Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Meelar (talk | contribs) at 02:01, 18 February 2004 (support ChrisO). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Communitypage Here you can make a request for adminship. See Wikipedia:Administrators for what this entails and for a list of current admins.

Guidelines

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

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

Nomination. Users can nominate other users for administrator. Anonymous users cannot be nominated, nor can they nominate others. The absolute minimum requirement to be involved with adminship matters is to have a username in the system.
Self-nomination. If you want to nominate yourself to become an administrator, it is recommended that you have been a user for a reasonable period of time - long enough to be regarded as trustworthy (on the order of months). Any user can comment on your request—they might express reservations (because, for example, they suspect you will abuse your new-found powers, or if you've joined very recently), but hopefully they will approve and say lovely things about you.

After a 7 day period for comments, if there is general agreement that someone who requests adminship should be given it, then a developer or bureaucrat will make it so and record that fact at Wikipedia:Recently created admins.

Nominations for adminship

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

Please place new nominations at the top

Redwolf

I hereby nominate RedWolf for adminship. Since his first edit on 26 Oct 2003, he has made over 6000 edits, a significant proportion of which relate to disambiguation. He has authored many new articles and submitted several wonderful pictures. As far as I can tell, he hasn't been involved in any dispute, which seems to be a feat in itself at the moment. RedWolf clearly has a good understanding of Wikipedia and I think he will make a fine admin. Stewart Adcock 17:44, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)

  • Support. (Based on above, haven't verified... somebody please verify) --Hemanshu 17:47, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Tuf-Kat

ChrisO

ChrisO is a good contributor and should be a sysop if he wants. He has shown remarkable patience with difficult users. --Wik 00:06, Feb 17, 2004 (UTC)

  • (Not a vote) - User has been here since October 21 and has 940 edits. →Raul654 00:10, Feb 17, 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Did a complete rewrite of Kosovo War that was really needed, and has handled himself well with those that brought it to that state. Dori | Talk 00:14, Feb 17, 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Chris appears to have a good understanding of Wikipedia and would make a good sysop. Angela. 07:39, Feb 17, 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Immense patience shown. Morwen 07:40, Feb 17, 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. A really good contributor and works towards NPOV on controversial articles on central/east european topics. Secretlondon 07:51, Feb 17, 2004 (UTC)
  • Support 172 08:22, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Support; nothing but net, as far I can see... Cimon Avaro on a pogostick 09:19, Feb 17, 2004 (UTC)
  • Tuf-Kat
  • Support. I've known Chris O since the early days of the Scientology Internet war. He has treated this infamously controversial subject with honesty and lack of bias, and he has contributed enormously to those subjects here along with many others. --Modemac 20:44, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. I've seen nothing but good from Mr. O. --No-One Jones 21:29, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Support, welcome aboard! Meelar 02:01, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Crikey - I wasn't expecting this at all! Thanks for the support, it's genuinely unexpected and I'm glad to have been able to make a contribution. So, ummm... do I get a gold star now or something? :-) -- ChrisO 23:45, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)

DavidWBrooks

I nominate DavidWBrooks -- he'd been a help today at Curse of the Bambino...when I went to thank him, I realized he'd been here since January 2003, with over 1,100 edits. He seems like a real pleasant and intelligent fellow, and I think he would make an excellent admin. Jwrosenzweig 21:41, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Jengod

I'd like to nominate Jengod. She's been here since May 2003, and has over 4,500 edits. She's quite pleasant to work with. I thought she was an admin already, but apparently she's not. →Raul654 05:23, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)

Thank you kindly Mr. Kitty in a Glass man. I didn't know if I wanted to get deeper in, but I suspect I was kidding myself--I'm pretty far deep in already. :) jengod 06:30, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC) (Haha - you don't get called that everyday :) →Raul654 22:19, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC))

  • Support Tuf-Kat
  • eek! Support. --Jiang
  • Good choice -- Viajero 09:26, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Bmills 09:32, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Defer (for now) Support (in light of explanation below). If Jiang is supporting you then I guess things are OK, but could you explain what was going on at Leland Stanford? Dori | Talk 16:12, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)
    • Yes, I bumped into that a few days ago too. What is with that? Stubbornness will lead to many many more stupid edit wars over puny matters like that. Quite unnecessary. --Menchi 16:48, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • FWIW, I was editing at home on my 56K modem (slooooow) and so didn't check the edit history--if I'd known it was Jiang I would have totally stepped off--I wasn't entirely sure if my edits were contradicting someone or if it was just a wonky server. Anyway, after I saw Jiang's notes the next day and did some investigation, I'm now totally on board with the "anything bigger than a paragraph is a short article, but not a stub" train. jengod 16:54, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)
      • Since it's merely a misunderstanding, I'll support Jennifer. She's been great otherwise. --Menchi 17:00, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Support unconditionally. -- Decumanus 22:14, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Quality work. Meelar 23:35, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Good balance of dedication and positive attitude. Jwrosenzweig 00:10, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Jengod has good taste in television programming. --Ed Senft! 00:20, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. --Danny 17:30, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. -- Jake 22:00, 2004 Feb 14 (UTC)
  • Support. -- Warofdreams 16:13, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. --Hemanshu 17:49, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. -- Kaihsu 20:51, 2004 Feb 17 (UTC)

Requests for adminship

Please add new requests to the top



De-adminship

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship&oldid=2429760"