Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Cobi 2

Contributions summary for: Cobi
Username	Cobi
Total edits	1682
Image uploads	1 (1 cur, 0 old)
Distinct pages edited	784
Edits/page (avg)	2.15
Deleted edits	218 (browse)
First edit	2007-06-30 05:37:29
Edits by namespace 	Namespace	Edits
Articles	307
Talk	25
User	592
User talk	550
Project	180
Project talk	18
Image	1
Template	8
enwiki_p: Portal	1

Do we need a new type of admin?

Cobi appears to be doing amazing work with his bot- yet doesn't have a lot of interaction with users and mainspace wikipedia editing.

I have often wondered if we need a whole new type of wiki-assistant, who was not an admin but had a few of the abilities of admins for more cleaning up/tidying housecleaning work (which Cobi is already doing in abundance) and less user-interaction settling disputes work.

Cobi is doing oodles of good. Instead of making him an admin- with a whole range of powers, responsibilities, why not simply create a new type of wiki-assistant so we can support and empower Cobi (and I have seen others like him apply for admin) in doing the very needed and extremely helpful work they are already doing?

For example, he can spot and block vandals.

Thoughts? Sethie (talk) 04:11, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Notes to bureaucrats

Will has cast an Oppose ballot in the Support column. I moved the ballot to the Oppose column. Nick reverted my edit, citing good faith that Will knows what he is doing. I then posted on Nick's talk page a request for Will to clear this up. Kingturtle (talk) 14:38, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Clarified. Kingturtle (talk) 17:00, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

We need to consider whether the Support cast by User:Crispy1989 should be counted or not. This user has only 5 total edits, and all of them are on Cobi Requests for adminship pages. Kingturtle (talk) 14:45, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

It's one extra user. It really won't matter much in the long run. Redrocketboy 14:54, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

If (and I say if) the one extra user is a sock-puppet, then it matters. Kingturtle (talk) 14:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I think you should assume good faith. Cobi said the user is someone he knows. Redrocketboy 15:00, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me? "Cast", "ballot", "vote"? Миша13 15:21, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I never said the word vote. And I chose my wording very carefully not to use the word vote. Kingturtle (talk) 15:28, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

You may have to forgive Kingturtle. He's a bureaucrat who recently came out of hibernation, and probably does not realise we work by a consensus these days. It says specifically on the RFA - this is not a ballot. Not looking at Kingturtle in particular, but this is an excellent reason bureaucrats should be reconfirmed. If KT is so out of touch in calling RFAs a ballot (not even a vote, but a ballot), then something is very wrong. Redrocketboy 15:26, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Please don't speak for me. I can speak for myself. Thanks. Kingturtle (talk) 15:28, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Ballot is the same thing. You did say ballot, and it says on the RFA page this is not a ballot. Redrocketboy 15:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)