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 Danny (talk | contribs) at 00:33, 17 September 2004 (→[] - []). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 00:33, 17 September 2004 by Danny (talk | contribs) (→[] - [])(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) Shortcut
  • ]

Requests for adminship (not to be confused with requests for arbitration at WP:RFAr) is a page to nominate yourself or others to become a Misplaced Pages administrator, also known as "sysop". Admins have access to a few technical features that help with Misplaced Pages maintenance. Please see the reading list and how-to guide before applying here. For current admins, see the list of administrators; for users who were recently made administrators, see recently created admins. Boilerplate questions for candidates can be inserted using {{subst:Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Candidate questions}}.

Rules

Administrator status is granted to known and trusted members of the community who are familiar with Misplaced Pages policies. Administrators have no special authority on Misplaced Pages, but are held to higher standards. Because admins have been confirmed by the community as trusted editors, they are perceived by many, particularly new, users as the official face of Misplaced Pages. Therefore they should take care to be courteous, exercise good judgment and patience in dealing with other users. Nominees should have been on Misplaced Pages long enough for people to see whether they have these qualities before adminship will be granted. Most new administrators have at least three to four months of participation and more than 1000 edits. You can nominate yourself, but the number and quality of your contributions may be scrutinised more closely if you do this so it is advisable to exceed usual expectations before doing so.

Nominations will remain for seven days so the community can vote and comment on the application. Bureaucrats may choose to extend this where the consensus is unclear (because consensus is subjective, bureaucrats have some discretion, but the threshold on this page is roughly 80% support). Nominations which are clearly not going to gain sufficient support may be removed earlier to prevent the discussion causing ill feelings, which can make it more difficult for the nominee to seek adminship later. However, keep in mind that most editors don't visit Misplaced Pages daily, so a reasonable amount of time should be allowed. Some people believe all nominations should be allowed to run their course, and disagree with having them removed early. If your nomination is rejected, perhaps because you are too new or inexperienced, please wait a reasonable period of time before applying again.

Vote in the appropriate lists and optionally add a short comment. Don't discuss other people's votes in the vote list itself. If you want to comment on other people's votes or comments, please do that in the Comments section below every nomination. Also, when voting, please update the vote tally of the nomination that you are voting in. The vote tally format is as follows: (Support/Oppose/Neutral).

Please note that anonymous users cannot be nominated, nominate others, or vote.

Template:RfAInstructions

What is consensus?

There is no hard and fast rule on what constitutes consensus to promote to admin. However, since numerical tallying has become usual in RfA, be aware that most Wikipedians consider 75% approval to be the minimum for promotion, and 80% to ensure promotion. In between those numbers, bureaucrats are expected to use their discretion to determine whether consensus has been reached. In extraordinary cases, promotion might be granted or denied outside the 75%–80% range if, as an example, sockpuppetry has been involved.

Current nominations

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.

Current time is 09:25, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

CJCurrie - Vote here

(22/1/4) ends 15:50 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

CJCurrie is a PhD history candidate at Queen's University in Kingston Ontario. He has been with us since April 2004 and has focussed largely on Canadian topics. His articles are thoroughly researched and meticulous and his editing has been problem free. He's also avoided any conflict with other editors. AndyL 15:50, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I accept this nomination. I've become extremely interested in Misplaced Pages as of late, and I'm willing (and able) become involved at the next level, beyond simply writing articles. CJCurrie 20:20, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)


Support

  1. JOHN COLLISON | (Ludraman) 16:26, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  2. Gzornenplatz 17:08, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)
  3. -- orthogonal 17:37, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC). We represent the Lollipop Guild, The Lollipop Guild, The Lollipop Guild / And in the name of the Lollypop Guild, / We wish to welcome you to Muchkinland.
  4. Seems a strong user. Andre 19:28, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  5. A very strong user - Tεxτurε 19:37, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  6. Lst27 21:04, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  7. —No-One Jones 21:30, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  8. ] 22:13, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  9. Merovingian]Talk 04:28, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)
  10. Wile E. Heresiarch 06:56, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC) Careful & well-mannered. A solid contributor.
  11. Sjc 09:19, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC) Support; thoughtful and careful work which will translate well into adminship.
  12. 172 12:20, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  13. Danny 14:50, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  14. - SimonP 15:31, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)
  15. Jwrosenzweig 13:49, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC) Seems a solid candidate, and a good contributor. I have confidence that CJ will make up for any lack of experience in fighting here by consulting others before making momentous decisions.
  16. Adam Bishop 20:57, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  17. ffirehorse 22:11, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  18. Expecting to have seen lots of involvement in Misplaced Pages's debates only biases the process against the levelheaded kinds of people we need as admins. His reasonable tone and excellent work shows that he has internalized well the policies relevant to editing, and I have no doubt that he can internalize the policies related to admin privileges as well. --Michael Snow 00:02, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  19. Rhymeless 01:06, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  20. I recognize him (well, his name, anyway) from several other Canadian political forums (can.politics and the Election Prediction Project, for two) and can attest that he knows his stuff. Bearcat 05:36, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  21. CryptoDerk 14:28, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
  22. Jayjg 22:20, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Will support after 2,000 edits. blankfaze | (беседа!) 16:53, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Neutral

  1. Cannot get a clear picture on community involvement. Hard-working, certainly, but I have no real way of knowing the level of CJ's knowledge of policies at this point in time. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 22:18, 2004 Sep 14 (UTC)
  2. I agree with Grunt. I certainly don't think CJCurrie will misuse admin powers, judging by the quality of his edits. However, he has very few edits to pages outside of the Main namespace, and, since his user page consists solely of his name, I have a hard time judging his views on Misplaced Pages. I certainly don't think that every admin needs to be a mean, lean, policy-writing machine like Angela, but I do think that admins should at least be familiar with resolving conflicts and have some sort of involvement in metadiscussions. --Slowking Man 03:19, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)
  3. Ditto. ] 03:20, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  4. ugen64 00:58, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC) - I cannot, in good faith, support someone who is willing to take editing to "the next level". (just kidding, guys, don't jump on me, now)... actually, I'd like to echo Grunt's concerns. ugen64 00:58, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)

Comments

Questions for the candidate
A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. Have you read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list?
A. I have.
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?
A. I am, and I do.
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.
A. I would be interested in watching for vandals and vandalism, and would be willing to assist in overseeing the "recent changes" list.
4. In your opinion, what article have you contributed the most succesfully and helpfully to?
A. Political parties of Canada. I've added several new parties to the list, and have written articles for many of them.
5. In your opinion, what has your best contribution to the running and maintenance of Misplaced Pages been? (i.e., have you reverted a bad stretch of vandalism, done extensive work categorizing articles, helped mediate a dispute?)
A. I've not done extensive work in correcting vandalism or mediating disputes (as of yet). I have categorized numerous articles in the field of Canadian political history, particularly as regards politicians in the province of Manitoba.
6. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and will deal with it in the future?
A. I have not been involved in hostile exchanges with other users.

Zoney - Vote here

(40/0/0) ends 13:39, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Zoney has been with us since early March 2004 and has greatly expanded our coverage of Ireland-related subjects and European topics. Zoney generally handles conflicts well, and has an amiable outlook towards others. I have no doubt the community can trust him. Neutrality 13:39, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I accept this nomination, I've gotten more heavily involved I feel in Misplaced Pages over the last few months, and I feel confident at this stage to take on greater responsibilities. zoney ▓   ▒ talk 15:17, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Support

  1. Neutrality 13:39, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  2. David Remahl 13:41, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC). My encounters with Zoney have been constructive.
  3. Norm 14:40, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  4. -- orthogonal 15:00, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC). Definitely, a friendly fellow except that he won't tell me where he keeps his pot o' gold.
    • Argh! Stop teasing us Irish :-) The Simpsons are bad enough... JOHN COLLISON | (Ludraman) 20:45, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
      • This is reverse discrimination. No one is opposing him because he's Irish! ;-) func(talk) 23:04, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
        • No, orthogonal was slagging about the pot of gold. In case you're confused, no I did not take offence, I was just commenting on O's reference to Irish Leprechauns and the like. God, I shouldn't a said anything... JOHN COLLISON | (Ludraman) 16:14, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
          • And just in case anyone else is confused, both Ludraman and I had those little smiley, jokey emoticon things ;-) after our comments. func(talk) 23:26, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
            • I heard Ludraman came to Misplaced Pages in the wheel-well of an Aer Lingus jet. Ludraman told me to burn things. -- orthogonal 21:45, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
              • I did? I did? between func and yourself, I think im missing something here... JOHN COLLISON | (Ludraman) 21:49, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
              • Is it ok to use words like Lingus on a family-friendly website? func(talk) 23:24, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
                • Only if no other words come before it ;-) --MerovingianѤTalk 09:53, Sep 18, 2004 (UTC)
  5. Michael Snow 15:43, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  6. Antandrus 16:02, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC) I've been impressed with his contributions and common sense.
  7. Zoney is a great contributor and fun to work with. JOHN COLLISON | (Ludraman) 16:38, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  8. blankfaze | (беседа!) 16:50, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  9. func(talk) 16:53, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC) I've only seen good edits by Zoney, (love the Irish breakfast, btw). :)
  10. Good user. Andre 19:28, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  11. Conti|✉ 19:29, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)
  12. Tεxτurε 19:40, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  13. Arminius 19:59, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  14. Agree with Ludraman. --Lst27 21:04, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  15. squash 21:15, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC) Zoney also hangs around on #wikipedia on freenode. His or her contributions to Ireland articles and the other edits are great... would be nice sysop.
  16. — Kate Turner | Talk 21:20, 2004 Sep 14 (UTC)
  17. —No-One Jones 21:30, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  18. ] 22:13, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  19. I know you... -- Grunt 🇪🇺 22:15, 2004 Sep 14 (UTC)
  20. Acegikmo1 23:59, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  21. Merovingian]Talk 04:28, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)
  22. Good contributor, will make good admin JFW | T@lk 04:34, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  23. 172 12:19, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  24. Sean Curtin 23:11, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)
  25. —Morven 23:18, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)
  26. Second John Collison's thought above. The Zonester will serve Misplaced Pages well! He also shows curiosity about topics outside his native Ireland - he's dialogued with me about California transportation topics in Ridge Route, and added to that article by his questions. --avnative 23:33, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)
  27. Blah, blah, support, blah, blah, leprechaun, blah, I can't believe he's not an admin already! Tuf-Kat 00:19, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)
  28. Blah, blah, support, what he said. Ambi 10:28, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  29. ] 10:39, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  30. Danny 14:51, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  31. Jwrosenzweig 21:59, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC) You know a candidate is well qualified when you see their nomination, immediately go to support, and then discover that there is nothing either humorous or laudatory to say about them that hasn't already been said. :-)
  32. Markalexander100 01:37, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  33. • Benc • 10:47, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC). Absolutely. Zoney is an excellent contributor, always willing to lend a hand to those needing help.
  34. ffirehorse 22:12, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  35. Austin Hair 22:53, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)
  36. Rhymeless 01:07, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  37. Cyopardi 02:10, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  38. Kevin Baas | talk 15:56, 2004 Sep 20 (UTC)
  39. Jayjg 22:21, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  40. Yeah yeah, let's get on with the Special:Makesysop... ugen64 00:55, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)

Oppose

Neutral

Comments

I think it has become quite clear that we are not going to achieve consensus on Zoney. I therefore suggest that we hard-ban his IP. func(talk) 15:03, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Im with func. I cannot in good faith support anyone who thinks I would make a good admin. My vote is oppose. JOHN COLLISON | (Ludraman) 20:49, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate
A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. Have you read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list?
A. I have.
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?
A. I will.
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.
A. Certainly responding to requests, I like order also, so I hope to get up to speed on article/history mergings. I'll be available for other chores also.
4. In your opinion, what article have you contributed the most succesfully and helpfully to?
A. Train station and railway platform perhaps, along with associated articles.
5. In your opinion, what has your best contribution to the running and maintenance of Misplaced Pages been? (i.e., have you reverted a bad stretch of vandalism, done extensive work categorizing articles, helped mediate a dispute?)
A. As regards running/maintenance, I like to give opinions. I now frequent Village Pump a lot, and am happy to give my voice on any issues needing decisions.
6. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and will deal with it in the future?
A. Most serious conflict was probably when I just arrived, over Irish breakfast - I'd handle it better now I think. Nevertheless we worked out an agreement that involved expanding the article (the other party didn't want to keep the article, so that was something!). I'm not one for getting stressed, I'm a typically laid-back Irishman!

Gerald Farinas - Vote here

(21/0/2) ends 02:46, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Gerald Farinas is one of the most dynamic Wikipedians I've had the good fortune to meet. He is dedicated, friendly, bold, and hard-working, and has made invaluable contributions to hundreds of Hawaii-related subjects, almost single-handedly. I know the community can trust Jerry to be a good sysop.

Neutrality 02:46, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I've been nominated a couple months ago but withdrew my nomination feeling that I wasn't quite ready and needed more experience interacting with other Wikipedians. I'm honored for this nomination and will accept this time around. --Gerald Farinas 03:14, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Support

  1. Neutrality 02:46, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  2. This is my time to say, "He isn't an admin already?" Mike H 02:47, Sep 12, 2004 (UTC)
  3. Rhymeless 03:15, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  4. —No-One Jones 03:50, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  5. -- orthogonal 04:09, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC) Anyone willing to withdraw his own nomination to get more experience I think demonstrates that he's more concerned with Misplaced Pages than his own ego. So I strongly support. So I really ought not to have mistakenly listed this under "oppose", should I have?
  6. MerovingianTalk 06:21, Sep 12, 2004 (UTC)
  7. Lst27 15:47, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  8. Andre 16:45, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  9. Guanaco 21:57, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  10. ffirehorse 00:51, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  11. Young? Is he unusually young for a college student or something, blankfaze? The average college student probably falls near the middle of our age demographic. In any case, regardless of chronological age, Jerry has demonstrated plenty of maturity to qualify for adminship in my opinion. --Michael Snow 01:23, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  12. After seeing some of his incredible work on articles like Alan Keyes, how can I say no? -] 01:43, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  13. 172 10:22, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  14. ] 20:27, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC) Strong support. Within his first day or two on Misplaced Pages he contributed five articles. One was a short paragraph about Moanalua High School, and it got listed on VfD. Fortunately, he wasn't discouraged and shrugged it off, which tells me almost everything I need to know about him. Perhaps he shrugged it off because was too busy working on a very good article about Rogers Park, Chicago to worry about it. Since then, he has contributed mumble-hundred articles, and all the ones I've glanced at being just superb. Moanalua High School survived VfD by the way, and subsequently got polished into a little gem. Gerald Farinas knows how to write encyclopedia articles, and has a non-contentious personality.
  15. I'm not sure how I've failed to ever see Gerald's name before, given his large number of edits, but he seems like an excellent editor, and courteous and helpful in discussions. Definite support. —Stormie 01:42, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)
  16. • Benc • 02:44, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  17. Tεxτurε 19:42, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC) - Can I change my vote to oppose due to my jealousy of your office view? Or should I support you and hope to leverage this into a job?
  18. Danny 14:53, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  19. Of course. +sj+ 21:20, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  20. James Easton 04:50, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC) Support. He's got to be one of the most charming people on Misplaced Pages and has something most editors lack. When it comes to disputes or arguments with others, he has tact and is quite polite.
  21. Ambi 09:18, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Oppose

Neutral

  1. Unsure about his knowledge experience with the Misplaced Pages community. Is certainly polite with others, but I am not sure if he has a complete grasp of all of the policies in place here. Plus, what would he do as a sysop? -- Grunt 🇪🇺 02:55, 2004 Sep 12 (UTC)
    • Grunt, when you ask "what would he do as a sysop", I'm not sure what you mean. Could you expand on that, please? -- orthogonal 18:06, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
      • I mean, essentially: How can the Misplaced Pages community benefit from making Gerald a sysop as opposed to his not being a sysop? -- Grunt 🇪🇺 22:20, 2004 Sep 14 (UTC)
    • What do you do as a sysop? --MerovingianTalk 23:05, Sep 13, 2004 (UTC)
  2. If I'm not mistaken, isn't he a bit of a young chap? Seems to be a good contributor, but I would worry about inexperience, maturity, and the like, perhaps. Oops. Not that young after all. 8750 edits? Wow, impressive. But if Sir Grunt is reluctant to support, so then shall I be! blankfaze | (беседа!) 22:06, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
    He's 21, if that matters. Mike H 01:24, Sep 13, 2004 (UTC)
    Ah, fie, I feel afool. I must be thinking of someone else, or... something. blankfaze | (беседа!) 01:38, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
    Perhaps you're thinking of me; I'll be 16 in November. --MerovingianTalk 23:06, Sep 13, 2004 (UTC)
    Nay, Mero, you are young, but responsible. Though I know not what you were thinking when you decided to put an animated gif in your signature! blankfaze | (беседа!) 00:23, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
    :D --MerovingianTalk 07:50, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)
    Don't let my vote influence yours, please... -- Grunt 🇪🇺 22:24, 2004 Sep 14 (UTC)
    I understand your concerns, Sir Grunt, but I trust your judgement in most any situation; and if you have reservations about supporting, then I, a user notoriously reluctant to support, shall too. blankfaze | (беседа!) 07:03, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Comments

~8750 edits since May 17. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 02:55, 2004 Sep 12 (UTC)

That number may be slightly misleading—he has a pattern of rapid consecutive edits to the same article, which probably is an indication of care and meticulous proofreading—but he has created a truly impressive number of articles in any case. ] 23:46, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
So does User:Lord Emsworth, and we all know how he turned out :-). ugen64 01:00, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate
A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. Have you read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list?
A. Yes, several times since being first nominated for adminiship a couple of months ago. I withdrew my nomination then so I could get a better grasp of Misplaced Pages rules, policies and the overall culture that Wikipedians maintain.
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?
A. Yes, I work at a desk all day and when work is slow I usually end up on Misplaced Pages. I do have a considerable amount of time free to perform the necessary chores that come with the position.
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.
A. I would be free to do whatever is needed to be done in various areas as needed.
4. In your opinion, what article have you contributed the most succesfully and helpfully to?
A. I'm quite devoted to the Hawaii-based articles, especially the major historical articles: Republic of Hawaii and Territory of Hawaii. I also spent a lot of time categorizing the Hawaii-based articles — Category:Hawaii.
5. In your opinion, what has your best contribution to the running and maintenance of Misplaced Pages been? (i.e., have you reverted a bad stretch of vandalism, done extensive work categorizing articles, helped mediate a dispute?)
A.
6. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and will deal with it in the future?
A.

Andrevan - Vote here

(20/0/0) ends 05:50, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Andrevan has shown hirself to be an excellent Wikipedian. It is clear to me that Andrevan can be trusted with the privileges and responsibilities of adminship. Sie is hard-working and trustworthy and as an admin will undoubtedly be able to contribute much more to Misplaced Pages. Node 05:50, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thank you, I accept the nomination. For what it's worth, I have 1325 edits up to this point. Andre 06:01, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
An update: I now have 1618 edits. At this rate, I should be able to hit 1800 in time for Blankfaze to vote for me! :) Andre 19:28, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I now have 1801 edits. Victory! Andre 01:02, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Support

  1. Node 05:50, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  2. Absolutely. Longtime contributor, and a fellow video game aficionado to boot! --Slowking Man 06:13, Sep 11, 2004 (UTC)
  3. Merovingian]Talk 06:50, Sep 11, 2004 (UTC)
  4. Norm 12:11, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  5. Ана́рыён 13:30, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  6. Mike H 15:20, Sep 11, 2004 (UTC)
  7. Neutrality (talk) 15:21, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  8. Lst27 16:56, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  9. Zchangu 18:00, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  10. -- orthogonal 19:51, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  11. We can always use more grunt workers. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 03:04, 2004 Sep 12 (UTC)
  12. Guanaco 22:00, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  13. Beau99 22:51, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  14. ffirehorse 00:51, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  15. I oppose anyone who's so confrontational that they can start arguments over articles about invented, non-existent deities. Listing my vote in the support category is a valid surrealist technique. --Michael Snow 01:27, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  16. Tεxτurε 19:49, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  17. FriedMilk 05:01, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)
  18. Ah, what the hell, might as well. You should feel special, because, having evactuated for Sir Ivan, I am without a broadband connection, and am using some of my precious time on this dreadfully slow dialup connection to support YOU. Fie. blankfaze | (беседа!) 05:38, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  19. Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 13:56, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)
  20. squash 07:34, Sep 18, 2004 (UTC) Good user with good edits.

Oppose

Sie? I don't know what a sie is, and as such, I'm not sure a sie would make a good admin. Will support after 1,800 edits. blankfaze | (беседа!) 03:46, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
You are opposing someone because Node used a gender neutral pronown? Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 23:56, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Blankfaze, believe me, I'm a he, not a sie. Node just used gender neutral pronouns because he wasn't aware of my gender. If you want to oppose me because of my lower-than-your-standard edit count, do so, but please don't oppose me because my nominator referred to me in a gender-neutral manner. Andre 03:29, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I kid, everyone, I kid! blankfaze | (беседа!) 03:46, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • "Sie" is a neologistic gender-neutral third person singular pronoun, analogous to "he" or "she" but without specifying gender, but also without, like "it" implying the referent is non-human. -- orthogonal 23:58, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
    • It's also, uh, the German word for "she". Who came up with this nonsense? john k 02:17, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
      • In German Sie (with capital S) is also third person M/F single or plural for a polite form of 'you' (like 'Usted' in Spanish, 'Vous' in French or 'U' in Dutch). English does not have this form at all. (Hint: john, brush up your German) 213.51.209.230 21:55, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Through Misplaced Pages, I found out about Spivak pronouns, which I think I prefer. E, em, and eir sound much better to me than sie and hir, besides which, I like sounding slightly Cockney. func(talk) 00:14, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Ladies and gentlemen, you all seem to forget about hu! Oh, that political correctness silliness!--Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 13:56, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)

Neutral

Comments

Questions for the candidate
A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. Have you read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list?
A. Yes, and I read it again just now to refresh my memory.
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?
A. Yes, very interested, and I'm sure I'll have time to do them.
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.
A. RC patrol is mainly what I think I can help with... vandalism, speedy deletes, and other maintenance that shows up on RC. Of course, I will respond to requests and do VfD as well.
4. In your opinion, what article have you contributed the most succesfully and helpfully to?
A. I'm a big fan of No soap radio, which I wrote most of myself. However, it's hard to pick one contribution that was the most helpful.
5. In your opinion, what has your best contribution to the running and maintenance of Misplaced Pages been? (i.e., have you reverted a bad stretch of vandalism, done extensive work categorizing articles, helped mediate a dispute?)
A. I try to add a lot of new, interesting, and appropriate material, but I've also done NPOVing and vandalism revertion.
6. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and will deal with it in the future?
A. Just one on Talk:Invisible Pink Unicorn, but that was hardly a conflict, and everyone was satisfied with the end result.


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.

Taoster - Vote here

Taoster

Vote here

(6/11/1) ends 23:28, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I would like to nominate myself for adminship under the following circumstances included herewith. This username has seen about 900 edits since its inception in August 2003, and I have edited with both diligence and impartiality since then. To my knowledge, I have not made any libelous remarks against any individual or group of individuals, nor have I wittingly engaged in any activities which violated Misplaced Pages's codes of conduct. My edits are mainly that of Chinese-related topics, and I have recently endeavored to create and translate articles present in the Chinese Wiki but as of yet not present in the English Wiki. And for both General Chemistry and Organic Chemistry, I have found Misplaced Pages to be an indispensable learning tool, so I'm looking forward to contributing towards those topics in the future as well. My primary reason for requesting adminship is to be given the ability to revert vandalism where it occurs (rollback); if provided with such, I will use it sparingly and only when necessary. Please feel free to ask me any questions.

Support

  1. –Andre (talk) 00:34, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  2. MerovingianѤTalk 00:36, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)
  3. User has more edits than I had when when I was made admin. Κσυπ Cyp   19:09, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  4. -- orthogonal 21:04, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC) Give the kid a chance. After all, we have a well-known and easy to use mechanism for de-sysopping bad sysops. -- orthogonal 21:04, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  5. Xiaopo ℑ 15:29, Sep 19, 2004 (UTC) I have only seen him do good work.
  6. Austin Hair 19:30, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Too new, IMO; especially so for a self-nomination. Come back in a couple of months :) Grunt 🇪🇺 00:35, 2004 Sep 17 (UTC)
    August 2003 is over a year. Maybe you meant too few edits? –Andre (talk) 00:38, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  2. 896 is too few edits. (And claiming "about" 1,000 edits is misleading and detrimental to your request.) Should return after getting a better feel for the comminity and the job. - Tεxτurε 21:10, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
    Perhaps there has been a misunderstanding. I had no prior knowledge of the actual amount of edits attributed to this username, merely the approximate amount. Although I do apologize for not making a more accurate statement, it was not at all my intention to skew the statistics in my favor. --Taoster 14:28, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  3. Netoholic @ 22:08, 2004 Sep 20 (UTC) - agree with above.
  4. Geogre 01:38, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC) I do hate to vote against anyone, but I think greater involvement and a bit more of a "paper trail," as it were, would help out enormously. I find nothing objectionable about the user at all, except that there isn't sufficient interaction yet.
  5. ugen64 04:03, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC) - echo Grunt and Texture's concerns
  6. RickK 01:15, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC) Anybody who supports EDGE for Adminship is suspect. RickK 01:15, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)
      • So now you're voting against someone who just so happens to hold a view different from that of your own? You need to get out more. --Taoster 13:05, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
        • It has nothing to do with your having a different view from mine and everythign to do with your judgement. RickK 20:37, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)
          • You had better get an attitude check, buddy. If your userpage is any indication of it, flawed judgement seems to be your specialty. --Taoster 21:13, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
            • Is this somehow supposed to make me change my mind and vote for you? Or to make others who are undecided to suddenly see what admin material you are? RickK 05:20, Sep 24, 2004 (UTC)
              • No, but it has humored me quite a bit. --Taoster 18:07, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  7. Users interactions with RickK and support of problem user are cause for concern. Ambi 06:19, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  8. Come back after some more edits. {Ανάριον} 07:43, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  9. A long-time user, for sure, but has edited rather sparingly. Will he be able to keep up-to-date with the project? --Slowking Man 02:03, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)
    • Yes, as I have taken on a new initiative to contribute on a more routine basis. --Taoster 14:06, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
      • I have moved my vote to Oppose, after seeing Taoster's ad hominem attack upon RickK above. --Slowking Man 07:45, Sep 24, 2004 (UTC)
  10. Has done an excellent job of convincing me not to support his request for adminship. —Stormie 11:46, Sep 24, 2004 (UTC)
  11. I concur with Stormie. And it never helps to argue with those voting against you in the middle of the list of votes.... BCorr|Брайен 19:34, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Neutral

  1. I will support you after more edits, on both the English and the Chinese Wikipedias. --Lst27 20:26, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Comments

  • User has 896 edits as of just now. –Andre (talk) 00:38, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate
A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. Have you read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list?
A. Yes.
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?
A. Yes, if need be; I will complete whatever chore is requested of me. That is perhaps one of the benefits of becoming a sysop: attending to things that you would normally not be involved in.
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.
A. I will edit as usual, although I will take greater heed to topics which require mediation. Also, consideration will be given towards requested article edits and the like.
4. In your opinion, what article have you contributed the most succesfully and helpfully to?
A. "Simplified Chinese character" was much more condensed and generalized in 2003; since then, many users, including myself, have worked towards the restructuring of its foundation. It is, today, a full-fledged article that is worthy of being featured.
5. In your opinion, what has your best contribution to the running and maintenance of Misplaced Pages been? (i.e., have you reverted a bad stretch of vandalism, done extensive work categorizing articles, helped mediate a dispute?)
A. I have Added interwiki links, catagorized articles, and compromised when arguments had arisen.
6. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and will deal with it in the future?
A. Yes, a few. Sometimes it is a small annoyance, but life goes on. I try not to provoke the offending party any further so that the situation is quelled in time. As with any large project mutual understanding is necessary.

David Remahl - Vote here

David Remahl

Vote here

(32/1/0) Ends 09:40, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I've argued for self-noms to be given the same consideration as "normal" nominations many times, so I think it would be hypocritical to wait for someone to nominate me, or even worse to ask someone to nominate me. I've been using Misplaced Pages since May 31, 2004 and have approximately 2050 edits on en (a high proportion of those are minor, but I have contributed quite substantially too). I've taken the liberty of answering the standard set of questions below. Feel free to ask me anything else — here, or on my talk page. Note: My user name is "Chmod007", and my signature is my real name: "David Remahl".

Support

  1. First post. PS, it's me, Mero, from #wikipedia!! --MerovingianѤTalk 10:10, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)
  2. Support wholeheartedly. I actually thought about nominating you a few days ago, but didn't get around to it. Sorry about that. Now show up at Chalmers damnit :) Fredrik | talk 10:16, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  3. — Kate Turner | Talk 10:20, 2004 Sep 16 (UTC)
  4. Jwrosenzweig 14:01, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC) Nice to be able for a non-controversial candidate....my first here in a while. :-) David is an excellent and intelligent user, well worthy of this position.
  5. —No-One Jones 14:05, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  6. Acegikmo1 14:27, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  7. If people I trust support him, I see no reason not to. And adminship should be no big deal anyway. {Ⓐℕάℛℹℴɴ} 14:36, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  8. -- orthogonal 14:39, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC) Self-noms should be given the same consideration; as long as they have at least one supporting vote, it's almost the same thing, no? And as Ananrion notes, adminship is no big deal, as desysopping is frequent and easy to achieve.
  9. Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 14:52, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  10. Sippan 16:10, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  11. func(talk) 16:47, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC) This will get me some of your Mac shareware for free, right? ;-)
  12. Although I waited too long and missed the opportunity to nominate him myself, I'm glad to see he uses this opportunity to make a point I support about self-nominations. --Michael Snow 17:24, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  13. Yes, ofcourse. ] 18:25, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  14. –Andre (talk) 19:07, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  15. Wasn't he already an administrator????? Strongly support. --Lst27 19:34, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  16. Indeed. +sj+ 21:21, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  17. ] 00:27, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  18. Grunt 🇪🇺 00:32, 2004 Sep 17 (UTC)
  19. Support strongly. blankfaze | (беседа!) 07:00, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  20. ffirehorse 22:15, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  21. Danny 23:35, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  22. Bishonen 00:11, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC) Excellent user, extra points for the self-nomination!
  23. Geogre 01:39, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC) Extremely strong approval. He has gone the extra mile in trying to contact authors and always shown moderation, and yet strong standards.
  24. David Gerard 20:41, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  25. I could have sworn I had already voted support, but I'm not seeing it in the list. Well, here it is now. Support. SWAdair | Talk 23:30, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  26. SupportBesu 06:29, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  27. Well this is a nobrainer. CryptoDerk 14:30, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
  28. Austin Hair 19:34, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
  29. Jayjg 22:22, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  30. Hopping on the bandwagon, and anyone that Mr Grinch opposes, I endorse. --Golbez 00:09, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)
  31. Good user. ugen64 04:03, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)
  32. Great user. - Mark 06:15, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  33. Nice user. squash 00:54, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. He's accused me several times of trolling and sockpuppetry, without any grounds for such accusations. — i386 | Talk 14:40, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
    • He had grounds indeed, and rightfully accused you. You should not try to dirty this man's good and honest name. blankfaze | (беседа!) 07:00, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
      • He can if he thinks chmod007's actions are detrimental to his abilities as an admin. --MerovingianѤTalk 10:00, Sep 18, 2004 (UTC)
    • If he's accused you of sockpuppetry, it's on the grounds of your documented use of sockpuppets - David Gerard 20:41, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

#Oppose. He makes unjustified personal attacks. Evidence: Talk:General_Mayhem#Repost. In the discussion, User:Ambi is seen as an icon of sincerity, individuality, creativity and female dignity. Then, Chmod007 comes along and starts making personal attacks. That kind of mental instability is something an admin should not have. Besu 21:24, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Neutral

Comments

Note that 33451 has admitted to having more than one account. One of the accounts was used to vandalize, he has just slipped up and blown his cover on another account as well, see my talk page. Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 14:52, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

In case it's not clear, "33451" is the username of the person who signed "i386" above (not the candidate in question). VV 02:40, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • (edit conflict, this is what I was trying to say before, but poorly worded).Okay, my comment before was poorly phrased. Let's look at it this way: WikiWatch was a sockpuppet, but I thought that by replying to him on my main account, I could convince other users that more than one person had heard of the WikiWatch Foundation. So although his accusation was correct, is had no background and was totally inappropriate. Also, I object to his adminship on the grounds that this user links to other users' subpages without their consent. — i386 | Talk 17:47, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
      • You just have to love the "truth is not a valid defense against charges of libel and slander" argument there. --Michael Snow 18:33, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
    • I put back the link, but now it doesn't link to your namespace. I wasn't, and still am not, aware of any policy prohibiting linking to pages in other users' namespaces. Satisfied? — David Remahl 17:58, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
      • There is no such policy, and it sounds mostly like an unjustified attempt to extend ownership over pages in the user namespace. David can link to any page he chooses, and the only issue is that by linking to a wiki page, you always risk the possibility that the page you link to will change in some way. — Michael Snow 18:29, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
        • No, not at all. I simply don't want trolls such as him linking to my subpages (main pages are fine) to ruin my reputation unless they are posting on an RfC or RfAr. I can't afford to have trolls using my own subpages against me. — i386 | Talk 18:32, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
          • I'd say this was a case of the pot calling the kettle black, except that David is no kettle. --Michael Snow 18:35, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
            • The pot calling the refrigerator black? - David Gerard 20:41, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
    • (before he reworded his statement)Then, how come you suspect that a sockpuppet search would show the incredible coincidence that WikiWatch and you were actually editing from the exact same terminal at the exact same school? — David Remahl 17:42, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Candidate would make Misplaced Pages only other-writable. VV 02:41, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

:-P. For the unitiated, this is a reference to my nickname, chmod 007. — David Remahl 08:20, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

To anyone that may consider voting against, on grounds that this is a self-nomination: I fully endorse this nomination, as if I had myself nominated him. blankfaze | (беседа!) 07:00, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

User:Besu has 3 edits. Nevertheless, I want to explain the situation on General Mayhem. I do not believe that claiming that a particular attitude is wiki-unfriendly is a "personal attack." I've got nothing at all against Ambi personally, but in this case I think she used policy unnecessarily to the letter. In any case, it was nothing more than a simple disagreement. I did not "come along" all of a sudden and start making attacks. Everyone was also more irritable than normal that day, since General Mayhem was the target of repeated vandalism. Everyone on the page had been helping to clean it up. Furthermore, Ambi and I were both on IRC at the time, so we had the opportunity to work out the "conflict" there. — David Remahl 06:11, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. Have you read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list?
A. Of course. I obviously wouldn't nominate myself if I didn't have a good idea of what it was.
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?
A. I've manually reverted vandalism many times. I've taken part in VfD and policy-forming concerning that process. I will continue to do these things, only more efficiently.
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.
A. Oops, I already answered this above :-).
4. In your opinion, what article have you contributed the most successfully and helpfully to?
A. Hmm, difficult question. I'm rather proud of the articles I've written almost exclusively myself (Crypto Operating System, Mark Abene, PlainTalk, etc.). However, I wish that in the future, other people will want to edit them as well!
5. In your opinion, what has your best contribution to the running and maintenance of Misplaced Pages been? (i.e., have you reverted a bad stretch of vandalism, done extensive work categorizing articles, helped mediate a dispute?)
A. I've always done a lot of image tagging. I've added interlanguage links too, which is the main reason for my contributions outside of en (my native tongue is Swedish). I've also done some categorization, but not for a while because I think the cat system is too arbitrary right now...As for vandalism, as I said, I've always manually reverted it as I've seen it. Last week I helped keeping a watchful eye on the people who were editing/vandalising General Mayhem, making sure they stayed on that particular page.
6. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and will deal with it in the future?
A. I was disturbed by Robert Brooks' behaviour on Penis. He removed a link to an "anti-circumcision" website, and I put it back and suggested a small informational message . Later-on, he expanded the informational message in a POV way and was generally disruptive (he is now on RfC, thanks to Theresa). Most conflicts have been minor like this one. I really haven't edited that many controversial subjects, although I can't promise you I'll stay out of them forever. I'm quite aware of what constitutes abuse of sysop powers, so you need not worry about that.

Lst27

Closed, vote was (15/9/2)

It has been about three months since my last RfA, and I want to try again for adminship. I am not the kind of person that I was before that was obsessed with adminship. Now I welcome a lot of newcomers, revert a lot of vandalism, and if I become an administrator, I will delete nonsense pages, and block vandals.

I have made approximately 2150 edits; but the number might be inaccurate because some edits were to correct my own spelling mistakes that I made before.

I withdraw my nomination. Thanks for voting... --Lst27 19:31, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Support

  1. I must agree that there has been a marked improvement in Lst's behaviour. I support. — David Remahl 22:12, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  2. ‘"This should be no big deal," as Jimbo has said.’ (per Misplaced Pages:Administrators). Recent edits would appear to be good admin material. ] 22:15, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  3. I'd have nominated him myself; he's a good editor and committed to the project, so he ought to be an admin by now. Everyking 22:16, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  4. He expressed interest to me in being nominated last week, but I was so busy that I didn't respond to his email or recommend him. I would have, however. I support. Mike H 22:18, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)
  5. Andre 22:20, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  6. Jwrosenzweig 22:55, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC) Lst has done exactly what we asked....honestly, I'm sorry I didn't nominate Lst27 myself. Even if Lst is Alex, he's behaved the way we said Alex needed to, and I see no evidence that any of Alex's accounts are still around that would make Lst a sockpuppet if Lst is Alex (and I suspect Lst isn't).
    How did you say he needs to behave? Did you tell him he should create a new identity, deny being Alex, and try not to get caught? I thought he was told to come clean, say he's sorry, and go on editing without request adminship all the time. Gzornenplatz 00:10, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)
    At this point, I think we'd all like to forget the Alex fiasco -- Alex included. I don't think this is Alex. But if Alex is back, under any name, it's not vital to me that he tie himself to his old name -- only that he behave like a good Wikicitizen. That's all I ever asked of him. And again, I don't think this is Alex. Jwrosenzweig 00:22, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  7. -- orthogonal 23:00, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC) i find JwRosenweig's argument compelling (and similar to mine re: Anarion, but I will not ask for royalties)
    • You released the argument under the GFDL -- I figured it was fair use. ;-) Jwrosenzweig 23:07, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  8. VV 00:05, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC) I don't know the whole matter, but even if this is Alex<removed>, is this anything more than a power game at this point? No other notable issues with this user have been raised.
    I don't know what's a "notable issue" for you, but that someone's whole purpose seems to be getting adminship and is willing to lie to everyone to get it seems notable to me. Gzornenplatz 00:10, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)
    • Calm down Gzornenplatz. Please remeber, there has been no community ruling stating that Lst27 has lied. Theres is only speculation at this point and I think your comming precariously close to violating No personal attacks. -JCarriker 00:20, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)
    My comment was made on the assumption that he's Alex, in which case he clearly lied by saying he is not - and VeryVerily said that there was no issue for him even if it is Alex. If the issue is just whether it's in fact Alex, I'm sure I could assemble good enough evidence - but here people seem to say they wouldn't oppose even if it is Alex, which I think is a dangerous lowering of standards, especially considering that once someone is made sysop they can not be voted out again. Gzornenplatz 00:31, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)
  9. I agree with Chmod007. --MerovingianTalk 04:30, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)
  10. Snowspinner 04:35, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)
  11. I don't estimate any evil from him. Dr Bug  (Volodymyr V. Medeiko) 15:49, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  12. Jayjg 16:12, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  13. Strongly support. ] 16:06, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  14. assume good faith --Jiang 07:50, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  15. ugen64 19:18, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC) - too many good people have been refused for adminship forbad reasons (ahem Mydogategodshat)

Oppose

  1. Gzornenplatz 22:25, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)
  2. Oppose. Wile E. Heresiarch 06:38, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  3. uc 19:25, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  4. Oppose. RickK 22:18, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)
  5. Very strongly oppose. blankfaze | (беседа!) 05:47, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  6. Oppose. See comments section for reasons. SWAdair | Talk 09:13, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  7. Oppose. --avnative 10:08, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)
  8. Oppose. Not a bad user as such, but the same old issues still remain. Ambi 10:25, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  9. Oppose--BCorr|Брайен 15:40, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Neutral

  1. Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 15:57, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)
  2. Xiaopo ℑ 17:34, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)

Comments

  • If people would refrain from commenting in-line with the votes, both the vote and the discussion will be a lot easier to follow. Some brave sole may want to refactor the above comments, but I won't. — David Remahl 00:33, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Last self-nomination failed 3-11, and not because he didn't have enough edits or anything like that. I don't see anything substantial having changed in this case. And "I am not the kind of person that I was before that was obsessed with adminship" is a ridiculous comment to make in a request for adminship. Also this seems to be an implicit admission that he was indeed Alex <removed> (the person who obsessively tried getting adminship), which he categorically denied in his last nomination under the name Lst27. So if he lied like that less than three months ago, he is not ready for adminship now. Gzornenplatz 22:25, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)
    People do change... Andre 22:29, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
    But he hasn't. He needs to come clean about his previous identities, apologize for the lies, and then wait a substantial time before he can be considered (otherwise he would just make a fake apology to get adminship). Gzornenplatz 22:36, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)
    What do you mean? --Lst27 22:40, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
    Believe me. I have shown more than enough evidence that I am not the same person as ]. I am Nan from Guilderland Center, New York, not Alex <removed> from somewhere in Virginia.
    • User:Perl claims to be Alex <removed>. Perl is an adminstrator at the Maori WP, and they must have felt the user could be trusted. In light of this, the question of Is Lst27 Alex <removed>? seems quite moot. Why would Perl admit to being Alex <removed>, only to come back as Lst27. That wouldn't make any sense. -JCarriker 22:58, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)
    The Maori WP is a nonentity, he just asked a developer and was made admin there, without even speaking Maori, and consequently never doing anything useful there. It was apparently a clever trick to get adminship on Meta, which at that time was given to anyone who's an admin on any wiki. And Perl only admitted being Alex <removed> after it was proven beyond reasonable doubt - and since he couldn't get adminship with that identity, he invented a new one, as he did so often before. What doesn't make sense there? Gzornenplatz 23:16, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)
    What does that have to do with my nomination? I am not the same person as Alex<removed>. -- User:Lst27
    Just one month ago Lst27 stated on his user page: "I really, really, really wanted to become an administrator of this site. I sought adminship twice, and both times it failed. I am losing interest in this project, and will go away for a while and come back later, when there is a better chance for adminship." Is someone whose whole pursuit here seems to be getting adminship a suitable candidate for it? Gzornenplatz 23:52, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)
  • I don't trust a person who, in the recent past, wrote I really, really, really wanted to become an administrator of this site and is seeking adminship again now. If User:Lst27 doesn't really, really, really want to become an admin, let him/her wait for someone else's nomination. Really, really, really wanting adminship is evidence of weak judgement, and User:Lst27's other contributions don't give me any more confidence. Wile E. Heresiarch 06:38, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
    • This is really, really, really irrelevant. So what if someone wants to be an admin? Is that so unreasonable? You're not even asking why; maybe he really, really, really wants to help. VV 22:31, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
    When I started using Misplaced Pages, I really really really wanted to be an admin, and now I am. Do you think I have bad judgment? --MerovingianTalk 09:15, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)
    Reread what I wrote above & draw your own conclusions. Wile E. Heresiarch 16:06, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
    The I am gone for now, but might come back later bit doesn't inspire confidence. If a person gets bent out of shape and leaves in a huff, they're not admin material. Wile E. Heresiarch 06:50, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
    Better to leave than to blow up at someone and stay. Besides, I think that "not admin material" qualification there is purely rubbish to me. Mike H 14:29, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)
    Better still to keep a level head. Wile E. Heresiarch 16:06, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
    But we are all human, are we not? Mike H 21:31, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)
  • I oppose because:
    1. I am skeptical of self-nominations, particularly those likely to be controversial. Prospective admins should find someone willing to nominate them, and in controversial cases, would do well to get a longstanding and widely respected member of the community to nominate them.
    2. There is the appearance that Lst27's participation here has been primarily for the purpose of obtaining adminship.
    3. Adminship is a de facto lifetime appointment at Misplaced Pages with no effective review priviledge, and I am unsure of Lst27's motives
    4. Adminship is not intended to be a reward, instead it exists to further Misplaced Pages's purposes.
    5. While Lst27 has made many good contributions, the contributions have for the most part been mechanical (e.g. welcoming new users or adding articles like this). I have not seen as much insightful, carefully written material (either in articles or talk pages) as I would like.
    6. I remain concerned about some of the past events mentioned by others above.
uc 19:25, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

One Misplaced Pages downside/feature is that everyone can read everything that has ever been on someone's user page. The relevance of this is that Lst27, formerly someone who really really really wanted adminship, has changed in a month, and his user page has changed as well. Now we can read Lst27's old user page, but we can't vote against the old Lst27, just the current Lst27. The current Lst27 has realized that writing that really really really wanting adminship is bad. Just because he used to should not count against him. –Andre (talk) 19:26, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Andre, it is my considered opinion that people's motives and character traits don't change much in a month. In some cases, over the course of six months to a year, or more, they may change, though even that is rare. People do acquire knowledge and learn group norms in shorter periods of time, but changes to motives and character traits are slow. uc 16:25, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
That's if you're gullible enough to believe him. But if you do some research and look into all the lies Alex <removed> has previously presented, you would not believe any word he says, especially when he contradicts his words by his very action of requesting adminship! If he really were no longer obsessive about it, maybe he should prove it by not asking for it, don't you think? Gzornenplatz 19:52, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)
Well I admit it's suspicious. What exactly is your link between Lst27 and Alex<removed>? And as for being obsessed with adminship, wanting it is different than being obsessive about it. –Andre (talk) 20:13, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I suggest you read carefully through the previous nominations of A<removed>/Alexandros/Greenmountainboy/Sennheiser/Perl/Lst27 (not necessarily complete list: , , , , , , , , , , ), and you should get an unmistakable impression of that person. There have always been skeptics. Particularly funny is a comment by Raul, a respected user but look how wrong he was there: on a nomination of "Greenmountainboy" someone asked "Are you Alexandros?" and Raul said: "He's not. First, Alexandros and he have talked on Greenmountainboy's talk page. Second, by looking at "their" pages, they are interested in very different subjects. Third, their edit styles are completely different - greenmountainboy makes 10 edits in a row to an article, while Alexandros makes one or two substantive ones." Of course, Greenmountainboy later admitted being Alex (their accounts are now united as Alex<removed>). Apparently Raul couldn't imagine that Alex would "talk to himself" to fool people. Yet here again there are some who either don't realize it's him or think he's OK now - after all, he says he's no longer his former obsessive self. (Yeah, and less than a month after saying that, he applies for adminship!)
What some like Jwrosenzweig appear to be doing seems to me like the behaviour of parents who, when their child is begging for something long enough, will ultimately grant it just to have their peace. So the idea is "just give Alex the damn adminship and we can put an end to all this nonsense". I think that's not only wrong on principle but it also wouldn't be the end of it. It would only be the beginning. Judging by his previous behaviour he seems unstable and would almost certainly abuse sysop powers, and we all know there's no option of voting someone out again. I quote Angela from January: "Perhaps we just need a better de-sysopping policy then so we don't need to be so wary about making people sysops in the first place. Currently, even where a majority feel someone should be desysopped, there is no process for making that happen." Indeed, and that process is still not there, so we cannot take chances.
And for those who are not convinced it's Alex, they may just look at the Lst27 nominations - that's enough bizarre behaviour in itself: soon after coming here, he started supporting virtually everyone on RfA in order to later gain their vote in return (it certainly worked with MikeH ), no matter how obviously unqualified (previous Alex incarnations did the same thing, by the way), and for the same reason he is welcoming tons of people (in fact that's about 90% of what he's doing lately), which is designed to leave a good impression with people who may not even realize it's a boilerplate . Gzornenplatz 23:53, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)
I supported those people because they deserved to be supported. I am a really easy kind of person, and support people easily. But, when someone too new (i.e. has only been here for a month), I don't support them. I usually vote oppose. But my votes to support is absolutely not to later gain their vote in return. Also, as I have said soooooo many times before, I am not Alex<removed>. --Lst27 00:16, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Hey, could you stay away from the implicit accusation that MikeH is trading favors with Lst27? MikeH left the same message, or something similar, to just about everyone who voted to support his adminship (quite a bit of work, considering that was 64 people). It's a friendly thank you, not in the least a promise of "I'll vote for you if you vote for me." Whether I agree with MikeH or not on this page, in my observation he always considers nominations on their merits. --Michael Snow 00:18, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Thank you. I was planning on nominating him myself, which should put the "get a respected user to nominate you" crap thing to rest. I just didn't have the time and I was very busy. Mike H 05:09, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)
  • I just spent the last hour and a half reviewing and comparing a lot of edits. I reviewed the nomination history provided by Gzornenplatz (above), checked editing patterns of Lst27 vs other incarnations, compared writing styles, sentence length, grammar, etc. Combined with the repeated self-nominations, I am convinced that Lst27 is Alex and may have temporarily changed his ways for the sole purpose of getting something he really, really, really wants. Even if I am wrong about Lst27=Alex, this edit from 11 MAY would, on its own, cause me to oppose for some time to come. Assuming good faith is a very good rule of thumb. The evidence convinces me that doing so in this case would be unwise. I must oppose. SWAdair | Talk 09:13, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • I'd really like to assume good faith, but can't for two reasons (1) The famous problem of having no effective means of de-adminship and (2) The fact that "assume good faith" has been abused by A<removed> before:
"You should assume good faith and look at Principle Of First Trust and Iterated Prisoners Dilemma. Green Mountain 19:18, 8 Jan 2004 (UTC)" (quoted by Xiaopo)
On the other hand, if he really isn't A<removed>, I'd really hate voting against him, and I'm not sure what options he has if he really has been falsely accused of being A<removed>. So I'm of two minds on this. --Xiaopo ℑ 17:34, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)

Requests for bureaucratship

Bureaucrats are simply users with the ability to make other people admins or bureaucrats, based on community decisions reached here. The process for bureaucrats is similar to that for adminship above, but is generally by request only. New bureaucrats are recorded at Misplaced Pages:Recently created bureaucrats.

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

Other requests

Categories: