Misplaced Pages

:Requests for adminship/Asterion: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 12:29, 21 December 2006 editFish and karate (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators36,446 edits →[]: sup← Previous edit Latest revision as of 20:45, 25 January 2024 edit undoJonesey95 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Mass message senders, Template editors370,301 editsm Fix Linter errors. More needed. Leaving font tags for bots. 
(88 intermediate revisions by 51 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate metadata rfa" style="background-color: #f5fff5; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a '''successful''' ]. <span style="color:red;">'''Please do not modify it'''</span>.]''


===]=== ===]===
'''Final'''
''''''
'''(38/0/0); Scheduled to end 08:52, ] ] (UTC)''' '''(78/0/1); Ended 15:26, ] ] (UTC)'''


{{User|Asterion}} – I would like to nominate Asterion to become an administrator. Asterion has been w/ us since September 2005 and for benefit of those with editcountitis, he has around . Asterion is very active in ], ], ], ] and many politics related articles. This level-headed user has shown a great adherance to ]. He's also been very active in mediation processes. I haven't seen any Spanish administrator yet in en wiki and would like to to see Asterion on board. -- '']'' ] <small>]</small> 12:37, 11 December 2006 (UTC) {{User|Asterion}} – I would like to nominate Asterion to become an administrator. Asterion has been w/ us since September 2005 and for benefit of those with editcountitis, he has around . Asterion is very active in ], ], ], ] and many politics related articles. This level-headed user has shown a great adherance to ]. He's also been very active in mediation processes. I haven't seen any Spanish administrator yet in en wiki and would like to to see Asterion on board. -- '']'' ] <small>]</small> 12:37, 11 December 2006 (UTC)


:''Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:'' :''Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:''
Line 17: Line 21:


:'''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? :'''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:''' Yes, I have edited controversial subjects (i.e. ] and other Balkan related articles, ]). During any dispute, I have been ''cool as a cucumber'', even under personal attacks. I tried to work things out in the talk pages, generally by deflating any source of conflict (see ]) and trying to reason with other users. If things did not work out, I went the whole way to ] and mediation. At some stage I have to admit I have felt ] but did not lose faith on the system. As a last resort, I had no problem with referring or things being referred to arbitration. Nonetheless, I have been slowly moving away from controversial subjects, as I find these tend to take far too much time which I could put to work better on other areas. In the future, I will continue to stick to my personal 1RR and zero-tolerance for personal attacks policies. ::'''A:''' Yes, I have edited controversial subjects (i.e. ] and other Balkan related articles, ]). During any dispute, I have been ''cool as a cucumber'', even under personal attacks. I tried to work things out in the talk pages, generally by defusing any source of conflict (see ]) and trying to reason with other users. If things did not work out, I went the whole way to ] and mediation. At some stage I have to admit I have felt ] but did not lose faith on the system. As a last resort, I had no problem with referring or things being referred to arbitration. Nonetheless, I have been slowly moving away from controversial subjects, as I find these tend to take far too much time which I could put to work better on other areas. In the future, I will continue to stick to my personal 1RR and zero-tolerance for personal attacks policies.


'''Optional questions from {{user|Malber}}''' <!-- For a study guide, see User talk:Malber/rfap --> '''Optional questions from {{user|Malber}}''' <!-- For a study guide, see User talk:Malber/rfap -->
Line 29: Line 33:
::'''A:''' I would try to research the notability of the organisation/company, assess the tone of the article (i.e does it read as PR or an advertorial?) and if in doubt asking for a second opinion at the Administrators' Noticeboard. ]<sup>]</sup> 00:56, 21 December 2006 (UTC) ::'''A:''' I would try to research the notability of the organisation/company, assess the tone of the article (i.e does it read as PR or an advertorial?) and if in doubt asking for a second opinion at the Administrators' Noticeboard. ]<sup>]</sup> 00:56, 21 December 2006 (UTC)


:'''7.''' What is your age?
::''Please be aware there is a discussion about asking a candidate's age at the ], there is a suggestion that candidates might want to reply something like this: "''Old enough to be eligible for the RfA process''".'' ]<sup>] | ]</sup> 14:19, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
::'''A:''' No secret here. Just check my userpage ;-) ]<sup>]</sup> 14:29, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

'''Optional questions from {{user|Mecu}}'''
:'''8.''' Why were you absent from Misplaced Pages at the end of 2005 and start of 2006? (0 edits in Nov/Dec 2005 and ~60 in Jan/Feb 2006)
::'''A:''' Mainly for personal reasons. ]<sup>]</sup> 06:10, 22 December 2006 (UTC)


;General comments ;General comments
Line 34: Line 45:
*See ]'s edit summary usage with . For the edit count, see the ]. *See ]'s edit summary usage with . For the edit count, see the ].
<!-- end edit count box --> <!-- end edit count box -->
* NB: I will be offline for approx. 24h. Any possible questions will be answered then. Have a nice xmas! ]<sup>]</sup> 08:39, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
*
---- ----
<!-- IMPORTANT: Only registered Wikipedians may comment in the "support", "oppose" or "neutral" sections. Non-registered users or editors who are not logged in are welcome to participate in the "comments" and "questions" sections. --> <!-- IMPORTANT: Only registered Wikipedians may comment in the "support", "oppose" or "neutral" sections. Non-registered users or editors who are not logged in are welcome to participate in the "comments" and "questions" sections. -->
Line 44: Line 55:
'''Support''' '''Support'''
#]<span style="font-size:70%;">]</span> 12:41, 20 December 2006 (UTC) (whoo, first!) #]<span style="font-size:70%;">]</span> 12:41, 20 December 2006 (UTC) (whoo, first!)
#'''Strong support''' as nom. -- '']'' - <small>]</small> 12:46, 20 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Strong support''' as nom. -- '']'' - <small>]</small> 12:46, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' - clearly a dedicated editor. ] 12:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support''' - clearly a dedicated editor. ] 12:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' seems good though a little more Wiki-talk would be better, not severely lacking though and definitely not enough to warrant an oppose. ]<sup>] | ]</sup> 13:04, 20 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support''' seems good though a little more Wiki-talk would be better, not severely lacking though and definitely not enough to warrant an oppose. ]<sup>] | ]</sup> 13:04, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' 7500 edits spread thoroughly between all areas of editing space seems good enough to qualify as an admin. ] 13:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support''' 7500 edits spread thoroughly between all areas of editing space seems good enough to qualify as an admin. ] 13:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' - Unless any disturbing revelations are unearthed, passes my only criteria: very unlikely to abuse the tools or other editors and at least passably well-informed about policy. ] <sup>]</sup>⁄<sub>]</sub> <small>&bull;&nbsp;13:26, 20 December 2006 (UTC)</small> #'''Support''' - Unless any disturbing revelations are unearthed, passes my only criteria: very unlikely to abuse the tools or other editors and at least passably well-informed about policy. ] <sup>]</sup>⁄<sub>]</sub> <small>&bull;&nbsp;13:26, 20 December 2006 (UTC)</small>
#'''Support'''. No reservations, an excellent all-around editor. He has a higher Misplaced Pages Talk edit count than I do and I've been an administrator since last September. ] <sup><small><font color="DarkBlue">]</font></small></sup> 14:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support'''. No reservations, an excellent all-around editor. He has a higher Misplaced Pages Talk edit count than I do and I've been an administrator since last September. ] <sup>]</sup> 14:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
#Of course - <b>]</b><small> ]</small> 14:40, 20 December 2006 (UTC) #Of course - <b>]</b><small> ]</small> 14:40, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
#Per the Crazy person above. &mdash; ]<span class="plainlinks"> </span> 14:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC) #Per the Crazy person above. &mdash; ]<span class="plainlinks"> </span> 14:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Obvious, strong and swift support''' Will make an excellent admin.--<strong><font style="color: #082567">]</font>]<font style="color: #082567">]</font></strong> 14:45, 20 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Obvious, strong and swift support''' Will make an excellent admin.--<strong>]]]</strong> 14:45, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Strong Support''' It's quite a lot since I first noted Asterion, and have always held his work in great esteem, especially the edits has done in such inflamatory areas as the Balkans, where Asterion is one of the very few non-admin editors without Balkan links active. I also greatly appreciate his zero-tolerance for PA: to much leniency has been displayed in Balkans-related issues towards incivility and PA, and I hope Asterion will give a hand in changing this.--] 14:54, 20 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Strong Support''' It's quite a lot since I first noted Asterion, and have always held his work in great esteem, especially the edits has done in such inflamatory areas as the Balkans, where Asterion is one of the very few non-admin editors without Balkan links active. I also greatly appreciate his zero-tolerance for PA: to much leniency has been displayed in Balkans-related issues towards incivility and PA, and I hope Asterion will give a hand in changing this.--] 14:54, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support'''. I'd prefer it if you had never gotten blocked, but 9 months ago is long enough. -] <small><sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub></small> 14:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support'''. I'd prefer it if you had never gotten blocked, but 9 months ago is long enough. -] <small><sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub></small> 14:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' per Nearly headless nick :). &mdash; <span style="font-family: Verdana">]<sup>]</sup></font></span> 16:00, 20 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support''' per Nearly headless nick :). &mdash; <span style="font-family: Verdana">]<sup>]</sup></span> 16:00, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support'''. I know him as a dependable, reasonable and intelligent editor. ] ] 16:13, 20 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support'''. I know him as a dependable, reasonable and intelligent editor. ] ] 16:13, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support'''. Nothing wrong at all. <tired cliche here> --] ]] 16:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support'''. Nothing wrong at all. <tired cliche here> --] ]] 16:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support'''. Seems well qualified and unobjectionable. ]]] 17:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support'''. Seems well qualified and unobjectionable. ]]] 17:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' Looks good, no immediate problems and a good spread of edits in the main spaces. ] 17:11, 20 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support''' Looks good, no immediate problems and a good spread of edits in the main spaces. ] 17:11, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' A Good candidate. Excellent quality edits. ]-] 18:33, 20 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support''' A Good candidate. Excellent quality edits. ]-] 18:33, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' - you have convinced the Russian. No more reason is needed to support. ] <sup> ]</sup> 18:53, 20 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support''' - you have convinced the Russian. No more reason is needed to support. ] <sup> ]</sup> 18:53, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' - per Moreschi ;-) --<font color="#27408B" size="2">'''Kind Regards - '''] | ] | ]</font> 19:54, 20 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support''' - per Moreschi ;-) --<font color="#27408B" size="2">'''Kind Regards - '''] | ] | ]</font> 19:54, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' per above. ] 21:10, 20 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support''' per above. ] 21:10, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' ]</font><font color="green">]</font><font color="#007FFF">]</font> 21:17, 20 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support''' ]]] 21:17, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' per everything listed. Seems like a fantastic user who obviously knows his way around the tools.] 21:33, 20 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support''' per everything listed. Seems like a fantastic user who obviously knows his way around the tools.] 21:33, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' looks completely good.-- ] <sup>]</sup> <sub>]</sub> 21:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support''' looks completely good.-- ] <sup>]</sup> <sub>]</sub> 21:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
Line 70: Line 81:
#'''Support''' Looking mop-worthy. - ] 00:32, 21 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support''' Looking mop-worthy. - ] 00:32, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' No obvious reasons to oppose... ''']]]''' 00:55, 21 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support''' No obvious reasons to oppose... ''']]]''' 00:55, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' Long overdue. ]<font color="green">]</font>] 01:06, 21 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support''' Long overdue. ]]] 01:06, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support'''. Nothing to add to the above really. Good all-round candidate. ]&nbsp;<sup><small>]</small></sup> 01:16, 21 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support'''. Nothing to add to the above really. Good all-round candidate. ]&nbsp;<sup><small>]</small></sup> 01:16, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support'''. Definitely qualified. ''']]''' 02:03, 21 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support'''. Definitely qualified. ''']]''' 02:03, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' per all the above comments. --<font style="background:gold">]]</font><sup><font style="background:yellow">]</font></sup> 03:20, 21 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support''' per all the above comments. --<span style="background:gold;">]]</span>] 03:20, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' a good candidate --]] 03:23, 21 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support''' a good candidate --]] 03:23, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support'''. I'm now crazy abotu the relatively high avg edits/article, but reallythere's ntohign wrong that I can find about you as an admin. --] 04:06, 21 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support'''. I'm now crazy abotu the relatively high avg edits/article, but reallythere's ntohign wrong that I can find about you as an admin. --] 04:06, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support.''' Positive interactions and experience, a well-considered candidate.--]<font color="#DAA520"> | </font>] 04:23, 21 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support.''' Positive interactions and experience, a well-considered candidate.--]<font color="#DAA520"> | </font>] 04:23, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' ]]]] 05:07, 21 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support''' ]]]] 05:07, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support'''. Another goody. ]...''<small><font color="#008822">]</font></small>'' 05:13, 21 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Support'''. Another goody. ]...'']'' 05:13, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Strong support''' - ''']''' (]) 06:03, 21 December 2006 (UTC) #'''Strong support''' - ''']''' (]) 06:03, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' <span class="user-sig user-Quarl"><i>—] <sup>(])</sup> <small>2006-12-21 10:32Z</small></i></span> #'''Support''' <span class="user-sig user-Quarl"><i>—] <sup>(])</sup> <small>2006-12-21 10:32Z</small></i></span>
#Sure, why not? (]) 12:23, 21 December 2006 (UTC) #Sure, why not? (]) 12:23, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''A favor''' - definitely. ]<i>::</i><small>]</small> 12:29, 21 December 2006 (UTC) #'''A favor''' - definitely. ]<i>::</i><small>]</small> 12:29, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' as per others.--]] <sup>]]</sup> 15:13, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Sure'''. Seems eminently sane. It would be nice to have a resident admin on those North African topics. - ]] 15:17, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' Keeping cool is crucial for admins, especially in sensitive areas. ] 15:25, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''': Candidate looks good. ] ] ] 19:20, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' (edit conflict) Everything looks good here. '''] ]''' <sup>(])</sup> 19:29, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''': Beyond passable! --Slgr]ndson <small>(] - ] - ])</small> 21:06, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' Seen him around. ]] 22:50, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' per above. ]<sup> ] | ] | ]</sup> 08:28, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' per above. ] 10:18, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
# support --] <small>(])</small> 11:47, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' obviously a good candidate for adminship. Nice job Szvest. ← ] <sup>]</sup> <small>13:29, 22 December 2006 (UTC)</small>
#'''Support''' - Asterion is the type of user that could do with the extra buttons. ] (] • ]) 13:43, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' A very helpful wikipedist, from my experience!--] 15:12, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' I thought you already were (alas, this sounds like the mother of all clichés). ] <sup>] / ]</sup> 18:56, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
#:'''Support''' per above. ] 21:42, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
#::Sorry but you can only vote once, see #21. ]-] 22:25, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
#:::Whoops. Sorry about that. ] 22:28, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' ] 02:25, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' good anwsers to questions, and good amount of expierence. // ] 04:28, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' - long overdue. <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">]]</span> 10:56, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' - If those that opposed my RfA support here I have no worries at all. ] 11:46, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
# I'm ] and I '''approve''' this message! - 12:12, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''', seems good to me. ] (]) 14:53, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support'''. No concerns. Will be a good admin. ] <small>]|]</small> 17:07, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' great work. ] <sup>(]/])</sup> 19:25, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support'''. Very good user; will make a great admin. ] 21:27, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support'''. Strong candidate. ]] 05:31, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support'''. Solid answers, a wealth of positive contributions, and cool-like-a-cucumber attitude make this a strong endorsement for adminship. ] 15:39, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support'''. ~]&nbsp;(]&middot;]) 19:11, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' per pretty much everything above. ] 19:57, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support'''. Good, talented, complex editor. - ] 22:41, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' Solid candidate, good answers ] 05:04, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' Will make a good admin. ] 06:03, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' --] <sup>(])</sup> 01:51, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support'''. ] 02:17, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support'''. ] 02:24, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' --''''']''''' (''']''') 19:08, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Strong support''' Such dedication] ]/] ] 20:11, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' A great Wikipedian that has shown leadership throughout their editing history. --] 22:15, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''' ~ ] 04:58, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support'''. Will make good use of the tools. Smart guy. -] 05:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC)


'''Oppose''' '''Oppose'''
Line 88: Line 140:


'''Neutral''' '''Neutral'''
# Question 4 worries me, but question 6 was answered exactly as I expect an admin to act. --] <small>]</small> 14:19, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#
#:If we put the answer into the same context as the other questions we'd find nothing to worry about i believe. Indeed what's really wrong in question 4? -- '']'' - <small>]</small> 14:56, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#::Calling WP:IAR common sense worries me quite a bit, but he shows good thought otherwise. It's too much for me to support, but not enough to oppose. --] <small>]</small> 15:35, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#:::I believe both explanations are ''right''. ''If the rules prevent you from improving or maintaining Misplaced Pages, ignore them'' is too simple as a policy statement to merit a ''common sense'' labelling. -- '']'' - <small>]</small> 16:17, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#::::Hi Badlydrawnjeff. Just for the record I feel the need to clarify that by common sense I was referring to WP:SNOW. Let's say if we have a clear support for a decision and no one else seems to object, it could be snowballed. There are effective mechanisms at work to stop any abuse of WP:SNOW, as for example deletion review, applicable in some instances. As far as I understood the question, WP:IAR was being applied to the use of WP:SNOW as spelled out in Malber's question. As I have had no feedback from him I can only interpret it this way. Thanks and regards, ]<sup>]</sup> 19:17, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
#:::] is a good principle, especially with respect to ] - in fact, ] used to redirect to IAR. The crucial part in being an administrator is knowing when others will agree with your common sense. <span class="user-sig user-Quarl"><i>—] <sup>(])</sup> <small>2006-12-21 20:59Z</small></i></span>

:''The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <span style="color:red;">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either ] or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.''</div>

Latest revision as of 20:45, 25 January 2024

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


Asterion

Final (78/0/1); Ended 15:26, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Asterion (talk · contribs) – I would like to nominate Asterion to become an administrator. Asterion has been w/ us since September 2005 and for benefit of those with editcountitis, he has around 7000 well spread edits. Asterion is very active in Spain, Morocco, The Balkans, Western Sahara and many politics related articles. This level-headed user has shown a great adherance to WP:NPOV. He's also been very active in mediation processes. I haven't seen any Spanish administrator yet in en wiki and would like to to see Asterion on board. -- Szvest 12:37, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
I humbly accept. Asterion 08:52, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Misplaced Pages in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Misplaced Pages backlog and Category:Administrative backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
A: I have been quite active on recent changes patrolling. The administrator tools would certainly prove useful there as I would be able to respond more quickly to any blatant vandals (I will keep a close eye on WP:AIV too). I also foresee work on other not so popular areas, not limited to but including, closing requested moves backlog, page protection and WP:3RR.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Misplaced Pages, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I edit articles on many different subjects, from geography (Lebrija, San Roque, Spain, Hibaldstow,...) to cars (Zastava Skala). Overall, I am a compulsive image-taker: I take my camera or camera-phone with me at all times. As I travel considerably, I tend to use any photographs taken as an excuse to start a stub or update a related article. I had one of my articles featured in the homepage Did you know? section, Glanford Power Station.
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: Yes, I have edited controversial subjects (i.e. Plitvice Lakes and other Balkan related articles, Western Sahara). During any dispute, I have been cool as a cucumber, even under personal attacks. I tried to work things out in the talk pages, generally by defusing any source of conflict (see Talk:Plitvice Lakes) and trying to reason with other users. If things did not work out, I went the whole way to WP:RfC and mediation. At some stage I have to admit I have felt disillusioned but did not lose faith on the system. As a last resort, I had no problem with referring or things being referred to arbitration. Nonetheless, I have been slowly moving away from controversial subjects, as I find these tend to take far too much time which I could put to work better on other areas. In the future, I will continue to stick to my personal 1RR and zero-tolerance for personal attacks policies.

Optional questions from Malber (talk · contribs)

4. What do the policy of WP:IAR and the essay WP:SNOW mean to you and how would you apply them?
A: It is a matter of common sense. In any case, I would never use it as an excuse to advance any personal goal or harm the project (i.e. closing early AfD for articles I might dislike and so on). Asterion 00:56, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
5. Is there ever a case where a punitive block should be applied?
A: No. Blocks are not punitive, they are used to counteract disruption against wikipedia. Unless someone can offer me some very good reasons, my answer will always be negative. Regards, Asterion 18:45, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
6. What would your thought process be to determine that a business article should be deleted using CSD:G11?
A: I would try to research the notability of the organisation/company, assess the tone of the article (i.e does it read as PR or an advertorial?) and if in doubt asking for a second opinion at the Administrators' Noticeboard. Asterion 00:56, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
7. What is your age?
Please be aware there is a discussion about asking a candidate's age at the RfA talk page, there is a suggestion that candidates might want to reply something like this: "Old enough to be eligible for the RfA process". James086 14:19, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
A: No secret here. Just check my userpage ;-) Asterion 14:29, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Optional questions from Mecu (talk · contribs)

8. Why were you absent from Misplaced Pages at the end of 2005 and start of 2006? (0 edits in Nov/Dec 2005 and ~60 in Jan/Feb 2006)
A: Mainly for personal reasons. Asterion 06:10, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
General comments

Discussion

Support

  1. Duja► 12:41, 20 December 2006 (UTC) (whoo, first!)
  2. Strong support as nom. -- Szvest - 12:46, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  3. Support - clearly a dedicated editor. Insanephantom 12:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  4. Support seems good though a little more Wiki-talk would be better, not severely lacking though and definitely not enough to warrant an oppose. James086 13:04, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  5. Support 7500 edits spread thoroughly between all areas of editing space seems good enough to qualify as an admin. Diez2 13:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  6. Support - Unless any disturbing revelations are unearthed, passes my only criteria: very unlikely to abuse the tools or other editors and at least passably well-informed about policy. GeeJo ⁄(c) • 13:26, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  7. Support. No reservations, an excellent all-around editor. He has a higher Misplaced Pages Talk edit count than I do and I've been an administrator since last September. A Train 14:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  8. Of course - crz crztalk 14:40, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  9. Per the Crazy person above. — Nearly Headless Nick 14:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  10. Obvious, strong and swift support Will make an excellent admin.--Húsönd 14:45, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  11. Strong Support It's quite a lot since I first noted Asterion, and have always held his work in great esteem, especially the edits has done in such inflamatory areas as the Balkans, where Asterion is one of the very few non-admin editors without Balkan links active. I also greatly appreciate his zero-tolerance for PA: to much leniency has been displayed in Balkans-related issues towards incivility and PA, and I hope Asterion will give a hand in changing this.--Aldux 14:54, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  12. Support. I'd prefer it if you had never gotten blocked, but 9 months ago is long enough. -Amarkov edits 14:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  13. Support per Nearly headless nick :). — Seadog 16:00, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  14. Support. I know him as a dependable, reasonable and intelligent editor. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:13, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  15. Support. Nothing wrong at all. <tired cliche here> --teh tennisman 16:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  16. Support. Seems well qualified and unobjectionable. Coemgenus 17:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  17. Support Looks good, no immediate problems and a good spread of edits in the main spaces. (aeropagitica) 17:11, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  18. Support A Good candidate. Excellent quality edits. Canadian-Bacon 18:33, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  19. Support - you have convinced the Russian. No more reason is needed to support. Moreschi 18:53, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  20. Support - per Moreschi ;-) --Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 19:54, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  21. Support per above. Just H 21:10, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  22. Support Joe I 21:17, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  23. Support per everything listed. Seems like a fantastic user who obviously knows his way around the tools.Ganfon 21:33, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  24. Support looks completely good.-- danntm C 21:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  25. Support looks good all around. Dar-Ape 22:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  26. Support Looking mop-worthy. - Kukini 00:32, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  27. Support No obvious reasons to oppose... S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 00:55, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  28. Support Long overdue. Scobell302 01:06, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  29. Support. Nothing to add to the above really. Good all-round candidate. WJBscribe  01:16, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  30. Support. Definitely qualified. Nishkid64 02:03, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  31. Support per all the above comments. --Siva1979 03:20, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  32. Support a good candidate --Steve (Slf67) 03:23, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  33. Support. I'm now crazy abotu the relatively high avg edits/article, but reallythere's ntohign wrong that I can find about you as an admin. --Wizardman 04:06, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  34. Support. Positive interactions and experience, a well-considered candidate.--cjllw | TALK 04:23, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  35. Support Terence Ong 05:07, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  36. Support. Another goody. Grutness...wha? 05:13, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  37. Strong support - Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:03, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  38. Support —Quarl 2006-12-21 10:32Z
  39. Sure, why not? (Radiant) 12:23, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  40. A favor - definitely. Proto::► 12:29, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  41. Support as per others.--Eva 15:13, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  42. Sure. Seems eminently sane. It would be nice to have a resident admin on those North African topics. - BanyanTree 15:17, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  43. Support Keeping cool is crucial for admins, especially in sensitive areas. IronDuke 15:25, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  44. Support: Candidate looks good. s d 3 1 4 1 5 Happy Holidays! 19:20, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  45. Support (edit conflict) Everything looks good here. Tennis DyNamiTe 19:29, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  46. Support: Beyond passable! --Slgr@ndson (page - messages - contribs) 21:06, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  47. Support Seen him around. NikoSilver 22:50, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  48. Support per above. Alex43223 08:28, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  49. Support per above. VegaDark 10:18, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  50. support --dario vet ^_^ (talk) 11:47, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  51. Support obviously a good candidate for adminship. Nice job Szvest. ← ANAS 13:29, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  52. Support - Asterion is the type of user that could do with the extra buttons. Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 13:43, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  53. Support A very helpful wikipedist, from my experience!--Garcilaso 15:12, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  54. Support I thought you already were (alas, this sounds like the mother of all clichés). Valentinian 18:56, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
    Support per above. Just H 21:42, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
    Sorry but you can only vote once, see #21. Canadian-Bacon 22:25, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
    Whoops. Sorry about that. Just H 22:28, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
  55. Support John254 02:25, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
  56. Support good anwsers to questions, and good amount of expierence. // I c e d K o l a 04:28, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
  57. Support - long overdue. Khoikhoi 10:56, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
  58. Support - If those that opposed my RfA support here I have no worries at all. Agathoclea 11:46, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
  59. I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message! - 12:12, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
  60. Support, seems good to me. Stifle (talk) 14:53, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
  61. Support. No concerns. Will be a good admin. Nephron  T|C 17:07, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
  62. Support great work. Shyam 19:25, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
  63. Support. Very good user; will make a great admin. Firsfron of Ronchester 21:27, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
  64. Support. Strong candidate. Jpeob 05:31, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  65. Support. Solid answers, a wealth of positive contributions, and cool-like-a-cucumber attitude make this a strong endorsement for adminship. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 15:39, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  66. Support. ~crazytales (t·c) 19:11, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  67. Support per pretty much everything above. Newyorkbrad 19:57, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  68. Support. Good, talented, complex editor. - Darwinek 22:41, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  69. Support Solid candidate, good answers Bwithh 05:04, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
  70. Support Will make a good admin. Dionyseus 06:03, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
  71. Support --WinHunter 01:51, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
  72. Support. Zaxem 02:17, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
  73. Support. alphachimp. 02:24, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
  74. Support --Majorly (Talk) 19:08, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
  75. Strong support Such dedicationWikiMan53 T/C edits Review Me! 20:11, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
  76. Support A great Wikipedian that has shown leadership throughout their editing history. --Extranet 22:15, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
  77. Support ~ trialsanderrors 04:58, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
  78. Support. Will make good use of the tools. Smart guy. -Mysekurity 05:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Oppose

Neutral

  1. Question 4 worries me, but question 6 was answered exactly as I expect an admin to act. --badlydrawnjeff talk 14:19, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
    If we put the answer into the same context as the other questions we'd find nothing to worry about i believe. Indeed what's really wrong in question 4? -- Szvest - 14:56, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
    Calling WP:IAR common sense worries me quite a bit, but he shows good thought otherwise. It's too much for me to support, but not enough to oppose. --badlydrawnjeff talk 15:35, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
    I believe both explanations are right. If the rules prevent you from improving or maintaining Misplaced Pages, ignore them is too simple as a policy statement to merit a common sense labelling. -- Szvest - 16:17, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
    Hi Badlydrawnjeff. Just for the record I feel the need to clarify that by common sense I was referring to WP:SNOW. Let's say if we have a clear support for a decision and no one else seems to object, it could be snowballed. There are effective mechanisms at work to stop any abuse of WP:SNOW, as for example deletion review, applicable in some instances. As far as I understood the question, WP:IAR was being applied to the use of WP:SNOW as spelled out in Malber's question. As I have had no feedback from him I can only interpret it this way. Thanks and regards, Asterion 19:17, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
    Misplaced Pages:Use common sense is a good principle, especially with respect to WP:IAR - in fact, WP:UCS used to redirect to IAR. The crucial part in being an administrator is knowing when others will agree with your common sense. —Quarl 2006-12-21 20:59Z
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.
Category: