Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:21, 25 April 2004

Shorthand:
WP:RFA

Template:Communitypage

Requests for adminship are requests made for a Wikipedian to be made an administrator. These requests are made via nomination.

Important notes

Here you can make a request for adminship. See Misplaced Pages:Administrators for what this entails and see Misplaced Pages:List of administrators for a list of current admins. See Misplaced Pages:Bureaucrats for a list of users entrusted to grant sysop rights.

If you vote, please update the heading. If you nominate someone, you may wish to vote to support them.

Guidelines

Current Misplaced Pages policy is to grant administrator status to anyone who has been an active Misplaced Pages contributor for a while and is generally a known and trusted member of the community. Most users seem to agree that the more administrators there are the better.

Wikipedians are more likely to support the candidacy of people who have been logged-on contributors for some months and contributed to a variety of articles without often getting into conflicts with other users.

Nomination. Users can nominate other users for administrator. If you want to nominate another user, please notify them by leaving a message on their talk page in advance, as a courtesy. If the user wishes not to be nominated, please abide by that decision. Along with the nomination, please give some reasons as to why you think this editor would make a good administrator.

Self-nomination. If you want to nominate yourself to become an administrator, it is recommended that you have been a user for a reasonable period of time - long enough to be regarded as trustworthy (on the order of months). Other users can comment on your request—they might express reservations (because, for example, they suspect you will abuse your new-found powers, or if you've joined very recently), but hopefully they will approve and say lovely things about you. Please also give some reasons as to why you think you would make a good administrator.

Anonymous users. Anonymous users cannot be nominated, nominate others, or support or oppose nominations. The absolute minimum requirement to be involved with adminship matters is to have a username in the system. This requirement has been added to prevent abuses of the system.

After a minimum 7 day period for comments, if there is general agreement that someone who requests adminship should be given it, then a bureaucrat will make it so and record that fact at Misplaced Pages:Recently created admins and Misplaced Pages:Recently created bureaucrats. If there is uncertaintly, in the mind of even one bureaucrat, at least one bureaucrat should suggest an extension, so that it is clear that it is the community decision which is being implemented.

Nominations for adminship

Note: Nominations have to be accepted by the user in question. If you nominate a user, please also leave a message on their talk page and ask them to reply here if they accept the nomination.

Please place new nominations at the top.

User:Wetman (8/0/0) ends 06:10, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

Wetman has been around since September 2003 and has about 4,700 edits. He has a done a lot of good work for wikipedia. I think it would be helpful if he had the ability to rollback and block vandals and perform other admin tasks. Maximus Rex 06:10, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Okay, I accept. But I'm not a good patient admin type: I secretly disdain certain aspects of "NPOV", hate the thumbnail format, can't format, can't upload images yada yada yada. Wetman 07:55, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Support:

1. Maximus Rex 06:10, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
2. Meelar 06:11, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
3. Gentgeen 06:14, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
4. Tuf-Kat 06:16, Apr 25, 2004 (UTC)
5. SUpport strongly. RickK 06:21, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
6. Support strongly, what a contribution to wikipedia 4600+ edits. GrazingshipIV 06:38, Apr 25, 2004 (UTC)
7. support strongly Sam Spade 06:49, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
8. Angela. 12:36, Apr 25, 2004 (UTC)

User:Catbar(5/0/0) 04:48, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

Catbar has been here since December and has made about 800 edits. Solid contributor who deserves admin status. Meelar 04:48, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I'm pleased to be nominated - thank you, Meelar. I've found it interesting to work on the Misplaced Pages. I hope I can be a worthy admin. Brian Rock 05:32, Apr 25, 2004 (UTC)

Support:

1. Meelar 04:48, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
2. Cecropia 05:54, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC) I was wondering when we were going to get the all-cat channel on WikiTV.
3. Maximus Rex 05:57, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
4. Tuf-Kat 06:17, Apr 25, 2004 (UTC)
5. Support, although 800 edits is a little weak. GrazingshipIV 06:29, Apr 25, 2004 (UTC)

Oppose:

Neutral:

Hcheney (20/1)

I would like to nominate Hcheney for administrator. Not only does he have 1150+ edits since 23 December 2003 and a generally calm and collaborative attitude about his work here, but Hcheney acted very impressively when previously nominated for admin and withdrew his acceptance of the nomination when it became obvious that foul play was occurring (through no fault of Hcheney's). I think that this kind of community-minded behavior is a fine example of what a Misplaced Pages administrator should seek to embody, and I have every confidence that Hcheney will continue to act with this care and integrity in the future. Jwrosenzweig 22:55, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Thank you for the nomination. I ask that the voters please consider my merits and faults as an editor and wikipedian. If any editor has questions or concerns, I would gladly address them either on my talk page or by e-mail. --H CHENEY 00:57, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Support:

1. Jwrosenzweig
2. moink. Good editor, and actions of others should not be held against him.
3. Having worked with him, I can say that HCheney is a model contributor. If anyone deserves this, it's him. And I can understand being disillusioned--that was a confusing, frustrating and unpleasant situation for all concerned. However, that was in no way due to HCheney him(?)self. Meelar 00:15, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
4. Support. ugen64 01:33, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)
5. Support. Tim Starling 01:41, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)
6. Support. →Raul654 02:21, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)
7. Gentgeen 02:32, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
8. BCorr|Брайен 03:04, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)
9. Support. Having reviewed a random selection of his edits, I found nothing to complain about and much that was good. A thoughtful and responsible editor. Isomorphic 03:37, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
10. Stewart Adcock 03:44, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
11. Support. 172 13:34, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
12. Merovingian ↕ Talk 13:51, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)
13. Support -- Baldhur 13:55, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
14. Hold up, hold up... You mean he wasn't one already? - Fennec 14:32, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
15. I've disagreed with Hcheney, but I believe he is a conscientious and well-intentioned contributor. Cribcage 14:55, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
16. Warofdreams 15:43, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
17. Support: good, responsible editor. —No-One Jones 17:11, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
18. Support: only seen good things. —Morven 17:36, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
19. Support. Wik's objections are invalid. As much as I dislike Grazingship, Hcheney has nothing to do with that. RickK 23:48, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
20. Support. Ambivalenthysteria 05:17, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Oppose:

1. He did not act impressively at all when previously nominated and withdrew his acceptance not "when it became obvious that foul play was occurring" but only in the last moment when it became obvious he would not get a consensus (when the vote stood at 15-9). His "impressive" reaction actually consisted in making a pretense of leaving , which lasted about a week. He also said "The entire RfA process has completely disillusioned me" which is strange - if he wasn't requesting adminship himself, why would he care so much about it? I still suspect that Hcheney and GrazingshipIV are the same person and he cares too much about adminship, much like Alex Plank. --Wik 23:56, Apr 22, 2004 (UTC)
   • Hcheney and GrazingshipIV are not the same person, both the technical and human evidence are quite clear on this. They know each other from high school but now live in different cities. Their IP addresses confirm this story. -- Tim Starling 01:40, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)
     • I also can confirm that Graz and Hcheney are not the same user. Their IPs are quite different. They know each other outside of wikipedia. They are two different people. Kingturtle 01:44, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
       • If they know each other from high school, then Hcheney is clearly a liar since he claimed last time that he did not know Grazingship. --Wik 01:45, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)
       • Note that the technical evidence only confirms that they live in two different cities, not that they knew each other from outside Misplaced Pages. -- Tim Starling 01:50, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)

Comments: OK, I want to support, but I also want to know what's behind Wik's statement that Hcheney lied about not knowing Grazingship. I remember the original incident but I wasn't paying all that much attention to it. Can anyone remind me, and confirm/deny what Wik says? Isomorphic 02:30, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I'm not sure where the alleged incident was in which Hcheney denied knowing Grazingship. However, is a discussion of the issue of their relationship, begun by Hcheney. moink 03:00, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

That statement could easily be misunderstood to mean that Hcheney denied knowing GrazingshipIV. What it actually says, I believe, is that when Hcheney was contacted by GrazingshipIV, he did not realize that GrazingshipIV was the same person who had introduced him to Misplaced Pages. Keep in mind that when Wik questioned GrazingshipIV as an inexperienced nominator, GrazingshipIV claimed to be a long-time user who had only recently gotten a username. --Michael Snow 03:16, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

If you believe that story that Hcheney presented last time as an obvious last-ditch attempt to secure his nomination, then I would say you've crossed the line from "assuming good faith" into "gullibility". Let's review the facts. Consider this excerpt from the last nomination:

1. Oppose - nomination by a 13-day-old user is dubious. --Wik 20:22, Mar 22, 2004 (UTC)
   • If it is any consolation I have used Misplaced Pages for years. I would hope you would base your vote on the merit of the candidate rather than myself.-GrazingshipIV 20:36, Mar 22, 2004 (UTC)
     • It just gets more dubious. Used for years and only thought to edit 13 days ago? A likely story. --Wik 20:43, Mar 22, 2004 (UTC)
       • No I got a user name 13 days ago.

Now what does the last line from Grazingship there imply? Apparently he's saying that he edited before but just got a username 13 days previously (as it would indeed be hard to believe that he used Misplaced Pages for years only as a reader, without ever editing). Yet the fact that he made obvious newbie mistakes after "getting his username" strongly suggests that he did not edit before. When I raised this contradiction he said: "When I said I've been using it for years I DID mean as a reader." One wonders then how to explain his statement "No I got a user name 13 days ago" above. In any case he returns to claim that he did use Misplaced Pages for years as a reader without ever thinking to edit. Not only is that unlikely in itself, it raises the question: how did he get to know Hcheney then? If you just read Misplaced Pages, you don't see usernames. Once you read talk pages, page histories, or Recent Changes, you will of course edit yourself too. When I asked him about this contradiction he did not respond. Now why would Grazingship get into all those contradictions to support Hcheney? If they aren't the same person it is crystal clear to me that this was arranged, not just, as Hcheney claims, as an offer from Grazingship which he was not going to comply with, but an agreement by both sides. Had it worked, Hcheney would have nominated Grazingship later. Hcheney's behaviour is strong evidence for this (his story about Grazingship's emails, combined with messages he left on everyone's talk pages asking to reconsider their votes; and comments like "I do not intend to continue with Misplaced Pages having the status of a joke user." showing his fixation with adminship that would not be explicable if he hadn't expected the nomination, as he originally claimed: "I am flattered that I would be nominated so early"). --Wik 14:42, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)

Why do you think it's unlikely that someone would be a long-term reader of Misplaced Pages without editing? Two people I have met by chance in real life have been overwhelmingly impressed when they hear I am an editor for Misplaced Pages. They are both fans who know all about what Misplaced Pages is and how it works, but just never quite get around to editing. One has plans for things that she "really should contribute when she gets the time". The other thinks it's the best site on the net and spends hours reading it, but he's too intimidated by the whole thing to start editing.

As I said before, Graz got to know Hcheney from outside Misplaced Pages (yes, there is such a place). Graz noticed Hcheney's username while reading, and hatched the adminship plan. He was very keen to support Hcheney because he wanted Hcheney to support him in return. However Hcheney refused. I don't see where the mystery is. -- Tim Starling 06:54, Apr 25, 2004 (UTC)

I can't make the blind see. But why do you think Hcheney made his statement only in the last moment when his previous nomination was failing? Do you seriously think he received that email from Grazingship just then, and not before? Obviously (considering the campaigning he did on everyone's talk pages, and his complaining about the whole process) it was designed to save the nomination. Why did he suddenly care so much when initially he pretended to be surprised to be nominated "so early"? --Wik 20:21, Apr 25, 2004 (UTC)

XJamRastafire (15/0)

I want to nominate XJamRastafire. XJamRastafire has been here for a loooooooong time and made many great contributions to Misplaced Pages. Go to his user page for more details. --Lst27 23:49, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Information: 4,942 edits since February 2002. Jwrosenzweig 23:59, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Support:

1. Lst27 -- He has worked very hard and made almost 5,000 edits to Misplaced Pages.
2. To have been here that long, with that many contributions, and yet I've never seen him work tells me two things -- one, we must either have different interests or else his edits are minor, and two, he must not get into trouble. And with that many edits without trouble, I can't see not supporting this candidate. Jwrosenzweig 23:59, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
3. I've certainly seen him around the Wiki. I haven't ever seen him involved in any problems or disputes, so I support. Isomorphic 00:02, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
4. Danny 00:09, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
5. Gentgeen 00:20, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
6. Nohat 02:43, 2004 Apr 21 (UTC) Funny username.
7. Gaz 08:01, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC) (Nohat thinks XJamRastafire is a funny name - Funny!)
8. Merovingian ↕ Talk 09:23, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC)
9. RADICALBENDER★ 13:49, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
10. Cribcage 14:40, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
11. Tuf-Kat 18:38, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC)
12. Jwrosenzweig says it better than I. Meelar 02:43, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
13. Very worthy, support. GrazingshipIV 01:48, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)
14. He is around here for ages; should definitely be an admin. -- Baldhur 13:55, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
15. Angela. 03:37, Apr 24, 2004 (UTC)

Michael Snow (29/0)

I would like to nominate Michael Snow for adminship. He has been involved in discussions about the Main Page and would benefit from being able to edit that page. He has also been very involved in maintenance of the requests for comments pages and admin access would help him with this as pages that do not meet the guidelines need to be deleted. Michael has made over 2000 edits since December 2003. I believe he has a good understanding of Misplaced Pages and would be a highly trustworthy sysop. Angela. 21:35, Apr 20, 2004 (UTC)

That's very kind of you, Angela. I accept the nomination. If anyone has any questions or concerns about my conduct on Misplaced Pages that they would like to discuss before voting, you are welcome to leave a message on my talk page. Not just to help you decide whether to support me, but also to help me know what I could do better in the future. --Michael Snow 21:51, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Support:

1. Angela. 21:35, Apr 20, 2004 (UTC)
2. You're kidding me, he's not an admin? Wholeheartedly support. Jwrosenzweig 21:36, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
3. He seems quite omnipresent, that is, appears in such a wide variety of topics. Certainly is an asset to Misplaced Pages - Tsynergy 22:54, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
4. john 23:08, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
5. Sure. A good guy. Isomorphic 23:57, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
6. Danny 00:10, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
7. Gentgeen 00:20, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
8. I love snow, it's all white and cold and stuff :-P. ugen64 01:24, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC)
9. Support most violently. -- Cimon 03:29, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC)
10. Agree w Cimon Sam Spade 04:43, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
11. I'm shocked and awed that he was not one already. --mav
12. Ditto - Gaz 08:03, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
13. Ditto - Merovingian ↕ Talk 09:25, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC)
14. RADICALBENDER★ 13:49, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
15. Cribcage 14:41, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
16. Dori | Talk 15:35, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC)
17. Stewart Adcock 16:24, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
18. Hcheney 16:30, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC) As an added bonus, Michael Snow is a nice person.
19. BCorr|Брайен 16:32, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC) Of course!
20. Bkonrad | Talk 16:53, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
21. jengod 18:19, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC) I have no idea who Michael Snow is by Cimon's testimony makes me heart him. :)
22. Fabulous contributor. Support. Moncrief 20:13, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC)
23. Woohoo! -- Seth Ilys 19:08, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
24. He would make a GREAT admin (though he was one). Support strongly! GrazingshipIV 01:16, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)
25. Warofdreams 15:41, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
26. I thought I already voted yes! --Uncle Ed 18:24, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
27. Support unreservedly. →Raul654 19:19, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)
28. Repeat all of above, except Uncle Ed's comment. - Woodrow XXIII, Emperor of the United States, Minister of Ministry 04:08, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
29. moink 18:44, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

User:AndyL (3/9/9); ends 04:10, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

AndyL's contributions are always scrupulously informed and scholarly. Although he hasn't been a user for a long time, he works on a daily basis and is extremely active, methodical, and efficient. His prodigious user history (almost two thousand edits in a remarkably short time span) already establishes him among the most valuable WP users in the site's history. He is so productive and such a good task manager on a daily basis that he puts to shame a sizable number of the other academics on this site (and esp. myself, I'll grudgingly admit). 172 04:10, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I think the nomination is probably premature (though I'm not prepared to say if elected I will not serve:) but thanks to my nominator and thanks to people for the kind comments. AndyL 00:49, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Support:

1. 172 04:05, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
2. Support, looks like he knows what he's doing Comrade Nick
3. Danny 02:53, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC).

Oppose:

1. Although this user has made a lot of contributions, he has only been a logged in user for 18 days. I will definitely consider supporting him for adminship after more time has passed. Maximus Rex 04:15, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
2. Agreed with Mirv.....although I might have to wait till 8 weeks on principle. :-) Still, an excellent user with an incredible track record already. Jwrosenzweig 15:44, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
   • This is taking the fetishization of procedures way too far. Had he made the same number of contributions of the same quality over a period of, say two years, we wouldn't have a single vote in opposition. The short time span of his user history only proves the incredible rate which he's been working. The world's being turned upside down if this is viewed as a reason to hold off on voting for adminship. BTW, AndyL's also proven to be remarkably good at diffusing tensions on WP. On his own, I bet he would be able to prevent dozens of edit wars in the time that other users want to wait before voting to grant admin status. This is clearly an exceptional case and there are compelling pragmatic reasons to disregard how long he's been a logged in user. 172 15:53, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
     • 172, all I'll say is this. Admins need to prove they can stay out of trouble. Right now, Andy's made so many edits in so little time that I want to wait a bit to make sure I see others react to his edits, and then see how he responds to their reactions. I think he'll respond fine, but I want to wait and see. Now may my vote be considered legitimate? :-) Jwrosenzweig 16:00, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC) P.S. What pragmatic reasons, may I ask? I'm very open to hearing and considering them.
3. Tεxτurε 16:19, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC) - agree with Jwrosenzweig.
4. I agree, its too soon, but please try again after another six weeks. Warofdreams 18:49, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
5. Too soon -- will certainly be renominated after a bit. BCorr|Брайен 18:58, Apr 19, 2004 (UTC)
6. No way. AndyL completely disrespects my work and I shudder to think of the retribution he would bring down upon me if he was an admin. TDC 21:05, Apr 19, 2004 (UTC)
   1. Can we have an example of a conflict between you two to look at please? Snowspinner 22:01, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
      1. I assume it's a reference to their edit war over Allegations of human rights abuses in Castro's Cuba. Niteowlneils 22:17, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
         1. There are other topics in which TDC has come to blow with Andy, and others, including me. see Talk:Fascism, for instance. john 04:52, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
            1. For the record, TDC's allegations are baseless and absurd. Yes, there have been edit conflicts between TDC and AndyL -- after all, this is Misplaced Pages and everyone is involved in an edit conflict with someone else! Moreover, AndyL's comments have always been well-informed, clear, and patient beyond belief. He has never been abusive or even mildly hostile (e.g. sarcasm, abruptness) to TDC or anyone to my knowledge. There is no reason at all to believe that he would bring down retribution on anywone. TDC's comment perverts the process of selecting admins. Slrubenstein
7. Andy may become a good candidate, but this nomination is premature. I concur 100% with Jwrosenzweig's comment, above. Cribcage 06:04, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
8. Rude, assumes bad faith, and appears unable to debate in a polite manner. Sam Spade 23:51, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
9. Nothing wrong with a little patience. -- Dissident (Talk)] 18:31, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Neutral:

1. No-One Jones 13:50, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC) If anyone deserves an early adminship, it's him; however a little bit of seasoning and experience never hurt anybody. I'll be the first to support after another six three weeks or so. —No-One Jones 05:28, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
2. Agree with Mirv. LUDRAMAN | T 16:28, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
3. What's the hurry? Isomorphic 18:38, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
4. Slrubenstein 18:40, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC) I have to agree with Mirv and Ludraman. But I urge others to keep a sharp eye on AndyL, and make him a sysop as soon as is reasonable -- thus far he has demonstrated an absolute commitment to serious scholarship, clear writing, and congeniality. I am certain that he would make a superb administrator.
5. john 04:52, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC). I'd note that while the User:AndyL has only been about for 18 days, he posted for an additional 20 days or so as User:Andylehrer before he, by his own account, forgot his password. But still, perhaps, too early - nevertheless, I think he definitely could do the job. john 04:52, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
6. Has Andy accepted the nomination yet? I hope he requests his old contributions be moved to his new username, for the purposes of future discussions like this. +sj+ 10:07, 2004 Apr 20 (UTC)
7. His comments in declining earned him a lot of credit in my book, though. Meelar 02:45, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
8. Good user with excellent potential, give it time.GrazingshipIV 01:55, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)
9. Lst27 20:22, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Gentgeen (17/0/0); ends 21:55, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Gentgeen has been around since October and has over 2,000 edits. Gentgeen knows his way around wikipedia and is familiar with the policies and guidelines. He has been involved in maintenance tasks such as reverting vandalism and transwiking pages to more appropriate places; admin abilities will help him do this better. Maximus Rex 21:55, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Thank you Maximus. I guess I accecpt. Gentgeen 19:35, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Support:

1. Maximus Rex 21:55, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
2. Danny 21:57, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
3. Finlay McWalter | Talk 22:15, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
4. Definitely support. Angela
5. Holy crap - he's not one already? Support 100%. →Raul654 23:35, Apr 18, 2004 (UTC)
6. Tuf-Kat 03:33, Apr 19, 2004 (UTC)
7. Absolutely. :-) Jwrosenzweig 17:13, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
8. Yup. Isomorphic 18:38, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
9. Excellent edit history -- plus I always have an added measure of respect for users who post their real names. ;-) Cribcage 06:00, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
10. Stewart Adcock 16:01, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
11. Tεxτurε 17:13, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
12. jengod 19:27, Apr 20, 2004 (UTC)
13. Gaz 08:05, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
14. RADICALBENDER★ 13:49, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
15. Cribcage 14:45, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
16. Seth Ilys 14:27, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
17. chris 73 | Talk 10:43, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Oppose:

Neutral:

Self nominations for adminship

Please add new requests at the top of this section

User:Jor (0/6/0); ends 05:57, 30 April, 2004 (UTC)

I would like to request admin status. I've been actively contributing since 17 Dec 2003, and believe that admin status will help me be a better contributor here. I do not expect to get involved in edit wars — if I do (it seems unavoidable as some users will insist on starting one always) I will not abuse admin tools to "win". — Jor (Talk) 05:57, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Support:

Oppose:

1. Why is everyone pulling aplanks nowadays? Jor's last nomination was removed just 19 days ago when the vote stood at 19-14-2 . Jor is an ugly German-nationalist POV pusher and out-and-out liar (for a good example of this, he put an anti-nationalist statement on his user page and at the same time is waging edit wars to use German names for Polish cities). It is clear what would happen if he were an admin: he would let Nico do his revisionist edits, and when the edit war is on, he would protect those pages on Nico's version. --Wik 13:25, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)

   POV objection from Wik? The Pot really does call the Kettle blackDaeron 02:15, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

2. Oppose. Totally concur with Wik's statement above. 172 13:37, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
3. Oppose. His behaviour has even become worse after the last nomination 19 days ago. His claim to be anti-nationalist is ridiculous after adding fuel to the fire all the time. -- Baldhur 13:45, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
4. Merovingian ↕ Talk 13:57, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)
5. I'd tend to support, but I'm opposing on principle -- one nomination per month is sufficient. As an aside, I hope an AC member will note Wik's comment, above. Cribcage 14:43, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
6. Danny 02:23, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Comments: I am tired of having to see Wik's rants and lies here (172 and Baldhur are Wik-like users and might as well be him, for what I've seen from them). I remind people that last time I was nominated (as in, not self-nominated) I came under attack by a series of sock puppets, who like Wik accuse me of blatant nonsense. (He won't backup his claims with proof because he cannot.) In any case I fail to see where the 'one nomination per month' rule is listed, but if that concerns people I will end this application as it will be unfavourably judged solely because of that. — Jor (Talk) 15:04, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

As an aside, who is this 'Alex Plank' ("aplanks") Wik continually (I assume unfavourably and in hostility) compares me with? — Jor (Talk) 15:09, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

He means User:AlexPlank, currently known as Perl, formally known as..., well, lots of things. Angela. 15:20, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)

Just to be clear: I'm not aware of any rule limiting nominations. My comment above reflects my own opinion, nothing more. A vote reflects community consensus, and should carry some weight. I think renomination in less than 30 days is inappropriate. I'm not proposing a rule -- just a guideline. Cribcage 15:32, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Earl Andrew (8/1/0) (UTC); ends 04:02, 27 April, 2004 (UTC)

Hello there, I am nominating myself. I think I have been here for a while, since autumn anyways, and I have god knows how many edits. (just check my user contribs). I've finally stumbled across this page, and I've always wanted to be admin. Mainly because, I feel I can contribute to the main page. Anyways, that's me. I hope that you all accept me! Earl Andrew 04:02, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Support:

1. Support - someday we will get all those Ontario communities finished! Adam Bishop 04:25, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
2. An ideal nominee, as best I can tell. Cribcage 06:10, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
3. Total support. Earl is a great worker. --Merovingian ↕ Talk 08:44, Apr 20, 2004 (UTC)
4. Support - I've been very impressed with his work. - SimonP 00:55, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC)
5. Meelar 02:46, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
6. Support: Made a random check of his 2000+ edits, very solid and good work, nice stub patrol -- chris_73 15:28, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
7. Angela. 03:37, Apr 24, 2004 (UTC)
8. Support, although I wish he'd make more use of the edit summary. moink 17:28, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Oppose:

1. Not what I would conciter admin material.--Rbil88 14:20, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
   • Could you clarify? (User has seven edits.) Cribcage 14:39, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Comment:

Requests for bureaucratship

Please add new requests at the top of this section

Other requests

Requests for adminship or bureaucratship on other Wikimedia projects can be made at m:Requests for permissions.

Requests for adminship or bureaucratship on meta can be made at m:Administrator.

Requests to mark a user as a bot can be made at m:Requests for permissions following consensus at wikipedia talk:bots that the bot may run.

Requests for self-de-adminship on any project can be made at m:Requests for permissions.

Possible misuses of administrator powers

• Information on misuses of admin privileges
• Current reviews of admin actions