Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Cocoaguy

Questions for the candidate

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: Mostly Vandal fighting, the protection of articles, and other admin only vandal fighting tools. Though the ability to block will be light and i will try to "convert" vandals or experimenting users to constructive editors. Also i will hope to do image and article clean up.

2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

A: My best contributions were to the Salem Witch Trials Task Force (which i founded with Psdubow am now co-chair of) and to the James McCune Smith article.

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, i have always kept a cool head on wikipedia and all the problems i was involved with ended smothly.

General comments

• See Cocoaguy's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

• Links for Cocoaguy: Cocoaguy (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)

Please keep criticism constructive and polite. Remain civil at all times. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Cocoaguy before commenting.

Discussion

Support

1. Support--U.S.A. (talk contribs) 23:11, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
2. Moral Support A good editor with great potential. Good luck, Dfrg.msc 00:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose Your work on James McCune Smith consisted of adding a couple of headers; if this is really your best mainspace edit, I don't feel you've enough article-writing experience to support. As I've said elsewhere, if you haven't experienced for yourself just how hard it can be creating valid content, I don't think a sysop can empathise with editors who are having their material deleted/reverted. If you can provide some more substantial mainspace diffs, I'll be willing to reconsider — iridescent (talk to me!) 23:15, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
2. Oppose - per iridescent. Start doing more than just adding infoboxes to articles, and I'll be happy to support. --Agüeybaná 23:24, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
3. Oppose per a lack of experience and the terse answers here. VanTucky ^Talk 23:45, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
4. Oppose. Just get some more experience with major editing. •Malinaccier• ^T/C 00:13, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
5. Oppose All you need is more experience, and try again later on. Jmlk17 00:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
6. Oppose More experience needed with article writing. -Lemonflash_{(do something)} 00:32, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
7. Strong oppose for unilateral moves, like to Hurricane Jeanne, a retired hurricane which should not have a year disambiguator. You need to learn to discuss things and not do them unilaterally. – Chacor 02:45, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
8. Oppose per Chacor. I'd gladly support later if you learn to discuss before performing controversial actions, as well as get more experience in various areas related to policy (as well as article space). --Coredesat 03:11, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Neutral while he has some good edits and good edit count, I can see iridescent's point. I'm a maybe. Bearian 00:34, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

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.