Misplaced Pages

:Requests for adminship - 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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Gareth Owen (talk | contribs) at 17:14, 6 July 2004. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 17:14, 6 July 2004 by Gareth Owen (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) Shortcut
  • ]
WP:RFA does not stand for Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration.

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.

Voting for nominations is for a period of 7 calendar days, unless extended, measured from the time of nomination. Current time is 01:23, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

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.

While achieving administrator status is rightly considered a recognition by the Misplaced Pages community, those being proposed should ideally desire to actively use their additional powers to help the community with the often tedious but very necessary chores that require their extra access. Though administrators speak with no special authority when interacting with other editors, those seeking the position should be aware that other editors, especially new ones, are likely to expect them to represent the best of Misplaced Pages and be courteous and helpful and willing to point them in the direction of information they seek. While there is no harm to having an inactive administrator, Misplaced Pages administrators should be willing to use their extra powers when they can to keep Misplaced Pages up-to-date.

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. It is expected that nominees will have good familiarity with Misplaced Pages policies and procedures. The quality and quantity of a nominee's work here is also a factor. Many Wikipedians take into account the number of edits a candidate has made, as a rough indication of how active the candidate has been. There are no hard guidelines on this, but most users seem to expect between 500 and 1000 edits before they will seriously consider a nomination.

Nominations which are obviously unqualified (those with fewer than 100 edits, for example) may be removed before the voting is complete. Past votes shows that the great majority of Wikipedians will not support such nominations, so they have no chance of success. Nominations may also be removed early if the current voting makes it clear that there will be no consensus to grant adminship.

Nomination. Most users become administrators by being nominated by another user. Before nominating someone, get permission from them. Your nomination should be indicative that you believe that the user meets the requirements and would be an exemplary administrator. Along with the nomination, please give some reasons as to why you think this editor would make a good administrator.
Self-nomination. If you wish to become an administrator, you can ask someone to nominate you. Self-nominations are accepted; however, if you want to nominate yourself to become an administrator, you should probably wait until you exceed the usual guidelines by a good measure.
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.

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 uncertainty, 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.

Current time is 01:23, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

User:Gareth Owen (1/1/2) Ends 15:35 July 13

Can you believe that Gareth has been at Misplaced Pages since March 7, 2001!! He has about 2,070 edits that have been invaluable to us. He knows what he's doing. Peace Profound! --Merovingian✍Talk 15:34, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)

This user has not accepted the nomination yet.

Support

  1. Merovingian✍Talk 15:34, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Cecropia | Talk 16:28, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC) I looked at his talk page...
  2. GWO 17:14, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC) I have it on strong authority that this person is insufficiently fluffy to join our splendiferously lovely Clique'O'Admins.

Neutral

  1. Dori | Talk 15:41, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)
  2. Jwrosenzweig 16:19, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Comment(s)

I don't know this user, but from his talk page he seems to be rather rude. Dori | Talk 15:41, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)

I share Dori's impression. I hope Gareth will point us to some discussions which counter that impression? Jwrosenzweig

User:Mark (11/0/0) Ends 06:55 July 12

Mark's been here since late 2001 (no, that's not a typo). He's a very familiar face on IRC, and he's been nominated here at least twice (that I know of) and he's turned both of them down. I asked him again if he wanted to be an admin, and this time he agreed. He's a hard worker and extremely trustworthy, and I have no doubts he'd make a fine admin. →Raul654 06:58, Jul 5, 2004 (UTC)

Thank you. As Raul says, I finally agreed. I've been here a long time, but I haven't been an especially active user, and I don't expect to become incredibly active any time soon. The only sysop privleges I would use if I had access to them would probably be image deletion (getting rid of thumbnails obviated by the thumbnailer) and page deletion (for when the slightly smarter vandals create a new page of vandalism, rather than just editing an existing page). Anyway, only support my nomination if you feel I have the necessary experience and you trust me. - Mark 08:03, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Note for blankfaze: Yes I am Mark Ryan on both IRC and Meta. That used to be my username here on Misplaced Pages as well. - Mark 10:29, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Support

  1. Support --H. CHENEY 08:12, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  2. EddEdmondson 08:38, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  3. Mark Ryan? Of course I support. blankfaze | •• | •• 09:05, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  4. David Cannon 09:48, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  5. Of course. James F. (talk) 09:56, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  6. About time. Dori | Talk 13:15, Jul 5, 2004 (UTC)
  7. Acegikmo1 17:00, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  8. If Raul supports him... ;) Neutrality 18:16, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  9. Wow! 2001, I'm impressed. Merovingian✍Talk 18:24, Jul 5, 2004 (UTC)
  10. David Gerard 21:38, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  11. Mark Ryan from IRC? Support, naturally! DO'Иeil 13:48, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)

Oppose

Comments

  • Mark has made 1540 edits. --H. CHENEY 08:12, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • Mark has the necessary experience, and I trust him, but this sort of emphasizes that we don't know how many admins we really have; active rather than honorary. Nothing at all personal to Mark; I'm not opposing him. -- Cecropia | Talk 15:04, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    • By "not active", I mean I make sure my studies and personal life take precedence over time spent on Misplaced Pages (except during holidays). I'm not planning to go away for six months like I did in 2002. - Mark 02:40, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

User:Markalexander100 (14/1/1) Ends 00:42, 2004 Jul 9

An excellent contributor. ~2100 edits as of this comment and has been around since February.

Thanks, I'd be happy to accept. Markalexander100 07:58, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Support

  1. 172 07:42, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  2. Merovingian✍Talk 07:55, Jul 2, 2004 (UTC)
  3. David Cannon 11:18, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC) An excellent contributor. It would be great to have Markalexander on board.
  4. JCarriker 12:07, Jul 2, 2004 (UTC)
  5. Support --H. CHENEY 13:54, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  6. Lst27 17:39, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  7. Neutrality 20:04, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  8. Jiang 01:57, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC) of course
  9. I've seen some lovely, patient work. And the cabal needs more blonds. +sj+ 02:08, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  10. Danny 08:45, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  11. Cecropia | Talk 14:31, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  12. jengod 00:51, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)
  13. Woggly 06:24, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  14. Morwen - Talk 15:43, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Oppose:

  1. No offense meant toward Mark. But IMHO, I feel he still needs more experience in our community. Kingturtle 17:32, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    Sheesh, Kingturtle. You're a hard nut to crack. You seem to consistently reject nominees for being too new. What's the minimum of time you think is enough? Or is it also a function of numbers of edits, or types of edits? (I don't mean this agressively. I'm delaying my own vote until I read your answer). --Woggly 18:37, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    Uh ... Don't you mean hard shell? Sorry, can't ignore a straight line. Anyway, I think KT once said something like four months and 3,000 edits. I'm sure he'll correct me. -- Cecropia | Talk 15:08, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    3,000 edits is about twice as much as what I would assess establishes a solid editor. Anwyay, I'm not going to wait for Kingturtle to answer, I've explored Marks record and it looks okay to me, I'm supporting this nomination. Woggly 06:24, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Neutral:

  1. Lots of experience but over a comparitively short time. Certainly a few months from now I'd support EddEdmondson 06:55, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Comments: Nominated before in May, nomination failed on account of being "too new". --Woggly 18:37, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

A few standard questions for admin candidates, if you care to respond:

  1. Have you read the section on Administrators?
  2. Are you interested in, and do you think you'll have some time to perform, the chores that only sysops have access to do, to help keep Misplaced Pages up to date?
  3. If you become a sysop, which sysop chore or chores (WP:VFD, recent changes, watching for vandals and vandalism, responding to editor requests for assistance, any other) do you especially think you would be able to help with.
Thanks and good luck. -- Cecropia | Talk 14:16, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

User has 2111 edits as of this comment and has been around since February 17. -- Grunt (talk) 14:58, 2004 Jul 2 (UTC)

Standard questions - can you give us an example of any edit wars you have been involved in and how you acted during them, or ways you have "been involved in the community", etc etc? →Raul654 17:34, Jul 2, 2004 (UTC)

Questions 1 and 2, yes and yes. Question 3- I'm happy to do whatever needs to be done. Being in an Asian time zone, probably my most useful ability is being awake to keep an eye on things when Americans and Europeans are asleep. ;-) Edit wars: probably only Liancourt_Rocks, where I'm pretty confident I was on the side of the angels. My most active involvement outside "my" articles has been on FAC- I've done quite a bit of copyediting on candidates. Markalexander100 08:44, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)

User:Cutler (11/1/0) ends 20:37, 8 July 2004

A very smart, polite user who has made many fantastic contribs (~1140) about the scientific community, scientists, etc. Here since at least December 30, 2003.

Honoured and flattered to be nominated. Not something I'd especially sought but pleased to accept and be part of this great project. Cutler 16:01, Jul 1, 2004 (UTC)
In response to User:Cecropia, I guess that I so believe in this project that I'll certainly make it a priority to get involved in some chores. I don't have a well-developed programme of how I will use admin priveleges. I guess that I'll start off with the more straightforward stuff: hang around WP:VFD, watch the more experienced admins, contribute and gradually build a role for myself from there. I think that it will evolve. Cutler 12:22, Jul 3, 2004 (UTC)

Support

  1. Merovingian✍Talk 12:39, Jul 1, 2004 (UTC)
  2. Support --H. CHENEY 15:16, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  3. Wile E. Heresiarch 15:54, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  4. A shoo-in. Neutrality 16:16, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  5. Strongly support. David Cannon 22:33, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  6. 6 months and 1140 edits is a lot of experience. Support. --Lst27 17:39, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  7. EddEdmondson 06:53, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  8. Danny 08:45, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  9. Cecropia | Talk 13:53, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  10. Rhymeless 09:20, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  11. 172 06:35, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. IMHO, not yet enough experience here. Kingturtle 17:29, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Neutral

Comments

User actually has exactly 1140 edits as of this posting (). -- Grunt (talk) 14:01, 2004 Jul 1 (UTC)

A few standard questions for admin candidates, if you care to respond:

  1. Have you read the section on Administrators?
  2. Are you interested in, and do you think you'll have some time to perform, the chores that only sysops have access to do, to help keep Misplaced Pages up to date?
  3. If you become a sysop, which sysop chore or chores (WP:VFD, recent changes, watching for vandals and vandalism, responding to editor requests for assistance, any other) do you especially think you would be able to help with.
Thanks and good luck. -- Cecropia | Talk 14:17, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Self nominations for adminship

Self-nominators, please review the qualifications above. Many editors feel that self-nominees should "exceed the usual guidelines by a good measure," have an account name that is many months old and have many hundreds of edits. This is not to say that self-nominators are necessarily any less qualified than "sponsored" nominations; however, many editors use their knowledge of the nominator as a "jumping off" point for considering nominees, and it is human nature to be more skeptical of those asking for a position than those being proposed by others. If you self-nominate, a good solid background is therefore very important.

User:Falcon Kirtaran (1/5/1) ends 04:30, 9 July 2004

Ordinarily I would not nominate myself for adminship, however without the ability to remove a number of pages I have created, my work on the Dewey Decimal classification will remain a huge mess and probably become even more so. Falcon 04:32, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Note: User has edited at Misplaced Pages since mid-March; currently has ~440 edits. Jwrosenzweig 04:43, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Support

  1. Sorry, Falcon, but you have not made that many edits. I will support you after you make 600 edits. But you are doing great, and keep up the good work! :-) --Lst27 17:33, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC) I think we should give him a chance. 480 edits is good enough, considering the quality of his edits. :-) --Lst27 18:47, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Will support after 750+ edits. Sorry. In the meantime, take Chris 73's suggestion, or if something needs to be deleted right away, put {{delete}} at the top of the page. --Merovingian✍Talk 05:01, Jul 2, 2004 (UTC)
  2. I agree with Merovinginan; Falcon has simply not been a contributor long enough for me to support a self-nomination. As the section heading states, self-nominators should exceed the normal nomination standards by a goodly amount. Also, I am concerned by a claim on this user's talk page that he is not "at all tolerant of pro-corporate POVs, or even a hint thereof." I would find it unsettling to have a sysop who claims to have such an extreme bias. -- Slowking Man 05:12, Jul 2, 2004 (UTC)
    I'm not supporting Falcon, because of the lack of edits, however I find it morally wrong that people are judging potential admins based on what they say on their user pages. People should be judged by their behaviour, not by their opinions. IMO we should have a number of admins with a diverse range of opinions. The point of a user page is that you can write your own thoughts, opinions and biases. It is the one place where you are free to be POV, to say whatever you please. I don't want non admins frightened to express themselves on their user pages just in case it is used against them at a later date when they are up for adminship. (Sorry to have a go at you Slowking Man, It's nothing personal) theresa knott 15:08, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    I can't quite agree with you Theresa, especially when you say "morally wrong." NPOV is supposed to be "absolute and non-negotiable". Now of course most everyone on Misplaced Pages has a POV, and that is OK, but you are supposed to write, edit and perform duties entrusted to you in a NPOV fashion. Declaring a specific intolerence so strongly for someone seeking adminship requires, at the least, an explanation. And it seems natural to me to go a person's user page to figure out if they are suited to admin duties. This is not a free-speech issue, it's an attitude issue. -- Cecropia | Talk 15:33, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    We are talking about user space not article space here. Of course articles should be NPOV and if anyone pushed a POV in articles I would certainly oppose making them an admin.But this is different. I don't think people should be made to "explain" their opinions before they can be made an admin. Admins must behave well. That's how they should be judged. theresa knott 15:45, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    Please, Theresa, this makes no sense. I'm not asking him to explain his honestly held opinions, I want to know how his declared bias would affect his duties. "Not al all tolerant" is a pretty strong phrase. If he had said he is not "at all tolerant of anti-Nazi POVs" would you say "hey, it's his user space--it's immoral to question it"? -- Cecropia | Talk 15:51, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    Wooah! don't stray so close to Godwin's Law! It's not the questioning that bothers me. It's the questioning in this section(oppose). What if he'd said "I'm not at all tolerant of POV"? Or "I'm not at all tolerant of loud rock music". theresa knott 16:26, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    "Not at all tolerent of POV" would be a plus--he'd be expressing acceptance of a core Misplaced Pages principle. Why not consider it? "Loud rock music" describes a personal taste. I doubt he would rampage through the non-existent Loud rock music article. But "anti-corporate," something which could cover many articles, especially when combined with "not at all tolerant" and the Misplaced Pages buzzword "POV" rings a bell. Why should we not conisder it? -- Cecropia | Talk 16:34, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    anti corporate does cover many articles. Has the user rampaged through them so far? theresa knott 17:00, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    Let's get down to brass tacks, Theresa. I did not post the original complaint about "intolerant of anti-corporate" and I'm not sure whether I would consider it important or not if his user history suggests no problems. I'm arguing with your specification that we can't use what a potential admin says on hir userpage in our considerations, and that this is "morally wrong" no less. -- Cecropia | Talk 17:06, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    If it's the phrase "morally wrong" that you are worried about I'm happy to withdraw it.Let me restate my case to make my position clear. I do not believe it right to oppose someones adminship based on their views. Especially when those views are expressed on their own talk page.I don't think people should have to defend their views in order to become admins. The point about adminship is it is a position of power. We have to trust admins not to abuse their powers. The only sensible way IMO to judge whether someone is trustworthy or not is to look at their behaviour. Having said that, I don't really have a problem with people asking questions. But questions, IMO should be on the user talk page, or in the comment section of this page, they should not be in the oppose section. theresa knott 00:51, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree. I don't believe in extensive argumentation here (as we're doing with this back-and-forth) to the point of distraction, but we're not conveying an honorific, we're approving of people with responsibility on Misplaced Pages, and I think the transparency of discussion here is important. Cecropia | Talk 04:35, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    My two cents here: there is no such thing as a person with no point of view. People can try their darndest to be objective when writing about particular subjects, but even the most open-minded people have only one set of experiences and are therefore biased. Declaring one's own prejudices on a user page is, in my eyes, an admirable demonstration of self-knowledge and candor. As long as the person demonstrates an effort to write NPOV text, *having* a point of view is not a problem. In fact, identifying our prejudices for the information of our peers assists them to check and balance us. So I guess I'm siding with Theresa here (though I agree that "morally wrong" was too strong). --Woggly 06:59, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  3. Oppose - Falcon, I'd personally suggest you set out how you would go about restructuring these pages in your user page somewhere, or in a suitable article's talk page. Then hopefully a current admin can perform the changes for you (if they think they can be done without going to VfD). Later, when you've more experience like the others are discussing you can (be nominated|nominate yourself) for adminship. We'd be setting a dangerous precedent otherwise. EddEdmondson 16:41, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  4. Not yet enough experience here. Keep working and keep participating :) Try again this autumn. Also, if you need help deleting articles, just tell me what you need done. Kingturtle 17:20, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  5. Not long enough IMO. But I think the above has established that if you have administrative stuff needing to be done, there are people who will help - David Gerard 10:23, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Neutral

  1. David Cannon 11:31, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC) Falcon, please keep on doing what you're doing. The Dewey Decimal System classification has the potential to be a very valuable resource, and I'd hate to discourage you. It's only fair to all Wikipedians, however, to hold to uniform promotion rules. Those who vote "NO" are not saying "Never"; most often, they are saying "Yes, but not now." All of us need time to see and judge the quality of an editor's work, and applying the rules evenly to everyone is important. Come back in a couple of months, Falcon, and you'll be in with an excellent chance. I, for one, will support your nomination in a couple of months if you just keep up with what you're doing.

Comments:

A few standard questions for admin candidates, if you care to respond:

  1. Have you read the section on Administrators?
  2. Are you interested in, and do you think you'll have some time to perform, the chores that only sysops have access to do, to help keep Misplaced Pages up to date?
  3. If you become a sysop, which sysop chore or chores (WP:VFD, recent changes, watching for vandals and vandalism, responding to editor requests for assistance, any other) do you especially think you would be able to help with.
Thanks and good luck. -- Cecropia | Talk 14:16, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Requests for bureaucratship

Please add new requests at the top of this section (and again, please update the headers when voting)

Merovingian (6/0/0) 10:30 UTC 13 July 2004

I've been a sysop for a few months now. This isn't a big deal, right? All you do is (un)make sysops. I just want to make a sysop when the elections are over AND support is 85% to 100%. Good day.Peace Profound! --Merovingian✍Talk 22:50, Jul 5, 2004 (UTC)

Support:

  1. David Gerard 22:59, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  2. Cribcage 23:49, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  3. jengod 00:53, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)
  4. David Cannon 01:05, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC). Support. As a teacher, I am of the opinion the people of Merovingian's age (15½) should be encouraged to take positions of leadership and responsibility - provided that they have demonstrated the maturity required. In my opinion, Merovingian has. He's been a sysop on several wikipedias for a period of time, and I haven't heard any complaints about him. Give it to him.
  5. Neutrality 01:42, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  6. UninvitedCompany 02:20, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC) Merovingian is level-headed and well-suited for the job.

Oppose:

Comments:

Other requests

Possible misuses of administrator powers