Ritchie333

Voice your opinion on this candidate (talk page) (3/0/0); Scheduled to end 21:18, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Nomination

Ritchie333 (talk · contribs) – Another user of the right calibre who practically had to be frogmarched to RfA, Ritchie is one of those editors about whom many of you are going to say “I thought he was an admin already!”. Well, he isn’t, but in my opinion he should be, and that’s why we’re here. Software engineer and musician in real life and friend of real ale, Ritchie has been around since the days of yore when one could collect a mop from the store on 2,000 edits and 3 months tenure. Not only has he racked up a participation in no less than 41 good articles, he has created enough articles of substance to be truly autopatrolled, and has more than adequately demonstrated his knowledge of deletion/inclusion guidelines through more AfD than some recent RfA voters have made edits to Wikipedia. Ritchie has also written a raft of poignant but respectable short essays: How newbies see templates, Don't template the retirees, Wikipedia doesn't own you, The Dumpy test, and Hit and run editors. Do take a moment to read them before voting here because whether you like them or not or whether you have a genuine sense of humour or not, they all demonstrate one thing: that Ritchie genuinely cares about Wikipedia and the welfare of its editors and readers.

Like many experienced users, aware that RfAs of even the most mop-worthy candidates sometimes get turned into a fiasco, Ritchie was at first reticent but if there were a bot (heaven forbid) that would accord the bit based on tenure and experience, Ritchie would be automatically accepted so I am asking the community to come to the same conclusion - from a human angle. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:43, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Co-nomination

I've had my eye on Ritchie333 as a prospective admin for a long time - ever since I learned that he hadn't been granted the mop already. A straight-talking, policy-savvy editor who isn't averse to dealing with the more confrontational areas of Wikipedia, he'd be a much needed addition the the admin corps. He also has a proven track record in article work, creating over 60 new pages and more than 40 GAs, more than enough to show that he knows our content policies back-to-front.

I don't know whether Ritchie has taken his own advice in preparing for this RFA, but whether his best friend is still driving or not, he's done more than enough on-wiki to convince me that he's ready. Thankfully I'm not alone, and the increasing pressure from other editors has finally convinced him to take the plunge. I think it's about time, and I hope you will agree. Yunshui ^雲_水 12:08, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Another co-nomination

Don't want to be piling on, but Ritchie is an excellent candidate. First and foremost he's a creator, and in addition he's a creator and writer and editor of good articles, many of them Good Articles. He has plenty of common sense and a very decent knowledge of our policies and guidelines, and I have the fullest faith that he will not abuse the tools. We need good admins, in fact we need them pretty badly, and here is one for you. Ritchie, thank you for running. Drmies (talk) 21:04, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Thankyou for the nomination; I am happy to accept it. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:42, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?

A: I regularly patrol the backlog at CAT:CSD reviewing nominations to check if they are appropriate, and I expect I would work in this area as an admin. I spend quite a bit of time at AfD and intend to help close down old debates. As I like rescuing articles from deletion, I'd be keen to work at WP:REFUND and help editors get articles restored. I would probably keep an eye on CAT:UNBLOCK, especially regarding spam / promotional usernames, which I see have a regular queue.

2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

A: I've improved 41 articles to GA, but my personal favourites have been Hammond organ, Denmark Street and Ika Hügel-Marshall as they were done as part of a team. Strong collaborative content work is one of the nicest experiences you can have on Wikipedia. Elsewhere, I've reviewed numerous submissions at Articles for Creation, and handled replies at the AfC Help Desk, and I'd like to think I have given many new Wikipedians a positive impression of the site.

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 certainly encountered conflict and disagreed with editors. I ignore name calling and insults, and try to resolve issues on the talk page, or walk away from the conflict and work on something else. I have very occasionally been blunt and direct, but never to new or inexperienced editors. I consider all disputes I have been involved with to be in the past and prefer to move on from them.

General comments

• Links for Ritchie333: Ritchie333 (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
• Edit summary usage for Ritchie333 can be found here.

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review his contributions before commenting.

Discussion

Support

1. Yes. Drmies (talk) 21:05, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
2. It's an honor to support. --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 21:23, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
3. Finally - pretty sure I e-mailed you about this about 2 years ago, what took you so long?! GiantSnowman 21:26, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Neutral