Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jiang (talk | contribs) at 02:05, 16 August 2003. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


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

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

If you want to become an administrator then add your name to the list below. Any user can comment on your request -- they might express reservations (because, for example, they suspect you will abuse your new-found powers, or if you've joined very recently), but hopefully they will approve and say lovely things about you.

If there is general agreement that someone who requests adminship should be given it, then a developer will make it so.

Requests for adminship

  • I hereby volunteer for light housekeeping duties. I dedicate this self-nomination to Marshallharsh and Gar, who have been a big inspiration. Cyan 02:46, 6 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • Support: Seen him copyediting and updating materials around, and he seems to be the "light housekeeper" type. --Menchi 04:50, Aug 6, 2003 (UTC)
    • Seconded. Angela 21:52, 6 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • I would like to ask the Wikipeida community if it would consider making me an admin. I have been a reader of this resource for almost exactly a year now, and an active contributor for eight and a half months. My principle reason for wishing to apply is the chance to hopefully cool potentially harmful flame wars and rollback the actions of users on vandalism sprees. Many of my chances to Wikipedia have been style alterations, but I have also helped start some articles and am glad to help. I can invest much time in the project currently, as I am on university vacation and generally will be able to edit between the hours of 15:00 and 03:00 UTC. I shall not be offended if my request is turned down and will, of course, continue to contribute regardless. Thanks for your consideration. Tompagenet 12:40, 30 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • Neutral stat: 150 edits in 9 months (since Dec 2002). --Menchi 23:24, Aug 1, 2003 (UTC)
      • That is kinda light for 9 mos.-戴&#30505sv 06:58, Aug 4, 2003 (UTC)
    • Hm. I need to see a more extensive track record of edits before I would support your application. --mav 08:09, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • I support Tom; he's been here for nine months, and as far as I can tell, hasn't been disruptive once. Sure, his number of edits may be on the light side, but have you forgotten about User:ilyanep who was made a sysop after thirty or so edits to the sandbox? -- Notheruser 19:41, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
      • Yes, and Ilyanep disappeared soon after. I support Tom's request as well. Just a few days before Zippy became an admin (see below), although he has made even fewer edits than Tom. So it wouldn't be fair to exclude Tom just because of the number of his edits. -- Cordyph 20:58, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • I agree with the above. Unless there are explicit objections, I'll make Tom a sysop.--—Eloquence 22:08, Aug 5, 2003 (UTC)
  • I would like adminship for Wikiquote please. - Fonzy
    • Support. --Menchi 22:09, Aug 13, 2003 (UTC)
    • Second. --Angela
    • Agreed. -- The Anome 22:22, 13 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • He does have a disturbing tendency for cross-wiki self-promotion [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]. I think he should stop trying to get his name into as many articles as possible. As is, I'll remain neutral on the request.—Eloquence 03:44, Aug 14, 2003 (UTC)
      • In light of the evidence below, I oppose Fonzy's request.—Eloquence 23:04, Aug 15, 2003 (UTC)
    • fourthed - 81.102.56.49
    • Fonzy is a very enthusiastic contributor to wiki, that of itself should be enough to grant this request. However I believe, Fonzy may sometimes be too enthusiastic and do things that a responible contributor (such as a sysop) shouldn't. Notice that the first (and at time of writing, only) contribution that the 'fourth-er' of this nomination (81.102.56.49) is to this page. By itself this may seem somewhat strange, an anon ip choosing an wikipedia namespace page to make their one and only edit on an obscure admin issue. A similar thing has happened over at London Congestion Charge. There was a vote over a trivial matter. Two anonymous IPs voted in line with Fonzy's opinion. The first anonip had, as above, no User Contributions apart from this vote ([6]). The second had contributions... including editing Fonzy's user page to add some more information about Fonzy and editing the wikitionary page to comment that Daniel/Fonzy was 'the main founder' ([7]). The two votes were enough to swing the vote in Fonzy's favour (5-4 instead of 3-4). It is my unproven assertion that Fonzy ballot-stuffs a little to get what he wants. As I say, if this is true it is only because Fonzy is a fan of wikipedia , but still, if it is true, he should stop it. Pete 14:42, 15 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • AGAINST - Fonzy is more than a little dishonest and exploits the IP ban far too easily, especially when he doesn't understand the issue. The anonymous IPs voting in favour of Fonzy are almost certainly himself.
      • OK, I will admit that I have ballot-stuffed in the past but on nothing mager, I suppose I did it because I was annoyed and felt abit depressed at the time, it was very wrong, But that "81.102.56.49" was not me. - fonzy
      • BTW if people wish me not to be a sysop then you can de-op me from wiktionary, I will not argue with it. -fonzy
      • Please sign your post so people know who you are. --Jiang 02:05, 16 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • Would the real 81.102.56.49 please stand up? -- Cyan 01:25, 16 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • I tried to deny it, but I became a Wikipediholic. So now I need the higher dosage of being an administrator, so I can do more of the housekeeping work as well. -- andy 11:44, 15 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • Support. Does good things with maps. -- Cyan 01:25, 16 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • Support. Gotta love good maps. --Menchi 01:53, Aug 16, 2003 (UTC)
  • I just noticed I am the least most active wikipedian. This spurs to make a humble request for adminship. My reasons are a mixture of wanting to help out with the housework and wanting to know what the extra buttons look like. (User:Pcb21) Pete 13:33, 15 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • Support. -- Cyan 01:25, 16 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Nominations for adminship

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

  • I nominate Graculus. Although a very recent contributor, he is very active, making up to 50 edits a day. He's already one of the site's best history contributors. In addition, he has been thoroughly vetted, having survived an edit war involving Adam/Bridget/Lir/Vera Cruz/Susan Mason/Dietary Fiber/Ril/Pizza Puzzle. He has also been unable to edit a protected page. His capability boundlessly exceeds the requirements. He has already needed sysop powers. And his ability to get around the Wiki has already been proven. 172 08:28, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • Seconded. Good choice - not the type of person to abuse sysop power (to the contrary - he'll be a check on other Admin's who may slip into the gray area once in a while). --mav 08:37, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • Thirded, he edited New Imperialism, and survived. Ксйп Cyp 09:13, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
It wasn't a matter of surviving New Imperialism, but surviving a page haunted by Lir. Notice that all tension subsided immediately when Lir/Pizza Puzzle agreed to leave and cultivate a new persona. 172 09:46, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • Adam Bishop -- A friendly writer responsive to questions. Helps improving articles, if he could, when others requested assistance. Has done 1619 edits in less than 2 months (June 9 - August 7). --Menchi 01:20, Aug 8, 2003 (UTC)
    • I'll second that. - Hephaestos 01:21, 8 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • I can vouch that his contributions to a wide variety of Canadiana articles have been excellent. - SimonP 19:30, Aug 12, 2003 (UTC)
    • I agree - Adam Bishop is an obvious choice. --mav 22:07, 13 Aug 2003 (UTC)
      • Ooh, I didn't know I was listed here...I have to reply here, right? Adam Bishop 03:56, 14 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • Adam would be an excellent sysop. I enthusiastically endorse his nomination. FearÉIREANN 18:50, 15 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • Schneelocke for sysop! Simply put, Schneelocke is an uncontentious and prolific contributor who will make an excellent admin. He helped clean up after User:Wakka who was trying to "prove a point" by vandalizing articles (*shakes head*) and will benefit from being able to revert and delete pages. Wikipedia needs more contributors who are able to clean up after vandals and delete junk pages, especially in light of Wikipedia's press coverage. This is a good start. -- Notheruser 21:58, 13 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • Support. --Menchi 22:02, Aug 13, 2003 (UTC)
    • Absolutely.—Eloquence
    • Yep. I agree. Schneelocke is an excellant contributor who has helped me greatly with the periodic table. 100% support from me. --mav 22:07, 13 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • I agree too. Good choice for admin. Angela
    • Thanks for the nomination, Notheruser. I feel very honoured, and accept the nomination. ^_^ -- Schnee 14:24, 14 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Requests for de-adminship

Discussion of user:172's status moved to Wikipedia:Adminship of 172

Recently created admins

Moved to Wikipedia:Recently created admins

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship&oldid=1297573"