Wikipedia:Administrators/Archive1

From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive of administrator requests:

Contents 1 Promoted 1.1 Tdxiang 1.2 Eptalon 1.3 Vector 1.4 Tangotango 1.5 Billz 1.6 Archer7 1.7 Freshstart 1.8 Blockinblox 1.9 aflm 1.10 Ricky81682 1.11 Netoholic (bureaucratship) 1.12 Netoholic 1.13 Tango 1.14 SimonMayer and Mero 1.15 Cprompt 2 Not promoted 2.1 Vector (bureaucrat) 2.2 ForestH2 2.3 Ionius Mundus 2.4 Psy guy 2.5 Deon555 2.6 Sarahgal 2.7 Archer7 (bureaucrat, withdrawn) 2.8 Freshstart (bureaucrat, withdrawn) 2.9 Keitei 2.10 Eptalon 2.11 Kbrooks 2.12 Aranda56 2.13 Hailey C. Shannon 2.14 User:LBMixPro 2.15 Y0u 2.16 Lucky 6.9 2.17 Phroziac 2.18 NickGorton 2.19 Thorpe 2.20 Postdlf 2.21 Ricky81682 2.22 User:Turcottem 2.23 Sverdrup 2.24 Darrien 2.25 User:Marknew 3 Inactivity 3.1 Cprompt, Menchi, Mero, Optim, Tango

[edit] Promoted

[edit] Tdxiang

Note: I'm moving this back from the archive. Most people support Tdxiang's adminship and Netohlic had no right to "veto" it. Angela 03:46, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I didn't veto it, but people seem to forget that I opposed promotion in this case (which affected the totals making it only 8/11 votes to support), and could not promote in good conscience due to some recent irregular actions by Tdxiang. -- Netoholic @ 04:39, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

• EditCounter
• EditCounter

I would like to do a self nomination for adminship. Here are my reasons:

1. I normally work at hours when acitve admins are offline. As such, vandals strike and I would need blocking tools and rollback for efficient anti-vandalism operations.
2. When Requests for deletion reach a concensus, deletion is necessary for nonsense articles. Also, spamming is a problem here, which makes the tools come in handy.
3. I have been here for six months, helping out with the cleaning up of articles and wikification.

Thank you. :)-- Tdxiang @ 03:27, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose - Just today hit 1000 edits, a fact you made sure to note about 15 minutes before posting this self-nomination. About half are article namespace (not the worst I've seen), but where you've usually edited about 125-175 per month, in October, you've made one big push with over 500 edits. You had two failed RFA requests on EN, but I do not hold it against you. What I am concerned about is that those might have lead you you to believe that edit count alone is the main factor for adminship. What are your thoughts on Wikipedia:Core article, and why you did you create the Anus language page? -- Netoholic @ 04:51, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Please note that "Oppose" statement appeared in 13/11/2003 06.35 UTC revision, people usually count only expressed votes... --M7 10:11, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Answer: Core articles are recommended for Simple as we want people who have little understanding of English to be able to comprehend what we are trying to put through. the reason for creating Anus language is because we already have an article on English Wikipedia. As such, articles explaining different languages, like French language, Italian language and other similar articles should come in handy for people using Simple as well.-- Tdxiang @ 09:24, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

• Addenda:Anus language itself is not a nosensical article and it is also notable. :)-- Tdxiang @ 09:34, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
• Question: Just how exactly do you plan to handle the sysop tasks concerning about vandalism, articles, and about the wiki systems? And what's your goal when if you do become a admin? Also what time hours (in PDT) will you work on? --§ Alastor Moody _{(T + C)} 06:09, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Answer: Rollback, like I mentioned earlier, is a tool for quick reversion of vandalism. Blocking is also one other way. I am familiar with Wiki markup and I also hope to clear any doubts, as an admin, about existing policies involved in Simple English Wikipedia. As for the timeslot, I cannot assure a definite one. in the event of unforseen circumstances, I will be offline. However, I will still be on when I am available, so you don't have to worry too much about this one. I hope I have cleared any doubts here. :)-- Tdxiang @ 09:24, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

• • You cannot possibly expect him to answer that last part of that question. Poeple have lives, we don't spend every waking moment from a certain time to a certain time here. Secondly, you surely cannot expect him to answer in PDT when he's not even in the United States. That is ridiculous. Chacor 08:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

---

• Support - I think that simple.wikipedia is in deep need for administrators and Tdxiang can be of help, despite his dreadful signature. --M7 16:27, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
• Support. We do need more admins, and Tdxiang does know his way around I think now. Archer7 - talk 17:46, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
• support --vector ^_^ (talk) 17:48, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
• Support: A great user all around. PullToOpen ^Talk 22:04, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
• support --§ Alastor Moody _{(T + C)} 23:57, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose A currently active user that is a great asset to the simple wp community. However, an admin should know when it is necessary to post an article tagged for deletion to WP:RFD and when it is not necessary. The article "The Reluctant Dragon" which I tagged for deletion didn't have to be posted at RFD since it was nonsense [1][2]. It was not an unusual circumstance and until now, I cannot imagine a discussion coming out from an RFD of that article or similar to it. It couldn't even pass for a stub. I'll probably support a future RFA, but not yet. zephyr2k 00:54, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose Neutral For much the same reason as Zephyr2k, as I have also tagged nonsense posts for deletion and received comments about RFD. Also while it could be due to the excessive number of recent edits, but there have been some questionable edits (Piping the link [[America|American]] without noticing that the page linked to was a redirect as well as not the correct page as context indicates, tagging a page for immediate delete without checking history and noticing it just needed reverted - did check after the edit and re-edited the revert, his edit of Jose Rizal makes me wonder if he thought that was all he thought the article needed.) The high volume of recent edits, questionable edits, RfD issues all makes me wonder if he is ready for the position at this time and is over extending himself in the goal of quantity over quality to get admin. Creol 01:24, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Changed my vote to neutral as his consistancy has returned to a much better level as the volume of his work decreased somewhat to what appears a level he is more comfortable working with. It appears the issues I had were likely being affected by overworking (which can easily cause errors to happen) -Creol 03:10, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

• • Dear Creol, I understand your concerns over these matters concerning Rfds. However, I would like to assure you that such loopholes in my work were accidental and that I work for the quality, not the quantity. I understand your concerns about consistency in my work. However, take a look at my other edits and you would realise that I have not left out any other things in editing. Yes, there has been a phrase saying "In this life, you're either consistent or you're non-existent." I would assure you that I value time and consistency and that my work to articles is the most important. Thank you.-- Tdxiang ^Adminship @ 02:10, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Thank you, Creol!-- Tdxiang ^Adminship 03:16, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose --Duffus 17:56, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
  • 11 edits made, 0 on mainspace.

Comment: Remember, this is no big deal! Everyone makes mistakes. But that's just my opinion on this of course. Archer7 - talk 18:55, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

• Support - is experienced with the Simple English Wikipedia, and unlikely to abuse the sysop tools. - Tangotango (talk) 14:09, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
• Support - We do need an active and loyal editor like Tdxiang who is dedicated to this project, especially in the hours when most of us are asleep, and he is the only one here to combat vandalism. We could have used him as an admin on several nights, at least until the other day when he suddenly disappeared, after I reverted a mispelling of his. I hope he comes back and was not put off by my reverting him. Blockinblox 14:19, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Haha, definitely not! The "stronga" word was an accident. I meant to put strong, but accidentally typed an "a" there. Apologies... :)-- Tdxiang ^Adminship 02:37, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

• Support I have seen Tdxiang as an active contributor. I think he can be trusted in the use of the administrative tools. I have seen him make many good contributions. I fully support his candidacy. -- Eptalon 22:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
• Support. Angela 03:46, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
• Support --Terence Ong 07:18, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

  This user has 5 edit....--vector ^_^ (talk) 08:09, 13 November 2006 (UTC) With 0 on main namespace.-- Tdxiang 02:28, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

  I just joined simple today, I'm on en wiki for 22 months. If I cannot be participating in this RFA, then you may like to disqualify my "vote". --Terence Ong 15:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, Terence. Sorry.-- Tdxiang 10:03, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

• Support - still don't get why wasn't he sysopped the first time. Misza13 16:36, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Note:I'll tell you later. ;)-- Tdxiang 02:28, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

• Support- nice user, very helpful and unlikely to abuse the sysop tools. — This unsigned comment was added by The life of brian (talk • contribs) .
• Support I asked him questions, he gave friendly answers. He would be good! MoglinFiend 12:22, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
• Strongly support This editor is very friendly and I know he will be a great editor.--Sir James Paul 21:18, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

---

• Vote Log: Strong Support: 1, Support: 13,Neutral: 1, Oppose: 2; Support: 82%, Neutral: 7%, Oppose: 11%

[edit] Eptalon

• EditCounter
• See Eptalon's previous request for adminship

I would like to nominate Eptalon (talk ▪ changes) for admiship because of his experience, his vandalfighting skills and his user-friendliness.-- Tdxiang ^Adminship 02:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you all for the trust you place in me. I am looking forward towards placing my skills at the hands of the community, should you chose to elect me. My current work schedule permits me to continue editing Wikipedia in the range of what I did the last few months, about 250-500 edits/month. I am looking forward to being able to fight the vandals myself, rather than having to recur to others to block them. Thanks. -- Eptalon 15:36, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

• Support Excellent editor, constantly creating new needed articles. Good at handling vandals and is available often for supplying admin assistance in times of need. --Creol 02:53, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

• Support After almost a year here, Eptalon really has got the hang of the project and should be trusted to fight vandals. Blockinblox 03:25, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
• Support I would certainly trust him with the admin tools. PullToOpen ^Talk 03:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
• Support as nominator.-- Tdxiang ^Adminship 09:28, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
• Strong support. Would definitely help this WP a lot. Archer7 - talk 10:32, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Support - An extremely experienced user, can definitely be trusted with the admin tools. - Tangotango (talk) 10:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
• Weak support --§ Alastor Moody _{(T + C)} 19:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
• Weak support I have no problem handing out admin tools to you since you've shown dedication through your work in this project. Just be careful of typos. zephyr2k 20:30, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
• Support --vector ^_^ (talk) 21:21, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
• Support --M7 23:22, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
• Support - Seems like a very solid editor and this wiki could use more admins. Misza13 20:44, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
• Support. ...Aurora... 13:22, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Requested promotion on Meta. Archer7 - talk 23:37, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Done. PROMOTED!!! --vector ^_^ (talk) 09:41, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vector

• EditCounter

I would like to candidate myself to sysop status because, I spent about 18 hours in wikipedia, My favourite work is patrolling...my VF is always open with the recent changes of simple.wikipedia, if we look on my edit we fount a good number a rollback. Sometimes when I fight with vandals I never found an admin to help me. I'm a sysop on italian wikipedia, but I believe in this "simple" project. Now there are (13) pages in request in Category:Deletion requests but anyone delete them...

We have 6,010 users...and 7(0.15%) active sysops...it's a small number.

Thanks anyone for supports and not supports --vector ^_^ (talk) 18:02, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

• Question: Sysop status isn't just about vandal fighting. What other tasks do you plan to engage in to contribute to the Simple WP community? zephyr2k 01:19, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

thanks Zephyr2k for the question, sysop status comports 4 bottons(delete,block,rollback,protected/unprotected) but sometimes I look in some special categories like stub or wikify for done some works, in particular I see that some pages that are segnalated as stub, is a very good article, and sometimes I wikify same page.

• Question: It can be seen in your editcount that October edits are significantly lower than your September edits. How will sysop status affect your editing here in simple, knowing that you also have responsibilities as an admin in Italian WP? zephyr2k 01:19, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

thanks Zephyr2k for the question, jes, in september I done a lot of work because I create the italian regions. Now I control the last changes.

(I suppose it means: "Thank you, Zephyr2k, for your question. Yes, in September, I did a lot of work on creating articles about suburbs and various regions in Italy. For this month, I work on vandalfighting, by watching the recent changes." Translated by Tdxiang ^Adminship

---

• Support! A super vandal fighter! Qualifies to be a sysop. --§ Alastor Moody _{(T + C)} 23:56, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
• Support - He was recently elected sysop for it.wiki, but he has already demonstrated to the community that his will and commitment are really useful. --M7 00:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
• Support. He has the will to move us forward.-- Tdxiang ^Adminship @ 02:12, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
• Support --Duffus 17:54, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Note that this user has only 11 edits and 0 on the main namespace.-- Tdxiang ^Adminship 03:04, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
• Neutral. Active and friendly user, and could definitely handle the technical side, but I would be slightly concerned about your communication. Although your English is very good, it can sometimes be difficult to work out exactly what you mean. Archer7 - talk 15:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC)э
• Support - Extremely effective with dealing with trolls and vandals without Admin powers on 4 Nov. With the powers, would have made short work of them. Creol 17:36, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
• Support - Vector is quite the vandal fighter, and unlikely to abuse the sysop tools. - Tangotango (talk) 14:07, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Support. As with Archer7, good communication skills is needed as a sysop. I think you can develop it. Just be mindful that this is still an English WP, and make sure to review edits before saving. I believe you will use the admin tools wisely. zephyr2k 19:42, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

• Support Vector looks like a good candidate for adminship. There are things that still need to be learned (who does not have such),but this can be done on the job. Go for it. :) -- Eptalon 15:38, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tangotango

I would like to nominate Tangotango to become an administrator to stop vandalism more efficiently than he can now. He has already fought a lot of vandals. His first edit was on 2006/07/09 09:56:37. Now he has 831 Edits.(ארגה · ‽ · Manecke 18:20, 8 October 2006 (UTC))

• Userpage
• EditCounter (inactive for now)
• EditCounter

I have mainly been involved in cleaning up, categorizing, and expanding our core articles. I have also been an avid vandal fighter, and it is for this purpose that I would like to become an administrator. As it is not always possible to find a sysop or steward at present, I feel that having the tools at my disposal would let me do a quicker and more thorough job of cleaning up the vandalism that accumulates here.

I would also like to use my experience as an m:OTRS volunteer to help clean up our copyright situation. Also, as I am an administrator on the English Wikipedia, I believe that I will able to import what is good about that wiki, and leave out what isn't. (That having been said, I realize that the two projects have different goals in mind.) Thank you, Tangotango (talk) 18:28, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

• Support - A good vandals fighter is helpful for our wikipedia. mfg --- ארגה · ‽ · Manecke 18:27, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Support. Just the sort of person we need. Archer7 - talk 21:59, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Support. Nice user and a good role model for administrators. Also great talents on fighting vandalism. --§ Alastor Moody _{(T + C)} 23:39, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

• Support Anyone who stops vandalism is always needed! Geeksluvpi 00:03, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

• Blocked as a voting sock puppet. Nominator is also been blocked, I really hope Tango has not solicited outside help here. -- Netoholic @ 03:44, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

I can assure you I know nothing about this user. (I just woke up, in fact.) I don't know how I can effectively prove my innocence, but please feel free to do a Checkuser, etc. if you are so inclined. Cheers, Tangotango (talk) 06:11, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Jumping in here to help but actually, how to you know if User:Tangotango is a sock puppet for User:Tango? cuz simply because of related usernames dosne't always mean sock puppets. Sock puppets can have very distant different usernames far from the orginial user and username. --§ Alastor Moody _{(T + C)} 00:25, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Unblocked Geeksluvpi. Can't see any evidence of being a sockpuppet, awaiting Netoholic's response before unblocking nominator. Archer7 - talk 15:59, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

• Strong support is a very good user....prensent for fight vandals!!! --Vector (write to me please) 17:07, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
• Support - Excellent vandal fighter. PullToOpen ^Talk/_Contribs 17:47, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
• Support I've often seen him on IRC asking for help with SEWiki from stewards, and I can see his dedication to the project. --Srikeit 18:26, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
  • 10 edits, 2 in Main. -- Netoholic @ 18:02, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
• Support --M7 18:25, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
• Support. And I don't think it is his sock...-- Tdxiang @ 03:35, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
• Strong support. Very civil user; has done a lot of work on fighting against vandalism.--TBCΦtalk? 15:09, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
• Support. I've had nothing but good experiences with this user, as an editor, as a fellow sysop at enwiki, and as a vandal patroller. He runs the IRC bots which help patrol for vandalism, and is obviously dedicated to simplewiki. Most important, for me: I trust him. Luna Santin 07:27, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
• Support per Luna-San. His enwiki experience will be a bonus. Chacor 11:07, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • 15 edits, 2 in Main. -- Netoholic @ 18:02, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
• Support. One of the few active users around. He has a good background as well. zephyr2k 19:15, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
• Support --Duffus 17:57, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

• I am concerned that so many voters here are also part of Wikipedia:Esperanza and have only been on this wiki for a very short time, much like Tangotango himself. I really want to hear from other active admins before putting this promotion through. -- Netoholic @ 18:02, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

As it says above, Anyone who has been adding to this website for a while is allowed to be an administrator. Jimbo Wales, the founder of the Wikimedia Foundation, said "this should be no big deal". So, what is the big deal? For my part, I am convinced that Tangotango has the qualifications, and am confident that we can handle giving him the sysop rights. Therefore, I am pleased to offer my support for this nomination. Blockinblox 01:47, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

• Netoholic, I understand your concern about community-based support. However, I look at the qualifications of a user before voting. :)-- Tdxiang @ 03:32, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Billz

I now feel that it is time for me to apply for administrative privileges in order to block vandals and revert pages faster. I am becoming increasingly frustrated at the amount of vandal attacks on Simple English Wikipedia and the time taken for an administrator to respond, due to the increasing amount of inactive sysops. On many occasions, I have been reverting vandalism for half an hour in a vicious circle, which is causing major disruption to other users, before an administrator blocks them. According to Interiot's tool (Here), I have over 3,400 edits on this Wikipedia and have been a editing for nearly four months, which I believe has given me enough experience to use Wikipedia effectively and efficiently. I usually spend between ten and fifteen hours per day here, which can be seen by my large number of edits each day. If I am not on Simple English Wikipedia, I can be contacted by email, which I have set to automatically check for new mail every minute and will give me text and sound notification of incoming messages. I enjoy contributing on Simple English Wikipedia because each day is a new challenge and gives me a great sense of satisfaction. More information about me can be found on my user page. Thank you. Billz (Talk) 22:25, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Ten to fifteen hours a day? According to that, you spend about 52% of every day on Wikipedia. If I take off 8 hours of sleep, you only spend about 2.5 hours of your time while you are awake away from Wikipedia. 78% of your time awake is on Simple. I'm sorry, but this isn't healthy. You need to go outside sometimes, you'll get RSI, damage your eyes etc. Really, take a break. It's dangerous. Archer7 - talk 13:08, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

As you can see from the graphs here, I do usually spend between ten to fifteen hours a day patrolling Simple English Wikipedia. Obviously, due to various commitments, I can not always spend this amount of time here, although I do try to aim for at least ten hours, where possible. I spend this sort of time here because I really enjoy editing and contributing to such a great project. I do have a life outside of Wikipedia, where I enjoy assembling and repairing PCs and attending computer fairs. By using a high quality TFT monitor and an ergonomic keyboard, I do not suffer from eye strain or RSI. Thank you for your concern. Billz (Talk) 13:38, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Support - You have indeed been very helpful in fighting vandalism. It often takes administrators far too long to block such vandals. It would be a great help if you were an administrator. --Ionius Mundus 23:12, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Support is a very good user!!!!!!!! --Vector (write to me please) 08:16, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

• Support! Has helped make this encyclopedia grow, and has kept the vandals at bay. Would be great as an administrator. - Tangotango 08:22, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

• Neutral. Archer7 - talk 09:39, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
• Strong support. Good vandalfighter and nice user too.-- Tdxiang 10:16, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

• Support - I was wondering when you would apply! My only concern though is that you would exercise a bit of caution with your powers as an admin, as not everything you have tagged in the past has been blatant vandalism...! Blockinblox 15:51, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

You do not need to have this concern because if I was made an administrator, I would be very careful with what I do delete and I would fully check beforehand whether it is of some use. Thank you for all of your votes. Billz (Talk) 15:55, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

• Support - Someone should have nominated you a while ago. Seems very dedicated to SE WP, and we need all the anti-vandal help we can get. --LBMixPro^<talk|to|me> 05:12, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

• Support. Seems dedicated to SE, from everything I have seen. We could do with another active admin to stop vandals. Luna Santin 05:15, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

• Support. Nice guy, with a lot of experience and knowledge. --§ Alastor Moody _{(talk + contribs)} 23:31, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

• Support Dedicated chap. Knows what he's on about. Won't abuse the mop. T. Moitie|Talk|Esperanza 00:09, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

• Support: Yes, unfortunately we have many administrators who are not active, and so there is scope for more administrators. I think Billz shall use the powers carefully. I wish him all the best! One thing more - please be careful about your health: an old proverb says - Health is Wealth. Archer is right. --Bhadani 13:53, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

• Weak oppose: You certainly are a capable editor, and you certainly do enough for SEWikipedia. Comparing My editcount with yours, which is like 4 times as much (for 08 2006, I think it would be good to step back. I think a good editor also needs an abiliity to step back, and view things with a little distance. -- Eptalon 18:20, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I understand that I do spend a lot of time editing and improving Simple English Wikipedia, however this isn't going to change whether I become an administrator or not. During August, I really found my feet here and this is reflected in my high edit count during that month (Over 50 per day on average), but due to internet problems at work, my edit count will be nowhere near the 1580 I clocked up during August. I understand that your vote is your choice, but I will try to keep editing on Simple English Wikipedia whatever happens, so please do not worry about my health. Thanks. Billz (Talk) 19:11, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry for this....but the number of edits Is not important..it's important that an admin bust be present, helpful in all the situation with the new users, the admins and the normal user...billz is a very good user....he is much present and controll the majors of the pages modificated....I hope he will became a GOOD sysop....like his time as user...good lack Billz!!!!! --Vector (write to me please) 20:08, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much for those kind words, Vector. I try to be on Simple English Wikipedia as much as possible and be as polite and helpful as I can be in all situations. I believe these are the qualities which make a good administrator here. Billz (Talk) 21:24, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, to say so, I am not really against you becoming an admin; though I know what I am talking about (if you look in the history, you will find my own (failed) application here). During that time I had between 600 and 800 edits/month, or about 20 a day. This was hard to keep up, given that I have a daytime job, and sometimes I go out on weekends. Since then, I have stepped back, and became a happier, though still unprivileged editor). To put it into a nutshell, I'd prefer an admin to be on this wikipedia less, but rather have more of a social life (which also influences on the knolwedge about things one has. This can be important ot see the other side, aka NPOV). In short, I dont stand in your way, if you think you must go ahead. I simply dont feel comfy about the long hours (And I know what I am talking about, I have a computer job as well..). And no, its definitely not about editcount. -- Eptalon 21:17, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I do use computers a lot, but I also do have a great social life when I can. I have a wide circle of friends, from whom I have learned a lot of knowledge about computers, science and maths. I have never put Wikipedia before my social life, because as you can see from my graphs, I do pop in and out for various reasons, whether due to work or other commitments. If I am asked to go out somewhere by a friend, I will try to go where possible and I wouldn't ever think about not going because I have work to do on Simple English Wikipedia. I can totally understand your viewpoint, but I can assure you that I am happy in my life at the same time as helping Simple English Wikipedia. Billz (Talk) 21:24, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Oppose -- User has been acting irresponsibly at Big Bang reverting reasonable edits by myself and has a warped sense as to what NPOV represents. He seems to think that it's okay if unverified qualifications that "no one was there at the beginning of the universe so no one knows how it began" are included in the spirit of NPOV. This is the most ridiculous sort of philosophizing that can go on. He hasn't helped solve the conflict, has only help escalate it. It would be a shame to see such an incompetant editor promoted to the rank of administrator. --216.125.49.252 21:53, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I'd note that Billz upon reading this comment promptly removed it from this page even though it is directly applicable to his candidacy. He then proceded to continue edit warring by reverting my well-justified edit to Big Bang. This is not conduct becoming of a potential admin. --216.125.49.252 18:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• Weak Support Billz looks dedicated to what he does; I think he would do well as a sysop. PullToOpen ^π/_φ 20:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Archer7

I'd like to nominate myself to become an administrator mainly to block vandals, and revert vandalism with a rollback button that actually works (I'm currently using godmode light). I've been here since December 2005, and I've got over 1700 edits according to Interiot's tool and I think I now have a firm idea of how this project is run. I'm also part of the Counter Vandalism Unit on en:, although I have more or less given up editing over there and focused my energy over here. Archer7 16:34, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

• Support: Archer7 is a regular contributor. Sometimes I really have trouble matching the high quality of his edits. I fully endorse his candidacy -- Eptalon 21:37, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
• Strong support. Good interaction with Users (see blue segment on Interiot's stats). Good usage of edit summary. He'll be a good sysop. --M7 22:12, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support, I think you would be as good a sysop as any. But same with Eptalon, your 3 month anniversary is still 6 days away! Looks like you two both made your first edit on the same day! And now I have voted 3 times in one day! Blockinblox 22:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support. GFJ 14:30, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support. A very good, active contributor, who will only be more able and active as an admin. Of course, vandal-blocking isn't the only thing admins do, but it is certainly a valid focus to have. In the same way that edit count should only be a secondary consideration, I think that exactly how long a person has been editing here should also be secondary. This goes for Eptalon, too, of course. If someone has well over 1000 edits, let's not be so worried about time since their first edit. However, the reverse is not true: if someone has been here a long time and has very few edits, that does not reflect a high level of interest in or commitment to the project, so that should be considered as well. Primary considerations (for me) are quality of edits, good faith, sustained interest in the project, and understanding of what being an administrator means and does not mean. --Cromwellt|talk 18:05, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support. As Netoholic said, the big thing to remember is not to use your abilities in any conflicts (editing or otherwise) that you're directly involved.-- aflm ^Talk 20:56, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support. Diligent editor; would be a good janitor. Freshstart 01:00, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Freshstart

I would like to be an administrator, mostly so I can block people when there are sustained vandalism attacks (EG Special:Contributions/Kevin_da_Scally - watching that sort of thing until I could reach Net, Ricky, or Angela[3] (before alfm and blockinblox became admins) was really painful). I've been here a few months, and have close to five thousand edits [4] [5] (and more than 6 times as many on EN, but I've given up on that project). Since most of that time I was unemployed, and now have a fulltime job, and another parttime one starting Monday, my editting will not be anywhere near as prolific as it has been up until the past few weeks. Freshstart 02:09, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

• Support. Freshstart is a very active contributor and vandalism fighter. We can use more admins like him. --Cromwellt|talk 04:07, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

• Neutral to weak oppose. Support. I clearly support Freshstart's candidature, he is very active and has good quality edits, as far as I can tell -- Eptalon 12:43, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

To clarify the raying above: Freshstart sure is a tireless contributor, but his edits seem to focus on fixing what is there. In itself, this is certainly not bad, but to gain visibility, we should also focus on extending the reach of this project.This can only be done by either getting in new articles, or getting in new people who contribute new articles. Also as I am being criticised of not reacting fast enough to my errors, when importing articles. Given his comments on my candidacy below, I do not see why I should support this candidate. Raying above added by me. -- Eptalon 16:09, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Comment. Some people focus on some things, other people focus on other things, but we need all kinds of people to make this work. I continue my strong support of Freshstart's nomination. --Cromwellt|talk 18:05, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Comment. I agree with Cromwellt. Archer7 11:02, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

• Support. . Can I suggest some more interaction in other Users' talks? --M7 13:50, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

• Support. We always need more responsible admins who can fight off the vandals, and Freshstart already has a head start on that score. I will also add my support vote to Eptalon very soon, I just don't want to move overly fast, ya know. Blockinblox 14:05, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

• Support. Tireless contributor. Would definitely do well as an admin. Archer7 16:34, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support. GFJ 14:30, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
• Neutral. -- aflm ^Talk 20:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blockinblox

I would like to be a sysop here; I have enough time and edits, am very familiar with writing simple and most of the necessary articles here, and understand that sysops have no 'special authority', but are allowed to protect vandalised pages and block vandals when necessary. I would only use these powers to combat blatant vandalism. Blockinblox 13:42, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

• You've been here for quite a while, and you do help with a couple great tasks, like updating the Wikipedia:Recentchanges notice. The main problem I have is that I don't know anything about you. You've never voted on WP:RFD, nor voted here on other candidates. You also only rarely edit summaries for your article edits. This especially make it difficult for other editors to see what changes you've made. It's a subtle thing, but I think that communication is important for an admin. -- Netoholic @ 07:03, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

• • Well, those specific things seem pretty easy to change, and I'm now trying to show that I can do a better job of communicating, on edit summaries and WP:RFD. What else did you want to know about me? -- Blockinblox 16:43, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Also, I didn't vote here before, because I didn't realize non-admins were allowed to vote on this page; but I promise to do better at communicating in the future, especially if my role changes to admin/sysop. --Blockinblox 18:59, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

• Support. I had similar concerns as Neto, but they have been addressed to my satisfaction. And the regular updating of Recent Changes seems to indicate the sort of temperament that would be well-suited to having the keys to the janitor's closet. 24.18.215.132 20:21, 2 March 2006 (UTC) (Um, I guess I forgot to sign in. Freshstart 04:25, 3 March 2006 (UTC))

• Support. I agreed with Freshstart about Neto's concerns, but he has over a thousand edits in the mainspace along with edits across other spaces. Plus, he's been good in helping with vandalism. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:42, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support. -- aflm ^Talk 22:49, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support - M7 22:55, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] aflm

• I like to help this Wikipedia, specially putting categories and interwikis. If you agree, I will do my best to be a nice and useful operator. -- aflm 23:15, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Before I vote, I'd like to know your views about Simple -- what is it's purpose, how does it fit in with other Wikimedia projects, and what changes would you like to see made? -- Netoholic @ 05:10, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
    • I will try to answer the questions in a small number of words. The Simple Wikipedia is a special Wikipedia because we make it to help people learn a language that is useful for them. It is its main purpose, but its articles have other utilities, for example, people can use them for make versions in other languages.
    • A change I would like to see made is the way in which some users help us. These users create many stubs about topics similar to unknown bands and small football teams. They would help more if they create and expand important articles, for example, those of the What we should have page.
    • Happily, we have nice wikipedians here working a lot to make useful articles. The number of wikipedians of Simple is increasing and I hope to see this Wikipedia among major Wikimedia projects, with many complete and good articles. -- aflm 00:25, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
      • Support - aflm has proved to be a great editor, and I think that giving sysop priviledges would be best to help this project grow. -- Archer7 23:04, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
• Support. I think Aflm has enough edits and has been here longer enough to be given sysop priviledges. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:52, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
• Support. A productive, conscientious editor. Could add edit summaries a little more consistently, and get more involved a little more often in back-end discussions about policy, etc. and things like Wikipedia:Requests for deletion. (FWIW, I disagree about the primary function of Simple, but agree that ideally editors would focus on core topics--besides "the list", I see that as being history, world affairs, basic science topics, great thinkers, major historical nations/cultures/languages, and things like that. More pop-culture things like the band-du-jour; every movie, album, and video game or platform ever released; every fictional character/place/thing; etc. are better left to EN, at least until more of the basics are covered.) The stated reasons for being an admin don't really require admin tools, but the edit history shows enuf justified {delete} tags that I think the admin tools would be used constructively. Soliciting votes on admin nominations is frowned on at EN, but I can understand why the low traffic here might be more likely to cause people to resort to it. Freshstart 10:40, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ricky81682

User page | Pages worked on

Ok, my second nomination. While I was on waiting to self-nominate myself again after I had been here a full three months, our recent vandal (and Shenme's suggestion) has made me speed up my thought process a bit. Ok, according to Kate's tools, I have over over 7,200 edits in English and over 2,500 edits in Simple.

Admittedly, I have a ton of edits in categories, since (as one can see on my user page) I have been trying to organize Category:Years, Category:Births by year, and Category:Deaths by year. I did manage to complete the days of the year a while back. I admittedly haven't written a lot of articles. Truthfully, I only wrote Julian calendar, Gregorian calendar and peer review after noticing a need for them. My main use for Administrator rights would be for deletion and against vandalism. Looking at its history, one can see that I have been fairly active at Wikipedia:Requests for deletion.

I guess that's all I can think of. Actually, I have one question. Is it just me or you can't select namespaces in user contributions anymore? Either way, if anyone has any questions for me, please ask. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:06, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

• support - I don't have any concerns. -- Netoholic @ 13:35, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
• Support - very good contributions. • Thorpe • 18:55, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
• Support - and I was only counting the Simple edits! -- Shenme 20:06, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
• Support - We do need an extra active sysop. Aurora 08:35, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
• Support - Seems trustworthy, and I concur with Aurora. Michael 11:56, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Netoholic (bureaucratship)

User page | Pages worked on | Log of admin actions

User:SimonMayer is currently the only bureaucrat for Simple, appointed by Angela when she departed that position. Granted, we don't have much call for it, but he's not been active here lately. I think we have quite a few contributors who would soon be available for adminship, and it would be nice for one of our own to be able to promote them and handle name change requests. I've been an administrator here since Oct 2004. -- Netoholic @ 14:04, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

• Support - Active and a mainstay (further reference: For the meaning within Wikimedia projects, see m:Bureaucrat.) Shenme 20:01, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
• Support for the same reasons as Shenme. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:04, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
• Support - Trustworthy, active, needed. Michael 11:56, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
• Support - Same as above.
  SimonMayer 20:53, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Netoholic

I posted a request for temporary admin status at Meta to deal with a a troublesome user (Haydes) from the regular English WP. He was blocked recently there, and has found a home on Simple: creating dozens of bad articles. He's already vandalized my user page, and has proven himself to be very annoying on the EN: side. With Angela on a wikibreak, and unable to get in contact with the two other active admins, I'm not sure what else to do if this user becomes an even bigger problem. -- Netoholic @ 01:50, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

It doesn't seem to be a huge problem. He hasn't created that many articles, and it's debatable whether a sub stub is candidate for speedy deletion anyway. A lot of pages here are substubs, far more so than on the English Wikipedia. If he becomes a bigger problem, just list on vandalism in progress, but since he's not even banned on en at the moment, I don't think we should be auto-deleting everything he does. Angela 04:48, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

No, it looks like a few hours later he was unblocked (he came from an AOL proxy). I never suggested that we "auto-delete" everything he added. I think, though, that I'd like to make this now into a formal request for sysop status here. Since discovering simple:, I've found that I enjoy contributing here, and look forward to participating further. Let me know what you think. -- Netoholic @ 22:56, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I have made you sysop before I see this. I will let admin status for a week then. Anthere

I see no problem for letting you sysop since no one complained. So I will let the status "on" (my opinion). If anyone disagree afterall, they can indicate it on my talk page :-) Please let this discussion on this page Netoholic :-) user:Anthere.

[edit] Tango

I would like to apply for adminship. I've been on this wiki (on and off) for a while (since before it started using MediaWiki). As this wiki grows it will need more than just 5 active admins, I think, so here I am! -- Tango 21:35, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Support

1. Support. Tango did a lot of good work here before the software switch, which unfortunately doesn't show up in his contributions list, but he started here around October 2003. I believe he can be trusted with administrator access. Angela 03:40, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
2. Same as Anglela. --Mero 16:41, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
3. Sure. Noticed his anti-vandalism fights. --Menchi (Talk). 23:49, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Neutral

1. I would like to abstain on whether Tango becomes an administrator, as I do not know this user. However I have noticed that he/she has helped tackle vandalism.
   

   I would also like to take this opportunity to say we should have more administrators. Often it seems that vandalism could go on for several hours before anyone comes to the rescue. Having more administrators will give us extra coverage, but we must be careful to only allow those we can trust.
   SimonMayer 00:17, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

[edit] SimonMayer and Mero

I would like to nominate SimonMayer for adminship and Mero has requested adminship. Both have done some great work on finding pages that need to be deleted and I think it would be useful if they had the ability to carry out the deletions themselves. I propose they both be made sysops if there are no objections over the next week. (Note: I have already emailed the other active sysops about this and had no objections from them). Angela 00:57, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I would like to become an administrator. Is there a set of procedures for me deleting a ridiculous page or should I delete nonsense immediately? Thank you for nominating me. SimonMayer 17:51, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC)

We've got a fairly simple deletion policy at the moment, but obvious nonsense can certainly be deleted immediately. When in doubt, go with the policies at the English Wikipedia. Angela 16:03, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I'll be careful with what I delete. I imagine I'll learn the rest in time. --Anon (I must have posted this whilst not signed in SimonMayer 10:55, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC))

Support Simon and Mero. --Menchi (Talk). 10:12, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Cprompt

I'd like to be a sysop. I'm a sysop on the English Wikipedia, but I haven't spent much time on Simple yet. I don't mind waiting if I'm supposed to spend more time on Simple first. --Cprompt 22:02, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)

There's not a lot for sysops to do here yet, but there's no harm in having more if you think you will be active here. The only policy written so far is Wikipedia:Bans and blocks so there isn't even much reading to do before you become one. :) Angela 01:21, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Well, I do plan on writing quite a few Simple versions of articles I've worked on in the English Wikipedia, and keeping my eyes peeled for WikiVillains. I'll leave my request for adminship up here, and if another sysop is needed, leave a note on my talk page :-)

--Cprompt 17:35, 16 Jan 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Not promoted

[edit] Vector (bureaucrat)

Since 2 or 3 more bureaucrats are needed on simple.wikipedia, I candidate myself to this role, I promise to act upon the Community consensus. --vector ^_^ (talk) 18:28, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

• Support, a young user, really helpful and fair. --M7 18:31, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose - you were promoted to admin only a day ago, and your choices have been questionable in that short time. -- Netoholic @ 18:40, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

  sorry, on November 10, at 7. --vector ^_^ (talk) 18:56, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose - I think you should be given more of a chance to prove yourself at adminship, before being given the additional responsiblility of being a bureaucrat. -- Eptalon 18:45, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose - sorry, but there's a lot of learning to do when you first become an admin, and you just need a bit more time. Archer7 - talk 20:21, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

I renounced, please stop voting :) --vector ^_^ (talk) 20:42, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ForestH2

I would like to nominate my self to be an admin. I have been a simple wikipedian user since June, and have expanded, improved, and started my own articles. I want them to revert vandalism faster and block users as very recently we have had sysops not on simple and lots of vandalism from Anita934 sockpuppets. I have been an English user since April but stopped in September because I wanted to make simple the wikipedia, I contribute most too. Mostly, I work on the airline articles. I am not the most active communicator, but I expect to have more communications once I am an admin. Thanks. ForestH2 00:26, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose. I think you need more edits before you can be a sysop. PullToOpen ^π/_φ 01:49, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I have 110 edits or so. I guess I might need a bit more edits but this is not en where you need 1,000 to 5,000 edits before becoming an admin. ForestH2 03:07, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

• Weak support. I know you try your best to help the simple Wikipedia and I know you have the capability, but you need to know an administrator has some big responsibilites and must be on full duty. --§ Alastor Moody _{(T + C)} 03:55, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose. We usually recommend at least 500 to 1000 edits and three month's experience before you will become a sysop. Billz (Talk) 06:17, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I have three months experience but no 500-1000 edits. Hey, is there any way you can check your edit count over here? ForestH2 14:31, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Click here to check your edit count. It is currently at 113 edits, which I believe is inadequate to become an administrator. The more edits that you do, the more experience that you gain, so only doing about 100 edits will not have given you enough experience, in my honest opinion. Billz (Talk) 15:54, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

• Support --Vector (write to me please) 15:25, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
• Support Seems like a good user. Carmelapple 23:44, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Support Needs more edits; though has four months here already. Treebark 23:46, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
• Question - Is English your first language? I see you live in Idaho, but a couple of minor things in your above paragraph do not seem like the writing of a native speaker, eg. "my self", "make simple the wikipedia, I contribute most too" etc. Just wondering... Blockinblox 01:05, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
  • No, Swedish is. English is #2. ForestH2 01:21, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Support per Treebark. Jack01 02:29, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
• Support per Jack. AlexY 02:42, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. Of your support votes, the last two voted here as their very first edit after logging in. Another supporter, User:Carmelapple, uses almost identical writing style on his/her homepage, and is mostly involved with airline articles. Let alone the fact that you do not have nearly enough edits under your own name for serious consideration. I really think we need to get a checkuser here on some of these accounts... Blockinblox 03:15, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

So we show the same interest in airline pages?... Carmelapple's page is nothing like mine, mine has a few paragraphs, his is one whole paragraph. ForestH2 03:20, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

I stopped this early because the accusations of sockpuppetry in this vote have been more than convincingly been shown. I would not promote under these circumstances. -- Netoholic @ 04:44, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ionius Mundus

I would like to nominate myself to become an administrator mostly to stop vandalism more efficiently than I can now. I have been here since July 22, but I had been observing the process of using wikipedia beforehand. I have made about 400 edits so far. I have also created 32 new articles - about the rate of an article per day. Thank you for any support. Ionius Mundus 18:33, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

• Weak support. You have so far proved yourself to be a good editor, however a little more time and a few more edits would make you the perfect candidate. Billz (Talk) 17:43, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
• Weak oppose. We like to have longer than a month, and at least 500-1000 edits, before approving admins. Your edits and vandal fighting are good, though, although it takes practice to try to find the neutral middle ground, putting our personal opinions aside (I am looking at edit for example, where you wrote that Pinochet was a "brutal dictator", it may well be true but it still seems a little 'pov' way of putting it, and the guy is still alive! Maybe better to say he is "considered" a brutal dictator by so-and-so, or something...) I don't think that's a bar to adminship though, goodness knows I have done similar things myself... The important thing is that the power to delete, block and protect not be misused in a content dispute, but only for blatant vandalism or other rule breaking. Let's give it about two more months' worth of edits, then there will be less to object to on grounds of time spent, and I will happily reconsider my vote. Blockinblox 18:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

As stated, I would use administrative privileges almost entirely for fighting vandalism. --Ionius Mundus 23:19, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

• Weak oppose. Blockinblox's reasons. Keep up the good work though. Archer7 - talk 21:34, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
• Weak support. More time is needed.-- Tdxiang 08:28, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
• Weak oppose. Certainly, you are a good editor, and show potential. However, i feel that your skills at editing (finding the middle ground, aka NPOV) could still become a little better if you edited a little more. It is like the taste of a bottle of a good wine, which often gets better with age. Age some more. -- Eptalon 09:39, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
• Weak support. You seem to have the potential to be a sysop, but needs a little bit more experience. --§ Alastor Moody _{(talk + contribs)} 23:29, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. You seem like a nice person, but we need more track record before we can really see how you are doing. Try again in a couple months, after a few hundred more edits. --Cromwellt|talk|contribs 21:38, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Support but he must be present in simple.wikipedia!!! --Vector (write to me please) 07:42, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Psy guy

After being here for a few months, I feel that I have learned and more fully understand the finer points of Simple Wikipedia; therefore, I humbly request to be a sysop for Simple Wikipedia. I am an avid vandal fighter on English Wikipedia, English Wiktionary, and here at Simple Wikipedia. I am a member of the Counter Vandalism Unit. I am a channel staffer at #vandalism-simple-wp, #vandalism-en-wt (the Wiktionary vandalism channel), and #vandalism-meta (the Meta vandalism channel). For the full picture, I am an op in #vandalism-en-wp (the WP channel). In addition to CVU bots, I frequently watch for vandalism with CDVF.

I know that my edit count is relatively low compared to other new admins, but one should note that many of my edits have been speedy deleted after I have posted speedy tags on articles. In addition, I feel I should mention that I am an admin on English Wikipedia and English Wiktionary. Also, I have already served as an admin on Simple Wikipedia in a temporary capacity twice. I offer my logs as testament to my judgement as an admin. I feel that admin rights would assist me in the course of my work and help me to better serve the community.

I completely understand if the community feels that I should be here longer for applying for powers, but I strive to assist the wiki-community. Therefore, I offer myself to you for your consideration. -- Psy guy 23:58, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose due to your low post count on Simple English Wikipedia. The minimum is 500 to 1000. Billz 06:08, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Just curious. Is this your minimum or the project's? I looked around for admin requirements on this project, but I didn't find any. -- Psy guy 13:16, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
    • It's an unofficial thing that naturally developed. There's no official admin requirements, but they work well (1000 edits for experience, 3 months for observation). _Archer7 | ^talk 16:11, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Support. I think we could definitely trust you with admin tools, you've shown that on other wikis. I don't have a minimum edit count or amount of time for admins as at this stage every case must be assessed individually. However, I can't really tell whether you do know the finer points of this Wikipedia. _Archer7 | ^talk 09:48, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• Strong support. -- aflm (talk) 19:17, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
• Support because I've noticed him being a good admin on the normal English wikipedia. Picaroon9288 17:39, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Are his works on English Wikipedia releated to those over here?-- Tdxiang 07:32, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

No, but they are proof that he can be a good admin. See Archer7's comment. Picaroon9288 16:07, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

• Weak oppose. You do good work here, thats not the question. Do some more, ansd get your edit count up to 1.000 and I will fully support you. -- Eptalon 11:47, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
• Support. You have what it takes to go far.-- 陈鼎翔 贡献 Chat with Tdxiang on IRC! 04:40, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deon555

I understand that I am quite new - on this WikiPedia, but I have been on en wikipedia for aaages now, and have heaps of edits, in the main space, Wiki, Template etc. I do Recent Changes Patrol, New Changes Patrol, I monitor high-profile pages, espech Wikipages (including the Main Page). I am familiar with many Wiki features, like:

• Editing your Monobook.js page
• Reverting Vandalism
• Rollback
• Banning and Blocking Policys - incuding things like dodgy Usernames etc
• Warning Vandals

on en:wiki i have Popups, Godmode-light (Rollback), RC Filter,etc and other 'advanced tools'.

In closing, I believe Adminship/sysop status should not be given out on the basis of edit count. There are political and technical arguments against this. The technical side is that adding all users above a certain edit count to an implicit group would require at least one extra query on page view; this could turn into an unreasonable performance demand. There's a workable solution to this, however. On the political side of things; English Wikipeia, and I'm sure this one also, is a wiki where "editcountitis" is discouraged and in some cases, condemned. An edit count is not a valuable indicator of a user's trustworthiness where Adminship/sysop status is concerned, nor is it a good indicator of the value and quality of their contributions.

Thank You Sincerely,

--Deon555 03:46, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Oppose. Sorry, but Simple works rather differently to EN, and you'll need some time to get used to things, even if you have the technical knowledge. 09:06, 27 May 2006 (UTC) -- (Comment by Archer7, as to changelog of page -- Eptalon 10:43, 27 May 2006 (UTC))

Oppose. I agree that the edit count should not be the sole thing looked at for the decision on who to grant admin status (or other privileges) to. Things like warning vandals and reverting pages can also be done without being admin. The change of the old layout of simple to the new one was done completely by someone who does not have administrative status (Only for the final commit might they have needed an admin). As of this writing, you have an editcount of 2 (edits probably spent on putting up this request). As to my knowledge, adminship requires working with the project for about three monnths. This is simply to get to know how things work here. I therefore propose you to worki with us, as a normal user. After about 3 months, you come back, if you want, and show us what you have done. This is the basic idea of a meritocracy. -- Eptalon 10:07, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'll do some editing, and come back. Is there a real base line for the number of edits? --Deon555 22:38, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Oppose, per above. Neither edit count nor time spent should be the absolute test of admin rights (I think a few excellent users should be granted it earlier), but both are useful in most cases. Three months is a good amount of time, and the edit limit is about 1000 edits. Happy editing! --Cromwellt|talk|contris 03:54, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Oppose, per above. -- Blockinblox 15:33, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Oppose: even has no user page. How am I supposed to know you and your work? 89.50.64.212 15:52, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sarahgal

I know I seem completely new on Simple English Wikipedia, but for about six months I have contributed without a loginname. I have contributed to the userboxes and articles in ENWikipedia (although I am not an admin there). My goals for Simple English Wikipedia is to create Simple English userboxes, simplify articles and to help end vandalism! (The dreaded v-word!). I cannot do much researching as I have internet restriction. I may seem young (13) but dedication, responsibility and ability are the only things that should contribute to being an admin. I know I have little basis for proof as most of my edits are anonymous. If you think I am not credible, then I will try to get credible.

Sarahgal 18:03, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Comment: I don't see how we could even credit your past contributions, unless you told what number you posted them under and verified it by posting a confirmation here from that same number... Would you be willing to do this? Blockinblox 00:05, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I'd be willing but I can't. Most contributions weren't on this IP. I have like 50 contributions on this at the most. Sorry. Gosh- I seem like a horrible canidate I know but- I guess trust is all you have but its hard to trust a stranger. Sarahgal 00:11, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose. You don't seem like a horrible candidate. Can you at least tell us what IP that was? If you can, we can at least check the contributions, etc. About how many contributions did you have here on that IP? I am in full agreement with you that age does not ultimately matter for adminstrator's rights. I even think that the time and editcount requirements can be bent at times. But you should be pretty close to both before even thinking about asking for admin rights, normally. The requirements are three months (you've passed that you say, and I believe you) and 1000 edits. Do you really have that many? I think if you can't prove that IP, we're not going to be able to count them for you, since we don't know if those were you, or even if they were good or bad edits. That's one of the reasons we tell anon users to get a username. There is a certain reputation that builds up around a username (plus the contributions can always be checked), so people know if that user is a good one, a poor one, or a vandal. Even though it's a pain, I'd say to get editing, and request admin status again when you've got 1000 edits under this username. If they're all good edits, I can almost guarantee you that you'll make it. --Cromwellt|talk|contris 02:37, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I can think of no way of getting that IP I am very sorry. Maybe in a month or so I can try again. I wish I had a username then .... grrrr! Sarahgal 05:21, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Why don't you name some of the articles you have worked on.... then we can probably figure it out...Blockinblox 05:28, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose: As per above, either point us to some of the articles you edited anonymously, or provide an IP address (range?) you did that from. The 50-odd edits you did under this user ID will certainly not get you an admin status. -- Eptalon 09:23, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I just remember the ones I worked on recently. I could tell you the range of things I did. Simplifying, spellchecking. Nothing too big- mostly small things. This is going bad. I guess I'll just try to do as much as I can in a few hours getting (hopefully) to 1000! But that won't work an I know it... Sarahgal 16:57, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Archer7 (bureaucrat, withdrawn)

I nominate Archer7 for bureaucrat status. I will also add this nomination at meta. If you support this nomination, please say so here. --Cromwellt|talk|contris 02:55, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I would like to withdraw my nomination for the same reasons as Freshstart, at least until this is sorted out. _Archer7 | ^talk 21:56, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose - this nomination is purely political. Archer7 in particular does not have the proper judgement or experience decide adminstions, since he cannot deal with even fellow admins on a mature level. -- Netoholic @ 03:51, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I came across rather immaturely, but I was rather furious at the time. About your block, I would have done it to any other user, it was nothing against you. However, I don't think your actions were appropriate for a bureacrat. _Archer7 | ^talk 09:29, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Comment. As I pointed out on meta not long ago, all nominations are by definition political, and all oppose votes are too. I think that Archer7 is an excellent candidate for bureaucrat, since he respects the rights of other users. I admit my bias, since it was my rights he has defended. But that does not lessen the validity of this nomination. Having another bureaucrat or two shouldn't bother you, Netoholic, unless you are desperate to keep that power all to yourself. You nominated yourself for CheckUser ostensibly to avoid power abuses, but you don't want any other project bureaucrats who would prevent that same issue. If I'm wrong about your fear of other bureaucrats, nominate one yourself. --Cromwellt|talk|contris 09:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Do it later: Archer7 is certainly a candidate to consider to become bureaucrat. Hoever, given the recent conflict (which involves Archer7/Netoholic/Crommwellt) I don't think a rational decision can be reached now. Try again later on, in a month's time, when people have calmed down. -- Eptalon

• Comment. Please note that Archer7 did not nominate himself: I nominated him. --Cromwellt|talk|contris 11:45, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Comment:I am aware of both entries not being put up by the candidates. All I am trying to say is that common users out there are too taken up with a possible abuse of admin rights/possible overrreactiion of an admin. Any decision taken now will highly be emotional. Such decisions usually do not stand later scrutiny. We have lived with the current situation for at least 6 months. What is anothe month to wait for people to calm down? (Also appies to nomination of Freshstart below) -- Eptalon

• Oppose. -- aflm (talk) 17:48, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
• Support I have seen Archer7 act maturely as an admin and I believe he is ready for a new set of tools to help Simple. DaGizza 12:39, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Freshstart (bureaucrat, withdrawn)

I nominate Freshstart for bureaucrat status. I will also add this nomination at meta. If you support this nomination, please says so here. --Cromwellt|talk|contris 02:55, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I would like to withdraw from consideration. However well-intentioned, this nomination doesn't seem to be helping resolve the recent issues so people can move on. Freshstart 01:39, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose - I am a big fan of Freshstart, but this nomination is purely political. I think it's best not to make these sorts of decisions in the heat of a disagreement. I would support in a little while, if Freshstart later indicates he wants to be a bureaucrat and if the number of adminship nominations increases. -- Netoholic @ 03:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. I'm glad you are a big fan of Freshstart. He has nothing to do with our disagreement, so you shouldn't oppose his nomination if you aren't just trying to keep yourself in some kind of exclusive power position. This isn't ultimately about the number of adminship nominations, which you know as well as I do. Of course, Freshstart may decline the nomination if he chooses. --Cromwellt|talk|contris 09:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Do it later: As stated above, the community is currently not in a state to reach a rational decision about this. Try again in a month. -- Eptalon 11:28, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Comment. Please note that Freshstart did not nominate himself: I nominated him. --Cromwellt|talk|contris 11:45, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

see above -- Eptalon 13:17, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose. -- aflm (talk) 17:48, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Keitei

I have only just joined here, so I'm just putting myself here for future consideration. I'm an admin on Uncyclopedia, the UnMeta project, and two wikia (dance and broadway), and I'm a bureaucrat on the last three. That is to say, I'm familiar with the software and happy to help if you need it.
So, I'm happy to sysop when/if it's needed. Cheers! --Keitei 06:26, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Oppose - Hello there. I suggest that at currently 21 (4.3.2006, midday) edits you contribute some more before putting up the request. When I put up my request (which was refused), I had about 1600 edits, currently I am at about 2100. Also please compare Hirohito to Stanislav Lem or Yitzhak Rabin for example, and see how things are normally made up here. Please note, I am not opposed to you becoming an admin, I just think you should be around longer, that is to say more edits, before doing so. -- For the other poeple who want to comment, List of Keitei's contributions -- Eptalon 10:47, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Oppose. Sorry, but it's not just knowing the software, there's lots of things to get used to over here. Feel free to apply again in a few months. Archer7 11:39, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Oppose. While Keitei has quality edits, and is a strong vandal fighter, he or she has not been here very long and does not have a high number of edits (333 currently). He or she should wait until later, when he/she has made more edits and has been here longer, before requesting adminship. --Cromwellt|talk 06:49, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Oppose Not enough experience at the simple wiki. DaGizza 09:04, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eptalon

Hello, If I can, I would like to be granted admin status. I have been on this project since about late December '05, and I have cumulated a bit over 1600 edits on simple (usually about 20 a day, a bit over 2 edits per page).Editcount on Interiot"s tool. On de, en, and la I have also a few, but I really focused on this project.I currently have a job, and edits happen in my free moments. I am also interesed in quality edits, rather than quantity. I know that this must look pale compared to Freshstart , who's candidature I fully support. -- Eptalon 12:43, 14 March 2006 (UTC) (raying added -- 213.200.248.36)

• Support. Can I suggest some more interaction in other Users' talks? --M7 14:01, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I didnt say I was faultless. So far my interaction has limited itself mostly to putting tepmlate tags on the talk pages of supposed vandals. Probably can be reduced to like four tags. - 213.200.248.36 15:39, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

• Support. It's supposed to be 3 months of activity, but your 3 month anniversary is in only 6 days, and I think you've already proven your responsibility and commitment to fighting vandals... I just hope I'm not doing too much, too fast by supporting two good candidates in one day!  ;o) Blockinblox 14:12, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support. Would make a great administrator. Archer7 16:34, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support. GFJ 14:30, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
• OpposeStrong oppose (changing vote based on response and edits since the response) Torn between Neutral and Weak oppose. Good contributor and we can certainly use more multi-lingual editors, and I have no problem with the number of edits. But I am fairly concerned about the on-going, consistent number of typos/errors that seem to indicate a habitual lack of attention to detail; I think the best admins are going to be people who by nature habitually double-check their work. If it was limited to missing periods/full-stops and things like that, I wouldn't say anything--all of us make mistakes, and minor things like that can be hard to spot, short of pasting it into a program with a spellchecker. But the sheer quantity and severity, including broken links[6] [7] [8] [9] and broken iw links[10] (the iw ones in particular being easy to check [and even avoid by using cut&paste]) have to make me wonder if similar errors would be made with the admin tools. Freshstart 04:28, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I do not claim to be faultless. In the recent months I have tried to bring down the number of edits per page (exactly because of those 'broken links' issues,previewing also helps there). I started out at almost 3 edits per page, today I am slightly above 2. I am a professional computer scientist, and have done professional software development in several languages (eg. Java, C) as well as done things in "web-frontend" languages like PHP. Btw: Where those errors affect the syntax, I am sure there are tools that will tell me. -- Eptalon 09:47, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't expect anyone to be faultless. However, I do expect admins to be careful. The Wiki software will silently let you hang yourself, just as readily as C (at least in it's early days--hopefully with modern IDE's you'd at least get some sort of 'are you SURE you want to do that?' warning), at least in part because the problems will come from the data, not the syntax. An example in the MediaWiki world: IP blocking only checks that it is a valid IP address (or range). Transpose a couple digits or mistype a single character, and, instead of blocking the intended vandal in Timbuktu, you've blocked everyone using AOL or some other large ISP. And there will be no error message, and no one will know of the error, until people start complaining.

And this edit[11], made since I raised the concerns above and you responded, seems to indicate that even if you did get an error message (and it is probably my bias from 15+ years as a software tester, but I see counting on the software to catch your errors as a crutch; one that doesn't exist in the MediaWiki software), you would miss it, because you don't appear to look closely at the page after you click Save. (and now that I finally checked, did you realize your self-nom text above contains at least 3 or 4 typos and 1 usage that m-w.com says is correct, but any native English speaker would go "huh?" (cumulate--the common usage would be accumulate)?) And you don't even want to get me started on the difference of opinion about what is 'simple English'--"notorious"? (from the same 'Chernobyl' edit). Freshstart 13:48, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and I also have no problem with the number of 'User talk' page edits--one of the first things to annoy me on EN when I was active there was the number of 'small talk' edits on my user page. Freshstart 13:52, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

I do not think it is prolific to get into usage patterns of English words. They vary according to socioeconomic background, geographic region, etc. The comment to that edit reads Something stubbable taken from en. Considered intelligible for simple users.. It was a copy-paste operation, the brace left out from the copying was the very first character of the copying. Two minutes later, Archer7 noticed. Three minutes later I was putting in the (supposedly Ukranian) alternate spelling as a redirect, as I had seen that Archer7 was faster. - Eptalon 14:57, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Um, I hope that you realize that "I do not think it is prolific to get into usage patterns of English words." is a completely non-sensical statement to native English speakers--I have NO idea what you were trying to say.And exactly what percentage of partial English speakers do you think would understand words like "notorious"? 20?, 40? neither even close in my definition of 'Simple English'. And yes, it was a 'copy-paste operation' something which I and Netoholic have REGULARLY chastized you for, since that results in non-simple articles. You seem to believe that putting EN articles here overrides the 'simple' rules, and I believe the opposite, that SIMPLE Eng is the priority here. We can agree to disagree on that, but the enormous qty of typos you introduce/reproduce here has me very concerned, and your stated reliance on the software to catch your errors, even tho' it CAN'T, leaves me DEEPLY concerned. 165.121.26.170 08:48, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Ok, let's keep it down to the facts. Freshstart thinks that based on the many typos I make, and the editing patterns he sees, that I am unfit to hold admin responsibility. He fears that I might mistype an IP address( 10.16.x.y instead of 10.61.x.y, for example). Also he thinks that relying on the computer in those areas that the computer is good at, is wrong. He also thinks that importing articles from English Wikipedia, before actually simplifying them is a wrong approach. Does that about sum it up? -- Eptalon 14:16, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I think those are all of Freshstart's concerns. --Cromwellt|talk 22:48, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

• Support. Eptalon is a good contributor with a strong desire to help, always acting in good faith. Almost every error and problematic usage on Wikipedia can be corrected. I think the positive effects of having Eptalon as an admin far outweigh any negative ones. I think at least part of his typos, etc., can be explained by his self-nomination at the top: Eptalon edits in free minutes during work, so he/she does not have time to check over it for errors, and (realizing the nature of a wiki) knows that others will come and fix errors later. This is perfectly justifiable, IMO, and because of our appreciation of his/her interest in the project, we should be willing to accept a few minor errors which can later be corrected. I also believe that Eptalon will be more careful with administrative powers. Believe in people and you'll often be justified in that belief. --Cromwellt|talk 18:05, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Um, exactly where in

I do not claim to be faultless. In the recent months I have tried to bring down the number of edits per page (exactly because of those 'broken links' issues,previewing also helps there). I started out at almost 3 edits per page, today I am slightly above 2. I am a professional computer scientist, and have done professional software development in several languages (eg. Java, C) as well as done things in "web-frontend" languages like PHP. Btw: Where those errors affect the syntax, I am sure there are tools that will tell me."

did you find any indication that Eptalon intended to be more careful as an admin??? Any acknowledgement in that direction would have kept me from changing my vote, but I certainly didn't see it. As a software tester I have seen many attitudes from developers, and the 'oh, the software will catch my mistakes' is often associated with the developers I write the most bugs against. Software, by design, does what the programmer tells it--nothing more, nothing less; you only have to look at the failed (as in crash and burn--thousands, millions, or billions of dollars wasted) NASA projects to see how critical it is that developers check their own work, and not expect software to catch their errors, to see the problems with that approach. Look at the examples I cited, and see how many fixes were required beyond what I mentioned. 'Unapologetically sloppy' will always be 'unapologetically sloppy', in my experience, and Simple has too few editors to try and clean up after other admins' mistakes.165.121.26.170 08:48, 18 March 2006 (UTC) (User:Freshstart, apparently not logged in for some reason.)

Comment. I agree that checking one's own work is a good idea, which Eptalon should follow when he/she can, but I still think that either way Eptalon would be a good administrator, and I continue my support. Errors are fixable. --Cromwellt|talk 22:48, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I have no problem with typos, and I regret mentioning 'Simple issues' here as I believe this is not the best forum for such discussions. The unapogetic reponse from Eptalon still has me very concerned. Someone who does not habittualy 'check their work', to me is unhsuitable as admin. Freshstart 07:50, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Even after concerns about editting accuracy were expressed, Eptalon has continued to add, and not self-detect, link errors such as [12] an easily checkable iw link, and easily visible other links[13].

Typos are human, yes. To expect other editors (note that the Wikipedia software didn't complain about either broken link--it took the review of a human) seems like 'make-work' for other editors. I don't have a problem with 'typos'--we all make them. I DO have a problem with a consistent pattern of zero percent policing one's edits to avoid the most basic errors, creating extra work others. I have no idea where the "Also he thinks that relying on the computer in those areas that the computer is good at" comes from. The Wikipedia computer/software more than happily accepted Eptalon's broken links (check two versions before--it was only followup human editors (not just me) that detected and fixed Eptalon's errors. Computers will NEVER be as able to detect software errors as humans can.[14]--scroll to the bottom. Freshstart 07:30, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

While we are throwing around with links, here are a few of those zero percent policing one's edits examples as they are called by Freshstart (links provided are context diffs, newest ones first, oldest dates 17th of March): Seibersdorf (village near Vienna): [15]; Phobia: [16], [17]; Arachne: [18]; Grasshopper: [19]; Latex (the sap used to make rubber): [20]. -- Eptalon 09:59, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kbrooks

Note: This user did not say why (s)he wants to be an administrator.

• Oppose: You have been here less than two days. -- aflm 23:38, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose per alfm. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:44, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Aranda56

• I would like to become a administrator in simple english. I understand I haven't been in here long or haven't have that many edits but I think you guys need a little more help around here for fighting vandalism other admin tasks. I am a common editor on the regular english wikipedia with over 5300 edits there. [21] is my user page if anyones cares. Thanks --Aranda56 07:36, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

  Oppose. Administrators here need to show dedication to this wiki. Maybe in a few months of active work. -- Netoholic @

  Oppose. Very sporadic editing, with months in between bouts of a dozen or so edits. Pureblade 03:20, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hailey C. Shannon

• I would like be an adminstrator, I really care about this site and thier a lot of weasels screwing everything up that need to be blocked!

  Support. Seems to be dedicated and actively editing. Pureblade 03:23, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:LBMixPro

• I am an admin over at en:, and I would like to be an admin here too. Even though this Wikipedia isn't as known as the Standard english one, it may still have the same problems as the other one. for more info about me, and how I may be of use as an admin, see en:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Lbmixpro. --User:LBMixPro^<talk|to|me> 08:38, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Erm... you've been here less than a week and have 12 edits. Flcelloguy 20:26, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Oppose. Only 3 edits to actual namespace articles. Pureblade 03:21, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Y0u

User page | Pages worked on

I have not used Simple for very long (unless browsing counts,) but I would like sysop rights to help delete the many pages that I see go for a significant amount of time without being deleted. This is the only task that I intend to carry out as an administrator on Simple Wikipedia. I feel that my status as an administrator on the main English Wikipedia [22] shows that I can be trusted with administrator tools here. en Kate's tool Simple Kate's tool Y0u 08:25, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

• Oppose. Less than 20 edits is not enough. Even with over 3k edits and an adminship at English, it's still not enough edits in this wiki. Secondly, you've only really contributed for two days, which consisted of warning two users before nominating yourself. It's just too soon. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 21:58, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
  • While I don't think this is going to change your opinion (nor do I expect it to,) I'd like to point out that my edit count is higher than KT shows (maybe as much as 50% higher) because of marking speedy deletion candidates. Y0u 18:15, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
• Support, Y0u may not have that many edits, but he/she has proven him/herself on the other wikipedia, showing that he wouldn't abuse his/her admin powers. I trust that Y0u wouldn't do wrong. Private Butcher 05:14, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Lucky 6.9

Like Phroziac, I haven't been here at Simple very long, but I am an admin at English and User:Phroziac was kind enough to elevate me to admin status at his Wikicities radio control wiki. I have more than 13,000 edits at English and becoming an admin there was and is tough. I'm on a brief, self-imposed "wiki break" at English due primarily to some stress in my real life at present, so I'll be getting a "wiki fix" both here and at the R/C Wikicities site. Much more relaxing.  :)

I appreciate your support and thank you for it. - Lucky 6.9 05:31, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

• Lucky 6.9 has 93 edits on Simple: as of this message, starting out on 23 July 2005. -- Netoholic @ 16:02, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Phroziac

I haven't been here that long, but I've been editing the english wikipedia for a while, and have 788 edits there, all abuse-free. I recently found the simple english wikipedia, and I really like the idea a lot. But apparently some don't, with rediculous reasons like "it's not very big". So, I came here to work on it, since that's obviously better then complaining about it. If i became an admin, I would fight vandals, delete junk, and help simplify the interface some more (I still see some things in it that are not that simple). I hope I was not supposed to write this in simple english though... --Phroziac 00:08, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

• I realize that it is sort of ironic for me to point this out, but you have only been here two days and less than a thousand edits (overall, let alone on this wiki) is not really enough. Keep up the work like with testicle and I'll consider it. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 01:44, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

• I thought that might be an issue, but it doesn't look like there are any real firm standards for this here, and I doubt anyone will hold it against me if I fail. As for edits, while I don't care much about it, I like statistics, and I counted up my total edits on wikimedia (mostly commons, en wiktionary, en wikipedia, here, and a few wikis with less then 10 edits), and I have about 1020 edits. But I really do understand what you mean, regardless of that. --Phroziac 02:52, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

It's not so much the number of edits but that is a measure of experience, especially in regards to experience with other wikipedians. An administrator has the ability to block people and protect pages which is not a minor thing and I haven't seen enough edits to know how'd you react if some type of disagreement came up (you'd probably act very well, but still I don't know). Do you understand what I am saying? In regards to vandals and junk, there a lot that can be done, admin or not. On the other hand, what were the interface simplifications you had in mind? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 03:56, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I understand. As for those changes, here are a few I can think of at the moment....

MediaWiki:Edit should probably say "Change this page", but I'm not completely sure of that one.

MediaWiki:Savedprefs should say "Your settings have changed"

MediaWiki:dellogpagetext, not sure on what that should say though.

Ok, look at their talk pages. You don't need admin rights to discuss changing them. I admit, you do need admin rights to change them by itself. If no one objects in the next few days, I'll change them for you. Next time, why not write a note on the talk pages about bring it on Simple talk? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 00:15, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

True, *shrug*. Thanks. --Phroziac 13:45, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

1. Strongest possible support. A top vandal slayer at English and one of the very few English users with the intestinal fortitude to break off and create his own wiki over at Wikicities, one dedicated to radio controlled models. - Lucky 6.9 05:24, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] NickGorton

Alright, I am really really annoyed. The Ebonics comment was bad enough, but a spate of vandalism that made me actually put (albeit stubbed) content in Pokemon and Homer Simpson because they were newly made by a vandal is too much. I even had to look up Pokemon on en.

So despite the fact that:

• I actually said (today in fact) 'why the <expletive deleted> would Phroziac actually want to have to do icky administrative things?'
• Several years ago after a year in Dante's Inferno as an administrative chief resident I promised myself that I would never ever have the A-word (well at least not that A-word) after my name,

So despite that, whenever I've been her long enough and written enough, I would like to be an admin to stop that when in progress.

In the interest of full disclosure: on the negative side: I must admit though that I am not exceptionally computer savvy. But I have a live-in consultant/boyfriend who is. And I may not be the best luck as an admin. The last time I was an administrator of anything I was the ER admin on call in one of NYC's trauma centers on both days when flight 587 fell out of the sky over Brooklyn and the WTC was destroyed. Though I am certain that nothing will happen to this Wiki... It was coincidence. Really. And I don't wear that shirt anymore. NickGorton 11:16, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

• Support - A friendly wikiholic. --Phroziac

• Oppose - Sorry, I can't support this nomination; you haven't edited for long enough on this Wikipedia. I will support you however, if in a few months you have shown yourself to be a good editor. (You can check your number of edits at En:WP:KATE) --Marknew 13:32, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

• Support Undecided - Yeah I don't have an account created yet (but I've been doing a lot of work here on cleaning up articles, reverting vandalism, etc), and in that time I've been here I've seen that NickGorton is very conscientious in taking care of the wikipedia. For that reason I support this nomination (and maybe I should create an account, eh?). 65.31.115.145 22:03, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
  • I am changing my vote to undecided due to recent events. 65.31.115.145 01:24, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose - In addition to the excellent points made by Marknew and Ricky, I would like to add that Nick throws around accusations of NPOV against other people, when his own neutrality could itself be called into question with regards to certain topics. In fact, as a result of NickGortons attitude toward me over a simple misunderstanding, I will no longer be contributing to Simple (even though I had edited many many articles and tried very hard to make Simple a better place.) Do we really want an administrator that drives people away from wiki? I don't think so. 65.31.115.145 04:45, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

• Oppose. Unfortunately, I have to agree with Marknew. You simply haven't edited here long enough. I will support you in a few months if you continue to be a good editor. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 03:46, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

• Its like that quote from Rebecca West about feminism: “I only know that people call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments that differentiate me from a doormat or a prostitute.”

I am obviously a radical queer who is pushing the homosexual agenda if I say that being gay is about more than just sex or that its bad and wrong to criminalize LGBT people.

But then I imagine I am also going to burn in the fires of hell because I did a big re-write of birth control in which I (gasp) mentioned near the end that the Catholic Church's stand on condoms is increasing the spread of AIDS in Africa. (Of course the fact that this is well supported by epidemiological study after study is no excuse. Since when did research science tell us what is actually happening in our world? Why just the other day I was talking with a nurse as she applied leeches to the patient I had just bled to release his excess of black bile when.... oh never mind.)

But then as I said to Ricky previously, I am no longer interested as this seems really more about a popularity contest than anything else. Which is a like the proverbial red rag to a bull for me. Eeeew. Thanks but no. Since I started here (about a week after Ricky) I have produced just a little more than 1% of the articles on simple and I've expanded quite a few more. Moreover, I was being quite honest about my feelings about administrative activities, and have been amply reminded of exactly why I felt that way during this discussion.

So I am going to do what I do best anyway and I'm rescinding my request.-NickGorton 07:04, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thorpe

User page | Pages I've worked on

Hi, this is me, Thorpe. I started articles on the main english Wikipedia at the beginning of this year and I have come to find myself making pages here as well. Not only have I created new artcles but I have made a new stub and added various categories. I hope that by making me an administrator I will be able to deal with various problems such as vandalism.

Speaking of vandalism, I noticed quite a few pages were vandalised earlier (around 10 AM) and they didn't even get reverted until I come along and did so just a couple of minutes ago. It shows that we need more active people here. I would also be able to deal with people vandalising quicker if I were able to block certain IP addresses.

Please do tell me what you think and your comments are always welcome. Thorpe 16:14, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I don't think you've been on this Wikipedia long enough for me to support you, but you're making a good start. Keep up the good work. Vandalism is annoying, but as you've seen, you can already do a lot to help by reverting them. Please do request again in say about two months. -- Netoholic @ 16:38, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Postdlf

Postdlf

I'm new to simple, but you may remember me from such places as the main English Wikipedia[23], where I've been contributing for about a year and a half and an administrator for several months. I'd like to get more familiar with the writing style here and do what I can to expand the content, but I'd also like to help police on here for disruption, as I do quite frequently on en.wikipedia. Thanks! Postdlf 07:45, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

• I've seen your work on the main English wiki, but you've got less than 50 edits here as of today. Would like to see you put a lot more time and effort into this project. Thanks for showing interest! -- Netoholic @ 01:10, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ricky81682

I haven't done much in simple yet, but I have a decent amount of work done in the English Wikipedia. Most of my work in both wikis is minor edits. Right now, I'm working on filling out all the days of the years and am also looking at the shortpages for vandalism left over. For both, I think having some admin rights would be of some help to me. --Ricky81682 (talk) 23:17, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

• Very enthusiastic start, but you've only been with us about 4 days. Stick around, keep helping as much as you can, and you'll have my vote eventually. -- Netoholic @ 01:10, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] User:Turcottem

I would like to nominate Turcottem for adminship. I'm not quite sure how this system works, but I think that he would be a great admin. He has made several edits, none of which are vandalism, is well-liked by a large group of people on the site. He is very good at spotting vandalists, and is good at coming up with the deserved punishment. I consider him to be a trustworthy person very worthy of administratorship. The J-Man 17:40, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Oppose. This user has been somewhat disruptive in the past, and doesn't show the maturity required to be an admin. -- Netoholic @ 18:31, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Just a turcottem update coming from Wolfj: I think the fact that Turcottem has written 50 articles, only one of which can really be considering "bad" for the site is proof enough that Turcottem is mature enough to be an administrator. Wolfj- Friend Of Turcottem and Gracker. Be sure to read my articles, and when you're on IGN, say hi to Matty13624! 14:20, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• I can understand why you would not want to make me an admin. I am willing to live up to my vandalism. Yet, people change. I have written over 50 articles and am willing to be an excellent addition to the Simple Engish Wikipedia. Please consider me. --Turcottem 01:30, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Oppose. Same reasons as Netoholic.
  SimonMayer 20:13, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sverdrup

Hello, I am en:User:Sverdrup, sysop on en. I am currently pushing the meta:List_of_articles_all_languages_should_have project, and would like to request adminship to enable me to "move" on simple like I do on en. Sverdrup 14:07, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)

You don't need to be an admin to move pages. Also, Sverdrup has not edited here since June 18, so I oppose the request until he is more active here. Angela 14:11, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Agree w/ Angela. Your project is noble, just let any admins here know if you need specific help with a problem move. -- Netoholic @ 20:58, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Darrien

I would like to nominate myself, Darrien, for adminship here at the Simple Wikipedia. I realise that I'm rather new here, but I've been fairly active at en.wikipedia for about a year. I figure that you could use another administrator here and I have nothing to lose by applying.

Darrien 04:41, 8 May 2004 (UTC)

I second the nomination. --Cprompt 05:31, 8 May 2004 (UTC)

Darrien, you say you've been active on en for a year, but your contributions there show you've only been there a couple of months? Have you changed name or am I missing something? Angela 06:00, 8 May 2004 (UTC)

I contributed anonymously for awhile. I'm still waiting for my old edits to be assigned to me [24].

Darrien 06:27, 8 May 2004 (UTC)

You've made 36 edits on simple, 280 edits on the English Wikipedia, and an additional 14 before you got an account. I'm not convinced 36 edits here is enough or whether you have gained a suffcient understanding of the policies considering your limited activity on Wikipedia so far. Angela 07:32, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

That's what I commented to him on IRC as well. We need more evidence. --Menchi (Talk). 07:52, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

Oppose. Maximus Rex 07:02, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

Been busy, so sorry for being late on this: Oppose - too risky as Darrien has not yet done enough to earn trust.
SimonMayer 05:21, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] User:Marknew

I would like to nominate myself for administrator status. I would have been happier if I had been nominated (nominating yourself feels wrong!), but here are my reasons for doing it, and reasons why you should think about voting for me:

• My experience with Wikipedia:
  • I have been a member of the Simple English Wikipedia since October 2003 (see my talk page). I believe I made some minor contributions at the beginning (with the old Wiki software - and a couple in March), and then took a break until late-2004. I have made nearly 250 edits on here - none of them malicious.
  • I have been a member of the English Wikipedia since November 2002, with regular contributions starting in May 2003. I have made nearly 900 edits - again, none of them malicious.
  • I believe that these facts show that I have a reasonable knowledge of the way the Wikipedia system works.
• Examples of my articles on Simple:
  • Devon
  • Somerset
  • I am slowly working towards improving the pages of English counties - see here. Any help would be appreciated!
• One more reason:
  • I would like to help get rid of the nonsense which is posted on this Wikipedia - my contributions to Wikipedia:Requests for deletion should show that!

I now await the constructive criticism and votes! - Marknew 10:22, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Support:

• Oppose:
  • I'd rather wait a while, and I hope you understand. Your talk page says Oct. 2003 you got a message, but your contributions start in May 2004. Of your 235 edits, 196 of them are from the last two weeks. Thank you very much for your help, and I'd be happy to support you in a month or two. -- Netoholic @ 04:08, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • That's OK, I knew at the time that getting admin privileges now was a bit of a long shot; just offering another pair of hands to help with the menial tasks! I hope to be editing this Wikipedia for the foreseeable future (real-life committments permitting), but won't be nominating myself for admin... if you want me, you'll have to ask! :-) - Marknew 09:08, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
      • I'm sure we will. On such a small wiki, good effort is sure to get noticed. Keep it up, and let me know if you need any admin-ish help. -- Netoholic @ 23:11, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Sorry, not personally. I cannot support any editor who has less than 1,000 edit on a wiki, though you seem a good editor. To be a good admin, in my opinion, experience is required. I hope things go differently some monthes later. --Aphaia 10:27, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • That's OK, I'm not taking your views personally! I would agree with your views on number of edits to an extent. Yes, a fairly large number of edits is required to find out how good an editor is, but I also believe that the quality of edits should always be looked at before the quantity (I am not saying that my own edits are brilliant, that's your job - I'm just stating my opinion).

In the case of this Wikipedia, I realise that my number of edits is a bit low, but I nominated myself because I believe that three active admins on a Wikipedia of this size is not sufficient (I would be happy even if some other (good) people became admins and I did not - my aim is to see the number of admins increase, not boost my ego!). Thanks for taking the time to vote and leaving your comment. - Marknew 14:54, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment. I am happy to strenghen my first impression; you will be a good admin, or precisely, better with much experience. Over 1,000 experiences, I meant not only quality of contributions (both article and discussion) but also experiences with other Wikipedians; there are incredibly nasty things between the heaven and the earth. And specially on this wiki some editors seem to lack maturity, so editing experience is important, I think. Your activities are sincere and fine from my view. Let's keep it up. --Aphaia 00:04, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Comments:

[edit] Inactivity

[edit] Cprompt, Menchi, Mero, Optim, Tango

Several adminstrator accounts have been inactive for a very long time. These pose a danger to the wiki because someone may try to guess their password. It can also be confusing for people when they want to seek help from an administrator for more immediate help. I (or any future bureaucrat) will likely have no problem re-instating sysop access if they return and ask. Here is a list I propose for removal.

• Cprompt (talk • edits • e-mail •blocks •protects • deletes • moves) - last edit 28 August 2005
• Menchi (talk • edits • e-mail •blocks •protects • deletes • moves) - last edit 1 September 2004
• Mero (talk • edits • e-mail •blocks •protects • deletes • moves) - last edit 17 April 2004 (recent comment at 3 November 2006)
• Optim (talk • edits • e-mail •blocks •protects • deletes • moves) - last edit 6 March 2004
• Tango (talk • edits • e-mail •blocks •protects • deletes • moves) - last edit 4 July 2004 (recent comment at 1 November 2006)

Please leave your comments below. -- Netoholic @ 18:33, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

• We should block them. They can unblock themselves. Otherwise, if the consequences are dire, desysopping is necessary. Email them first, if possible.-- Tdxiang @ 10:46, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
• No, blocking them really wouldn't accomplish much because in the event their pw was compromised, the hacker would have the exact same ability to unblock himself. However, I feel the danger posed by this eventuality is infinitessimally small; and as I have pointed out, if someone was going to play 'guess the password' they might go for the bur., active or no. Since all passwords are unique and have billions and billions of alphanumeric permutations, it is too improbable to bother defending against IMO. Blockinblox 13:04, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
• I agree with the conception of sysophood as kept on meta.wiki... Sysop-hood is not a lifetime status. Get it if you need it. Keep it if people trust you. Quit it if you do not need it. Lose it if people feel they cannot trust you. Should these people return back to simple.wiki, they can easily re-apply and get admin status back. It is sort of confusing and sometimes can be misleading saying "there are nn administrators", while more than a half can not be seen... I propose that they are de-sysoped, if there is a consensus, but I absolutely do not see any reason for blocking their account. --M7 20:42, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
• Isn't de-sysopping a little mean without letting them know? Besides, may they are on a very long wiki-break or something. My decision is to just leave them alone. --§ Alastor Moody _{(T + C)} 03:09, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
  • What we are concerned about is that hackers might abuse these powers, creating problems for us.-- Tdxiang @ 03:11, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry I've been inactive for years, I might come back, but no promises. I am active on en and my email address is up-to-date, so if there are any problems requiring prompt admin action (I came here because I saw such a request on meta), feel free to email me or contact me on my en user page and I'd be happy to help out. I'll put a note to that effect next to my name in the list of inactive admins above. If you want to de-sysop me, I won't object, but I don't think you need to. --Tango 13:32, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

• I think maybe we should remove User:Tango out of the de-sysop list since he apologizied and provided a way to contact him so no worries. --§ Alastor Moody _{(T + C)} 01:44, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't come here too often simply because I'm busy. I guess you could de-sysop me if you think it's necessary. My email address still works, so I can still help out here in other ways. --Mero 10:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

• I think there is not much harm that can be done by these inactive people keeping their admin status; provided they have chosen a decent (hard to guess) password for their account. On the other hand, seeing that they are mostly inactive, I think it would make sense to "demote" them to regular users. When they come back, and start editing again, their admin privs can be restored. --- Eptalon 11:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

• I don't think there's much harm on the Simple English Wikipedia, which has few edits and only a very small number of administrators. The effect would be larger on the English Wikipedia, where there are thousands of edits a day and over a thousand admins - a single compromised admin account could wreck a lot of annoying damage without anybody noticing. Here, we tend to know what happens if we check New changes. In short, I don't think five inactive admin accounts are worth worrying about. - Tangotango (talk) 14:45, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

• Status removed for all five. Jon Harald Søby 17:11, 10 November 2006 (UTC)