Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Veinor

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.


Veinor[edit]

Final (55/1/0) ended 19:01 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Veinor (talk · contribs) - It gives me great pleasure to nominate Veinor (talk · contribs) for adminship. Veinor has been a member of Wikipedia since September 11, 2005, and has been highly active since October 2006. Since then, he has amassed over 10,000 edits, in all sections of Wikipedia. Veinor has spent his time here doing RC patrol and contributing to articles in the mainspace. Veinor has also submitted nearly 200 accurate AIV reports (many dealing with spam/advertising vandals) and has actively participated in dozens of XfDs. A member of WikiProject Spam, Veinor is one of the go-to guys when dealing with problems like external links, advertising, and linkspamming in articles. Veinor has demonstrated a thorough knowledge of policy, especially WP:EL and WP:SPAM, and will no doubt be an important asset as an administrator. Nishkid64 18:17, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept. Veinor (talk to me) 18:47, 26 February 2007 (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 participants:

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 plan on mostly blocking spammers (after fair warnings, of course), and doing a bit of CSD on the side, as well as AIV. I don't see myself handling really heated discussions such as AfD for a while (maybe a couple months, if not more).
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I'm proud of the program I made that parses logs from the anti-spam effort and shows how many times a link was added in a day; I'm currently working on getting a more automated version approved at BRFA. I also think I've done a good job overall on the anti-spam front. In terms of actual contributions, I like the way Direct Relief International is turning out, and I think I handled some recent controversy over Tech Support Comedy well (see below).
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: Spam removal, of course, generates lots of conflict, and I'm not always right. However, I've always remained civil, even in the face of insults. The worst-handled incident I can think of was when I was 3RR blocked over Painswick over a month ago. Even though consensus seems to agree with me, I deeply regret my actions, and I hope that they don't hurt my candidacy. In the future, I plan to only make more than 3 reverts in more clear-cut cases. Also, there was a recent debate over the length of Tech Support Comedy, a community that I'm involved in. I believe that I maintained a neutral point of view throughout the whole thing, and I can't think of any way I'd change it. As for stress, nothing that's happened on Wikipedia has caused me any stress. I know that Wikipedia is not the most important thing in the world.
4. (Optional) What is your personal definition of "spamdalism"? thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 18:57, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A. Strictly speaking, I'd define it as is adding external links/text with the sole intent of advertising, not improving Wikipedia. However, I often find that these inappropriate links are added by good-faith editors, and the term 'spam' is often used even in good-faith cases (e.g., {{uw-spam1}} can be used for both bad- and good-faith external link additions) So in a broader sense, spamdalism is the addition of external links or advertising that doesn't help the article, regardless of the intent.
General comments

Please keep criticism constructive and polite.

Discussion

Support

  1. Support A pleasure to be first to support a level headed candidate. --BozMo talk 18:24, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Beat the nom support, keep fighting the good anti-spam fight. But don't forget to participate in XfD's and other such backlogs. Good luck. The Rambling Man 19:03, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Strong Support as nom. Nishkid64 19:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support, good answer, in my opinion. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 19:06, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support - Good vandal-whacker so it makes sense to give him a mop. Has surprisingly thin encyclopedic contributions from the looks of it, though. —Dgiest c 19:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support - seems like he will make a great admin. BJTalk 19:34, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Strong Support a great user, will make a great admin. ~ Arjun 20:00, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support looks good to me. *Mishatx*-In\Out 20:25, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support we definitely need spam fighters, and this candidate is more than qualified for the job. - Anas Talk? 20:37, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support Seen nothing but good work.--Húsönd 21:36, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support: Excellent candidate, although he/she doesn't provide much other info about their administrative actions other than spam fighting. ~Steptrip 21:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support Spam seems to be a full-time job nowadays. You need the tools for it, and good luck! Please try the other side of Wikipedia (creation, editing) more often though, if only to avoid adminitis and stress! It works. Bubba hotep 21:41, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Strong support -- Veinor's daily link report of all links added that day has been invaluable in spotting and fighting spam. Veinor is also a great spam-fighter in addition to his work as a toolmaker. --A. B. (talk) 21:57, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support --Agεθ020 (ΔT • ФC) 22:01, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support bit weak in terms of article contributions, but he's surely demonstrated a need for extra buttons with his extensive experience at WP:AIV and spam-prevention. Veinor also seems to be good-natured, approachable, and easy to work with, so I'm sure his having extra buttons will only benefit Wikipedia, as well as his own volunteer experience gaillimhConas tá tú? 00:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support - good spamfighter, will make an excellent admin! --sunstar nettalk 00:15, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support. Afford this user the mop, the bucket, and the flamethrower. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:44, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support. We need more people working on spam. I particularly like that this user is not just removing the stuff, but working to improve the processes by which we remove it--we need more of that. Chick Bowen 04:06, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support Per above. Captain panda In vino veritas 04:07, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support —Quarl (talk) 2007-02-27 04:45Z
  21. Support - he has some great nom points, and he looks more than qualified for me. give him a mop! JoeSmack Talk 05:55, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support seems to be a good candidate. --Aminz 10:34, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Thumbs up - good chap. Moreschi Request a recording? 15:18, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support, per nom. Causesobad → (Talk) 15:26, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support - jolly good egg, and I like the cut of his jib. -- Heligoland 21:55, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support per nom. >Kamope< Talk · Sign Here 01:02, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support looks good.-- danntm T C 01:03, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support per excellent work on spam. Having the tools will certainly help this user and the project. John Reaves (talk) 01:11, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support, good spam-fighter. Dragomiloff 01:50, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Strong Support I've had much experiance with Veinor @ the WP:WPSPAM project and I've always been impressed. Spam fighting in all forms is an extremely valuable contribution, and the mop will definately be helpfull. No doubt it will be used wisely--Hu12 12:18, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support The project would benefit from this user gettin' some extra buttons. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 17:31, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support Sssspamfighter isss goood. Will use buttons for the benefit of all, methinks. My favour I bestow. My english is sorrowfully weird tonight, here. PigmanTalk to me 04:58, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support Surprised he isn't admin already. A1octopus 12:59, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support. PeaceNT 16:34, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Support Easy decision, really. Xiner (talk, email) 17:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support per above. Good luck! --Meno25 21:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support. While I don't consider "dozens" of XfDs to be alot considering his total edit count and his very weak answer to Q1 he looks good everywhere else and I trust the nominator's ability to find good canidates. NeoFreak 01:57, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Support Has done Quite a lot of Edits in the last few months and User Nishkid64 choices are always good so why not..--Cometstyles 14:25, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support unreservedly. Will be a solid admin. -- Satori Son 15:12, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Support per all the above. -SpuriousQ (talk) 17:45, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support Very active user, excellent record in spam fighting. gidonb 17:50, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Strongest Possible Support A hard working, excellent user. He is a genuine model for all wikipedia users. BashmentBoy 23:59, 2 March 2007 (UTC)BashmentBoy[reply]
  43. Support a good candidate --Steve (Slf67) talk 03:06, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Support excellent counter spam channel, will defiantly use the tools to whack a few vandals, letting others contribute to the encyclopedia in peace ;). As usual, adminship is no big deal —— Eagle101 Need help? 03:31, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support per nom; good editor. Trebor 15:58, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support per nom; very active spam-fighter. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:30, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Support per nom (who I trust implicitly). Cbrown1023 talk 18:11, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Support Seems level-headed and trustworthy. Good luck! IrishGuy talk 22:35, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Support. Michael 05:23, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Support I don't like spam either. This user should do well blocking spammers. James086Talk 05:56, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Support: Keep up the great work with your anti-vandalism fighting. Does deserve the tools. Extranet (Talk | Contribs) 10:40, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Support per nom. RB972 13:12, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Support. WjBscribe 23:48, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  54. Support Willy on Wheels this is Betacommand and I support this user
  55. An admin who can really help with spam? yay. Of course I'll (edit conflict)support then.--Wizardman 17:49, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. Oppose- not been active long enough Astrotrain 22:15, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Veinor&oldid=1207760708"