Misplaced Pages

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

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 23:09, 14 May 2007 editHadžija (talk | contribs)9,922 edits →General comments← Previous edit Revision as of 23:09, 14 May 2007 edit undoPaxEquilibrium (talk | contribs)25,001 edits →Discussion: reNext edit →
Line 116: Line 116:
#::Since you didn't provide any evidence of who made the charge or where, the only source for it right now is you. The point is that it's very poor form to raise such things, even if you're just "repeating" what others have said, if you're not prepared to back them up. Do you think it's a real possibility? If so, why? If not, why did you bring it up in the first place? --] 22:36, 14 May 2007 (UTC) #::Since you didn't provide any evidence of who made the charge or where, the only source for it right now is you. The point is that it's very poor form to raise such things, even if you're just "repeating" what others have said, if you're not prepared to back them up. Do you think it's a real possibility? If so, why? If not, why did you bring it up in the first place? --] 22:36, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
#:::A user that went by the name "]" claimed that his and Pax's cousin, Igor, passed away. We all figured that Sad News must've been the one who hijacked Pax's former account through his edits, and yes, Pax's account was hijacked. Sad News was then blocked indefinetely. Now, according to Pax, there was a hoax on Uncyclopedia that was apparently the death of HRE, in other words "HolyRomanEmperor" (Pax), and it spread until it came here. Around the time it came here, the hoax was deleted, however, Sad News continued on about how Igor (presumably Pax) had passed away. It is quite impossible for Pax to have played a hoax on us because he is a well-respected user here on Misplaced Pages and wouldn't leave us hanging and completely confuzzled (hybrid of ''confused'' and ''puzzled'') and plus in the middle of an RfA, he has gone through 2 or 3 requests in a short amount of time, which was a little unexpected. The last RfA, however, would've made him administrator until the hoax arrived. Now, of course, the one who hijacked Pax's account obviously didn't want Pax to become admin, so I rest my case. --] 22:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC) #:::A user that went by the name "]" claimed that his and Pax's cousin, Igor, passed away. We all figured that Sad News must've been the one who hijacked Pax's former account through his edits, and yes, Pax's account was hijacked. Sad News was then blocked indefinetely. Now, according to Pax, there was a hoax on Uncyclopedia that was apparently the death of HRE, in other words "HolyRomanEmperor" (Pax), and it spread until it came here. Around the time it came here, the hoax was deleted, however, Sad News continued on about how Igor (presumably Pax) had passed away. It is quite impossible for Pax to have played a hoax on us because he is a well-respected user here on Misplaced Pages and wouldn't leave us hanging and completely confuzzled (hybrid of ''confused'' and ''puzzled'') and plus in the middle of an RfA, he has gone through 2 or 3 requests in a short amount of time, which was a little unexpected. The last RfA, however, would've made him administrator until the hoax arrived. Now, of course, the one who hijacked Pax's account obviously didn't want Pax to become admin, so I rest my case. --] 22:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
#::::It appears that you know more about the scandal than me. :) I spent my days first just staying and watching as the events develop, powerless to affect it, before I returned as ]. I knew that this scandal has damaged my reputation to a level it will probably never ever climb back, the fact that I am the victim rather than the culprit of this terrible hoax even adds more to this; this is why I was reluctant to accept (and refused in the end) the nominations proposed to me by several people in the Wiki-world. (e.g. ]'s) --] 23:09, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


'''Neutral''' '''Neutral'''

Revision as of 23:09, 14 May 2007

PaxEquilibrium

Voice your opinion (16/10/6); Scheduled to end 23:20, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

PaxEquilibrium (talk · contribs) - I believe that this guy should've been an admin a year ago. When I first interacted with him, on IRC, he knew of policy enough that I thought he was an admin - especially the three revert rule. Looking at his past few hundred contributions, he's also been level-headed. In short, he possesses all the necessary attributes to be an admin, his past RfA shows this. He shouldn't be denied a tool he deserves because he's Serbian or because of a terrible prank. Will 16:12, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept.--PaxEquilibrium 23:20, 13 May 2007 (UTC)


Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Misplaced Pages as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?
A: 3RR violations, page protection and deletion of improper images and articles (that fulfill the speedy delete criteria). I think (AFAIK, am convinced) that Misplaced Pages desperately needs more administrators for dealing the first two (which is probably the main reason why I accept this nomination
2. What are your best contributions to Misplaced Pages, and why?
A: Stefan Nemanja, Duklja and several other history-related articles. That is because I'm deeply interested in History - and biographies at the same time (like musician Stevan Hristić). I believe in the old saying Historia magistra vitae est (especially due to the fact that history keeps repeating itself). Not to be Balkan-centric, I've also started Kingdom of Portugal (I was shocked that there is none!) and am researching on the subject currently, but for some time by now most of my edits are minor edits to various (all-kinds-related) topics, because I have the tendency to stroll the Recent Changes and because I have a gigantic watchlist. I have also an interest in politics to an extent (note: I am disgusted by it at the same time because of this, in which I was a victim of many devious minds, but that's probably the reason why I'm interested in it) so I edit National Assembly of Serbia and to an extent Assembly of Montenegro. I'm mostly interested in creating a balance in the torn world, between Albanian, Bosniac, Croatian, Serbian and other nationalists. I am also (note: losing modesty right now) kind-of proud of my eternal enforcement and following of practically each and ever single of Misplaced Pages's rules like a soldier (although I'm not sure if that's something I should be really proud of ;0).
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: Most conflicts over editing I solve through conversation at the corresponding talk page; when being 3rd party (e.g. Montenegrin Orthodox Church and Croatia) I both tend to research the problem deeply and stay neutral (which is a very hard thing to do). Yes, User:Afrika paprika has disturbed me very, very much. But for the entire agonizing one year of his trolling (and constant and repeated returning as User:Zrinski, User:Tar-Elenion, User:Pygmalion, User:Praskaton, User:Krpelj, User:Joker 13, User:Factanista,...), I've remained calm and every single second remained level-headed (even in the very moments when he cursed my mother *you-know-how*, threatened to kill me and kept vandalizing my Userpage for 19 times adding ethnic-driven ultra-nationalist provoking). But all users with whom I had conflicts are now banned (another is User:Alkalada), as the only thing for which I'm guilty is feeding the trolls, instead of doing like Doc said "If a user acts like a troll, treat him like a troll should be treated". I plan to be more rigid with cases of obvious trolling in the future (but not ever giving up a bit of smile and calmness!).

Optional question from Durova

4. What would you do as an administrator about ideological or profit motive attempts to manipulate Misplaced Pages? Bear in mind this statement from Brad Patrick as well as this news story, this conference summary, this press release, and these blogs. Durova 23:44, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
A.: I think that what is happening to Misplaced Pages is horrible. That's one of the reasons why I accepted this nomination, we must simply not allow Misplaced Pages's credibility sink. I'm seeing through a similar problem, where (obviously) a tourist company or some high-ranking employee probably, is bombarding (literally) Dalmatia-related with commercials. Yes, I commit myself to dedication in solving this (helping solve to be honest), but I cannot agree with a little thing User:BradPatrick said: Some of you might think regular policy and VfD is the way to go. I am here to tell you it is not enough. We are losing the battle for encyclopedic content in favor of people intent on hijacking Misplaced Pages for their own memes. This scourge is a serious waste of time and energy. We must put a stop to this now. I probably misunderstood it (that's possible, in that context), but I would never cross the limit of Misplaced Pages's policy. If there is a problem with the policy - change it - but obey it. --PaxEquilibrium 06:28, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Question from Samir

5. Please provide detailed comment on the circumstances behind your departure at the time of your previous RfA. Many of us remain perplexed about what happened.
A....and I am included in that many. However, there was no departure - due to my compromised account - I continued editing with another account. For a full grasp of my edge (lol, not to use point ;) of view can be seen at the User:HRE userpage and to the below on the answer to User:Nishkid64's question. --PaxEquilibrium 06:04, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Question from Nishkid64

6. From your block log as HolyRomanEmperor (talk · contribs), I see that there was a suspicion that your account had been compromised after it appeared you had "died". Could you please explain the situation, and if your account was compromised, can you reassure us that you now have a stronger password?
A. Yes, sadly, it was. For a detailed explanation (as much as I'm capable of offering one, it remains puzzled to me - I've drawn the question to "dig in" the matter quite a few times, but it appears that some administrators have deleted the pages created in the scandal), please refer to my temporary userpage. One possibility (mentioned by a 3rd part Editor) is that User:Ferick has hacked my account. And yes, my password is more than 15 characters long (not gonna tell you precisely how long, lol ;) and now gets changed from time to time (although to be honest, not as frequently as 30 days). --PaxEquilibrium 05:59, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
I withdraw this statement per User:Philippe to the below. My most sincere apologies for the misunderstanding. --PaxEquilibrium 22:31, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

General comments

  • See PaxEquilibrium's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.
  • Links for PaxEquilibrium: PaxEquilibrium (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
  • I will become Serbian in one week, when my documents are finally complete. ;) --PaxEquilibrium 23:20, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: There's a lot on here about Pax's "death" under his former username. His account was hijacked by one of his detractors. See this section in the RfA talk archives for the full unfolding of events, as well as his explanation at User:HRE. Grandmasterka 01:32, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  • I do not understand the explanation of User:Thewanderer's vote. I reverted the obviously incorrect version of the flag of Independent State of Montenegro. When the Axis forces invaded the Kingdom of Yugoslavia in 1941, they created a puppet-state around modern-day Montenegro and banned the (red-blue-white) tricolors by law. I also fail to see a hard downside at here (although I really should have put something, but it doesn't matter, since User:CrnaGora came and did himself. Also, I do not see that I do this often at all - and that this is just a single individualized mistake. As for "Greatest modern politician", it was cited from a source. --PaxEquilibrium 05:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Low usage of edit summaries : Lol, the reason is - no option of making edit summaries in such edits. ;) Trust me man, if Misplaced Pages had an option for that, I'd most certainly use edit summaries in there (those are all comments on various talk pages). --PaxEquilibrium 06:09, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  • If anyone at all has a single strong reason why I should not be an administrator, he or she should notify me in persona. In that case I will drop this RfA (I'm notifying this because of the controversial first two oppose votes). --PaxEquilibrium 07:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Previous RfAs: RFA 1, RFA 2, RFA 3, RFA 3a, RFA 4. Sarah 14:25, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Vote Canvassing: Inspection of Zmaj's contributions show that he has not made a single edit since 28 September 2006 and then he returned, just to vote on my RfA. Then this is how his vote goes: So today a Wiki-friend calls me and tells me: "our old acquaintance is making an RfA again; since you were so heavily involved before, at least give your opinion now". So here it is, and you could get it from any psychiatrist: a person who fakes his own death cannot be trusted to guide others only a year after the event. --Zmaj 15:59, 14 May 2007 (UTC) Ceha's contributions also show no edit activity but my RfA solely, although he didn't directly self-confirm that he was invited to vote against me. Both Ceha and Zmaj come from the same part of Europe. --PaxEquilibrium 19:53, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  • I was notified of this reason on my talk (presumably because I'm the nominator). Pax is right - Ceha has not edited in one month, and Zmaj in over nine months. Zmaj's oppose reason (calling Pax crazy) is also a personal attack, in my opinion. Will 20:11, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
    • I just looked at edits made by these two users on Croatian Misplaced Pages and it turns out that these two users haven't made an edit since February, Zmaj made only one edit after February, which was on 6 May and that was to support a candidacy for administrator. This just proves the alleged canvassy. --CrnaGora 21:42, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Username change: It appears that my changed Username (changed very, very long time ago) gives the image that I'm hiding anything - I have nothing to hide and explanation for my namechange can be seen on User:CrnaGora's talk page and numerous other places. The "HolyRomanEmperor" nick could be understood two-prong - in the good way - that I really "deserve" (?) such nick - in a bad way - giving the image of selfish and quite repulsive to myself egoism - thus, the explanation was that "..I am neither that good - nor that bad - to have that username". I hope this clarifies the issue. --PaxEquilibrium 21:18, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Opposing users: Just to represent the candidate's arguments more clearly:
  1. User:Ceha - inactive for 23 days
  2. User:Zmaj - inactive for almost 8 months
  3. User:Ante Perkovic - inactive for 2 weeks

Also, note that all of those users come from the same country, and after being inactive for a considerable time, they all found this RfA only hours after it had been submitted. I just thought people might find this interesting. Cheers. Sideshow Bob 22:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/PaxEquilibrium before commenting.

Discussion

Support

  1. Strong support. I know PaxEquilibrium quite well, since we cooperated on a number of articles, mostly history and politics-related. In our little Serbian v. Montenegrin edit battles, he was always the cool headed guy, or the referee if you will. And I think that is a sort of person that an ideal admin should be - a cool headed, rational guy with good faith edits and NPOV, which I believe Pax definitely is. Hence, he has my support in this request, although I think he should have submitted it a long time ago. Also, if he helped me become a normal contributor, rather than sort-of-vandal that I was in my first edits, I'm sure he can do whatever the adminship responsibilities require him to. :) Sideshow Bob 23:45, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
  2. Support. I concur with the nom on every aspect. We should help good people who are willing to work in mud-filled areas. Grandmasterka 23:47, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
  3. He is an excellent editor with a great passion and understanding of history. He is very cool-headed and knows his stuff. He is one of the best for the job of administrator and has my support, even though he should've become administrator ages ago. --CrnaGora 23:48, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
  4. I've seen him about doing good stuff. Should be fine. Majorly (talk | meet) 00:03, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  5. Support All I've seen from this user was good work. Húsönd 00:22, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  6. Support, looks good. --Phoenix 00:24, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  7. Support I can support this user because he has shown calmness under pressure. He works in a difficult area of history and is to be commended for his efforts. JodyB talk 00:55, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  8. Support Good admin candidate. Captain panda 03:46, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  9. Support Can't see any reason to oppose on current activity. I'm willing to Assume Good Faith about the past Tswsl1989 07:48, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  10. Support Thought he was anyhow, see no reason to go against that. -Bbik 08:33, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  11. Support as nominator. Will 10:51, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  12. Support per a comment that Badlydrawnjeff made - we are reaching the stage where it would be easier for experienced editors who have made mistakes or been controversial to create a sock account specifically to gain adminship. This isn't a healthy trend. Addhoc 13:04, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  13. Support The most neutral wikipedian from ex-yu that i have seen. Paulcicero 14:34, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  14. Support Satisfactory answer to my question. A few concerns remain, but with respect for the neutral and oppose positions these seem to be old history. Durova 18:01, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  15. Strong Support. PaxEquilibrium is one of the greatest wikipedians from former yugoslavia. He remains cool and has a calm level-headed atitude in conflict subjeckts, not a nationalist and fighting for tru causes, and that is the bridge between serb, croat and bosnian nationalists that plaigue wikimedia. --Edin Sijercic 18:08, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  16. Strong support. Very productive, calm and neutral user. I can't think of any other ex-Yugoslav user who would get votes from people with such a wide range of ethnicities and political views. In fact, I would say he sometimes keeps engaging with users when it is clear they are not editing in good faith. This has lead to a few POV warriors cooling off and becoming normal users - just one of the reasons why I believe he deserves adminship, and would be capable of using it responsibly. That's not even including his massive contribution to Misplaced Pages (14,000 or so edits), on subjects that would have been quite poorly covered without him.--Hadžija 20:11, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

Oppose. I hate to oppose because I believe you have truly changed in great ways since your days as User:HolyRomanEmperor. However, I am troubled by your extremely high number of edits without any edit summary (see ). Because you are so familiar with Misplaced Pages, I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt if you can explain why you don't use edit summaries more often. I'd also like to hear your responses to Samir and Nishkid64's questions, especially with regards to how you were reported as dead (see Wikipedia_talk:Deceased_Wikipedians#User:HolyRomanEmperor) and how your account could have been hijacked (obviously a concern around here with the recent hacking of several admin accounts). Best, --Alabamaboy 00:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
(edit conflicts) It appears that Pax uses edit summaries extensively on articles, but not in other namespaces; this is apparently fairly common among experienced users, there is a recent discussion on RfA talk about this. But of course I'll let him explain himself. Grandmasterka 00:56, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
I've changed my oppose to neutral. The low use of edit summaries is irritating b/c when someone looks through a user's edit history the lack of summaries makes determining information more difficult, even if edit summaries are used for all article edits. However, I won't oppose merely b/c of this issue. That said, the lack of edit summaries keeps me from supporting.--Alabamaboy 13:10, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  1. Oppose. Erratic edit behaviour. At Independent State of Montenegro (a fascist puppet state from WWII) he has at least twice inserted the flag of modern Montenegro, despite the fact that it is obviously incorrect (and he should be aware of this given his knowledge of Montenegro). Also, see Montenegrin parliamentary election, 1913 for at least one occassion where he has created a two-sentence, totally unwikified article. Also, apt to sensationalism. See Misplaced Pages:In_the_news_section_on_the_Main_Page/Candidates#April_29 where he refers to former leftwing Croatian president Ivica Račan as the "greatest modern Croatian politician" in an attempt to get more coverage on him in the news section. --Thewanderer 02:13, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  2. Oppose No explanation provided for how his password was compromised. I will (or a bureaucrat can) move this oppose to neutral after an affirmation that PaxE currently has a strong password (as determined by this tool or similar, reliable tools, and will change his password every 30 days to a new, unrelated, also strong, password. Hipocrite - «Talk» 03:30, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  3. Oppose -- Samir 06:13, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
    Any particular reason?--Hadžija 21:16, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
    Yes. I'm not convinced by his explanation of the circumstances of the death hoax -- Samir 21:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  4. Oppose Previous POV history.... -- Ceha 09:00, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
    Care to substantiate this claim? Also, your last edit before this RfA was almost a month ago...--Hadžija 21:16, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  5. Oppose. I'm just not comfortable with the whole HRE death hoax issue and the general controversy surrounding these accounts. And the hoax explanation doesn't smell right to me. Also, this is the candidate's sixth RfA and I'm rather disappointed that this was not mentioned by either the candidate or his nominator. I don't think six nominations is a reason to oppose but I like to see transparency in admins and admin candidates and withholding this information gives me pause. Sarah 14:25, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
    The death hoax, I'm understanding with. He should've really been promoted at the third RfA - the third was restarted because of all the ethnic-related votes, and consequently failed because of the controversy. I personally think that he didn't fake his death - there are users out to get him. Will 18:16, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  6. Oppose. (Disclaimer: Although I used to be quite active, I haven't contributed to the English Misplaced Pages for nine months now.) I remember when HolyRomanEmperor died. I read everything I could about it on the English, Croatian and Serbian Wikipedias. Now, it was a year ago and I don't recall the details, but I sure know one thing: the evidence made me conclude that he faked his death himself. So today a Wiki-friend calls me and tells me: "our old acquaintance is making an RfA again; since you were so heavily involved before, at least give your opinion now". So here it is, and you could get it from any psychiatrist: a person who fakes his own death cannot be trusted to guide others only a year after the event. --Zmaj 15:59, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
    So you oppose him because yu were invited to vote and because of yur personal hatred right? --Edin Sijercic 18:13, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
    I'm not sure of WP's guidelines on this, but I personally don't think this user's vote should be counted. The last edit he made before this RfA was on September 28 2006 --Hadžija 21:25, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  7. Oppose I cannot decide whether I believe HRE or not. (AGF is good advice, but it doesn't apply in cases of contrary evidence, and there is evidence here -- his story of a hacked account seems a stretch to me.) I might be able to support in July -- a year after the hacking and "death". I was horrified by that stunt -- it may be the single most tasteless thing I've ever seen on WP -- and would need to see a long, spotless record before I could support. Xoloz 18:09, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  8. Oppose. I don't like the fact that he changed his wikiname (smells like avoiding scrutiny from other editors), he had 5 previous RFA which failed, I believe people had good reason not to vote him then.--MariusM 20:57, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
    He failed three, not five, and of the three, one of those was a restart of a heavily ethnic-fueled RfA (check 3a - most of the votes relate directly to the controversy). Of the other two, one was restarted, the other ended due to a prank of the users death. Will 21:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
    Changing username is prefectly legitimate and anyone can request a change at Misplaced Pages:Changing username, and Pax has never hidden that he was HRE, so I hardly think that's a good reason to oppose. As for the previous three RfAs, are you really saying that in itself disqualifies him from becoming an admin? A lot of the people who opposed back then were ethncially motivated POV warriors, there was a lot of vote stacking against him, and some have been banned. It would be good is you had some proper reasons to oppose this great user's adminship.--Hadžija 21:08, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  9. Strong oppose. I still remember the fuss he created with his "playing dead" game. I watched the story unfolds in real time and I strongly believe that he stage it all. Even before hid account was "hijacked", he looked like someone desperately wanting to became an admin at any cost. His "death" and his extremely slow response to our questions (after he decided to announce that he is alive) made me believe that he stage it all.
    I really don't think wikipedia should risk with making this person an administrator. He just doesn't fit the psihological profile of a person that I would give an adminship. Considering how hard it is to take away someone's adminship, I believe that we have little to win (note that he can do 99.5% of his intented work here even without admin rights) and much to lose.
    Also, I really don't understand why he pushes this issue so hard? If this causes so much controversy, why not just give up and do the same work without those few extra buttons? If I were him, I would (for the sake of wikipedia) gave up long time ago. --Ante Perkovic 21:23, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
    I didn't push anything. I was nominated by 3rd party administrators and myself didn't actually bring the subject of adminship. After my last RfA failed, a year had passed without me mentioning adminship and frequent mentions of other users that I should be an admin (like User:Xompanthy), and now I accepted a nomination. What extreme pushing do you refer to? Also, if you read the comments on this article, you would've noticed that I said that I will pull this RfA the moment anyone presents a good reason why I should not be an admin. --PaxEquilibrium 21:36, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
    So, where did you gain your qualifications in psychology? Sorry to be facetious, but this oppose vote just reads like an extended personal attack to me. There's no reason to think Pax's account wasn't hijacked. Of course he may turn out to be a bad admin, but everything idicates to the contrary, that he will be great admin. If your unfounded fears were to be realised, he would stripped of his adminship, and that would be that. Also, your last edit was two weeks ago, yet you found this RfA very quickly, just like User:Ceha and User:Zmaj (also Croatians). Please forgive me if I am wrong in suspecting that you were called here to stack up ethnically motivated oppose votes, but that's what it smells like.--Hadžija 21:41, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  10. The fake death and alleged hijacking is difficult to sort through, and remains a cloud over the situation. I am puzzled that PaxEquilibrium chooses to raise, in response to this issue, the notion that Ferick might have hacked into the HolyRomanEmperor account. Naming a specific party is a serious charge to make, whatever one may think of Ferick otherwise, and furthermore this claim seems to me inconsistent with the more-plausible theory offered on User:HRE. --Michael Snow 21:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
    That accusation has not been made by me. That's a possibility said by another user that I noted, because the question insisted on details (and I gave as short as possible and as detailed as possible). --PaxEquilibrium 22:17, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
    Hogwash. By putting it in your question answers like that, you bring it into play. If you don't want that to be taken into account, I believe it's best to withdraw that statement. If you weren't endoring it, you didn't need to include it. I certainly wouldn't include things in answers to questions if I were up for admin that weren't things I wanted to be judged on. Philippe 22:28, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
    Since you didn't provide any evidence of who made the charge or where, the only source for it right now is you. The point is that it's very poor form to raise such things, even if you're just "repeating" what others have said, if you're not prepared to back them up. Do you think it's a real possibility? If so, why? If not, why did you bring it up in the first place? --Michael Snow 22:36, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
    A user that went by the name "Sad News" claimed that his and Pax's cousin, Igor, passed away. We all figured that Sad News must've been the one who hijacked Pax's former account through his edits, and yes, Pax's account was hijacked. Sad News was then blocked indefinetely. Now, according to Pax, there was a hoax on Uncyclopedia that was apparently the death of HRE, in other words "HolyRomanEmperor" (Pax), and it spread until it came here. Around the time it came here, the hoax was deleted, however, Sad News continued on about how Igor (presumably Pax) had passed away. It is quite impossible for Pax to have played a hoax on us because he is a well-respected user here on Misplaced Pages and wouldn't leave us hanging and completely confuzzled (hybrid of confused and puzzled) and plus in the middle of an RfA, he has gone through 2 or 3 requests in a short amount of time, which was a little unexpected. The last RfA, however, would've made him administrator until the hoax arrived. Now, of course, the one who hijacked Pax's account obviously didn't want Pax to become admin, so I rest my case. --CrnaGora 22:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
    It appears that you know more about the scandal than me. :) I spent my days first just staying and watching as the events develop, powerless to affect it, before I returned as User:HRE. I knew that this scandal has damaged my reputation to a level it will probably never ever climb back, the fact that I am the victim rather than the culprit of this terrible hoax even adds more to this; this is why I was reluctant to accept (and refused in the end) the nominations proposed to me by several people in the Wiki-world. (e.g. User:Xompanthy's) --PaxEquilibrium 23:09, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Neutral

  1. Neutral until you answer Nishkid64's and Samir's questions. The last time you died it caused significant disruption, it will be interesting to hear your side of things. — MichaelLinnear 01:16, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  2. Neutral per what Michael said. I would've supported in a heartbeat, but there is ironic twist. Just a couple days ago I was discussing old RfAs and who has had many nominations, etc. and HRE came up. This was with a newer user (not newbie, just not around then) who read the linkings and was flummoxed by what happened. I recounted the timeline as I remembered, but the most important part is that I felt there was absolutely no resolution to the issue. I trust HRE/Pax Equilibrium as the user, but I need to know why I should trust the account. Teke 03:30, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
    Oh yeah, and that "last time you died" comment was funny in that dark way and that it smacks of truthfulness. Notice that Category:Deceased Wikipedians is sparsely populated since verification is a difficult thing to do. Rob Levin was a different issue since he was notable. I miss lilo :( Teke 03:35, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  3. Neutral pending responses to Samir and Nish's questions. I'm prepared to accept that you were the victim of some sort of vicious prank - my sympathies, that's really very rough - but I'm still not sure. I might sit on the fence for a while. – Rianaऋ 06:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  4. Neutral me too. Given all the issues lately I feel uncomfortable with the history. sorry cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 08:06, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  5. Neutral. The low use of edit summaries is irritating b/c when someone looks through a user's edit history the lack of summaries makes determining information more difficult, even if edit summaries are used for all article edits. However, I won't oppose merely b/c of this issue, but the lack of edit summaries keeps me from supporting.--Alabamaboy 13:10, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  6. Neutral per Riana - I'm going to sit on the fence and watch how this one unfolds. I have a sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach, but that could just be the burrito... I want to sit here and listen for a while though before putting my name down as support or oppose. Gotta admire you for giving it a go though. Philippe 22:12, 14 May 2007 (UTC)