From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hall Monitor

final (47/1/0) ending 15:35 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Hall Monitor ( talk · contribs): has been a productive member of the community since May 11, 2005, with over 3,800 edits in that time, about 2/3 of which are in the article space. He participates regularly in VfD, hunts down vandals and copyvios, and comports himself in a polite and professional manner throughout. Besides, he's got the perfect admin name. --  BD2412 talk 20:24, August 16, 2005 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

Thank you everyone, I am quite flattered and humbly accept this nomination. Hall Monitor 21:50, 16 August 2005 (UTC) reply


Support

  1. Support, of course (pending acceptance by nominee). --  BD2412 talk 20:29, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Meets my unwritten requirements. — BRIAN 0918 • 2005-08-16 20:31
  3. Support. Oh good, now the cabal can finally have a good hall monitor to keep track of the little people. But seriously, lots of I've seen good work here. Dmcdevit· t 20:35, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
  4. Support. Good vandal fighter. -- Canderson 7 21:07, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
  5. Support. D. J. Bracey (talk) 21:36, 16 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  6. He's like those kids whose parents named them "Grace" and they became a dancer, or "Hamburger" and they became a fast food magnate. Support. -- Golbez 22:10, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
  7. Support Lol Golbez. Anyways, good user and well deserving of adminship. — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 22:58, 16 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  8. Support. This user has demonstrated significant commitment to performing vandalism cleanup, requests for sourcing claims etc. which show this user would definitely benefit from being granted administrator privileges. In addition, Hall Monitor has shown significant commitment to the Wikipedia community as a whole and shown civility, politeness and ability to assume good faith in communications. In short, I am certain this user shall use adminship well. -- NicholasTurnbull 23:03, 16 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  9. Support - Tεx τ urε 00:56, 17 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  10. Ab-so-lute-ly. -- Essjay · Talk 03:35, August 17, 2005 (UTC)
  11. Support. The username says it all... would make very good use of a mop and bucket. Sjakkalle (Check!) 06:17, 17 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  12. Support Always friendly! Plus returning the favor ;) Redwolf24 08:38, 17 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  13. Support We need more vandal patrols. Robert McClenon 11:29, 17 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  14. SUPER Support You arn't one already? Good greaf! Insanely great vandal fighter!! -- Ryan Norton T | @ | C 11:31, 17 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  15. Support. Thunderbrand 17:09, August 17, 2005 (UTC)
  16. Support- Astrotrain 17:48, August 17, 2005 (UTC)
  17. Support I've seen you around man, keep up the good work Tony the Marine 05:52, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
  18. Oppose changed to Support per [1]. Initially opposed because of the incident on July 12 where I removed unsourced Ricardo Montalbán from Fairfax High School list of alumni [2]. Then Hall Monitor added this (uncited) information to the RM article " was initially rejected from Fairfax High School in West Hollywood. He attended Belmont High School".
  19. Support ∞ Who ?¿? 19:55, 17 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  20. Support Awesome name. Acetic Acid 22:57, August 17, 2005 (UTC)
  21. duh! support good work so far... admin material imo.   ALKIVAR ™ 23:48, 17 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  22. Merovingian (t) (c) 00:33, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
  23. Support, has done excellent work on vandal cleanup. - Loren 01:11, 18 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  24. Support Talented vandal slayer. -- Ryan Delaney talk 11:02, 18 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  25. Support Active against vandalism. PTSE 15:12, 18 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  26. Support Very active in editing, carries out a lot of the less glamourous stuff that must be done. -- Jacj 19:33, 18 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  27. Support. A trustworthy vandal fighter and wikifier. Hall Moniter is really helpful and friendly on Wikipedia, and I see no reason why we should oppose. — Stevey7788 ( talk) 18:05, 19 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  28. Support. I haven't had a huge amount of contact with Hall Moniter but the interactions I have had with him make me confident that he would make good use of adminship. Jtkiefer T | @ | C ----- 19:07, August 19, 2005 (UTC)
  29. Sarge Baldy 21:26, 19 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  30. Support - Will make a a good admin and vandalbuster. ≈ jossi ≈ 22:25, August 19, 2005 (UTC)
  31. Support I've always been impressed with the way he handles himself around the site. KeithD (talk) 23:04, 19 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  32. Support- I hesitated initially because of some vague recollections about listings at WP:AIV that I felt were overly aggressive, despite appreciation of his vandal fighting. However, after a little investigation I find a proper caution towards questionable cases, am reassured by his responses below, and am confident he will be measured in the use of his admin abilities. - Banyan Tree 03:36, 20 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  33. -- Briangotts (talk) 04:56, 20 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  34. Support - Does great work in fighting vandalism. Sango 123 14:30, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
  35. Support give him the attack mop! Hamster Sandwich 06:05, 21 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  36. Cool. -- JuntungWu 08:48, 21 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  37. Support. Level-headed and determined. -- Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης) 11:48, 21 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  38. Support. Harrumph! -- MicahMN | Talk 22:23, 21 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  39. Support. Jaxl | talk 02:11, 22 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  40. Support. Good, very active editor. Hand him the mop. -- DS1953 03:53, August 22, 2005 (UTC)
  41. Support: I've seen him in action on occasion and liked his style. -- Hoary 09:26, August 22, 2005 (UTC)
  42. Support Nice contributor and helpful. EdwinHJ | Talk 22:10, 22 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  43. Support. An edit conflict when voting is usually a good sign (glares at Edwin). Mackensen (talk) 22:11, 22 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  44. Support. Helpful editor, and lots of good Article edits despite the short time. RC patrol is also much easier when he's around. -- Alan Au 01:32, 23 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  45. Support. Good editor. - Willmcw 01:46, August 23, 2005 (UTC)
  46. Support. -- Kbdank71 14:13, 23 August 2005 (UTC) reply
  47. Support Excellent work Tuf-Kat 16:03, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Oppose. Three months is too short a time to be promoted. siafu 14:41, 22 August 2005 (UTC) reply


Neutral


Comments

  • Wow... 27-0 and barely 3 months... it must all be in the name, LOL - I need a name change - something like TheSheriff :) -- Ryan Norton T | @ | C 19:27, 19 August 2005 (UTC) reply
    • Oh, it's not the name, it's the nature. --  BD2412 talk 21:31, August 19, 2005 (UTC)
  • I have seen this user revert simple vandalism on a number of occasions with edit summaries demanding to see sources cited and such...now, each to his own, and maybe it's just his brand of humor, but I find it a little odd. Everyking 05:31, 21 August 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. My overall goal is to make Wikipedia as accurate and complete as humanly possible. As a frequenter of WP:AIV, I would be happy to lend a hand to address the clear cut cases of vandalism, as well as continue my watchlist and RC patrol. With time and proper guidance, I may also assist User:Kbdank71 and company with the closure of CFD discussions.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. It is difficult to pick one contribution over another. Although none of these (in their present state) would meet my personal expectations for feature article status, a few of my favorites are Jack Ramsay, Randy Myers, and Jim Fowler.
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. This may or not be considered a conflict, but after discussing the issue at WP:MUSIC, I went through and cleaned up approximately ~300 vocalist articles which did not WP:CITE sources for vocal profiles. Previously, these vocal profile sections were a frequent target of vandalism and manipulation based on original research. At present, more than 99% of these articles have since been resolved by either eliminating the section or providing a credible source. Understandably, this change was met with some heated discussion from anonymous editors and regular contributors alike. After talking this through, I believe we have concluded that it is best to leave these sections out when no authoritative external reference can be provided.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Hall_Monitor&oldid=1142575827"