Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:15, 1 January 2010

Ironholds

Voice your opinion on this candidate (talk page) (38/14/6); Scheduled to end 04:13, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Nomination

Ironholds (talk · contribs) – Ironholds is an exceptional editor who has been with the project since 2006. With just about 46,000 edits (about 10,000 of which are deleted as a result of his NPP work), it is clear that Ironholds is a dedicated member of the project who cares for it deeply. Although he has always prioritized his university work above Misplaced Pages, Ironholds has maintained an incredible level editing, with anywhere from a thousand to two and a half thousand edits per month (most of which are non-automated).

Ironholds is primarily a content contributor. He has created over 500 pages, over 122 of which have been listed at Did You Know? on the main page. His work at the DYK submissions page indicates that he would likely be active there as an administrator. However, I would say that some of Ironholds' greatest content work comes in the form of his good and featured credits, namely 4 featured articles, 13 good articles, and 13 featured lists.

Ironholds is also active on the maintenance side of the project as well. Ironholds has over 200 mostly correct edits to Usernames for administrator attention and over 150 edits to Administrator intervention against vandalism. However, what I was most impressed with was Ironholds' work that went into creating this situation at Special:NewPages. Ironholds patrolled over 25,000 pages to clear an enormous backlog that had just been barely kept manageable for many many months. Although he make a few mistakes when patrolling the backlog, the vast majority of his taggings were spot on. I believe that Ironholds knows the policies governing the use of the vast majority of sysop actions very well.

The big question is why now. Ironholds has had a number of RfAs in the past (though the last was over 9 months ago), more than most candidates have had. A few incidents have made him come across as a bitey, sarcastic, and uncivil editor. While these incidents can be troubling, Ironholds genuinely tries to avoid confrontation whenever possible. He is also able offer insightful comments to heated discussions and complex disputes.

I hope the community agrees with me when I say that Ironholds would be an excellent help to the project as an administrator. Best wishes, NW (Talk) 04:00, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Short statement from co-nom: Ironholds is the first person I have nominated for adminship in my long time on Misplaced Pages- this nomination just started a few hours before I was ready to write up a statement. Ironholds is intelligent, logical and reasonable. He is someone who is very easy to talk to, and who I would happily trust to deal with any problems. He has contributed a great amount of his time and knowledge to the project, producing excellent articles in his area of expertise as well as doing his bit to maintain the project. I will happily admit that I opposed him in the past, but I now feel that he is more than ready, and has more than demonstrated his commitment to the project. Ironholds is the kind of editor we need more of, and I can't see any reason to assume he will be anything but the perfect administrator. J Milburn (talk) 17:54, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept. Ironholds (talk) 04:04, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Misplaced Pages as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?

A: Lots of areas really. CSD/PROD/AFD is the obvious one, but I'd also like to dedicate some time to DYK, since I've submitted enough articles there to be part of the problem :P. Other than that I'll be generally available for moves, history merges and the like as needed. I'm not going to suddenly get involved in the area of dispute resolution, as I feel that an administrator has no larger role there than a non-admin, apart from when handing out sanctions.

2. What are your best contributions to Misplaced Pages, and why?

A: My contributions have been rather varied in nature, but I'll try and come up with something here. In terms of content work, my Featured Articles; the one I'm most proud of is Gray's Inn, since I feel I put the most work in. All my Good Articles as well (in here, my favorite is the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999, yawn) and my Did You Knows, which overlap the G and FAs. Outside of content, my general CSD/AFD/PROD work and particularly this little baby, which I couldn't have done without other members of the community. I'm not a flawless CSD tagger, but I do get a hell of a lot more deleted than kept; 10,000 deleted contributions, as mentioned above.

3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?

A: I've been in conflicts, as my previous RfAs suggest; this is a recent one, based on this edit summary, which I found quite offensive. The dispute seems to have been adequately resolved, in that one of us has come around to the other's way of thinking (in this case, me - I accept I made a mistake). I quite like my actions , although that's a bit dated; a dispute at ANI and at risk of spilling into blocking territory. I kept in touch, and we worked on several bits and bobs together. With future conflicts (and previous ones) I try to deal with it through either a) reasoned argument or b) when that doesn't work, simply walking away.

Optional Questions from User:Average White Dork

4. Do you speak any languages other than English?

A:Bits and bobs in a few others, and I can read and write Latin pretty well, but not really. Ironholds (talk) 16:53, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

5. If you speak any languages other than English, could you please explain how you will use your language skills to mediate disputes, especially those on nationalistic edit wars?

A:Nope :P.

6. How would you describe how Misplaced Pages has changed in the time since you first started editing?

A:It's become a lot more.. "firm" is the word I'd use. There are a lot more guidelines, policies and the like, which as an "insider" I consider a good thing; potential users may not. The criteria for adminship have certainly changed, and despite constant hails from the media of our "death", if anything we seem to be increasing in size. Along with this there have been additional automated and semi-automated tools to help out with the new backlogs. In terms of "philosophy" I think we've moved out of the happy, optimistic phase that governed us for the first few years and into a more mature, albeit cynical, one. I'm probably not the best person to ask this, since I mostly kept my head down and away from places where things got Decided until 2008.

7. You edited under the name "O Keyes" for two years before registering the "Ironholds" account. Why did you feel you had to change accounts?

A: Essentially just a fresh start; not to hide from anything, just to hit F5, as it were. Getting my RL name out of general use was also nice (something these darn RfAs keep making rather moot). If it was to hide anything, it'd be a fairly ineffective way of doing things, for the aforementioned reason.

8. One of the early versions of your user page for the "O Keyes" account stated that you had registered an account in late 2005. Since the "O Keyes" account only dates to February 2006, can you please disclose the name of your account prior to you becoming "O Keyes" ?

Comment - The user page states joined, not registered an account. Given that this is a "community" and a project that "anyone can edit", it's quite plausible that simply showing up is considered joined...and even more so 4+ years ago.  Frank  |  talk  14:09, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

A:Sorry; I messed around from some IPs for a bit, editing odd bits and bobs and keeping an eye on the article on my school. I don't recall specific addresses.

9. Do you plan on maintaining your work in article editing and writing if you should become an administrator?

A:Certainly. I thoroughly enjoy my work on articles, as shown by the fact that I'm working on several more at the moment; as Neil Buchanan would've said, here's one I made earlier. I like writing content, and I see no reason to change that if I'm granted the tools. Adminship includes many obligations, but none of them require turning into a semi-automated vandal-killer or the like. I'm not going to be one of "those" admins (for one thing, I can't stand ANI most of the time), I'm going to keep chipping away at my articles and, other than DYK or CSD "when I feel like it", just help out when there's a backlog.

10. Which two articles that you either wrote or heavily contributed to do you feel are the best additions to Misplaced Pages?

A:As said in Q.1, probably Gray's Inn and Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999. Not only are they good articles, they're also good articles which didn't have a satisfactory format before I turned my hand to them. I'd rather turn 10 stubs into GAs than 20 B-class articles for this reason; it benefits the wiki far more. With both of those, I took completely unsatisfactory articles and turned them into good 'uns.

11. Have you seen the movie Danger: Diabolik?

A:...no? Ironholds (talk) 16:53, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

12. Back in 2008 you claimed that you are both autistic and have asperger's syndrome. Do you still claim that?

A:As opposed to people with aspergers syndrome who don't have a form of autism? :P I've been diagnosed as autistic; first as having Asperger's Syndrome, and then earlier this year as having High Functioning Autism. I maintain it's mild at best, while my partner doesn't think I've got it at all; either way, it's hardly a massive impact on my life.

13. Can you please disclose any and all "bots" that you have operated on Misplaced Pages through any of your registered accounts?

A:I have never operated bots.

Additional optional questions from Shawn in Montreal

14. Please explains your a7 speedy deletion tagging of Jordan Media City. Specifically, how did this article not "credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject?"

'A: I'm going to hold my hands up and say "my bad"; I didn't read the article properly. It was 3:28 in the morning (or 4:28? I can never remember if the Wiki's an hour off GMT) and I was probably knackered, something that's entirely my own fault. Luckily, no action on-wiki is permanent (with the exception of oversight, the reversal of which causes tricky technical problems). This doesn't justify my actions, and again, I take full responsibility for the mistagging. I'd like to think that with the exception of getting things right all the time, the best thing to have in an editor is an acceptance of when they've got things wrong.

Questions from  Skomorokh 

15. To what extent if any do you think administrators should be held to a higher standard of behaviour than other editors?

A: This is a difficult one. One the one hand, you could say they shouldn't (after all, adminship is simply technical access; it's constantly denied that it gives additional authority, among other things), and on the other that they should; I tend to go for the second. Admins should be held to a higher standard of behaviour in two areas; editing overall, and use of the admin tools. The latter is not really a "higher standard" as such, simply an area in which admins now have additional responsibilities and standards they did not have as an editor. The former is that the admin's general "tone" of editing should be higher than "normal" editors, as a result of (and reason for) the community's trust in them. I do not expect admins to be perfect, but I do expect them to follow the principle that you should "check your edits help the encyclopedia before hitting 'save page'" more closely than other editors. Sorry if this has come out as rather a confused muddle :P. Ironholds (talk) 17:14, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

16. What are your thoughts on the essay "Professionalism" by Kirill Lokshin?

A: It's excellent, and helpfully divides our duties and responsibilities up; duties to the reader, the writer and the subject. I appreciate the BLP points, since I've always considered that both an important and difficult area on the wiki. I think it's more an "in an ideal world..." that what Kirill accurately expects participants to do, but he might be an optimist :P. You're never going to get everyone behaving like that, but I think the wiki would be a far better place if everyone tried. Ironholds (talk) 17:18, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Questions from DGG ( talk )

(I realize that mistakes will be made in nominating articles, but I am asking about nominations which might show too rapid a rate to avoid egregious mistakes, or which might show misunderstanding of policy. I'm only mentioning a few, although I can find many more, in order to make the question answerable. )

17. Did you follow WP:BEFORE before nominating articles for prod or AfD in your NP clearance?

A: In most cases; I missed it a few times. WP:BEFORE as a firm step is something that has never really entered my head, which is a failing of mine. I'll make sure to follow it more closely in the future. Ironholds (talk) 18:34, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

18 If so, how do you explain the nominations of:

1.Golconda Express, heading for a snow keep at AfD.

2. Sergio Sartorelli, where you said "only source is autobio," but where other sources were found.

Note: this article was completely plagiarised and ought to be speedy deleted. Majorly talk 18:23, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

So it was originally, but I think Col Warden rewrote it. DGG ( talk )

19. With respect to speedy deletion

1. How do the conditions for speedy deletion under condition A3 apply to Starseed (novel), where stub information was presented in an infobox?

An assumption on my part that "no proper content" translates effectively to "no prose". Ironholds (talk) 18:42, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

A rather common mistake in fact. If infoboxes were meant to not count as content , they would have been included in the list in the A3 guideline. When I see them I just convert to prose, as Col.Warden did here. DGG ( talk ) 20:16, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

2. How does a national-level society like Italian Physical Society qualify for Speedy A7?

Thinking about it now, it doesn't, since WP:ORG normally gives notability to an organisation with national scope - a PROD would have been a better idea. Ironholds (talk) 18:42, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

I can't see why you would want to prod something that WP:ORG considered usually notable-- that's almost a bad. DGG ( talk ) 20:16, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

3. for Regional Input-Output Modeling System, did you consider that a .gov source might be US-PD--as this one actually was. ?

A:I missed the URL like a dolt, as explained in my conversations with the chap who removed the tag. Ironholds (talk) 18:34, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

4. How is Tensie Whelan blatant spam?

It's written as a professional biography, with an advertisement-style attitude that's big on pushing all the wonderful things she's done while at the same time light on sourcing. Sentences like "As president of the Rainforest Alliance, Whelan works to persuade companies to protect ecosystems and workers' rights through strategic alliances with farmers and a certification process which identifies companies with responsible business practices." and "Whelan works well with major corporations in part because of her background but also because of her own talents. Kraft executive Annemieke Wijn told Joseph Hooper of Elle , "Tensie conveys what she believes in an open, positive way, not in a 'nag the industry' way. And after work, we can have dinner, a glass of wine, and girl talk." Whelan herself told Organic Style , "Some people are dreamers; some implementers. I like to do both."", for example, are spam at its very best. Ironholds (talk) 18:42, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

It's also plagiarised from here. Whoops. Majorly talk 18:50, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

and so it is, and should have been speedied on that ground, which is much more definitive than G11. DGG ( talk ) 20:16, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Follow-up Questions from Average White Dork

20. This is a question in three parts. You say you are a "deletionist." a) Please tell the community what you mean by that, in your own words, and b) also please explain, if you would, why you are a deletionist, and c) how putting into practice the "deletionist" philosophy will be an overall benefit to Misplaced Pages.

A:I'm not a deletionist. I previously identified as one, yes, but that was a while ago; I'm now rather a moderate, with the exception of BLPs.

21. Above, you admitted to making poorly considered edits to Misplaced Pages whilst "knackered." With your heightened responsibilities as an administrator, how can you prevent this problem from happening again?

A:Not considering admin-related functions while horribly tired? I don't plan to be an all-out admin in the same way I am a writer and normal editor, so I'd hope that such a situation doesn't arise.

22. Do you ever edit Misplaced Pages under the influence of alcoholic beverages?

A:No?

23. If so, do you ever edit Misplaced Pages whilst you are impaired by the alcohol?

A:No.

24. Do you ever edit Misplaced Pages under the influence of cannabis?

A:No.

25. It is undisputed that you have a beautiful and articulate writing style. (I loved the "Slade Case," by the way). However, your edit summaries are another story. At first, you hardly ever used them, and now that you do, your edit summaries, with all the "bollocks this" and "sod that" language sounds more appropriate for an English football hooligan or Sex Pistols concert than an encyclopedia. How can you reconcile your obviously articulate writing you use for articles with the sort of slang/pseudo profanity with which you like to pepper your edit summaries?

A:I've been using edit summaries for the last two years or so; not sure where you got "hardly ever used them" from. I can occasionally be a bit casual, yes; the meaning behind it is hardly "profanity". There is no need to reconcile two different standards for two different areas; one is for the note of readers, one is for the note of editors. I take different stances, yes, but with two different goals in sight reconciliation is not really required.

26. Could you please explain fully what you mean when you said (in the answer to question 21) that you "don't plan to be an all-out admin . . . " ?

'A:I don't plan to spend every waking moment on admin stuff. Using the tools is going to be something I do when asked specifically, or when there's a backlog that needs clearing, or when I come across something in my daily wiki-work, not the main focus of my activities. I still plan to spend the majority of my time on content work; the Cincinnatus of administrators, if you will, coming out of content "retirement" when needed and going back as soon as whatever the problem is has been dealt with. Ironholds (talk) 20:11, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

27. a) Please list the three Misplaced Pages policies or guidelines you most feel should be revisited.

A: WP:BLP, and that's it.

b) For each one you list, please give a brief description why you feel as you do.

A: It's the most sticky, difficult and potentially damaging area of the wiki, and we need to have firmer rules there. I'd like to rewrite certain sections to clarify; requiring sources for all statements, for example.

c) How would you, as an administrator, work to have these policies re-visited or modified?

A: Not any more than I do now. An administrator is given a set of technical tools and obligations, not any greater weight in discussions.

Additional optional questions from Fences and windows

28. You plan to close AfDs. When will you give closing rationales, and why?

A:In any AfD on a potentially controversial matter, or where the margin between merging, deleting and keeping is narrow, or where there are other circumstances which could muddle the AfD such as a high level of sock/meatpuppet/COI involvement, taking particular care in BLP matters.

29. As you plan to close AfDs, how would you close Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Wytheville hostage incident, Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Juan Manuel Rodriguez (writer), Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Isaac Asimov's Robot City: Refuge, and Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/J.A.I.L. 4 Judges?

A:1) would be a delete, with no problem with the user recreating it if there are additional developments. WP:NOT#NEWS is a particularly thorny area, since it's vaguely worded, but I don't think one can really claim that 28 news articles equals notability, when you consider that as a hostage situation in a western nation it's particularly likely to get news coverage. 2) Keep; there are sufficient sources to pass WP:BIO, even if there is not the required info for WP:ACADEMIC. While many sources don't talk about him directly, coverage does not have to be direct, only significant, which this appears to be. 3) Merge to the main article on the series, since sources don't give the coverage necessary for a standalone article but are (at the same time) sufficient for content on the matter to appear on WP. 4) Keep, and ideally (myself) stubbify and rewrite. It's mostly a coatrack, but underneath that mass of coats and hoodies is a rack which passes the inclusion guidelines. Ironholds (talk) 21:44, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

General comments

• Requests for adminship/O Keyes
• Requests for adminship/O Keyes 2
• Requests for adminship/Ironholds
• Requests for adminship/Ironholds 2
• Requests for adminship/Ironholds 3
• Requests for adminship/Ironholds 4
• Requests for adminship/Ironholds 5

• Links for Ironholds: Ironholds (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
• Edit summary usage for Ironholds can be found here.

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Ironholds before commenting.

Discussion

• Edit stats posted on talk, courtesy of Caspian blue. -FASTILY 11:26, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
• I think that Ironholds' CSD work needs to be put in context. In the last four days, Ironholds has patrolled almost 3900 pages. And there are quite a few redlinks in there. J.delanoy_adds 18:11, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
  • To put that in perspective, Misplaced Pages grows at about 1300 articles a day. NW (Talk) 18:23, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Support

1. Strong support as nominator. NW (Talk) 04:12, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
2. Support For being blatantly awesome... (and qualified). Clearing the New Pages backlog a few days ago was quite a feat, and quite appreciated by fellow New Page Patrollers.  IShadowed  ✰  04:13, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
3. Support This guy's so incompetent he couldn't get laid at a frat party in a whorehouse. Luckily, he's running for admin instead. Should be exemplary. Bullzeye 04:29, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

   I second that.  IShadowed  ✰  05:14, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

   What do you mean by incompetent? This support is confusing. So is the comment from IShadowed, who said such nice things about the candidate in his/her own support. — Mr. Van Tine (t – c) 11:12, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

   It's called WP:HUMOR, I believe. Sometimes people know other editors very well, and have interacted with them a lot (they may even be "friends"). (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:02, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

4. If only for clearing the NPP backlog alone. The perfect admin candidate with everything else on top of that. --Dylan620 (contribs, logs) 04:36, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
5. The amount of RfA's is concerning, but since the first 2 listed were SNOW closures, and since it's been so long since your last one, I can't find any other concerns. The NPP backlog clearing was especially impressive, and clearly shows a need for the tools. The Thing _{Happy New Year!} 04:46, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
6. If I recall correctly, there were temperament concerns before - I could be wrong, though, and I might be mixing Ironholds up with somebody else. Unless something very convincing comes up in the oppose column, I'm supporting this editor. We need more admins, and Ironholds has been here long enough and has a wide enough breadth of experience to know how things are done. Master&Expert (Talk) 04:49, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
7. Support Ironholds has demonstrated the highest levels of competence and trustworthiness and I am sure that he would make an excellent admin. Triplestop x3 05:06, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
8. Timotheus Canens (talk) 05:13, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
9. Has clue, is experienced, and will not blow up any whales. Sounds fine to me. –Juliancolton |  05:19, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
10. Support Experienced and certainly is a net positive.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 05:27, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
11. Support – Ironholds' content contributions are top notch. He also does a lot of quality work in the area of BLP. He’s got a strong grasp on policy and experience across the board. His work in various admin areas displays competence, and his dedication to the project is indisputable. His sense of humor is sometimes lost on people, but I believe he'll make a fine admin. As for the situation Caspian blue mentioned in his oppose, having seen all the logs and heard from all involved at the time, I don't see how any informed person can consider Ironholds to have blackmailed Law. That's utterly ridiculous. Boys will be boys, and it was off-wiki activity. Lara ☁ 05:32, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Your view on the incident is yours, not mine. Your bashing about my assessment being "utterly ridiculous" looks reversely "ridiculous" in my view.--Caspian blue 05:36, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    I have no idea what you just said. Lara ☁ 05:41, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    I tweaked my words.--Caspian blue 05:47, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Ah, right. Well, since the events have passed I've seen all the logs and spoken with all involved parties. I got desysopped over the incident, mind you. If Ironholds had done something wrong, one would think I'd be pissed he wasn't part of the RFAR. He exposed a sockpuppet admin. And Daniel's comment on Ironholds' talk page is not something to hold Ironholds accountable for. Lara ☁ 05:56, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    While I steamed a bit about your comment in regard to my opposition, I'll respectfully disagree with your view.--Caspian blue 06:04, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Okay, you steamed, but you used the legal term "blackmail" and you have zero evidence to support that claim, yet you stand by it. What was he demanding? Lara ☁ 06:35, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Ha, you should get the fact straight and please be civil. I never used "such term" as you're falsely accusing. Zero evidence to support his behavior? If you can prove that the IRC log and comments including yours and the involved people's left on the offwiki site of which you're an active member are all "lies", then I will consider retracting my comment (not vote).--Caspian blue 06:50, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    I'm not intending to come off uncivil. Not sure where I did. Anyway, my apologies for stating you used "blackmail"; I see now that Ironholds did. You simply claimed "manipulation", but provide no evidence, instead directing people to one of the longest threads in WR history. You request he prove he abides by the civility policy, but you give no examples of incivility while basing your comments on behavior from more than nine months ago. As for the logs, some have been proven as either taken out of context or altered. Regardless, it's all off-wiki, so what exactly do you think he should be admonished for? His "POV" was the one backed by a policy, and the page currently sits at the title he requested. Lara ☁ 07:57, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Here, evidence for his incivility Misplaced Pages talk:Automatic Adminship. (I can't post the offwiki thread or IRC log as evidences). I did not necessarily feel to prevent evidences for his such behavior since that was well mentioned in his past RFAs. Ironholds should've used WP:RM instead of pushing Law to follow his demand on IRC. As long as off-wiki affairs affects onwiki, it matters. The off-wiki feud led to expose the whole incident.--Caspian blue 08:05, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Judging him from his last RFA to now, he's improved significantly. This single incident from six months ago is, in my opinion, debatable as far as incivility goes. He expressed an opinion many people share; the evidence is common-knowledge. But more importantly, you seem to be suggesting that this Law/undertow incident was some awful thing that is Ironholds' fault. Do you believe it's A Bad Thing that Law was revealed as a sockpuppet of a banned user? Lara ☁ 08:23, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    I don't believe that "that" is a single isolated or last case on Ironhold's incivility because of his feuding with The_undertow three month ago. The Law incident gives me many doubts about Ironhold's abilities as a potential admin. As for your question, I feel really funny to receive the question from you. I of course think the whole orchestrated lying and deceiving people for months are totally unacceptable. However, the most despicable thing in the whole incident is the way the secrecy was revealed.--Caspian blue 08:34, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Hey, I'm just here to entertain, so I'm glad you're amused. It's interesting to me that you believe Ironholds telling Daniel that Law was a sockpuppet admin was worse than "the whole orchestrated lying and deceiving people for months" part. Lara ☁ 17:08, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

12. Heck yes. Ironholds has a good outlook and is both humorous and focused at the same time. His content work is excellent, he's dedicated, and I think he'll make a fine administrator. ceranthor 06:10, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
13. Ironholds has grown up since the third RfA. He's got a lot of clue, he's a brilliant content writer, and he's got a good attitude that's jovial but at the same time comforting. Sceptre 06:11, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
14. Support-per ceranthor, Triplestop and others. --Zvn (talk) 07:31, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
15. Strong Support - And a happy new year! --Coffee // have a cup // ark // 07:36, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
16. Per NW's nomination. Daniel (talk) 08:36, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
17. Support per consistent positive contributions including (but certainly not limited to) clearing out the Newpage patrol backlog singlehandedly. Also per User:Ironholds/Awards and the recent lack of incivility (which messed up his last RfA). I know he has a few (<10 out of a 100?) declined speedies, but compared to the magnitude of PRODs, AfDs, and speedies he's tagged in the last few days, I don't much care. And finally (not like I need more reasons) he is one of the more clueful editors around. I trust him with the tools, so I support. Aditya Ex Machina 09:56, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    I just read Caspian blue's oppose, and I believe it is extremely childish and immature. To oppose on the basis of IRC logs that you've never seen, and a WR thread (of all places) is absolutely ridiculous. And then to say Anyway, I opposed you last time for your too eagerness to get the tool and incivility, so you can not change my mind unless you prove strong evidence that you're not. is frankly extremely pathetic (especially since it's been over 9 months since the previous RfA), and I get the feeling (as do many others, I'm sure) that Caspian's just fishing for a reason to oppose. Aditya Ex Machina 10:18, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Adity, I don't even what to say about your "pathetic" reliance on such WP:personal attacks. Sadly, your comment directly shows who you're. I firmly believe the closing 'crat well take care of your "extremely mature" and "grown-up"-like vote. Enjoy your WP:TROUT caught in your bait. :-)-Caspian blue 16:29, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Enjoy my WP:TROUT caught in my bait? Uh-huh. You have absolutely outmaneuvered me with your legendary wit, Caspian. I am speechless. Aditya Ex Machina 17:30, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

18. Definitely. I supported last time, and if this doesn't pass, I'll support next time. A great great benefit to the project overall, and can certainly get his head around complex issues that plague ANI and similar. GedUK  10:39, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
19. —Dark 12:32, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
20. Strong support BejinhanTalk 13:12, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
21. Strong support. I did actually intend to be a conominator here, but I chose to go to bed instead. Is it too late to add a nomination statement? Ironholds is intelligent, logical and mature, has a sense of humour, and is someone with whom it is easy to interact. All of these are extremely positive traits in an administrator. Further, he has a solid knowledge of a classically encyclopedic topic, and uses this knowledge to write great articles. He has a real commitment to the project, as shown by his article writing and his recent achievement with new page patrolling. Ironholds would have been the first person I nominated to adminship in my two and a half years of adminship- I just genuinely feel he is close to the perfect candidate. J Milburn (talk) 13:15, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Feel free to add a conomination statement; I have no issue with it. NW (Talk) 17:46, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

22. Support. No problems here; should have been appointed earlier. ~~ Dr Dec (Talk) ~~ 13:32, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
23. Support—I have always found Ironholds to be a committed, organised and approachable editor. ╟─TreasuryTag►hemicycle─╢ 14:17, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
24. In one episode of Newsradio, Matthew takes a magic pill and becomes super-intelligent. When someone objects that he now seems to prefer reading books upside-down, he replies, "If you've never read 4 books at once, then don't tell me how to do it." I'm not going to tell Ironholds that he's clearing out the NPP queue too fast, or writing too many articles. If someone can point to actual mistakes, fine. - Dank (push to talk) 15:36, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
25. Strong support excellent contributor and I trust him thoroughly to use the extra buttons with discretion and ever-growing skill. Bencherlite 17:27, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
26. Support While noting the opposers' concerns, I see insufficient evidence to cause me concerns about this candidate at this time. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:30, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
27. Support - I can understand where some of the opposers have come from, but I do believe that IH has the ability to learn, first of all, and secondly that he has demonstrated that ability in the improvements made to his attitudes. He will do well and, more importantly, be fair. I've known him to rather activly avoid any potential CoI, which is a fear some have with admins, and he has also gone to other people for opinions on things many times, showing his ability and desire to build consensus as well as an appreciation that admins are, shockingly, humans and not miracle computers that are always right. Providing he sticks his feet to the ground, he will be a great admin. Just no-one tell him I said that. --Narson ~ Talk • 17:56, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
28. Support Ironholds isn't to everybody's taste which I believe is to his favour. RMHED (talk) 18:15, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
29. With more then 40,000 edits, there's no reason not to support this editor. –BuickCenturyDriver 18:23, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
30. No concerns whatsoever. Majorly talk 18:25, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
31. Support See no problems. — JoJo • Talk • 18:32, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
32. Support: Ja good. Toddst1 (talk) 19:33, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
33. Absolutely, fine user.  GARDEN  20:18, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
34. I opposed last time, and I think the time before, but I'm sure that Ironholds is ready for the mop now and will not use it as a badge and gun as I feared before. He has sufficient clue. Keegan (talk) 21:05, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
35. Support As for the missing Latin knowledge "Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit" should help. Collect (talk) 21:18, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
36. Support Interactions have been mostly positive. Soxwon (talk) 22:39, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
37. Support I had a bit of an issue with the way he handled the Law/undertow thing, but nobody is perfect. If the community was a bit more accepting of a few mistakes, I think it would be a better site. I generally trust Ironholds to do the right thing, and I think he'd be a great admin. Killiondude (talk) 22:51, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
38. Support - Thought he already was one. Shadowjams (talk) 23:06, 1 January 2010 (UTC)