. Sandy 22:36, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  32. Beat the nom! --Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 22:40, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  33. Support only good, no bad. Istvan 22:56, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  34. You know I completely forgot that I'm supposed to support this. -- Steel 23:15, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  35. Support. I have never run into this user in my editing, but the contributions look good, and the answers are just fine. Good luck! Firsfron of Ronchester 23:49, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  36. Support looks like a good candidate.-- danntm T C 01:31, 1 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  37. Support.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 02:16, 1 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  38. SupportJoshuaZ 02:50, 1 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  39. Support definitely. Level-headed and contributes well -- Samir धर्म 05:49, 1 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  40. Support. Easily meets my criteria for the work on the English Wikipedia ALONE! Minor grammar mistakes don't concern me, the meaning always seems clear, which is all that matters. Grandmasterka 05:54, 1 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  41. Support - meets criteria and yeah, I know this is a pile on but I'm making it -- Tawker 05:56, 1 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  42. Support - a good candidate.-- thunderboltz(Deepu) 06:25, 1 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  43. Support --Terence Ong (T | C) 10:43, 1 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  44. Support Good editor, will make good use of the tools.--Húsönd 17:36, 1 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  45. Support He's been one of the most active contributors and an excellent admin in the Hungarian Wikipedia, and he has been rather active here as well. I have no idea where finds the time to do all this simultaneously, but I have no doubt that he is qualified. --DHanak :-V 20:26, 1 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  46. Support per above (although with a heavy heart, because that means he will have less time on huwiki :,-) --Tgr 20:29, 1 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  47. Support - Nyikita 21:07, 1 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  48. Support seems to be an intelligent, hard-working, valuable contributor. That, and some Magyar pride, makes me vote for NCurse! :) K. Lastochka 22:11, 1 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  49. Merovingian - Talk 23:41, 1 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  50. Support. Seems completely trustworthy and is obviously qualified. Markovich292 23:44, 1 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  51. Support. Good answers and demonstrated need of sysop tools. Plus, anyone who loves clearing backlogs should really get the mop. -- Merope Talk 00:34, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  52. Support positive experiences with him Jaranda wat's sup 01:02, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  53. Strong support. His dedication to the encyclopedia, as well as his positive demeanor, can be grasped from the amount of work he has dedicated to WP:1.0. No doubts here whatsoever. Titoxd(?!?) 01:08, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  54. Support. A good article writer, among other things. -- RM 01:55, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  55. Support. A good all-around editor, and has done a lot of good work for medical articles, especially now that I've been too busy to maintain MCOTW. — Knowledge Seeker দ 02:44, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  56. Support. Based on his work in the Hungarian Wikipedia, the English one will only get richer if you accept him as admin.. Cunya 06:30, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  57. Support. I know his activity on the Hungarian Wikipedia and I trust him. --Hkoala HU 09:33, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  58. Support. Good user - well worthy of adminship on en:Wikipedia. --Skenmy(talk)|(news) 12:07, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  59. Support – fantastic user, should be an asset to en. — riana_dzasta wreak havoc|damage report 13:52, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  60. Igen. --Kbdank71 19:37, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  61. The language thing will come. Right now we have a potential admin who can be trusted with his tools. Do it, NCurse! JFW | T@lk 20:58, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  62. Support  Doctor Bruno  21:59, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  63. Support per above comments. RFerreira 22:02, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  64. Support - Canderous Ordo 22:15, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  65. Support seems ok. --Mcginnly | Natter 23:36, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  66. Support - Why the hell not? --Aaron 01:36, 3 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  67. Support - already thought he was an admin! --plange 06:41, 3 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  68. Support - A good editor. would do better with a good sense of homour though, seems a little plain. TehKewl1 12:41, 3 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  69. Support - I didn't want to be one in the "million" supporters, but seeing the signpost, I thought I should help him get at least a hundred support votes. Also, more importantly, I think this enhance interwiki cooperation between the Hungarian and English Wikipedia in a way that with him being a single user couldn't be achieved. --Dami 17:04, 3 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  70. Support. Great work in Medicine Portal, Medicine WikiProject, and related articles. Should do great work with the tools. -AED 00:21, 4 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  71. Support. A bit weak in article creation, perhaps, but balanced by useful coordinating work at the Medicine portal and elsewhere. Espresso Addict 02:56, 4 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  72. Support --WS 14:04, 4 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  73. Support per nom. Anger22 19:05, 4 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  74. Support. Don't see any real issues. Jayjg (talk) 22:48, 4 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  75. Strong support - Prior experience. - Stephanie Daugherty (Triona) - Talk - Comment - 10:33, 5 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  76. Support - He does an enourmous job in the Hungarian Wiki and is a strong leader. I think he's absolutely the rigth choice to become an admin in any of the wikis (of course language knowledge is a must and his English is OK, IMHO) --Teemeah Gül Bahçesi 11:50, 5 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  77. Support. Fvasconcellos 15:08, 5 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  78. Support per Teemeah --Ageo020 (talk • contribs • count) 20:18, 5 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  79. Support. MaxSem 21:44, 5 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  80. Support he's not an admin already?? Wikipediarules2221 23:51, 5 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  81. Support loves removing backlogs? Give him the buttons! hoopydinkConas tá tú? 03:13, 6 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  82. Support A little Project-heavy, but projects drive brilliant prose, love to have help with ((adminbacklog))'s! — xaosflux Talk 05:27, 6 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  83. Support. Per "Lengyel Magyar két jó barát, eggyütt harcol s issza borát." :) and per his great Wikipedia edits. - Darwinek 10:26, 6 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  84. Support. Great nom, great answers, great editor. I've not run into this editor before but I have no doubt their adminship will help the project.-- Deville (Talk) 11:04, 6 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  85. Support per what he intends to do as an admin. --Alex (Talk) 13:39, 6 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  86. Support. Jon Harald Søby 14:25, 6 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  87. Support - Mainspace edits are a bit less, but I know how much time goes in maintaining projects and portals. His being an admin on another wiki is a bonus. - Aksi_great (talk) 18:47, 6 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  88. Support Delta Tango | Talk 20:45, 6 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  89. Support per nom. Sors bona 21:56, 6 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  90. Support No, worries. Thanks for your work on medical topics. FloNight 05:48, 7 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  91. Support—another fine administrator coming. Williamborg (Bill) 06:13, 7 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose

  1. Oppose. This user was not very friendly with me on my first encounter and pushed his opinions rather forcefully. It seemed if you don't agree with his ideas for portals or make yours *just like* the medicine one, even it doens't make sense, you get an earful. While he seems to be improving, I don't think he's ready for adminship. I'm shocked so many people have supported him and I'm sorry 944 mainspace edits is not nearly enough for him to have a good understanding of what goes on. The not so great English doens't help either. Perfect English is not required, but it sure helps one hell of a lot to be able to explain things well when the subtle nuances of your admin decisions need to be explained. I just can't see where this is a good idea. pschemp | talk 03:49, 7 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Neutral

  1. Seems like a great user, but 944 mainspace edits out of 4071 isn't really very much. Also doesn't seem to have a very firm grasp on English, as demonstrated by adding s to the end of words (1-2 dozens of AfDs) and the lack of words like an and the in his answers to the questions.  Jorcoga  03:51, 1 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Well, I guess there are users who just write articles all the time and users who are more interested in other things. NCurse works with WikiProjects a lot, that might explain why his Wikipedia-namespace count is so high -but that's a plus, no?
    His English is far from perfect, but more than sufficient for admin tasks, in my opinion.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 23:42, 1 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    A1 level english is not required for admin tasks. Trust me on this.Geni 00:34, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Answer to Steven Fruitsmaak: It is good to have a high Wikipedia namespace count, I'll admit that. I'm more interested in the maintenance side of things, but at least my mainspace count (even if it is low, but you don't see me running for adminship(I'd get withdrawn within the first hour or so)) is higher than all my other counts(which it should be). Answer to Geni: My point is, people who use this as a reference only (meaning can't see the little edit tag) are going to look at his article edits and think, what a substandard resource. I'm never going to use this again. This could drive away potential contributors.
    Jorcoga: As Steven said my English is far from perfect but I'll give more attention to the words like an and the as you mentioned above. I know well that I'm much more an organizer than an article contributor. You can see some of my contributions above (answer to Q4). After writing nearly 200 articles about genetics, medicine in Hungarian, I've found everything here and realized that I could organize things better. Anyway I wrote PSN2, then I plan to create more gene related articles. NCurse work 13:46, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Well you can't both dismiss him for the quality of his English and for the lack of mainspace edits. I think it shows that he is aware of his limitations. Different admins can help in different ways. The question should be: is his subpar knowledge of English going to lead him to be counter-productive as an admin. If you're only concern is that he won't be as productive as other admins then I don't see why this would pose any problem. Pascal.Tesson 17:37, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Oh, come on. His English is not perfect, but I can't recall a single time when I didn't understand what he was trying to say. I'm also interested in what this has to do with his ability to clear out our image backlogs. -- Steel 17:41, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    NCurse: Youi are a great editor. That's exactly why the oppose section is blank. PSN2, however is not whatI expected. It is a stub that Is extremely complicated. Pascal.Tesson: I never said he wouldn't be productive. A decent knowledge of English should be needed to contribute to an English encyclopedia. Steel: Read my answer to Geni.  Jorcoga  04:06, 3 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Neutral per Jorcoga. I'm a bit concerned, but I'm not concerned enough that I'm going to oppose. 1ne 05:02, 1 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. Neutral per my criteria. Themindset 23:49, 1 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    He falls short of your criteria by whopping 20 edits. Please explain how he'll be more capable as an admin then as opposed to now. -- Steel 09:23, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    It is explained in my criteria, which is wikilinked above. Themindset 18:48, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I have now 1022 mainspace edits and I've been here for more than 6 months, I've been using Wikipedia for more than a year now. NCurse work 18:55, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  4. Neutral per Jorcoga and Mindset. A promising choice, but language skills and edit summaries (important) need improvement. --Slgr@ndson (page - messages - contribs) 19:01, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[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.
Category