Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Poiuytman

Poiuytman[edit]

withdrawn by candidate on 6 May 2005 (6/4/3) original ending 00:29 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Hi. I've been editing articles, most involving computer and video games, since January 8, 2005. I tend to do a lot of re-organization, typically splitting up large article intros, rearranging sentences and paragraphs for clarity, and making new article sections. This is evident in my recent endeavor on Wikibooks — I removed the Game Guides and Strategy section from the Miscellaneous bookshelf, and gave it an extensive bookshelf and category system. I also am a stickler about italics, quotes, proper date layout, and dash types, as far as the Manual of Style goes. I'll often find myself spending 5–10 minutes editing an article I just started reading, fixing things like second-person voice, first-level headers, and inconsistent italicization. I must be drawn to repetitive menial tasks or something. Anyway, I would find some of the administrator features useful, like the ability to delete redirects for the purposes of moving an article (another common task of mine). --Poiuyt Man (talk) 00:29, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support

Good contributor with what looks like a solid record and wants adminship for constructive reasons. Grace Note 01:05, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. – ugen64 05:38, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good to me. Maybe a little early, but a solid record. --MikeJ9919 06:02, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Fine by me. Given the continuously rising standards for an admin, I don't think this RFA will pass. However, I believe a second nomination in a few months time would likely be successful. JuntungWu 16:49, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merovingian (t) (c) 00:21, May 6, 2005 (UTC)
Strong Support 1200+ edits isn't all that early in my opinion, and he appears to be a quality editor. I'd like to see him become an admin. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 02:00, May 6, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose

Oppose....but only because I feel it is too early. I'd like to see more activity - more experience with the peer groups - more examples of acting well under pressure. I will probably support at a later date. Kingturtle 05:17, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose at this time - Poiuytman seems to be a very good editor, but it takes more then editing skills to be a good administrator. As Wikipedia:Administrators' reading list says, "Sysops must have an intimate understanding of Wikipedia policy". Also, interpersonal skills are very important, if not MORE important then knowing how to edit. As an administrator, people are going to come to you with problems whether you want to deal with them or not; you have to be ready to deal with angry people from time to time. If all you want to do is edit, then being an administrator will most likely be a distraction from what you really want to do. Poiuytman, you do seem like a level headed person who could become a good administrator someday.... So I think that, you if still want the hassles and responsibility of adminship after reading this, then you most likely will become one eventually. - Pioneer-12 12:32, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Administrators should not merely be 'good' or 'acceptable'; they should be 'great'. Poiuytman seems too narrowly focused for my liking, and I've seen little negotiating or moderating experience like a good adminstrator candidate should have. Wait a few months, Poiuytman. --maru 13:39, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Poiuytman, based on what you answered on question #1 below, here is what I suggest you can do to gain more experience: participate on the VFD discussions, do RC patrol more to help spot vandalism, and contribute to the discussions listed on WP:RM. You might also want to help out with the discussions on WP:CFD, WP:TFD, and help out on the articles listed on WP:DA. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 16:08, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

~1200 edits, talk page is pretty thin, limited contributions to Wikipedia: space, only a couple of cases of vandal fighting that I can see. Didn't format this RFA correctly and even had to be bugged on his talk page because he didn't create the subpage after including it on the main RFA page (though this is really a fairly minor issue for me). I like his contributions to articles, as I'm a fellow video game freak, but I'm trying to stay unbiased here. I like what he's done so far, but this is just a bit weird... Few more months and a few more edits and I'll support. CryptoDerk 00:59, May 5, 2005 (UTC)
Not enough evidence of involvement in the general Wikipedia community (as suggested by extremely low edit count of articles in Wikipedia: space) for me to be comfortable that this editor has the required communication and negotiation skills. Would prefer to see more evidence of having done RC patrol and/or involvement in VfD; neither is evident from edit history. But no strong reason to oppose, either. Kelly Martin 12:49, May 5, 2005 (UTC)
User has shown himself to be a good editor thus far, so I am not going to oppose. However, I feel he has limited experience inasmuch as he has not really contributed too often to the areas I would expect from an admin (RC patrol, wikipedia namespace etc.). Keep doing what you are doing, and show your face a bit more in the community pages and show a greater commitment to vandal hunting and I will almost certainly support next time. Rje 14:48, May 5, 2005 (UTC)

Comments

The delay in creating the subpage was due to the fact that I had not prepared answers for the questions beforehand, and I had to spend a few minutes typing them into the edit box. --Poiuyt Man (talk) 01:09, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
About the "weirdness": it was a gift, as she wanted a detailed userpage and didn't have the time to write it herself. --Poiuyt Man (talk) 01:12, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Can't you guys give Poiuytman a break for helping out his girlfriend? Zzyzx11 (Talk) 02:25, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah! If there's one thing I can't stand, it's people declaring something weird, and then declaring the "weirdness" to be a negative, when in fact it was something clever that the observer just didn't understand. I give Poiuyt Man *BONUS POINTS* for such a clever and creative act. And I deduct points from CryptoDerk for calling it "weird" (even though CryptoDerk has a picture of a pimp on his home page, which some may call weird but I think is pretty cool). - Pioneer-12 05:52, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't fault him for it, but when User B's user page is created and updated wholly by User A, I think it merits pointing out. Incidentally, I don't know who that "pimp" is. I just randomly found the picture. He is, however, pretty cool. CryptoDerk 06:14, May 6, 2005 (UTC)
Thank you, everyone, for the votes and feedback. I have to admit that I was not fully aware of the administrator's role in Wikipedia, and after reading some of the comments above, and going through the related links, I now believe that I am not yet experienced enough to accept the position. I hold myself to high standards, and would like to do more in the community to earn my adminship. As such, even in the unlikely scenario that I do get enough votes of support, I must respectfully withdraw my self-nomination. --Poiuyt Man (talk) 10:53, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for the candidate
A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? (Please read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.)

A. I'd be interested in helping to manage the Votes for Deletion page. I'd mostly use the admin functions to aid in moving pages and removing vandalism.

2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?

A. I am most pleased with my work on the Dance Dance Revolution article and its related articles, mostly Dance Dance Revolution Solo, which was merged from two smaller articles and extensively re-written. Also, the work on Konami Code, which needed serious attention, and the reorganization of the Games category on Wikibooks (although that may not be relevant for this nomination).

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 will deal with it in the future?

A. The only conflict I've had was with User:Kitch over the naming and capitalization of articles regarding games in the category:Dance Dance Revolution series. I moved many of the articles without prior discussion, and he presumably became angry, and moved them all back. I started to re-revert them, but stopped, and instead made a topic about it on Talk:Dance Dance Revolution. I stated my reasons and evidence, and a peaceful resolution was reached.

I don't tend to get very opinionated, and I try to find a mutual solution when there's a disagreement. Recently, in Talk:The Legend of Zelda series, I expressed my opinion that the game belongs in the action-adventure genre, and not the RPG genre. I then came up with alternate text to be used in the article, that covered both viewpoints adequately.