www.fgks.org   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/The Blade of the Northern Lights

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.

The Blade of the Northern Lights[edit]

Final (133/1/0); Closed as successful by –xenotalk at 19:49, 5 December 2011 (UTC) [reply]

Nomination[edit]

The Blade of the Northern Lights (talk · contribs) – I am delighted to be able to make one of my infrequent admin nominations at this point, and hope and trust that the community will agree with me as to the exceptional merit of this editor.

The Blade of the Northern Lights has been active on wikipedia since March 5th 2010 (just before midnight). Since then he has racked up a very respectable total of over 21,000 edits; something over 5,000 show as deleted, which reflects his activity - his very effective activity - in admin-related work. He has a completely clean block log. I have interacted with him on a large number of occasions, and have had no reason to offer anything but praise for his editing here. I offered to nominate him her some few months ago, but he preferred to wait until later in the year; I am happy that he now feels that he is ready, and I wholeheartedly share this view. I believe that editors here will do likewise.--Anthony Bradbury"talk" 17:32, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Thank you very much for your nomination; I accept. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 18:03, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for the candidate[edit]

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
A: Mostly what I've been doing as a non-admin. I've done a lot of new page patrolling and monitoring the new user log, and of late I've been trying to help finish off the last of Category:Unreferenced BLPs. CSD, PROD, and UAA work will probably make up most of my administrative work. I have a firm grip of the username policy and of CSD policy, as my very high number of successful tags and reports should show. I would also put in some time at WP:REFUND; though I haven't been able to do much there as a non-admin, I've pointed new users there whose articles have been speedily deleted or deleted as PRODs, and being an admin would allow me to help more people through the process.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I feel my NPP work is my most important work, as NPP now is a very broken process, and I've been one of a few users trying to right the ship there. I've helped Kudpung both with gathering and with interpreting data; although much of the process is off-wiki, some of it can be seen here. In terms of content, I mostly do minor work; a little minor copyediting and perhaps adding a few lines of content in between my NPP/UAA work. However, I have occasional surges in content creation when I get interested in a particular subject; my best work has been to two articles, Zoya Phan and Inau, and I also created the article on Noh Poe. Those are my three most important content contributions, because they're on topics that are more obscure but still important, and they help to counter the systemic bias.
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: Of course I've been in minor conflicts here and there, but none of them have really caused me much stress. I was somewhat involved in the longevity arbitration case around 10 months ago, but not as one of the major disputants; indeed, I received several thanks from people on different sides of the dispute. The one time I was ever truly riled up over something on Wikipedia was after Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Proposal to require autoconfirmed status in order to create articles (which I started) had ended, and Snottywong, Kudpung, and I went to get the change implemented. The ensuing discussion can be read here (the bugzilla thread is linked there), and I was left with an extremely bitter taste in my mouth. It took me several days to regain my enthusiasm for Wikipedia after that, and I'm still not happy about how it all went down, but I've since tried to help some with the development of the Zoom interface that's being developed at MediaWiki. But that one instance aside, on the very rare occasions I begin to feel a bit stressed out, I take a look at the background picture on my computer of three Cambodian kids in a refugee camp; it helps me remember that it is, after all, only a website. That helps me keep everything in perspective, and prevents me from getting too wound up over anything. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 18:36, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Additional questions from Katarighe
4. When you become an administrator next week? Do you always block users when you find inappropriate or if they are vandalism-only account? Can you be involved in Wikipedia's SPI (sockpuppet investigations) and other noticeboards (such as UAA and AIV)? --Katarighe (talk) 23:35, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A: The first part; I think I'm well-enough versed in the username policy to know violations from non-vios (I'm fast approaching 1500 edits to UAA), but even now odd cases sometimes pop up. With vandalism, it's usually pretty clear-cut, but there can occasionally be ambiguities. In any event, especially when starting as an admin, I would be more than willing to report it to the proper noticeboard on occasions where I wasn't 100% sure what to do.
To your second question; I plan to be very active at UAA, and maybe put in a bit of time at AIV. I'm not terribly familiar with SPI (I've made a couple minor contributions to two investigations, but not in a long time), as the banned user I'm usually chasing after is far too obvious for an SPI (one only has to watch the new user log to find him; probably half of my AIV reports are his socks). However, I wouldn't have any issue making use of SPI if I suspected someone socking. I probably wouldn't become an SPI clerk, but it could happen; if it were, I would be sure to familiarize myself with all the relevant guidelines. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 04:21, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
5. What about on reviewing unblocks on blocked users (if blocked for something such as spam)? --Katarighe (talk) 23:39, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A: I've helped users fix malformed unblock requests a few times, and given people some advice; usually it's people who've been blocked for a username violation (c.f. User talk:AQUOSGROUP), but I've lurked at other blocked users' talkpages to see how admins handle their unblock requests. Those are usually fairly black and white cases, and if I start reviewing unblock requests I'd start there. I do have a little practice reviewing other kinds of unblocks, though; recently, I was asked off-wiki to review the block of User:Spidey665, and what I've said at his talkpage is still my position on the matter. I would want to gain some experience handling unblock requests before taking on something like that myself, though. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 04:21, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Additional questions from Wifione Message
6. Just to spruce up the knowledge bank for you Blade :) What does the name Anthony Seth have to do with NPP?
A: Well, he pretty much started it. He created WP:NPP as a proposal back on March 17th, 2004, and wrote most of the early versions of the page. Some things have changed since then (most obviously the patrol log, which is now handled by other means), but the general advice remains largely the same. One could say that he was the founder of NPP as we know it, or perhaps more accurately how we want it to be. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 04:35, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

General comments[edit]

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review their contributions before commenting.

Discussion[edit]

  • Editing statistics and AfD stats posted to talk. HurricaneFan25 18:54, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just in case there's any question, I can assure you that I am a male, and that he would be the proper pronoun. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 19:38, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

After this is over (can you snow close an RfA?) what say we all get together and throw a userpage makeover party for Blade? (grin) --Guy Macon (talk) 21:41, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A few lines of plain text means that this might be a bit too current for him. I suggest we build a page around this image. :D Sven Manguard Wha? 10:44, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I may be low-tech, but I'm not OLD; I'm only 21. That being said, my bands of choice are Rush, Def Leppard, and Death Angel, so people sometimes think I'm older. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい)
Support[edit]
  1. Support I've seen this user around a bit, especially with new page patrolling, and I've never seen a single reason to oppose any adminship nomination for this user. HurricaneFan25 18:46, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support without hesitation. Yes. Swarm X 18:47, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support Blade is clearly here to help, and he knows what he's doing. These are really the only two fundamental requirements for adminship. —SW— squeal 18:52, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  4. The candidate is excellent, capable, clearly has the experience required for the position and will be a very productive admin. --Mkativerata (talk) 18:54, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support. Competent, hardworking, and can be trusted with the tools. A random sample of edits didn't turn up anything suspicious, and my previous interactions with TBotNL have always been good. bobrayner (talk) 19:07, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Now that's a coincidence: a couple of hours ago I was wondering when we would see an RfA from The Blade of Northern Lights; I see their name everywhere, making excellent reports to AIV, UAA, CSD, etc. The Blade of Northern Lights is always doing great work, and I think that it will be highly beneficial to the project for them to have the admin tools. Acalamari 19:09, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Happy to support this helpful, hard-working editor. 28bytes (talk) 19:14, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support No two ways about it. Seen around a lot, does great work, accurate in assessment and polite. Sickening, isn't it? Peridon (talk) 19:25, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support, competent, trusted, etc. Ajraddatz (Talk) 19:29, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support - A capable editor with the right attitude to Wikipedia & adminship; the encyclopedia would certainly benefit with him as an admin. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 19:30, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support. I've come across Blade numerous times on Wikipedia, and from what I've seen, he's an experienced and trustworthy editor who can handle the sysop tools responsibly. The UtahraptorTalk/Contribs 19:37, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support Blade has proven to be an editor with clue... showing understanding of policy and guideline, making decent contributions, and always wiling to take part in discussion. Should make a fine admin. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 19:46, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support Guess I need to check the flags more often, here's another editor I thought was already an admin. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 19:55, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  14. You sir, have a crappy userpage -FASTILY (TALK) 20:06, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    IRL I'm a bit of a Luddite (I still go to record stores to buy CDs, I have a great set of real cameras, and I actually use my iPhone for phone calls), and while I don't mind other userpages with lots of bric-a-brac I'd rather keep mine simple. I haven't changed it since I created it on my 4th edit, and I have no intention of doing so at least for the time being; of course, things can always change, so I won't say never. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 20:26, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Hey, don't sweat, I tease ;) -FASTILY (TALK) 20:32, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I could tell, I just thought that would offer me an opportunity to explain myself. I actually take a certain amount of pride in it. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 20:35, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support. I've seen Blade doing lots of great work in all sorts of areas, and we've interacted a few times - I wish all RfA !votes were as easy to decide as this one -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:18, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Yep, Fastily sums it up. User page sucks. Clearly to keen on working on an encylopedia to bother to make an effort. I'm Supporting based on the fact that every time I see his siganture there seems to be an intelligent comment before it, a flick through talk page history seems fine and contributions are clearly strong. Anthony nominating is a big plus in my book too, but I won't let any of that take away from your shabby user page. Pedro :  Chat  20:25, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support - I've seen this user around patrolling new pages, among other things. I don't see any harm in letting Blade have the admin tools. -- Luke (Talk) 20:27, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support Strong candidate. CharlieEchoTango (talk) 20:35, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support. Will change to strong support if he finds an Alabama Crimson Tide userbox to add to his user page. Drmies (talk) 20:47, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support. What? he is not an admin already?--Sodabottle (talk) 20:49, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support - I know the name well from NPP. A great support. Shadowjams (talk) 20:53, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  22. I'm a talkpagestalker ;) So yes, support! mabdul 20:54, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support Seen him around and he seems to be suitable for the mop. Jarkeld (talk) 20:58, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support Wasn't he already a sysop? ~~Ebe123~~ → report on my contribs. 20:59, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support Blade is a clueful editor who does a lot for the project. I'm a bit wary about granting him the delete button though since some of of his taggings show a tendency to shoot first and ask questions later, something he should really be more careful with if this request is successful (two recent examples: G12 with only some copyvio that could simply be and was removed, G11 for a non-completely spammy article (that a experienced editor tagged for BLPPROD before already, thus indicating that it was already reviewed at this point) and which was shortly afterwards quickly copyedited). Nevertheless, I think those are exceptions and he can change his approach to avoid them even without me having to oppose this request. Regards SoWhy 21:03, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support Of course. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 21:15, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    made you look! Catfish Jim and the soapdish 22:05, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support – one of the best new page patrollers around. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 21:19, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support I wish more sysops shot first and asked questions later on BLPs, which he seems willing to do. A brief review of contributions leaves the impression of clueful productivity. Welcome. causa sui (talk) 21:24, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Certainly. Highly clueful. ceranthor 21:40, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  30. support --Puffin Let's talk! 21:43, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support. Per RfA tradition, here is the diff of the edit that will clearly sink this candidate: [1] (sound of evil laughter). But seriously, this is a very easy support for me. I've crossed paths with the candidate numerous times, and consider him to be outstandingly well qualified. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:45, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I was wondering if you'd pop up and remember that... I guess I have my answer! The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 21:46, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Scary, aren't I? Yes, this RfA is clearly doomed now. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:52, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Strong Support -- Very good editor. --Katarighe (talk) 22:00, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  33. NPP admins are a dying breed, but perhaps we'll see a comeback here. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 22:09, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Strong Support as nominator. Belated - apologies for that. Sudden emergency. Blade will be a most excellent admin. --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 22:12, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Yes. Need I say more? Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 22:16, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Yes, please. Salvio Let's talk about it! 22:36, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support Wait...you weren't one already? I've been tricked! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:51, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Hell yes Secret account 22:54, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support b/c there are no opposes, amazingly =). ResMar 22:57, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Support This one's easy --SPhilbrickT 22:59, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support All around great candidate. Excellent work at new page patrol (and Articles for Creation). I don't believe there are any reasons he shouldn't be an admin. Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 23:15, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Support and add me to the "he's not an admin already?!" club. --Kinu t/c 23:53, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  43. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 00:21, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Support - Opposers have unconvincing rationales →Στc. 00:34, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    {{tl:lol}} causa sui (talk) 01:05, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support per User talk:Σ.--v/r - TP 00:39, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support. Good contributions. Trustworthy. Axl ¤ [Talk] 01:15, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Strong support Well-qualified; close to the "ideal candidate", i.e. one with no readily identifiable weaknesses--Hokeman (talk) 01:42, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Support. Knows what he's doing with CSDs. Glad he kept editing after the WP:ACTRIAL fiasco. Jenks24 (talk) 03:11, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Support. As another member of the "he's not an admin already?!" club I can say that the areas where I have seen BotNL's comments they were always thought out and seem to reflect WikiP's core values. MarnetteD | Talk 03:27, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Support Great user! Baseball Watcher 03:28, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Support – Blade finally makes his RfA. —mc10 (t/c) 04:17, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Support Everything I've seen of this user's work is consistent with thoughtful use of the tools. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 04:21, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Strong Support Looked over edit history. Very impressive. Good candidate. One minor problem, though; his sig uses characters for his talk page that do not display properly on Firefox, IE, or Opera. Might I suggest changing that? Guy Macon (talk) 04:30, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    They're Japanese, you probably don't have the font installed. It's enabled by default on most newer operating systems.Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 04:35, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    It is on mine, though the font I use isn't the default for Wikipedia (it's MS Mincho, which is a distinctly Japanese style); in any event, it works by default on most browsers. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 04:49, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    This is really a triviality (and I strongly support adminship), but most browsers? I am running XP (which still has 50% of the market) with all updates and the latest versions of Firefox, Opera and IE that XP supports. None of them show that font by default. --Guy Macon (talk)
    You have to download a font, it's not a problem with your browser. See Help:Multilingual support (East Asian) for more information. →Στc. 08:20, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I am well aware of how to get the font to display. Three out of the four computers in front of me display it just fine. But the one that is a bog-standard XP system with the standard installs of all three browsers does not, which means that 50-75% of the readers see little boxes instead of characters. Nobody is going to download a font just to see Blades talk page link, fine lad though he may be. And an admin really does need to make it really easy for clueless newbies to find his talk page. I'm just saying. <smile> --Guy Macon (talk) 21:37, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    My HP laptop running XP, which I bought in a city that has about as small an Asian population as you can get in a large American city, renders the text just fine, out of the box. The only font that my computer didn't come with is Burmese/Myanmarese. Sven Manguard Wha? 10:32, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    A standard out-of-the box install of XP does not support Blade's font. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Multilingual_support_%28East_Asian%29#Windows_XP_and_Server_2003 for details. OTOH, if HP installs the fonts, it raises the question of how many other manufacturers do. --Guy Macon (talk) 23:52, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  54. Support. Great user, will do good with the mop. Enfcer (talk) 04:39, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  55. 賛成  Chzz  ►  06:31, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    ありがとうございます。ご評価します,あなたに一杯パイントヱビスをお負いします。 The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 06:50, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    スピーキン別の言語で表示されます。今それはただの無愛想だ。 --Philosopher Let us reason together. 00:31, 30 November 2011 (UTC) (Translation into Japanese courtesy of Google Translate. I think it says (tongue in cheek) "Speakin' in another language. Now that's just plain unfriendly. ")Philosopher Let us reason together. 00:31, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Not quite word-for-word human translation; あなたは外国語を話しますか。優しくないです。If you wanted to be really polite (don't have to with me), instead of 話します you can say お話しになります. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 01:21, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, thanks. Guess machines won't be working as interpreters any time soon. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 02:05, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    There are machines that can produce better translations, but they're not on the Internet just yet. I was able to get the gist of it, at least. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 04:51, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  56. Support the cabal says "yes" :P in all seriousness, though, I've seen his/her work at the admin noticeboards and elsewhere and they've shown nothing but competence and sound judgement. —James (Talk • Contribs) • 8:04pm • 10:04, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  57. Support Have seen him around the shop and know no reason to oppose - a cool name too! Brookie :) - he's in the building somewhere! (Whisper...) 10:19, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  58. It's that same old tired "thought he was already" comment again, which is one of the strongest indications of suitability for the mop IMO. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 11:50, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  59. Massive HUGE SupportThis user had guided me from the beginning when I started my editing here.Just see his contribs,no problems.THIS USER WILL NOT ABUSE THE TOOLS,I can clearly say this.This is also very civil.That's me! Have doubt? Track me! 13:33, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  60. I thought I knew all about NPP until Blade showed me some of its more obscure corners. We've worked hard together on NPP, and on desperate projects to improve it for over a year. I knew this RfA was coming and it should have come a long time ago. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:11, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  61. Support. Thought he already was one. bd2412 T 17:21, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  62. Support. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:28, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  63. Support very well qualified, this is long overdue. Hut 8.5 20:37, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  64. You do good work, and to me have demonstrated your competency to use the admin tools. I second Fastily though. Your userpage totally sucks. Just sayin'. Steven Zhang The clock is ticking.... 21:12, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Blade, don't believe all the crap about your userpage - I wish I were so modest, but at my age I have to be a bit MySpacey ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:58, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  65. Support without any hesitations.--Slon02 (talk) 02:03, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  66. Per Fastily. Monty845 02:25, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  67. Support A capable candidacy and a great contributor. Wifione Message 03:41, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  68. Stephen 04:33, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  69. Support I was recently trying to teach my sister how to edit, and was showing her how use the page history. I forget which article it was. Your name was there, we checked out your edit - good change. We went to another page, again there is Blade. So we try a third page off my watchlist, just as a lark. Blade. Sis asks, "Who is this person?" I reply, "Some sort of superstar, I guess." No red flags, dedicated editor. The Interior (Talk) 06:01, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  70. Support Will certainly be a great help to the encyclopedia.--Yaksar (let's chat) 07:23, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  71. Support Always assumed he was an admin. Adds more light than heat at AN/I, which is always a good thing. Sven Manguard Wha? 09:11, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  72. Support Will be fine. I assumed he was an admin already, and female, but then realised I was probably thinking of Elen of the Roads (talk · contribs) all along. It's the slight difference in usernames that threw me... BencherliteTalk 13:26, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  73. Support No reason to think they'll misuse the tools. FeydHuxtable (talk) 15:27, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  74. Support - Nolelover Talk·Contribs 15:51, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  75. Support - fully meets my standards: especially as a rollbacker, reviewer, etc. We need another admin who is culturally competent and can read Japanese. Bearian (talk) 16:49, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  76. Support to save face for the horde of us who believed based on your immense cluefulness that you were already an admin. Lagrange613 21:22, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  77. Very strong support. Immensely level headed. Extremely helpful with a particularly difficult case, very sane NPPer - understands the rules and the principles behind the rules. Elen of the Roads (talk) 21:43, 30 November 2011 (UTC) <...sounds nothing like Blade of the Northern Lights...[reply]
    Well, you've both got "of the" in your usernames, and look! here you both are, editing the very same page... hmm, it's very suspicious, the more I come to think about it. <heads off to WP:SSI> BencherliteTalk 22:12, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I admitz it. I iz evil twin sock of Blade of the Northern Lights. Elen of the Roads (talk) 23:34, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  78. SupportI appreciate the work he's done at NewPagePatrolling which is terminally short-handed, laborious, and not very glorious work. I have generally appreciated his comments else where and I believe he would be a productive addition to our declining admin ranks.AerobicFox (talk) 00:55, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  79. Support Qualified candidate. Courcelles 01:39, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  80. Support. Competent enough for the position of administrator. Probably won't make Radio Three's programme controller though. --Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 02:23, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  81. Support – I have been impressed with his new page patrolling for a long time. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 02:45, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  82. Support. Per this, user who take an active role to help administrators work. Good candidate! --Wagino 20100516 (talk) 02:51, 1 December 2011 (UTC)--[reply]
  83. Support- Good User, nice personality. --Kangaroopowah 04:08, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  84. Strong Support - The user will definitely make a great sysop. --Bryce (talk | contribs) 08:05, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  85. Opposes are patently unconvincing. Also, I like the username. T. Canens (talk) 10:07, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  86. Support the major contributor to Wikipedia:Deleted articles with freaky titles. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 13:02, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  87. Support --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 15:30, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  88. Support; owns a full set of well-maintained clue and isn't afraid to use it. — Coren (talk) 17:16, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  89. Sure, seems like you're well-qualified and will do a good job. Good luck... MastCell Talk 18:38, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  90. Indeed — Ched :  ?  21:54, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  91. Support - good chance will be net positive. Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:10, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  92. Support No reason to think this user would abuse the tools, besides, I need to jump on this bandwagon. --rogerd (talk) 22:15, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  93. Support. No concerns — Frankie (talk) 22:56, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  94. Support Great contributor. I've always had positive interactions with him. 100% support. --JaGatalk 23:46, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  95. Support. I've been watching this user from day one - and I've seen nothing but positive contributions. It's an easy call for me. Avicennasis @ 02:03, 6 Kislev 5772 / 02:03, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  96. Of course! Master&Expert (Talk) 02:53, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  97. Great to see you here Blade ... just remember, wet the mop first. - Dank (push to talk) 02:54, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  98. Support. Good contribs. Bonus points for awesome username.--Lenticel (talk) 03:14, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  99. Support I've never heard a negative thing about this editor, and associate the name only with positive contributions to the encyclopedia. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:20, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  100. Support based largely on observations of this editor's excellent work from a somewhat downstream point of view, e.g., in my processing of BLPPROD taggings. No concerns. Also, WP:100.  :) --joe deckertalk to me 06:59, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  101. Probably should be one, 100 wikipedians can't be wrong.--ClubOranjeT 07:23, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  102. Oppo...errr...Support From both a look at the contributions, and from my occasional times seeing their name, they're clueful and a net-positive to the project. Don't let the extra buttons detract from your great work! (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:58, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  103. Support. No problems that I can detect. Looks good to me. Best of luck, Malinaccier (talk) 13:20, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  104. I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message! - 14:06, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  105. Well, it's taken quite a while, there was a lot to go through, but TBotNL is an exceptionally helpful, useful and clueful individual. Exactly what we need. WormTT · (talk) 14:09, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  106. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 00:31, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  107. I can't think of a better way to round off my retirement-infringing visit here today than to Support this, per, well, everyone..., and I'm very glad not to have missed seeing it. Begoon talk 01:04, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  108. Support - Happy to add my support. - Hydroxonium (T•C•V) 01:12, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  109. Support, excellent choice of bands. But in all seriousness, every time I've seen this editor around it's been with a combination of competence and patience that we see all too rarely. I'm glad I caught this one. Seraphimblade Talk to me 05:12, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  110. Support per Fastily's comment on a bad user page errr no I mean per illegible sig err I mean per the stuff that actually matters: the good contributions I've repeatedly stumbled accross Cloveapple (talk) 05:34, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  111. Support - and here's another "thought he already was" reply! I've mostly noticed Blade in npp, done a bit of stalking to discover more, and liked what I saw. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 06:23, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  112. Support Even-tempered fellow who has been good in listening both sides in thorny issues. Kudos! CalvinTy 22:34, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  113. Support No concerns Jebus989✰ 23:21, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  114. Support Stay editing my friends. The most interesting man in the world (talk) 03:37, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  115. Noticed the accurate CSD work. -- Mentifisto 10:09, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  116. Support - Seems to be a good candidate, good luck...Modernist (talk) 13:01, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  117. Support - I've seen him around many a times. I used to think he was already an admin :) . Good luck. Lynch7 13:50, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  118. Support - Cool name. Plus above. Beyond495 (talk) 15:19, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  119. Support - he does excellent work! I wondered when someone would nom him! Will be a great Admin! jsfouche ☽☾Talk 16:28, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  120. Support I've seen this editor at work a couple times. Blade is a good editor who knows what he's doing, and the mop will help him.~ Matthewrbowker Say hi! 20:52, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  121. Support No explanation is needed. Horologium (talk) 21:00, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  122. Support Also, wiggling fingers upwards to indicate that I'm participating in a consensus decision-making process rather than casting an evil !vote. Have you got any idea of how hard it is for two-fingered typist to type while wiggling his fingers upward? I've read all of the comments in the oppose section, as of the time I'm typing this. I agree with every one. David in DC (talk) 21:43, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  123. Support. Happy to support. -- Ϫ 01:23, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  124. Support. You're obviously a better NPP than me! :P Rotorcowboy talk
    contribs     02:25, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  125. Support. I've seen the candidate around. I trust him with the buttons. Majoreditor (talk) 04:12, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  126. Good taste in music for a 21 year old. Trust his judgement on WP too.  7  05:48, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  127. Support Very happy to support this editor. Ryan Vesey Review me! 15:05, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  128. The times I have interacted with you have been pleasant. Your CSD work looks good. --Guerillero | My Talk 18:17, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  129. Support- Under the wire. Easy to spot at AfD and elsewhere. Policy supported rationales and suggested improvements. Dru of Id (talk) 18:20, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  130. Support – Adding my obligatory "What?? You don't have the mop already??" No concerns. – GorillaWarfare (talk) 18:21, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  131. (ec*2)Support The way the user has conducted themselves in NPP and in contentious portions of WP has given me much enlightenment and hope for one day becoming entrusted with the supply closet key in the future. Hasteur (talk) 18:22, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  132. Yeah obviously. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:25, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  133. rare support. Not that I don't think people should be admins or anything, just don't come by rfa much anymore. Syrthiss (talk) 19:02, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose[edit]
  1. Despite many statements about original intent of the position of admins, sysops are leaders in the Wikipedia community and the editors whom the least experienced Wikipedia users think of as role models. For me it is necessary that anyone who is an admin be prepared to look from the perspective of the new user who comes to them for help.

    It was not so long ago that a visitor wrote on your user page - see here. You have almost no content on your user page and I assert that all admins should give their visitors some idea of who they are and how they interact with people. I would qualify this user's experience as sub-par and a wasted opportunity to engage a user who reached out to you. What happened here is also representative of a large number of other users coming to your page for a purpose, seeing nothing, and leaving empty-handed without trying to interact.

    If instead a user goes to your talk page, the first alert they see is that "you may freely tell me that some guideline is a 'fucking pain in the goddamned ass'". Wikipedia is not censored but I feel that the level of professionalism in Wikipedia should raise in those areas in which users could go to for early contact and for help. Your level of professionalism is below that of the standard of manners in international culture. With you doing so much admin work, it seems likely to meet that you encounter new users and what you have displayed on both your user page and your talk page is not what I would want new users to see.

    I request that you change your presentation to the Wikipedia community. I also think that you should set up an archive on your talk page so that guests can easily see your past discussions, but that is a minor point and no factor in my vote to oppose your candidacy. I only bring it up because the scarce content currently on your pages made me want to see what you had done in the past. If it were my decision alone I would ask you postpone your adminship until you have either changed your pages or made an argument about why the way it is now is the way it ought to be. Blue Rasberry (talk) 06:44, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Comment It appears to me that you may have taken part of Blade's statement about "some guideline" out of context. Your point here is that he cares little about communicating with other editors, and as such, I interpreted it as if he would pooh-pooh anyone who expressed objection of any guideline to him, where this is not the case. He actually states that he is not bothered by such objections "as long as [they] have a reason." Plus, the turnaround time to entries on his talk page look pretty good to me. Who cares if he has "a crappy user page?" Even Fastily supports him despite this. I have a crappy user page. Does that mean I don't care? No, it does not. Rotorcowboy talk
    contribs     08:39, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment From what I can see Blade responded to the user in a polite and friendly way. The "presentation to the Wikipedia community" should be apparent mainly from editing Wikipedia main space content, not from fashionably styled user pages. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 09:10, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    The purpose of my low-tech userpage is 1 what I've described above and 2 an attempt to be somewhat newbie-friendly by not melting their faces off with several megabytes of code and text. As to the message atop my talkpage; I want to let people know that, if they need to vent, my talkpage is open to them. Sometimes people need someplace to complain about a guideline, an I'm always willing to listen. Whenever I get a message, I immediately stop what I'm doing on-wiki and respond as quickly as I can, especially with new users. I'm a firm believer in doing, not showing, both here and in real life (it is the rare day indeed where I'm not wearing a T-shirt); the user you link to has asked me for guidance multiple times (that time, I moved his question to my talkpage and responded on his) and is currently in the support column above, so it can't have been that subpar. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 11:27, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    (edit conflict) Comment @Bluerasberry: It surprises me that a trivial edit such as that would be enough to merit 3 paragraphs explaining why a user is unready for adminship. Many of today's admins, were they to stand for reconfirmation, would be slaughtered during the process, the harsh critiquing and otherwise seemingly brutal and unfriendly nature of the place is partly responsible for the aversion some users have to standing for adminship but also responsible for the stigma on the process. Furthermore, what a user does with their userpage is their choice, it is not our place to say whether or not content belongs there, as per WP:USERPAGE users can blank their userspace pages or limit the amount of content present. An editnotice is another matter, but that is in no manner a medium for the measurement of professionalism, this user's work is exemplary and his editnotice is in no way a violation of any existing policies. Do not take my comment as !vote harassing, you are entitled to your opinion, however, a single, trivial incident on the otherwise unblemished record of this user and other non-policy violating matters is surely not enough to merit an oppose !vote, at the very least it would only be a point for the Neutral section. —James (Talk • Contribs) • 9:42pm • 11:42, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    The Opposer is obviously entitled to his opinion, and everyone else is entitled to their opinion of his opinion. Mine is that the Candidate should be exceptionally proud that this is so far the only issue anyone has chosen to raise in opposition. I would be very happy to think that the worst thing that could be "dug up" on me in a week would be something so obviously weak as this oppose rationale. As to what it does to the RFA process - well that's another matter. Some people would think it adds weight to the arguments of those who cry that the process is broken, and does nothing to encourage already reticent good editors to allow themselves to be put forward. I'd be one of those "some people". Begoon talk 13:05, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    @Rotorcowboy - I am entirely taking his statement out of context. I hold admins to an accountability level closer to professional media than to casual talk, and I feel that despite his good intention and the context of what he wrote, first impressions should not be made using profanity. If your own page is "crappy" then I think Wikipedia would be a better place if you found five minutes to make it good.
    @Vejvančický - I feel that admins relinquish some of their expectation of privacy. A mop is a humbling tool and it means that anyone can come ask you to clean something. Admin space is partly public space because the public is drawn there.
    @James/M.O.X - If I had written less than I did then people would have asked for a longer explanation. I know that people voted differently in the past but Wikipedia is changing with many new public outreach programs. I work as a Wikipedia Campus ambassador and if I went to a class and showed this page to students who had never seen a Wikipedia user page before then I would be a little embarrassed to say that the best Wikipedia has to offer is less polite by conventional standards than no message at all. Typical users can do what they like with their userpages; I am holding admins to a higher standard and saying that they have to meet my standard of WP:NICE. I am not opposing this user because he makes first impressions with the general public using profanity; I am opposing him because he is of the mindset to think that this is normal.
    @Begoon - I like the Rfa process and I really appreciate all the feedback I am getting. What I find a little upsetting is that I am the only person who raised this issue. To me, this means either no one else thinks like I do, or other people felt the same way and said nothing, or no one else looked at this user's userpage intros. I hope that the situation is that this has not been a concern in the past, and I would like to make it more of a concern for the future.
    @The Blade of the Northern Lights - You are an awesome editor and thank you for the time you commit to this project. I know that you are trying to use a simple userpage to be friendly. I just think there is a middle ground, and I feel sad and really regret that I am asking you to compromise your style. I feel invasive and of course I do not want to criticize the things you do in the course of your good work. But to me, the question is, "Can I support you as a public figure?" To me, the most important work of admins is to be a friendly face when users reach out. Despite all your good work I do not think your page meets the concept of friendliness which I share with my real-life community. There are definitely other communities who would like you more with your current presentation; you should be happy and proud to add to the diversity of Wikipedia which pleases those groups, and I cannot say whether you should compromise at their expense. Thanks for putting yourself out there and being open to criticism. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:46, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    You said - "I hope that the situation is that this has not been a concern in the past, and I would like to make it more of a concern for the future." IMHO, then, it would be more productive to attempt to influence policy/guidelines to come to agree with your point of view, than to oppose the RFA of an "awesome editor", for this alone. I wouldn't personally have a Talk Page header that says what Blade's does, in the same words - but I certainly don't see it as an issue to oppose here. The purpose of the header is noble, and good - the wording is his choice, and violates nothing I'm aware of. A less charitable person than me could even see it as "pointy" to oppose because you want a change to policy or norms. I don't see it that way, but I do see it as unnecessary. I'm assuming, also, that you don't accept the explanation of the history regarding User:Dipankan001, since you have not struck or revised that part of your rationale? Begoon talk 16:00, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    The significance of Dipankan was showing that new users come to BNL's page. I am glad that this user had a good experience. I have no evidence of users who came to the page and left clueless or offended, but I am making an unfounded assertion that they exist because that is how I think I would feel as a new user. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:11, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for responding. I started by saying that you are entitled to your opinion, and I'll reiterate that as my last response here, too, since anything further would be unproductive at this venue. Begoon talk 16:20, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Bluerasberry—"What I find a little upsetting is that I am the only person who raised this issue. To me, this means either no one else thinks like I do, or ..."—Honestly, I think it's probably that not very many people think like you do here. I get where you're coming from, and I can see why this upsets you, but I just don't think a lot of people care too much about these kinds of userspace issues. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 19:05, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment - "Your vote is therefore not valid reason" - on my userpage. I do not feel like I am trying to change any policy or norms. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:11, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    It is what it is; reasonable people can disagree, and so can a reasonable person and I. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 16:39, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/The_Blade_of_the_Northern_Lights&oldid=1145829969"