Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Herbythyme

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.

Herbythyme

Final (88/0/1); Originally scheduled to end 13:35, 14 November 2007 (UTC). Nomination successful. --Deskana (talk) 14:38, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Herbythyme (talk · contribs) - I would like to nominate Herby for admin here. As you will see this is not a conventional English Wikipedia RfA nomination, because Herby is not a run of the mill editor.

Herby has the trust of several other communities, notably the English Wikibooks, Commons, and Meta, not only as an administrator, but also as a checkuser. He is one of a very few checkusers elected to more than one community. You can see his WikiMatrix for more information on his accounts and activities. Since becoming an admin at Commons and Meta, Herby has continued to work very hard: (his Commons contributions), (his Commons admin logs).(his Meta contributions), (his Meta admin logs). He also is very active at Meta and Commons in discussing policy, helping other users and just generally getting things done.

Herby is an experienced checkuser, as he holds the right on WikiBooks, Meta and Commons, and is someone that can be relied on to do that job efficiently, with aplomb and discretion. He is especially good at crosswiki work, often bringing thorny items to the attention of many of the rest us to help resolve. Herby is very active in the checkuser community (on the mailing list and to a lesser extent, via IRC), and often gets involved in crosswiki investigations, as do I, sharing results and suggesting courses of action to other CUs. He also is one of the folk on the checkuser mailing list that approves new checkuser access to the list, showing that the Foundation has a high regard for his trustworthiness. I bring all this up to show how widely trusted and well liked he is within the community.

Effectively, Herby would like to be able to edit one protected page regularly, the spam blacklist page MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. It is an extremely important page for us, since we are one of the top traffic websites in the world and spammers LOVE us. He has been dealing with the Foundation wide Meta equivalent for a few months now and have become increasingly frustrated about the lack of attention the en wp page gets. There has been a "backlog" tag on it for some time, and it can be a real challenge to keep such a page up to date. It is not glamorous work (even by our very unglamorous adminship work standards :) ) and it needs someone detail oriented and interested in the task to be involved and involved regularly. Herby is that person.

So, like I said, this is not your run of the mill adminship request. Although between the two accounts he has used here (see below for the links to contribs, logs and the like) he has made thousands and thousands of contributions, across a wide variety of namespaces, to focus on them, to focus on the standard adminship qualifications, is to miss the point. There is a task that really needs doing, it's not getting done as effectively as it could be, and we have a volunteer, widely trusted and eminently suited to the job, that wants to do it. He already does it for the global version of the list, (see m:Talk:Spam_blacklist to see just how active he is there) and has shown skill and aplomb at doing it. His history as an admin and CU at other projects is exemplary, he always seeks consensus for controversial actions, and is not afraid to ask for guidance if he's unsure of something.

Herby and I have worked closely together for some time, (I nominated him for CU on commons (the successful second nomination), and he nominated me for CU on meta) and I hold him in the highest regard. He "gets it", "has a deft hand" and is "not likely to go on a rampage" :) Finally, Herby knows where his towel is. I hope you will feel, as I do, that he is very worthy of your support. ++Lar: t/c 02:26, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

Thanks Larry for the longest nomination so far! I consider myself fortunate to have such a capable Wikimedian nominate me and Larry is someone I have considerable respect for. The blacklist here (& maybe the whitelist) could do with attention and there would certainly be some advantages to the community here & the Foundation to have someone involved with both lists.

I haven't created any great articles nor am I likely to, however I have dealt with quite a lot of requests on the Meta page. I have no plans to get involved with other aspects of en wp though I will always try and help where I can. I have had no particular conflict with other editors that I can recall however where things get heated on the blacklist I can & will walk away and allow others to deal with the situation if I feel I am not doing it well enough. I'd like to think that there were one or two others who would also seek sysop rights to assist with these pages regularly as well as me.

I'll happily answer any questions at all. I would certainly add myself to recall if granted the rights however I also have very strong views on inactivity so my matrix on Meta includes the authority for stewards to remove any additional rights that I have anywhere if not used for a period of three months and that would apply here.

Can I help - yes. Would you like me to help - your call. Can you trust me - I hope so. Will I delete the main page - not for a while. Thanks for your consideration --Herby ^{talk thyme} 13:18, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

1. You see that another administrator has blocked an editor and you disagree with the block. What is the policy about unblocking and do you intend to adhere to it?--MONGO 19:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A: The problem is that with so many things there are no such things as simple answers to complicated questions. I am not trying to be difficult, I am acknowledging the existence of the real world.

Policies rarely cover everything you want them to. So the best I can do for now is relate a couple of experiences.

1. As recently as yesterday I blocked what I determined was an unapproved automated bot on Commons. I actually know the owner quite well from another wiki. I blocked it only after there was no response to talk messages (meaning in my mind it was running automated). That block was overturned by another administrator but by that time there was a request in for bot status.

So... I would have preferred to have been informed that the block was overturned, does it bother, not to any degree. There was no threat to the wiki. Do I feel I acted correctly - yes.

2. Some time back on Commons I overturned what I considered was an inappropriate block on another user. I thought long and hard before I did it (I can honestly tell you I cannot remember who it was that was blocked). I let the community know and shared my concerns with some of the 'crats.

So... Would I do it again (in exactly the same circumstances) - yes

I have blocked people elsewhere and have not been sure that I was right (normally I am quite happy). I've then placed messages in the appropriate place inviting people to review/comment on/change my action.

To return to the start I distrust simple answers to complicated questions. If I'm not sure I'll ask, if I am reasonably sure I will act, I am happy for others to review or change my actions but I would like to think others would act with the courtesy I hope I would show. If you want to make the question more precise I'll try for a more precise/shorter answer. Thanks.

(supplemental) I probably should say that I have absolutely no intention of getting involved in the things that some folk here seem to find so much fun so I would sincerely hope that the opportunity to screw things up can be avoided - there are plenty of other folk to deal with such things. However my experience is related to wikis where I have - at the time - been the only active admin & I don't always answer myself when I ask me something!

2 Optional question from User:SJP I have a question for you. Lets say you are in a edit war with a user, and the user breaks 3RR. Would you block that user. Thanks for your time:)--SJP:Happy Verterans Day! 00:16, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A: Oh I do like simple questions - short answer no

Long answer - no. I'm not a 1RR or 2RR person but if I reverted someone twice I would be uncomfortable. I cannot envisage a situation where I would not have tried discussion. If I am so right then I should easily find someone else who would agree with me but I would not block in such circumstances.

If you were getting at "would I abuse power" by blocking I have ~~two~~ three special situations when my thought would be "how long" not "shall I block".

1. Vandalism on Open Proxies - many of my blocks are of those

2. "ism" vandals - racism mostly but anything abusive such as that

3. Attacks on other users

Any of those would almost certainly be blocked by me without question. If folk feel uncomfortable with such actions (rather more emotional than rational) do consider your vote as I would expect to do the same as for those types here as I would elsewhere. Thanks.

3. Upon becoming an admin, how much time would you dedicate to exclusively administrator related duties compared to editing encyclopedic content? -Malinaccier (talk • contribs) 01:50, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A: Ok - as it says this is not a conventional request & I am not a conventional editor (if there is such a thing). Balancing work on Commons & Meta (together with maybe the blacklist here) would leave little time and I still want to work more on en quote. If you are looking for creativity in articles then you have the wrong person (& I will happily accept an "oppose" vote based on that). I have done & will do what I can but I guess that is not my strength.

However I do think that it is somewhat strange that when looking for folk to deal with garbage there is such stress on seeking creative editors rather than janitors & the like. Don't get me wrong the positive contribution to the project is vital and so is balance but such creativity as I have is likely to be used on Commons. I'd prefer people not to take offence here but I find the atmosphere on Commons a little less fraught generally.

Question from Anonymous Dissident

Q.: Out of curiosity, do you envisage yourself becoming a CU here on en.wp? -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 10:03, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A: I sort of expected that as a possible question. I left here under my old name knowing I would "never" be back in any real way and would "never" be an admin anywhere so bear that in mind! However I can envisage no situation where it would be likely that I would become a CU here. Thanks

Thanks Herby. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 10:03, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think Herby can expect some armtwisting about this sooner or later (I did it before, I'll do it again) but the question is a bit premature at this point in my view. :) ++Lar: t/c 13:42, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

General comments

See Herbythyme's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

Links for Herbythyme: Herbythyme (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
Links for previous user NigelR: NigelR (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
Here are links to some of Herby's previous nominations for positions of trust:

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Herbythyme before commenting.

Discussion

I interacted with Herby for a while on Wikibooks and, though we didn't agree on many things, I found him to be sensible, discerning and willing to ask for help where needed. I think that giving him the mop here is a good idea. --Iamunknown 05:08, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support

As nominator. ++Lar: t/c 13:43, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Sure. A good contributor. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 13:46, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support, long-time trusted meta admin, completely sound. Guy (Help!) 13:47, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I just recently encountered Herby for the first time at the spam blacklist. Anyone willing the help out there is more than welcome, and given his checkuser status on several other projects, I think he can easily be trusted with the mop here even if he doesn't fit neatly into the mold we've created for admin candidates.--Isotope23 ^talk 13:47, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Trusted users are welcome admins. Edgar181 14:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Strong candidate. Kingturtle 14:29, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I know Herby only from spam discussions, but as we see from the above he has an excellent record. I think it is useful for more of our trusted anti-spam editors to have access to admin tools. It is also logical that we weigh contributions in the other wikis when considering if someone is experienced enough. EdJohnston 14:35, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strongest possible support. -- I've worked closely with Herby in the course of bringing spam from en.wikipedia to meta for blacklisting as well as on whitelisting requests. As a Meta admin, Herby is the backbone of the Meta spam blacklist. Herby is diligent and has a very keen instinct for sorting bad faith requests from good faith requests and I've never seen him bite a good faith editor once. In fact, I've never seen him bite a bad faith spammer, either, nevertheless he's always pleasantly firm in protecting Wikimedia projects. As for why he's requesting adminship, there's real benefit in having an admin dealing with spam simultaneously and seemlessly on both en.wikipedia and meta. Blacklist and whitelist requests come into our local pages that really should go to Meta (usually due to cross-wiki spam issues) and vice versa. We all really need Herby to get the admin bit here on en.wikipedia. For a sample of his work and temperament, skim meta:Talk:Spam blacklist. --A. B. ^(talk) 15:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support, of course. PeaceNT 15:21, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support, I've seen Herby's work on meta as an admin and here as an editor and have complete confidence that giving him the tools will benefit the project. -- SiobhanHansa 15:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've interacted with Herby on Commons and Meta; I trust him as an administrator implicitly. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:04, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support a pleasant, hardworking editor, with experience on many Wikimedia projects. Cares deeply for everywhere he works, and everyone he works with. Is a friendly person any user can turn to for advice or help. There isn't much better than Herbythyme. Good luck! Majorly (talk) 16:38, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support, Herby has been a valuable contributor to all the projects he's involved in; and I have faith he understands policies and procedures on the English Wikipedia as well. I have the utmost confidence and peace of mind that Herby will fulfill his admin role with a high standard of quality, civility and sensitivity. Cary Bass ^demandez 16:41, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Rudget _{Contributions} 16:48, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Herby is a dedicated and hard working contributer, the best of the best. - Epousesquecido 17:06, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nomination. Giving Herbythyme admin tools will be an asset to the project. --John 17:20, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above. (Where are the standard questions?) Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 17:24, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Err - I ran out of "standard answers"? :) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 18:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strongest Support - Absolutely super Commons admin, knows policy well, is hard working and above all, kind to everyone. I trust Herby implicitly here on en.wp.; anything he gets up to with the sysop bit can only be for the benefit of the wiki. Interested in dealing with spam? Bring him on already! - Alison ^❤ 17:45, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support I can't see the downside of giving the extra tools to a user who's accumulated this much experience and trust from multiple wiki communitites. Sheffield Steel^talk_stalk 18:02, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support As another member of the select "multi-project checkuser club", I can honestly and enthusiastically recommend him as a man of of dedication, good faith, and hard work. --SB_Johnny | ^talk 18:05, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support An excellent Wikimedian. Nishkid64 (talk) 18:38, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No brainer here. ~ Riana ⁂ 19:06, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - the spam blacklist could use another mop and Herbythyme has proven himself worthy on enough other projects. That earns my trust. Durova^Charge! 19:08, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Very Strong Support This user has proved himself to be a reliable admin on other wikis. Also, though I have never had communication with him here, I have had very positive communication with him on Wikimedia Commons. Good luck!--SJP wishes you a happy Veterans Day 19:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support One of the most level headed people that I've known on the various Wikimedia projects. Kind and thoughtful also. He will be an excellent addition to the admin team. FloNight ♥♥♥ 19:53, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I'm happy with what I've seen of him on other projects. ElinorD (talk) 20:07, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't know this user well, but I've heard him/her as a checkuser on English Wikibooks, Commons, and Meta, but not yet an administrator on English Wikipedia. This user needs the mop here as well as other projects. NHRHS2010 talk 20:17, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Not your everyday request, but well justified, someone I trust based on what else they're doing and where, and it makes sense. Mop 'em. Georgewilliamherbert 21:02, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Appears dedicated, knowledgeable and even-keeled from my observation of the candidate on Commons. Is also amazingly good-tempered given the amount of slogging through administrative tasks he does. No trust issues whatsoever. Banyan Tree 21:25, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Incredibly impressive CV.--Bedivere 21:29, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support I know Herby from many other projects where we work together and my experiences with him have shown him to be a hardworking and trustful person. He would be a great addition to the sysop team here. Cbrown1023 talk 22:48, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I thought he was an admin here because he's an admin at Quote and Commons Will ^(talk) 23:01, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
He's also a checkuser at Quote, Commons, and Meta. NHRHS2010 talk 16:59, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Herby is a great guy and will be an excellent admin. Sarah 23:14, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jmlk 1 7 00:04, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Versa geek 00:07, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Holy canoly, he's not an admin? Maser ^(Talk!) 00:23, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support. ;)--Hu12 01:11, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Clearly has enough experience, absolutely no indication whatsoever he would misuse the tools. My only real interaction with Herby was during a thorny vandalism incident in which a shock image was added to a page and wouldn't disappear despite local deletion. After a few minutes of discussion at AN/I, someone suggested it had been uploaded to Commons. I requested action over there and still haven't forgotten how quickly and efficiently a certain admin responded. He'd get my !vote any day :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:29, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly. I still remember the early days, and we need more admins to deal with spam (and those vanity/attack/nonsense pages). MER-C 01:57, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support--MONGO 02:36, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support no reason not to. Carlossuarez46 03:00, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support x 2¹⁰ Ρх₥α 03:08, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't my normal admin candidate here, as Herby has effectively demonstrated that he is suitable for the tools, after gaining much trust from other projects. I believe that he will be useful in the spam detecting and vandalism patrol areas, as I've seen him doing such work on Commons at the very least. While the focus for most candidates seems to be article writing and contributing to encyclopedic content, Herby has enough to deal with on other projects already, and therefore makes the article writing point moot. With the basis of that, and possibly more reasons; support. O₂ (息 • 吹) 03:23, 08 November 2007 (GMT)
Unique RfA, to be sure, but still an Easy Support. K. Scott Bailey 04:23, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adminthyme ;) Dfrg_msc 04:40, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Of course ---- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 05:45, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Given Lar's word and the rest of the recommendations, even I'm impressed. and I'm typically very skeptical of the "special circumstances require adminship" argument. Xoloz 06:11, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Absolutely. GlassCobra 06:40, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support, strongly. The time is definitely Herbythyme :) Ideal candidate ~ Sebi 08:52, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great user, nothing bad to say at all about him! Does great work on any Wikimedia project, no reason why he shouldn't be an admin here. 100% SUPPORT!! --Solumeiras ^talk 11:35, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support, although a mention of his old account on his user page might be helpful (but I've discussed that with him before) - it's not a big deal. Definitely trustable. Neil ☎ 12:16, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not bad at listening honest! --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:30, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support I have seen him doing a great job over at commons. I know Wikipedia will benefit from giving him the administrative tools. --Mark (Mschel) 12:45, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
--S^[1] 12:50, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support A very strong candidate who is unlikely to abuse admin tools. --S iva1979^{Talk to me} 13:16, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
User:Veesicle 13:21, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Bryan (talk|commons) 14:11, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Korg (talk) 15:57, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support - indeed I offered to nominate Herby myself. Very experienced user involved detecting and combating cross-project vandalism. His work in that arena and the general advantage to Commons admins of being able to see deleted en.wiki image descriptions give him a clear use for the tools here. He has my complete confidence. WjBscribe 17:32, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unconditional support! MaxSem^{(Han shot first!)} 18:07, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support, good candidate and trustworthy Meta/Commons admin. --Core desat 18:49, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support; an exemplar. Walter Siegmund (talk) 22:00, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Phgao 06:12, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Qualified. --Shark face 217 06:28, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Per Commons interactions (yes, I know...) Dihydrogen Monoxide 10:25, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. A hardworking and trustworthy admin on Commons and Meta; giving him the sysop bit here will benefit all three projects greatly. --krimpet ⟲ 12:56, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - No good reason not do, particularly with this user's record of trust. I hope the line about not deleting the main page anytime soon was a joke, though. :) John Carter 17:54, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is a Secret ^account 00:06, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 05:38, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message! - 08:01, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support as per nominator --Jake R-12 08:05, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Flexibility and willingness to compromise are good admin features. - Jehochman ^Talk 17:04, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support, per nom. @pple complain 18:46, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Very strong support Haven't seen this request until now. Sorry, that I'm supporting so late. :( Regards, —DerHexer (Talk) 21:24, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support nominator notwithstanding... LessHeard vanU 02:00, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A trustworthy candidate. Acalamari 02:58, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support I will stupidly admit to being a pile-on here but, per all above, I can't imagine him being untrustworthy with the buttons. Pigman^what?/trail 03:22, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support I personally first came across Herbythyme in Wikimedia Commons a few months back, where he offered me friendly, helpful advice. Having illustrated skill, experience, dedication, and all the prized qualities we look for in an administrator, I will very gladly support. -- Chris.B • talk 17:14, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - just look at all those positions of responsibility elsewhere! Obviously a trusted user! Good luck! Lra drama 19:12, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- very good sysop on Meta, trusted Wikimedian. --Thogo (Talk) 23:13, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support John254 03:10, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Thogo. He's a great admin on Meta, and should be the same here. _{Folic_Acid | talk} 16:10, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support He needs the mop here, too. --Oxymoron⁸³ 20:46, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Herby is not a typical run-of-the-mill administrator, and he is not a jack-of-all-trades. He is, simply put, one of the best vandalism fighters that wikimedia has ever seen. He cuts through vandalism like a freaking hurricane. People ask what he would do in this or that situation, but I say that those questions are moot, herby will never get involved in that kind of stuff. He will watch your back, protecting the gate so that we can all get on with our daily business: flaming each other and occasionally writing encyclopedia content. --Whiteknight (talk) (books) 00:07, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Although I'm playing add-on, I fully trust that this candidate will not abuse the tools in any way.-MBK004 00:24, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support I am usually not remarkably favorably disposed to supporting the RfAs of candidates who express a strong interest in partaking of muscular anti-vandal activities, but Herbythyme is surely not a user for whom any such concern should be relevant, and I am, of course, pleased to offer pile-on support. Joe 06:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yay. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 09:05, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support, This seems right. - Modernist 12:55, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Apparently, the candidate is not busy enough. No worries, we have plenty of work for everybody! In before the win! ZZ ^Claims~ Evidence 14:28, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Neutral

Neutral like Switzerland Keepscases 20:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Can you elaborate? Nishkid64 (talk) 21:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unconvinced that "unconventional new admin" is good precedent. Keepscases 21:24, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of his experience on other projects, I think he's qualified here. He edits articles, he participates in administrator-related tasks, and he's civil. A simplified, yet decent indicator that he's qualified, IMO. Nishkid64 (talk) 21:55, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He is not exactly a newbie here so I'm certain that he has a good grasp of our policies. As he is very collaborative, I'm certain that he will seek out 2nd opinions if he needs more input about a matter. FloNight ♥♥♥ 22:28, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I for one would prefer all our new admins were unconventional, would make for some spicy dramaz on AN. Oh, wait. ~ Riana ⁂ 13:05, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
zOMG drama?? --Iamunknown 23:59, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.