Meta:Requests for adminship/Adambro 3

Adambro

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a closed Meta-Wiki request. Please do not modify it.

Even discounting my vote, this is a clear pass. Promoted. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 08:49, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adambro (talk • contribs • count • logs • page moves • block log • CA • email)

I would like to invite the community to consider granting me adminship. I would like to become an admin here because I feel it would enable me to better serve the project. I will happily admit that I am not the most active editor here, like my activity on other Wikimedia projects it goes through phases as my work load in real life changes, but I am confident that having admin rights would improve the contribution I can make.

I intend to continue my work to improve the organisation of media files we have here and the ability to use the flood flag would be useful in this respect, particularly where I'm recategorising a large number of files. I've tried to do as much of this work using my bot flagged account but it would be much easier in some cases to use Hot Cat which can make it very difficult for others to monitor recent changes.

I also always monitor recent changes when I'm active and regularly tag content for speedily deletion as can be seen from my deleted contributions. It would be more efficient if I was able to speedy delete this content myself and admin rights would make dealing with things like this much more straightforward.

I've made around a thousand edits here, around about another thousand as AdambroBot, and many more on other WMF projects including the English Wikipedia, English Wikinews, and Commons, and I'm an administrator on each.

My first RfA, which was far too premature can be seen at Meta:Requests for adminship/Adambro, and my second, which seemed to become distracted by a difference of opinion concerning some images, is at Meta:Requests for adminship/Adambro 2. I think that since then I've developed a better understanding of Meta and shown, through my involvement in the fair use policy proposal, that I am more in tune with the necessity to use unfree images in some circumstances.

Thanks. Adambro 19:43, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support You seem like a fine candidate to me. --MZMcBride 20:13, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support I can support this candidate. Nakon 17:46, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Sure. - Rjd0060 23:09, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adambro is even-handed, and has my trust. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 08:55, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Marbot 18:03, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Dferg (talk) 18:53, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Good work! Vitorbraziledit ^msg 02:20, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Meta is a place where folk of many wikis come together. It's a place where consensus and calm need to hold sway... I'm wondering if you agree, and if you have any comments about this current deletion request on Commons: Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Caricatures of Alan Dershowitz by Carlos Latuff ... and this previous one: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Alan dershowitz by Latuff.jpg that area has been very contentious, and it seems that the category was an attempt to find a compromise everyone could agree with. I'm interested in your perspective on this. Thanks. ++Lar: t/c 23:30, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I clearly don't agree that the creation of this category is appropriate and because it seems that some others are also concerned I started the current deletion request. This issue was being discussed across a variety of pages and it is much more constructive to focus discussions in one place. I will respect whatever consensus emerges and not disrupt the community if the result is to keep the category despite my reservations about it. There are much more constructive ways in which I can spend my time. Adambro 08:51, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, that helps, thank you, but a follow up... The category was created as a way out of a thorny issue that was divisive. If the category is deleted, what's your suggestion for an alternative way to resolve the issue, keeping in mind the strong opinions of both "sides"? ++Lar: t/c 11:40, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Being persistent always pays off :) ....--War path 11:23, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
NeutralI'm not even convinced (per my previous comment)--Nick1915 -^{all you want} 11:56, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would appreciate if you could clarify exactly what your concerns are. The main reason for your opposition previously seemed to a concern about my approach to images. Images on Meta still need to be properly organised, as illustrated by Special:UncategorizedFiles, and so this is an area I would certainly continue to work. I'm not suddenly going to start deleting loads of images though. I can't recall exactly what, if any, images I've nominated for speedy deletion recently but that would give you a flavour of the kind of things I might consider speedy deleting. I think perhaps previously I didn't recognise the necessity to occasionally use unfree images and so suggested they be deleted. I would suggest though that my efforts in trying to create an EDP, as required by the Foundation for us to host unfree content, illustrate that I've gained a better appreciation of this project. Adambro 12:31, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
ok, it's enough for me. Support--Nick1915 -^{all you want} 07:44, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, he will do fine, --birdy geimfyglið _(:> )=| 13:39, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yo! Holder 19:21, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Juliancolton | ^Talk 23:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support He is active and does good work. MBisanz ^talk 13:49, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]