Wikibooks:Requests for permissions/Cspurrier

+Administrator
Hello, I think Wikibooks is a great project, with a great future. I think I can be helpful to the project as an admin. While I only registered my username recently I have been browsing on Wikibooks for several months. Even though I am new here, I am not a newbie to the Wikis, I have been editing for about a year on Wikipedia, and I am very active on Wikinews. I have been editing on Wikinews since mid-March and have made 2713 edit according to Kate's tool. I have been an Admin on Wikinews since 25 May 2005.

While most of my writing is for Wikinews, I plan to help as much as I can with clean up tasks here. I monitor the recent changes IRC channel for Wikibooks  and I have caught several vandals. I have read as many of the policy documents as I can find on Wikibooks, and I believe I fully understand the areas in that Wikibooks policy differs from Wikinews policy. --Cspurrier 02:26, 15 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Support - It's true, he sits on the RC channel, and reverts vandalism as it happens. I think he at least deserves the rollback feature. :) - Aya T C 02:53, 15 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Support - Why not, the more anti-vandals the better. Cspurrier's contributions here are relatively few, but they haven't been concentrated in only one place. Geo.T 03:11, 15 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment - (Neither for nor against this particular request) This is nothing personal against you, Cspurrier, but something to note in general. I would not like to see people becoming admins that are trying to "pad their resumes" and claim that they are an admin on X projects, letting a fact like that get them a swelled head.  If this is a request for adminiship for such a reason, it would be better if you just lie low and get a feel for this project first and try to help out where you don't need admin authority.  A tremendous amount of work can be done by an ordinary editor/contributor, including quite a bit of general cleanup.  If you become an admin, particularly from Wikinews, you need to remember to go extra light here and avoid deleting any content unless it specifically is against the stated policies here on Wikibooks.  Even then, err on the side of caution and certainly don't delete things that are still trying to be started.  Stubs are very reasonable to happen here, and there are also going to be a bunch of mistakes from new users trying all sorts of things.  Obvious vandals, of course, need to be dealt with swiftly and strongly, but I have no doubt you can help out with that sort of issue.  I hope that your experience here on Wikibooks is a good one regardless of wheither you get this admin position.  --Rob Horning 12:42, 15 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment - I can't say I really know much about Cspurrier enough to make a decision. While I trust Aya that he's probably the same guy who is very helpful I'd rather wait and vote for someone with a longer history. And I think it's important for that trust to be gained by more than just one person, it should be gained by several people in the community. (For just one example of what I mean: I could set up IPs in two different domains. With one I vandalize the wiki, with the other I sit on IRC and then undo what I just did an hour before. I've gained the trust of those sitting on IRC and boom, I'm an admin.) Now, I don't think that's likely the case at all here, because of his admin status on WN, but it does show the importance of gaining trust. For example, I don't think anyone could possibly "fake" all of the hard work AlbertCalhan or Kellen have done on the wiki... that's only something you see in true devotion. Perhaps there needs to be a policy that if someone becomes an admin on WB primarily because of the status of being an admin on another wiki that, should they do anything to be removed of admin privileges, they are stripped of the status on all wikis? MShonle 21:22, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Done - Aya T E C 16:22, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

+CheckUser
I am an admin here, EN Wikinews, and Meta. I am also a bureaucrat and member of Arbcom with checkuser access on EN Wikinews. I know I am not the most active member of Wikibooks, so I will not be offended in the least if you choose to vote against me because of that. While I do not edit here as much as I would like, I do monitor the RC IRC feed regularly, so I will be able to respond to requests promptly. I already have checkuser on Wikinews, so I understand the technical use of the tool and privacy concerns that go with it. --Cspurrier 00:14, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Good intentions, but I believe that we will have enough use of the tool with the above three editors. I am considering removing my support vote for Uncle G due to his recent inactivity and I think the other two nominated will definitely provide enough support for the tool themselves. I don't see the need for more than a couple CheckUsers right now. -Matt 21:29, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll go with Support now that I've removed my vote for Uncle G. You're active here and can help. -within focus 20:22, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. I agree with matt. You certainly have good intentions, and I appreciate that. However, we only need about 2 or so users with checkuser rights, and with so few, we need those users to be active. However, the fact that you already have the privledge on another wikimedia project is a valuable thing for us here. When we get our first few checkuser admins around here, your experiance will probably come in handy, if you are willing to share it with us. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 17:59, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support AlbertCahalan 22:27, 20 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Could not achieve in several months' time. Stagnated and thus failed. -within focus 02:35, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

-Administrator

 * Last Contribution: August 17 2008
 * Last Tool Use: August 17 2008

Per policy on inactivity. User may request tools again should they become active and have a need for them again.
 * I have no real objection to the removal, though it is rather pointless in that as a steward I still have the buttons. --Cspurrier (talk) 03:05, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * In case others aren't aware, steward policies prohibit you from taking action on wikis with active sysops such as this one except in emergency situations. I think it does make a difference. &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; talk 03:11, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ Removed at Meta Kylu (talk) 03:10, 23 August 2009 (UTC)