Battlestar Wiki:Requests for adminship/JubalHarshaw
- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.
- Current Count: (7/0/0)
- Current Date/Time: Sunday, April 2, 2023 at 06:28 (UTC)
- RFA Ending: Saturday, April 21, 2007 at 12:00 (UTC)
JubalHarshaw (talk • contribs • edit count • page moves • block user • block log) – When I saw JubalHarshaw's very first contribution, New Caprican loco weed, I realized we had a fine new contributor enter Battlestar Wikispace (besides the fact that I love a good silly page). Jeremy has often, without request, joined into many maintenance and improvement activities on Battlestar Wiki since he joined. From the small edit to the large, he's likely edited a page you thought was already OK. He has placed his two cents in important and trivial voting matters, exercising his right to make a difference through consensus. JubalHarshaw has mastered his hobgoblin to keep the wiki's consistency, which is greatly appreciated. As far as policy and guidelines, JubalHarshaw's editing has been very consistent, and comments to others through user talk and article talk pages are enthusiastic, detailed and helpful. A good attitude is just as important as adhering to form and function. JubalHarshaw will make a worthy member of the Order of the Mop: He's already working hard enough. :) --Spencerian 18:22, 13 April 2007 (CDT)
- Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
I'm honored. I gladly and humbly accept the nomination. JubalHarshaw 01:46, 14 April 2007 (CDT)
- Support per nomination. --Spencerian 18:22, 13 April 2007 (CDT)
- Support One of my favorite contributors, and I look forward to seeing him made an admin. Dude has good taste in music, too. --BklynBruzer 22:44, 13 April 2007 (CDT)
- Support Does good work --Serenity 06:57, 14 April 2007 (CDT)
- Support I have to admit I've been keeping my eye on JubalHarshaw for adminship for a while now. There's no question that he makes the kind of edits that need to be made. The only thing I was waiting on was if he stuck around with us, and he's done so. I'd be proud to have him mopping these halls. --Steelviper 13:40, 14 April 2007 (CDT)
- Support The recent Kobol split proved the nominee worthy of taking up the mop. Although really, he's just switching the mop he's already using for an official one :) --Catrope(Talk to me or e-mail me) 16:02, 15 April 2007 (CDT)
- Support as per the others. --Mercifull (Talk/Contribs) 07:00, 16 April 2007 (CDT)
- Support - Nothing worries me about granting adminship to this user. MatthewFenton 05:31, 20 April 2007 (CDT)
Questions for the candidate
A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:
- 1. What duties, if any, would you anticipate helping with? Please check out Battlestar Wiki:Project List's for a list of projects.
- A. I'm a WikiGnome in the extreme; I will always be rolling the dice and making improvements to any article I find, often small, sometimes major. Whatever is required. As far as formal projects, I've been making it a pet project to nominate quality articles ... I'm interested in most all of the projects listed, to a greater or lesser extent. Mostly I just enjoy BSG, enjoy being here, enjoy the people, and enjoy the constant, never-ending improvement of a wiki.
- 2. Of your articles or contributions here, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
- A. New Caprican loco weed, of course. In the afterglow of Unfinished Business, it hit me like a bolt out of the blue. What I originally wrote (see it here) was a shell of the quality Silly article that it has become; every contribution, from everyone, has only made it better. All Sillyness aside, I'm proud of every contribution I've made that has improved an article. Except when I occasionally drift from NPOV. :)
- 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 time here has been almost completely without strife. Which is more than I can say for my time with Wikipedia. It's amazing how many "wikipedians" there become attached to articles (and take edits personally). I've seen so little of that here, it cheers me. Most discourse is almost always concerned with how to improve articles, above and beyond any personalities or politics. If a conflict arose, I would trust to my judgement, the judgement of the other admins/'crats, and the judgement of the community, to help diffuse and find an acceptable solution within our framework of policies, and also through human judgement (no rules set in stone are ever as effective as the human mind, which can adapt and judge on a far more distinct and intelligent level than "zero tolerance").
- The above 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 article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.