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

Martinp23[edit]

Final (71/0/1) Ended Sat, 18 Nov 2006 11:13:16 (UTC)

Martinp23 (talk · contribs) has been doing some excellent work around here. He's created multiple bots, works on AMA and is dedicated to getting rid of vandalism and backlogs. We need help getting rid of those backlogs. A previous self-nomination in August failed due to a lack of experience, but I believe he's ready now. Mgm|(talk) 09:26, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I humbly accept Martinp23 10:13, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[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'd expect to use admin powers to primarily respond to block and unblock requests delivered by various bots on IRC and by monitoring WP:AIV. I'd keep a careful eye on WP:RFPP, and subsequent requests for page un-protection. Somewhere that I would really like to help clear the backlog is at CAT:CSD, where I would be willing to spend my time. Also, I'm sure that I would help out closing XfD debates and deletion review requests. I'd also try to help with the enormous copyright violation backlogs - although I haven't contributed there much, I do consider myself to have a solid understanding of the GDFL and of fair use (particularly for images - hence I would be involved at WP:IFD). As part of my dispute resolution efforts, I'd be sure to use admin powers to enforce the WP:3RR rule, where appropriate. Of course, on top of this, I'd keep an eye on the administrator noticeboards and try to take time out to do some vandalfighting, when not fighting the backlogs!
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: At the moment, I am most proud of the various bots I have written: AMABot, which updates the AMA alert case total, and reports on IRC; RefDeskBot, which archives the reference desks and the help desk; MartinBotII, which does a variety of Wikiproject related tasks, and some others. I also run a TawkerBotII clone (User:MartinBot) from time to time (usually at periods of high levels of vandalism). Aside from this, I'm happy with my vandal-fighting efforts, using tools such as VP, the IRC channels, and the traditional way - putting pages on the watchlist. Recently I've been involved with some article cleanup, at Cúcuta, and am working on others. Outside of articles, I've been involved with dispute resolution with the Association of Members' Advocates, both by taking cases and helping out "behind the scenes" with AMABot and other administrative duties. Most recently, I've set up WikiProject Beekeeping, something which I'm hoping will grow, and also something which I hope to "put on wheels" soon :). In terms of templates, I've created ((firstarticle)) (which is designed to encourage newcomers whose first contributions have been marked for speedy deletion).
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: My recent disputes have all been ones which I've invited myself into with the AMA - all of which I have been able to close successfully. Before I became a member of the AMA, I was involved in two disputes:
  1. Ste4k (talk · contribs) - I got involved in a dispute at Sculpture of Ancient Greece through WP:3O, where Ste4k was carrying out a move against the consensus on the talk page. After finding Ste4k to be uncooperative, I carried out the move per the consensus - my efforts were quickly reverted by Ste4k after I missed around two sentences of text, and Ste4k seemed unwilling to tell me what I had missed. In time, an RFC was brought against her here, to which I contributed (if I remember correctly) the section of "Greek Statue". Ste4k was later blocked per WP:ANI.
  2. During my last RfA (or around that sort of time), I closed and RfA as speedy redirect, as was the general consensus at the time. The AfD can be seen here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grassfield Elementary School, and I have fully explained my actions on my last RfA, but I will summarise: the nominator wished to have the article deleted after he/she had carried out a merge. Of course, this is a violation of the GDFL (the loss of article history would be the violation). In the RfA, there was clear consensus for a speedy redirect, so I took the action to closing it as a non admin (utilising WP:BOLD). The nominator took exception to this, and reverted me, at which point I left the AfD to be closed by an admin. Although I realise that parts of my handling of the AfD weren't perfect, I feel that I have learnt from it, and hope that others involved have done the same.
General comments

Discussion

Support

  1. Nominator support. - Mgm|(talk) 09:33, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support woo JDtalk 10:17, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. 10:27, 11 November 2006 (UTC) I support this person and I'm Kavadi carrier.
  4. Support - Seen him do good work and trust Mgm's judgement -- Lost(talk) 10:29, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support Martin-p-23 has a nice ring to it, and therefore he has done something I like and therefore he passes my criteria †he Bread 10:36, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Strong Support Maaaaaan! Talk about slow! When I saw the page creation I actually spoke to Mgm about conomming as I've been meaning to do this myself for some time. Martin's a great vandal fighter, notable spam remover, responsible editor and bloody great guy. Wikipedia would be terribly honored to have him as a mop wielder. Bring it on!  Glen  10:38, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. w00t!. — Nearly Headless Nick {L} 10:54, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message. - 11:54, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support This is yet another candidate I have been long awaiting. Good luck! --Alex (Talk) 12:06, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support This editor seems much improved since his last RfA attempt in August. (aeropagitica) 13:00, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support, another who I have ear-marked to !vote in favour of giving the tools. Kind, civil, thoughtful etc. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 13:02, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support looks good. Rama's arrow 13:23, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Mike | Talk 14:45, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support You've made over 4000 edits, most of them vandal reversions, and you're not one yet? SupaStarGirl 14:56, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support its time. A calm and thoughtful editor who does great work improving the encyclopedia by holding the vandals at bay. Gwernol 15:37, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support --kingboyk 15:48, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support I see no reason not to. Good luck! ↔ ANAS - Talk 15:56, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Strong Support Trustworthy, thoughtful editor, with a great grasp of policy. Xoloz 15:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support — Good luck ;). Matthew Fenton (talk · contribs · count · email) 16:09, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support semper fi — Moe 16:16, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support --Terence Ong (C | R) 16:57, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support - does a great job. Badbilltucker 16:59, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support per nom. Michael 17:11, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support. G.He 17:18, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support But don't forget the article editing. ~ trialsanderrors 17:41, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support per all the above comments. --Siva1979Talk to me 18:09, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support. Seen nothing but civility and good works from Martinp23 - he'll make a great admin. –- kungming·2 | (Talk·Contact) 18:25, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support-- danntm T C 18:27, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support per nom. John254 18:49, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support per above, fully qualified candidate. Newyorkbrad 21:27, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support - Good luck ST47Talk 21:49, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support - I thought this user was an admin.Bakaman Bakatalk 22:11, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Merovingian ※ Talk 22:19, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support Last time, I didn't even know him and I supported. In the last couple of months, we've worked together alot on AMA related things. He'll make a great admin. -Royalguard11(Talk·Desk·Review Me!) 22:55, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Yes. --Docg 00:02, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support It's great to see someone come back from a failed RfA and show a great deal of improvement. Nishkid64 01:02, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support -- SmthManly / ManlyTalk / ManlyContribs 01:27, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  38. 'Support A good Wikipedian who deserves the mop.Sharkface217 01:46, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support A fantastic wikipedian, who defintely deserves the tools. Hello32020 03:54, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Support I thought he was an admin. On another note, what is the deal with all of the redirecting to get to this page? I finally just had to click 'edit'. Wikipediarules2221 06:30, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support A deserving user with really good bots as well. Good luck, Jam01 07:25, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Support a good candidate --Steve (Slf67) talk 08:33, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Strongest Support - I came back just to say this and support Martinp23. Above all contributions, the bots really rock and he is really a meta-type guy, just perfect for an admin. I have also talked to him so many times, and he is really a nice guy. Good luck! Imoeng 10:05, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Strong Support great Wikipedian who has gained significant experience since his previous RfA. hoopydinkConas tá tú? 10:39, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support. Good editor. utcursch | talk 15:01, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support. Based on the current RfA lineup, I can safely say that Wikipedia is in for a bright future. — Deckiller 16:43, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Support - I agree with Deckiller - so many great candidates up right now. S'all good. riana_dzasta 16:52, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Support - yes :-) --HappyCamper 22:52, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Support.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  00:16, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Support --Ageo020 (T • C) 01:44, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Support Looks good to me :). I've seen excellent things. Alphachimp 03:47, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Strong support. Wow, lots of good candidates around right now. Iridescence talk • contrib 05:15, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Looks versatile to me. (Radiant) 13:56, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  54. Support - Szvest Wiki me up ® 15:04, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  55. Support - The nomination says it all. Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 12:59, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  56. Support per above. Addhoc 19:11, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  57. Support. This editor showed his calm, thoughtful aproach in the user:Ste4k matter. -Will Beback · † · 19:55, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  58. Support He is an all around nice guy let him be an admin Cocoaguy 02:05, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  59. Support based on history of positive contributions, looks good. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 05:53, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  60. Support Good answers above, considerate and an excellent contributor. The Template:Firstarticle demonstrates an empathetic value needed in a good admin. ▪◦▪=Sirex98= 08:50, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  61. Support - Gotta agree with the rest of them above me. Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:23, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  62. Support - This guy wrote a program for me to assist with finding non-spammers for #wikipedia-spam on the irc.freenode.org network. Very good user as long as I have known him. Can't think of a better admin candidate. He is active all the time on IRC as well. —— Eagle (ask me for help) 19:04, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  63. Support - Martin does great work for the encyclopedia, and is very patient and considerate with newcomers. IMHO, he would make a great admin. TheronJ 19:44, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  64. Sure, he could minimally use a rollback button (-: JYolkowski // talk 23:32, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  65. Pile on support All around good guy. --InShaneee 00:35, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  66. Support answered questions well, seems to be a fine wikipedian. James086 Talk | Contribs 02:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  67. Support per MGM and Lost. Anchoress 04:37, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  68. Support Blackjack48 15:14, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  69. Support per all of the above. Dionyseus 22:34, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  70. Support Sarah Ewart (Talk) 23:03, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  71. Support Seems to be a nice,intelligent wiki  Nileena joseph (Talk|Contribs) 08:54, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Neutral

  1. Neutral - Don't know this user. --evrik (talk) 22:31, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[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