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

Slakr[edit]

Final (54/0/0); Originally scheduled to end 09:00, 13 December 2007 (UTC). Nomination successful. --Deskana (talk) 12:23, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Slakr (talk · contribs) - Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you Slakr. I bumped into this user while reverting vandalism - my favorite way to find administrator candidates. Slakr has been a prolific editor with the project since May of this year, giving him a solid six month tenure in which he has amassed 2600+ mainspace edits and 7700+ overall. He contributes widely throughout the project, achieving impressive depth and breadth of involvement. He is an outstanding vandal fighter, with hundreds of reports to WP:AIV. He has a solid record at Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention, Wikipedia:Requests for page protection, WP:AFD, and many other areas as well. You can easily see from his Talk page that his interactions with users are polite and well-reasoned. Last, and by no means least, Slakr is the author of Sinebot, the incredibly useful helper of the forgetful.

Please join me in giving Slakr the mop so he can start blocking, protecting, and deleting instead of just making reports. Spike Wilbury ♫ talk 04:13, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

Lol, I totally forgot to accept. :P "I accept." --slakr\ talk / 09:16, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Questions for the candidate[edit]

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?
A: The stuff I'm most familiar with is reverting vandalism, AIV and overall article-oriented deletion (CSD/PROD/AFD).
I love recent changes patrol, because there's always something new. I'm going to acknowledge the vandals for a moment and state simply: there has not been a week that has gone by where I haven't stumbled across vandalism that has made me truly laugh out loud— it's better than paying to go to a comedy club. When it comes to AIV, I have a similar random sleep schedule to Can't sleep, clown will eat me (i.e., it's always funky). As a result, I tend to be awake'n'active when it seems as though nobody else is around to help clear off backlogs. Plus, I tend to stick around for the school vandal rush that seems to start around 10-12am UTC. I explicitly remember one time with another admin when it was basically him and me, the AIV page had what looked like a dozen or so reports, and I was reverting'n'warning like crazy while he was grabbing the blocks on the ones I'd reported. It was perhaps one of the most fun and intense times I've ever had on here :D
CSD-wise, I should have quite a bunch of CSD taggings over in deleted contribs (for those who are admins). Which, actually, that reminds me, it would be much easier to check for bad page creates on a user instead of relying on the history others' ((nn-warn)), ((db-attack)), etc talk page warnings or bugging someone on IRC to compare a suspected AFD recreate.
I don't really do too much over at AFD when it comes to controversial deletions; instead, I prefer to stay relatively neutral and defer to consensus or simply add comments of any data I find (particularly if I don't know a lot about a topic). So, at least for the foreseeable future, if I were to close any, it'd be when there's clear consensus and leave the tougher ones to the more experienced admins.
When I think about it I dive into the protected pages list to locate semied pages without extensive vandalism histories in order to try unprotecting them— especially if they're on otherwise-random-but-important-but-not-well-known subjects which would be expected to be generally enhanced by anons (as opposed to being frequently vandalized by them).
Also, I have interest in 3RR, and I very recently made a little tool to make it easier to harvest 3RR reporting info by dumping contribs to a page by a user. I'll probably end up making one that's prettier and smarter for the general public to use, and when I start verifying reports by others, I'll undoubtedly expand it to help with that.
I recently started hunting down vandal redirects that have evaded deletion using my other tool. Finally, I'd also like to be able to fill valid requests for changing fully-protected templates, especially on those minor changes for which you want to bug someone, but at the same time you don't want to bug someone because it's so minor (if that makes any sense :P).


2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: A strangely tough question, as it requires a lot of reflection. :P Off-hand, I'd say SineBot is the most readily-visible one that I continually develop. I'm also working on the PHP Wikipedia Bot Framework for allowing people an alternative to PyWikipedia that uses api.php almost exclusively.
I like helping out on some of the controversial topics, too. So far, the most notable one was splitting Race (classification of human beings) into an article series, since it had become clear that it was suffering from main article fixation and desperately needed splitting; but, at the same time, it was filled with tons of controversy, so it needed someone who neither cared about nor had a point of view on the topic itself. So, I especially enjoyed the challenge of keeping everything as NPOV as possible. At its peak, the main article was around 170,000 bytes long, which made the article size guideline cry. Now, it's around 55,000 bytes long. In the process, I created the ((Race)) article series template, as well. I also developed Talk:Abortion/FAQ after much archive digging, and most recently I made ((Censor)) for talk pages prone to people complaining about the content of Penis (et al) without knowing about not censoring for children. I was particularly proud of the last one (despite how trivial it is) because I normally suck at making things aesthetically pretty. :P
Sadly, I've never really had the desire to actually sit down and synthesize brand spankin' new articles. I rewrote a psychology one a while back that needed some loving just to see if I enjoyed it, but I honestly can't say that I love to do so. I'm much more of the fiction/just-for-fun/artistic writer (e.g., this thing I wrote after observing some Talk: page discussions), so it seems that I'll probably just stay behind-the-scenes for now and try to help everyone else agree on stuff. :)


3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
A: Yes and no. I've disagreed about various things, but I normally just go with the flow. I'll edit a page, or revert an edit once; and, if someone disagrees, I'll simply post to the talk page and ask why. Similarly, if someone doesn't understand why I did something, I always calmly explain my reasoning, and if I realize that I made a mistake, I'll gladly apologize and fix any possible damage. I definitely don't get stressed out; but, instead, I'll generally just make fun of myself, shrug it off, and go find something else to do, because it seems, at least to me, like a total waste of time to argue ad nauseam on most subjects.
My only semi-pet peeve is people who set the wiki defcon thinggy at 1, because I check it throughout the day when I'm bored, and, if I see it that high, I rush to the cause— only to find that it's level 3 at best. :P
Anyway, hopefully this isn't too long. In the spirit of the wiki, feel free to edit it down as needed, split into new pages, etc. :D Cheers =) --slakr\ talk / 08:49, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

General comments[edit]

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Slakr before commenting.

Discussion[edit]

It was funny at the time. I think I was led to his talkpage after visiting Sinebot's. DlaeThe Freudian Slip 17:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support[edit]
  1. Beat the nom strong support - I tend to block Slakr's reports to WP:AIV on sight. I see no reason not to allow him to now skip that step and block the sods himself. Good luck. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:09, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support Nominator made all the most pertinent arguments. Great vandal fighter, created possibly the most prevalent bot on the project (aside perhaps from Cluebot) and is a great overall contributor. Participates all over the encyclopedia, though I would like to see a greater percentage of his edits go to mainspace. Should make a top-drawer admin. :) (Damn, almost first) faithless (speak) 09:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support - Strong user, steady contributions, probably won't go nuts with the extra buttons, more than ready for adminship. --Bongwarrior (talk) 09:19, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support - would make a superb sysop. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 09:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Strong support, quite strongly. I completely trust Slakr's judgement. Spebi 09:22, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Oppose Created Sodding Sine Bot. Mind you, you do participate all over the place, you're not afraid to edit some contentious articles, and I see no issues with your identifying vandalism or poor content. I did note a couple of discussions on your talk page regarding warnings, and although they were legitimate "complaints" you handled them well. Pedro :  Chat  09:51, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support, I've seen your helpful edits around, we could use an active sysop like you. {^_^} Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 09:58, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Strong support, will make an excellent admin. --Oxymoron83 10:13, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support - :)..--Cometstyles 11:26, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support —Preceding unsigned comment added by Neil (talk • contribs) 12:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support User runs a mostly useful bot, and appears to be qualified in other areas too. Redrocketboy 12:47, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support as nominator! --Spike Wilbury ♫ talk 12:53, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support No problems here. A good user. --Siva1979Talk to me 13:07, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support - sure. You've demonstrated from both your edits and answers that you actually need the extra tools. — Rudget speak.work 15:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support - slakr is one of the users I've "seen around the place". Sure, we can trust him. :) Nihiltres{t.l} 16:26, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support. Excellent vandal fighter. I always see "IRC user Slakr" of vandalism information. J-ſtanTalkContribs 18:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support Sure sure! Looks good. :) GlassCobra 18:29, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Strong support. Inventor of ((Censor)) and Sinebot. Excellent answers to the questions. Vandal-fighter. Wow. Bearian (talk) 20:30, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Strong Support - Excellent User and a Perfect Prospective Admin. PookeyMaster (talk) 23:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Arbeit Sockenpuppe (talk) 23:45, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support. Good work with Sinebot. Malinaccier (talk • contribs) 00:09, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Miranda 00:53, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support – Despite being absent-minded as every person should be. :-P —Animum § 00:57, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support. Greg Jones II 01:49, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support — You were such a good user that at one point I thought you were one! -Goodshoped 02:11, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support No issues here, I have seen this user contribute to ANI before. NHRHS2010 talk 03:08, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support - Seen his vandal-fighting. Shouldn't have any problems with the mop and bucket. The Chronic 03:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support. AIV is still getting backlogged, believe it or not. I hope you're ready with your mop, there best be "no slaking!" Jack?! 03:59, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Excellent vandal fighter. :) Maser (Talk!) 04:21, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support big time! Great vandal fighting, cool under pressure, good article work, very familiar with policies. Generally a wonderful person. I know this because I've been looking through his contribs and stuff in the past few days, was going to offer to nom him myself. Snoose you lose, I guess :) delldot talk 05:19, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support Excellent user, knows policy well--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 23:33, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support. I absolutely loathe the spawn of HagermanBot he's responsible for unleashing on this project. But he's still a dedicated and experienced user, and very mopworthy. :) --krimpet⟲ 06:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support. Good contributor. -- Mentifisto 08:35, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Strong support Once you get that admin rollback bit slakr, you won't complain so much that I beat you to the revert. ;) KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 16:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Support sounds good; (Sinebot is mostly an excellent bot). Johnbod (talk) 19:23, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support. Despite his username, this user is not. Useight (talk) 02:41, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support Have seen this user around, good contributor, seems trustworthy and they have a need for tools.--Sandahl 01:25, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Support User knows his way around the Wiki. -- Cheers, LAX 15:13, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support Good vandal fighter and good answer to questions albeit detailed. --WriterListener (talk) 20:55, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  40. OMG I hatez teh sinebotz...but I luvz this user. — Dihydrogen Monoxide 01:40, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support - Strong editor. Lara_Love Talk 04:33, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Support Diligent, hard-working vandal-fighter; deserves the mop. Master of Puppets Care to share? 03:34, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Support Strong editor, with a fairly good range of edits. No reason not to. Woody (talk) 19:19, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Support will be a good admin. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:39, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support -should be just fine - Alison ❤ 00:04, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support - Contributions seem good, as well as the nom. Cirt (talk) 02:57, 12 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
  47. Support. Investigation reveals he's a great candidate. – Quadell (talk) (random) 04:13, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Support I have had the pleasure of occasional interaction with Slakr, and he has always been exceedingly polite, kind, and helpful to me. I assisted in some testing of SineBot (a bot that I really appreciate) and Slakr was quite helpful in identifying and explaining the problems I saw. (As well as fixing them!) With regards to vandalism fighting, I've bumped into him more than a few times during the course of my RC patrolling, (shall we dance?) and I've never once seen him loose his cool, or act with anything other than professionalism. With nearly 500 edits to AIV, it is obvious that Slakr has a firm grasp of policy and procedure, and I have no doubt that the administrators reviewing AIV have confidence in Slakr's reports there. Obviously, his experience here would be a valuable addition to the project. I think his essay NWEBH is a great example of his sense of humor, which I truly believe is an important part of a voluntary project like this. Humor helps diffuse conflict, and can prevent unnecessary escalation of debate, and foster collaboration. I also realize that there are those who believe that extensive article writing and creating, is a pre-requisite for administrators, but I would tend to agree with Slakr, we are all different, with different interests, talents, and expertise. It is precisely this great variety in the community that makes it so successful, there are those who are excellent at writing content, and there are those who specialize in the more behind-the-scenes work, with regards to formatting, or adding citations, or organizing articles for readability, etc. This is a good thing, and Slakr should be respected for his dedication and excellent work, even if some of it is not obvious to many readers. I truly believe that Wikipedia would benefit from the addition of Slakr to the current administrative team, and I have no doubts that when confronted with areas unfamiliar to him, he will seek out those more experienced, or defer to another administrator, rather than taking actions he's not comfortable with. Ariel♥Gold 04:16, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Didn't realise I hadn't added my name to the support party yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Riana (talk • contribs) 07:09, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Support. Experienced and trusted user. utcursch | talk 08:31, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Support Reverted 9503 edits by Slakr to last to last revision by Slakr (Administrator). ▪◦▪≡SiREX≡Talk 17:11, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Great user. Acalamari 21:26, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Snowolf How can I help? supports this candidate for adminship, as he is confident that this user won't do anything stupid with the tools (added on 01:11, 13 December 2007 (UTC))[reply]
  54. Support. Looking through this candidate's contributions, I can see that this editor will certainly not misuse them and if he continues with vandalfighting can miss the middleman (WP:AIV). Littleteddy (talk) 01:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose[edit]
Neutral[edit]
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