The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.

Final (53/1/1); Ended 07:25, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Jesse Viviano (talk · contribs) - Jesse Viviano has been here for almost a year, working slowly but steadily in a variety of areas. I notice he does a lot of things that really would be easier if he had admin tools, observe him here asking for admin help to deal with broken redirects, quite the janitorial task. He has over 100 reports to WP:AIV, lots of work related to sockpuppets and plenty of work on Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies. He's not the most prolific article writer, but enough work to show that he knows what he's doing [1], [2]. He doesn't seem to have gotten into any notable conflicts while here, all of his interactions I've looked at range from neutral to positive. In short, here's a guy who seems to have a use for the tools, and would do good work with them, so in the spirit of getting the tools to the people who can use them, I am nominating him for adminship. W.marsh 04:29, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Co-nomination by Sir Nicholas I wanted to nominate this user myself. He has already done a lot of admin-related work on Wikipedia and the tools, if provided to him, will only help us make this place better. This guy knows what he is doing and is comfortable with the policies and guidelines of Wikipedia. He is competent, civil and co-operative, without a hint of egotism :) Good luck! — Nearly Headless Nick ^{C} 13:21, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept this nomination. Jesse Viviano 06:45, 25 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 generally want to help with backlogs, like the backlog on images that exist on the Commons that need to be deleted here.

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

A: My best contribution was probably reverting the massive copyright violation (which came from an advertisement, by the way) at Native Command Queuing and bringing the pre-copyright violation version up to standards. I am proud of that work because I realized that many would have tagged it with {{Db-copyvio}}, and many more would not have stumbled onto the advertisement by chance. My next best contribution probably involves expanding the stub at CardSystems Solutions. I am currently in the middle of rewriting the piece of trash of one section in Tagged Command Queuing which confuses ATA TCQ and SCSI TCQ (which are two totally different things). However, I need to figure out how to add a reference to a printed scholarly journal before I can complete that job. As for my work at WP:AIV, I make the occasional report, and I occasionally go there and fix bad tags (like when someone uses {{Vandal}} when he or she really needed to use {{IPvandal}}.

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: I have had one major and one minor editing conflict. My major editing conflict is with a user who keeps removing verified information that Omaha Steaks is a spammer. I keep having to revert the occasional user who removes this important and verified information. My minor editing conflict is at commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Laden.jpg because I thought that images published by the FBI are public domain, but there is a strong case that the image might not be public domain. Since there are many FBI photos probably not taken by it, I have emailed User:BradPatrick about this issue and ask that he make a ruling on it. If he rules that the image is not public domain, I will ask that the FBI Top Tenner images be deleted on the Commons, because I do not want to put the Wikimedia Foundation in any legal jeopardy. I will then upload some of them here with a strong fair use claim. However, it is not very stressful to me. I have not been in any major stressful situations here. The other editing conflicts I have been involved in usually are those caused by vandals and spammers like Primetime and Tvhosted. I usually do not hunt down vandals actively (except at pages where Stephen Colbert encouraged vandalism like Elephant), but since I use Wikipedia often for school, I occasionally stumble onto spam and vandalism, and then I clean it up.

Optional question from Dgies

4. What experience do you have in handling questions of notability, reliable sources, or suitability for inclusion? —Dgies^t c 07:23, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly do not have much experience with that. I occasionally mark articles without any statement of notability for speedy deletion, and have taken a few articles like A. J. Rightway (a character used in a school puppet show used to educate morals to elementary school children) to AfD. However, I removed the speedy deletion notice from Northland Cable Television for non-notability because I felt that a cable company that had customers in more than one state was notable. I feel that notability and suitability for inclusion are judgment calls, while the requirements on reliable sources should be followed with much less wiggle room.

General comments

• See Jesse Viviano's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

Please keep criticism constructive and polite.

Discussion

Support

1. Support I do not recall having had any contact with you prior to your RfA, but in perusing your contributions and talk pages I have not come across anything glaringly wrong, and from what I see you do seem to enjoy the more technical aspects of Wikipedia - maintenance and vandalism fighting. I give you my support then. --Ozgod 07:25, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Support. A great editor which has the priorities of an admin. I'm sure he would do an excellent job as an admin. Plus, his edit count and edit summary usage (100% for major, 100% for minor) is also quite good. Acs4b 09:33, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Support per experiance. BuickCenturyDriver (Honk, odometer) 10:38, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. — Nearly Headless Nick ^{C} 13:21, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Support Looks like a good user to me. Captain panda In vino veritas 13:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. Support Trustworthy nominators = trustworthy user, and definitely needs the tools. – riana_dzasta 13:30, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

   Support. LocalShift29 14:09, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

   Another day, another sockpuppet of someone I've dealt with—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 18:53, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

7. Terence Ong 恭喜发财 15:20, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
8. Sounds good.--thunderboltz^(Deepu) 15:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
9. Support Looks like you wont abuse the tools.--Natl1 (Talk Page) (Contribs) 16:52, 25 February 2007 (UTC)][reply]
10. I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message! - 16:54, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
11. Support - BJ^Talk 17:03, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
12. Support per work on AIV.Bakaman 17:55, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
13. Support Good work at WP:AIV and WP:OP but I hope he will refrain from using admin powers in areas where he has little experience. —Dgies^t c 18:11, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
14. - NYC JD (make a motion) 18:31, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
15. Support: I thought he was one already.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 18:53, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
16. Support I trust the candidate. Evilclown93 20:50, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
17. Support per nom, answers, comments above. Fully qualified candidate. Newyorkbrad 21:05, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
18. Support. Long overdue. Khoikhoi 21:28, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
19. Support - I'm supporting just for your answer to Q1. I have moved probably a 100 images to the Commons myself over the past week or two and I get irritated at the backlog of images that have been moved to the Commons.↔NMajdan•talk 22:21, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
20. Support From interaction with him, he looks out for the wikipedia community and wouldn't abuse the tools RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 23:01, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
21. Support per above. Just H^{editor review} 00:49, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
22. Support Good answers, boffo noms and support statements. Whack with the magic admin stick and transform to admin, says I. (must be oscar night: "boffo"?) Pig^man_{Talk to me} 03:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
23. Support —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-26 05:28Z
24. Support trustworthy, level-headed, and dedicated. Qualified for the job! - Anas ^Talk? 12:10, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
25. Support for Jesse Viviano as Administrator. Right on! Keep up the good work. Sounds like you are ready and willing!!! :o)
    Good Luck, Jesse Viviano. —OnaTutors ^(talk) 02-26-2007 16:23(UTC)
26. Support per the great looking work and edit summary usage. John Reaves (talk) 17:09, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
27. Support well-done answers complement a good track record.-- danntm ^T _C 17:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
28. Support - read the nom statement :) -- Tawker 18:08, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
29. Support Looks like he's done good work. Believe he'd use the tools well. Shimeru 19:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
30. Support Sounds good to me. *Mishatx*-In\Out 20:41, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
31. Support --Agεθ020 (ΔT • ФC) 22:01, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
32. Support although Jesse appears to lack some experience when it comes to article contributions, he could certainly use some extra buttons to help with his vandalism prevention efforts (as demonstrated by the 100+ reports to AIV). I haven't come across this user around the wiki yet, so I'll just have to take the nominators' good words for his personability :) gaillimh^{Conas tá tú?} 00:17, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
33. Support Good answers, succinct informative noms, needs tools. Bubba hotep 09:21, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
34. Support Seems to be a good candidate. --Aminz 10:37, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
35. Support Looks good.--MONGO 10:54, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
36. Support WP:AIV user; good editor too - no reason not to oppose this one. (aeropagitica) 15:35, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
37. Support. Causesobad → (Talk) 16:53, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
38. Support See Newyorkbrad. Good luck with the adminship and your studies! gidonb 19:56, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
39. Support. Prolific vandal and spam fighter. Dragomiloff 01:58, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
40. Support. I often see this user making good contributions. -Will Beback · † · 00:57, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
41. Support a good candidate --Steve _(Slf67) ^talk 06:10, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
42. Support. WjBscribe 14:28, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
43. Support. PeaceNT 16:31, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
44. Support-looks pretty editing. Nileena joseph ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 16:37, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
45. Support Excellent AIV contributions. --Meno25 21:06, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
46. Support - clearly an excellent candidate. - Richardcavell 06:42, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
47. Support - seems like a good candidate..--Cometstyles 14:16, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
48. alphachimp 21:45, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
49. Support. Michael 01:16, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
50. Support, would be a good admin. Trebor 15:57, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
51. Support John254 18:02, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
52. Support You seem to be a good contributor that we can trust based on your nominations and answers. Cbrown1023 talk 18:09, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
53. Support: Valuable contributor and a mature appraoach to issues. --Bhadani 03:11, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

1. Strong oppose, based on my interactions with the candidate in off-wiki mail and the candidate's own accusations of plagarism against myself[3].

I have little doubt this one will be yet another Jobsworth who will abuse the tools as edit weapons and to pursue personal vendettas. He's obviously done a good job of fooling many here into thinking he's a niz guy. Not a difficult task to accomplish, and has been many times before. As current events show, things are often not as they appear online. For instance, in real life, most people seem to think I'm a niz guy:) I sincerely hope JV proves me wrong, if so I will gladly come back and strike this oppose from the record. Unfortunately, I've yet to be proven wrong by every candidate I've opposed, but hey, there's always a first. Oh and oppose per WP:BULL.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 15:49, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

1. Based on my research revolving around the user's talk page, this user has a lot of potential but still makes the odd mistake over policy. First I was gonna oppose, then I leaned towards support. Now I just want to advise that when they are given adminship, they take care when weilding their new buttons in case they're mistaken in their understanding of policy. I want to thank them for their hard work to date and wish them good luck for the future! :) --Seans Potato Business 22:36, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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.