Misplaced Pages

:Requests for adminship/Sam Spade 2: 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 editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 18:16, 15 February 2006 editDuncharris (talk | contribs)30,510 edits noway← Previous edit Revision as of 18:57, 15 February 2006 edit undoPerceval (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users6,294 editsm →[]: supp, tallyNext edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
===]=== ===]===
''' ''' ''' '''
'''(5/2/1) ending <nowiki>22:02</nowiki> 21 February 2006 (UTC)''' '''(7/4/1) ending <nowiki>22:02</nowiki> 21 February 2006 (UTC)'''


{{User|Sam Spade}} – Mr. Spade is well-known among the community, having established his account in November 2003, and having accrued over '''32,000''' edits. He is a charter member of the ], and has stood three times in the ArbCom elections. He ] broadly to topics in religion, politics, history, and the military, and is certainly unafraid of tackling contentious topics, for which he has developed something of a reputation. All of these things, I imagine most voters already know. {{User|Sam Spade}} – Mr. Spade is well-known among the community, having established his account in November 2003, and having accrued over '''32,000''' edits. He is a charter member of the ], and has stood three times in the ArbCom elections. He ] broadly to topics in religion, politics, history, and the military, and is certainly unafraid of tackling contentious topics, for which he has developed something of a reputation. All of these things, I imagine most voters already know.
Line 20: Line 20:
#'''Support''' would not abuse tools, which is the only really relevant criteria with me in these decisions. I hope he gets it this time. Enough is enough.] ] 16:54, 15 February 2006 (UTC) #'''Support''' would not abuse tools, which is the only really relevant criteria with me in these decisions. I hope he gets it this time. Enough is enough.] ] 16:54, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support''', hopefully wise enough not to abuse the admin tools. ]]]&nbsp;<sup >]]]</sup > 17:19, 15 February 2006 (UTC) #'''Support''', hopefully wise enough not to abuse the admin tools. ]]]&nbsp;<sup >]]]</sup > 17:19, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
#'''Support'''&mdash;] 18:57, 15 February 2006 (UTC)


'''Oppose''' '''Oppose'''

Revision as of 18:57, 15 February 2006

Sam Spade

(7/4/1) ending 22:02 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Sam Spade (talk · contribs) – Mr. Spade is well-known among the community, having established his account in November 2003, and having accrued over 32,000 edits. He is a charter member of the Association of Members' Advocates, and has stood three times in the ArbCom elections. He contributes broadly to topics in religion, politics, history, and the military, and is certainly unafraid of tackling contentious topics, for which he has developed something of a reputation. All of these things, I imagine most voters already know.

Mr Spade's previous nomination for adminship was quite some time ago, in October 2004. Whatever doubts about him existed then, I cannot imagine substantive objections to his candidacy now. Though Mr. Spade and I are political opposites (to be frank, white supporters of American paramilitarism usually scare the jinkies out of me), I find him to be a thoughtful and honorable man, with an exceptional knowledge-base, and a willingness to listen to discussion. Above all, I believe he respects consensus, and will act judiciously in the use of adminship "powers", if the community sees fit to grant them to him. Ultimately, adminship is not an award for the recognition of longevity, or edit count; nor a license to act according to one's whims. It is a mop, and with that mop comes a duty to serve the community: to keep the encyclopedia tidy, efficient, fair-minded, and friendly. I know Sam Spade understands this duty, and I trust him fully to honor it. I'm proud to nominate him for his overdue mop-bucket. Xoloz 22:02, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

Thanks, I'm proud to recieve such a heartfelt and thoughtful nomination. While I'll mainly use the new abilities for page moves and other ordinary actions, the ability to protect pages when requested to do so and so forth will be nice as well. Those who know me will be aware that I'll engage in precious little blocking, and will avoid wheel warring like the plague. Sam Spade 22:51, 14 February 2006 (UTC)


Support

  1. Strong Support as nominator. Xoloz 22:09, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
  2. archola 02:38, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
  3. Strong Support, I could think of few other editors who deserves this more. Ten Dead Chickens 14:56, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
  4. While Sam is often contentious and prone to conflict, I feel like I know him well enough to conclude that he is unlikely to abuse admin tools. Guettarda 15:31, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
  5. Support would not abuse tools, which is the only really relevant criteria with me in these decisions. I hope he gets it this time. Enough is enough.Gator (talk) 16:54, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
  6. Support, hopefully wise enough not to abuse the admin tools. Alphax  17:19, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
  7. Support—thames 18:57, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Strong OpposeCberlet 13:13, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
  2. I think Morven had it about right last time in commenting that adminship would only magnify the conflicts Sam gets involved in and make him more of a target than he already is. Also, while his previous nomination may be fairly old, I don't think that either Sam or the issues surrounding him have changed significantly since then, so the same outcome is warranted as before. Both for his own sake in terms of being able to continue editing, and for that of Misplaced Pages's community atmosphere, I oppose. --Michael Snow 16:56, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
  3. Oppose, sorry Jack, but I have to agree with Michael here. Jonathunder 18:09, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
  4. strong oppose I always think of him as a less intelligent and slightly ruder version of Ed Poor, and I think he will abuse his position. — Dunc|☺ 18:16, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

  1. Rob Church (talk) 17:13, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Comments

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, if any, would you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Misplaced Pages backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
A. Mainly moving obscure pages to old redirects, and protecting the odd page someone comes to my talk page to ask for help with. Stuff like Cartesian materialism 2 weeks ago...
2. Of your articles or contributions to Misplaced Pages, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. These.
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.Yep. The best way (perhaps unfortunately) is to click random page and edit something else, work on a stub or some insanely obscure topic, transfer content in from the 1911 britannica, or something like that. Getting into a tiff isn't fullfilling at all. See this article I wrote: Misplaced Pages:Truce