Wikiwand AI

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Jauerback

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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

Jauerback

Final (38/0/0); Closed as successful by WjBscribe at 01:45, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Jauerback (talk · contribs) - I would like to introduce my first RFA nomination, Jauerback. I crossed paths with him somewhat recently and looked into his contribs and statistics, which I found excellent. I was stunned when I learned that he wasn't an admininstrator and even more stunned when he told me he'd never given a second thought to an RFA. I was very confident that he was definitely qualified for adminship, but we ran through a quick admin coaching as a warm up. Jauerback has an excellent handle on policies and procedures, and tons of experience: over 8500 total edits with 4000 to the mainspace, several hundred deleted contribs, and an astounding 188 reports to AIV. Jauerback has been an excellent asset to the Wikipedia community and will be even more valuable as an administrator. Useight (talk) 22:54, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
Wow, I wasn't expecting this great of a write-up. Thank you, I accept. Jauerback (talk) 01:46, 19 January 2008 (UTC)


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: Currently, I tend to spend most of my time on Wikipedia fighting vandalism. While most Admins are rightfully proud of their mop, if granted Admin status, I would probably get more use out of a toilet brush. I started out fighting vandalism by hand, however after I finally clicked on the link for VandalProof after seeing it in edit summaries a few hundred times, I switched. But... after I accidently gave Oxymoron83 a vandalism warning, I stumbled across (and promptly stole first and asked permission second) his hybrid of Twinkle, Popups, and Lupin (that I believe he got from DerHexer) and have been using it ever since.
Going hand in hand with issuing proper vandalism warnings, I would block when appropriate and monitor WP:ANI to ensure that others have been properly warned (and are indeed vandalizing) before taking action. WP:UAA will also be monitored for inappropriate usernames.
I also monitor new pages and would delete any pages that fit the criteria for speedy deletion.
I would start paying even more attention to AFD, because lately I've only participated in discussions when I stumbled across something while monitoring Lupin, or on a whim.
Whether I become an admin or not, I also would like to participate more in aspects of WP:FC; specifically, WP:FA and WP:FP. Although, it's probably a good idea to get my feet wet in WP:GA, first.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I've created a few articles, but most of them are still considered stubs. Unfortunately, none have been even submitted to WP:GA status. Well, that's not entirely true. I did submit Weber-Stephen Products Co. to GA, but I withdrew it within a few minutes when I realized that I was being overzealous and that it really didn't meet the criteria. This is probably my best article, but it's nothing to brag about, really. However, I'd like to think that it shows that I have somewhat of an idea on what I'm doing. One thing that burns me about this article is that I found out weeks later that "Did you know..." articles had to be newly created (<= 5 days). I think "Did you know... that the classic Weber kettle grill (pictured) was invented by cutting a bouy in half and then fashioning it into a dome shaped grill with a rounded lid?" That would would have been perfect. Oh, well...
Although I didn't initially create it, I did save Timothy Krajcir from Speedy Deletion and have been the only major editor since then.
I think it's important that I share my worst article as well, which has been obviously deleted (that recreate wasn't me, by the way). It initially lasted for a few weeks, but it deserved to go, even though it seemed notable to me at the time I created it. I have since learned from that experience, however, with one exception. Although, it can be argued that she meets the WP:PROF, on her published works alone, I really didn't prove it with my single reference. I have since been unsuccessfully looking for a source to add. I realize it could be submitted to AFD at any time, and I have no real grounds to fight it, especially when DGG says "it looks a little indiscriminate", which in my opinion, generally means "Delete" (at best) if it were in an AFD discussion.
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: None. I've always been right. Next question?
Kidding.
Like everyone else, there are a few that come to mind. I started a discussion on POV pushing which continued into another one with some help from another editor.
Another time, I tried my best to help an editor understand about adding unsourced material to articles. I don't think I was very effective and I probably could have handled it better.
I also tried to help another editor in reminding them to use edit summaries. That wasn't very effective, either.
4. Any relation to Jack Bauer or User:Jack Bauer ? - TwoOars 13:31, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
A: My user name is obviously (or maybe not so to some people) a word play of Jack Bauer, but beyond the TV show, that's about where our relationship ends. It's up to you whether you believe this or not, but I think it's in your best interest to move on and maybe even forget that you ever asked this question.
Also, I know nothing of User:Jack Bauer. Jauerback (talk) 16:36, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey, no need to get all serious... I did say it was a fun question. :) Though I agree it's not all that funny. - TwoOars 17:43, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
I think your sarcasm meter is broken.  ;) Jauerback (talk) 21:19, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
First the humor meter and now you tell me the sarcasm meter too... :( - TwoOars 03:07, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Predicate question from Revolving Bugbear: Did you think the ending to season 4 was a cop-out? - Revolving Bugbear 16:43, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Do you mean with Jack faking his own death? Jauerback (talk) 21:19, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Yep. - Revolving Bugbear 22:41, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
I guess I never really thought of it like that. On one hand, I wasn't disappointed, but on the other, I can't say I was excited about it, either. Season 5 was, IMO, one of the best, so I guess one could argue that the ending of 4 at least transitioned well into 5. Jauerback (talk) 17:14, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

General comments

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

Discussion

  • NOTE - I will try to answer other questions as fast as possible over this weekend, but it's kind of a busy one for me. Jauerback (talk) 01:46, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Support
  1. Support as nominator. Useight (talk) 22:56, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
  2. Support experienced user, will not abuse the tools. --Oxymoron83 01:51, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
  3. Strong Support This user helped me a while back with Son of the Shark when I first started the article. He is an incredible contributor and I know that he is ready for the tools. --Sharkface217 02:06, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
  4. Support Excellent answers to questions. SpencerT♦C 02:46, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
  5. Support As per usesight through joined in April 2007 has more than 4000 mainspace edits and very good track.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 02:53, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
  6. Support per nom. Epbr123 (talk) 03:10, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
  7. Support, as the candidate has a good set of contributions, and the answers provided above show that the tools would not be misused. UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 03:20, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
  8. Support - Seen this user around, will not abuse the tools, give em' the mop! Tiptoety talk 04:03, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
  9. Support. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 05:23, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
  10. Support He's got a great record, and I've had very positive interactions with him in the past. I don't doubt that Jauerback can not just defend our country against terrorists, but make a fine admin, as well. -- Mike (Kicking222) 07:42, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
  11. Support User has gained my trust.--Phoenix-wiki 11:44, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
  12. Support - per nomination. Useight's got another good find. :) Rudget. 11:45, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
  13. Support Best Candidate I have seen in a long time! Dreamy § 14:36, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
  14. Gotta go with yes on this one. :) GlassCobra 15:28, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
  15. Support Worked with this user recently, he'll make a great admin.-Mastrchf91- 15:29, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
  16. Support. Good user. Malinaccier (talk) 15:35, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
  17. Support Will be a positive to the project, and meets my criteria. Unlikely to abuse the tools. Orderinchaos 20:22, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
  18. Support - Excellent candidate! One thing, what is the difference between your monobook and the standard Twinkle install? It seems like something I might want to use. -MBK004 21:02, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
    • Comment - I would direct that either toward Oxymoron83 or DerHexer. I just copied and pasted it. I've never used Twinkle in any other form than the hybrid code in my monobook. Jauerback (talk) 21:23, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
  19. Weak oppose - uses the word "dammit" too much. Has killed too many people. Furthermore, has committed numerous crimes in the line of duty, including treason. But per Mike, he's damn good at vanquishing terrorists and vandalism. Will (talk) 22:02, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
  20. Addhoc (talk) 05:40, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
  21. Support as hardworking and experienced editor. Capitalistroadster (talk) 05:48, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
  22. Support Liked your answers to the questions. :) Midorihana~いいですね？ 09:34, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
  23. Support Agree with Midorihana. NHRHS2010NHRHS2010 12:12, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
  24. Support No problems here. --Siva1979Talk to me 12:14, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
  25. Support Seems to be an excellent editor, I see no problems. - Revolving Bugbear 19:07, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
  26. Support Will be good for vandal fighting and deletions.--JForget 23:56, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
  27. Support Per nom - no reason to oppose.--Veritas (talk) 06:29, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
  28. Merovingian (T, C) 06:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
  29. Support Answers to the questions backed up by contribution history. Great stuff. Pedro :  Chat  09:35, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
  30. Support All the evidence I've seen shows good knowledge of policy and the right attitude. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 17:58, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
  31. Support Good user. Good question answers. Good contribs. --PTR (talk) 18:31, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
  32. Support. Good job, Useight. You have learned well... bibliomaniac15 03:55, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
  33. Support. --Bhadani (talk) 08:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
  34. Support. He has a great record of vandal-fighting with the scras to prove it, and no issues. Bearian (talk) 18:02, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
  35. Support. Wikidudeman (talk) 18:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
  36. Support. Yep! The Helpful One (Talk) (Contribs) (Review) 21:51, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
  37. Support long time great contributor, has good knowledge of policy. Oysterguitarist 01:24, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
  38. Dihydrogen Monoxide (party) 09:10, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
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.

Related Articles

Timelines

Top Qs

Fact Checks