Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Archive 1

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

User:Crimson has been editing on Wikinews since the beginning of August and has contributed a number of well-written articles, covering local stories from Canada as well as synthesis articles from around the world since then (eg. New Democrats score upset in Ontario's Parkdale-High Park by-election, Scottish Socialist Party to split as Sheridan launches new party, 5 killed as bus from New York City to Montreal crashes, see user page for a fuller list). He became an accredited reporter on August 31.

I find User:Crimson a valuable contributor to articles and helpful and knowledgable in discussions. I would like to nominate him for adminship. Doldrums 17:20, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I accept with thanks. Crimson 17:45, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

• Support —FellowWikiNews (W) 19:39, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

• Wholeheartadly Support Thunderhead(talk) View the latest updates on Accredidation Requests 23:18, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

• Support I think this user would make a great administrator. Bawolff ☺☻ 21:58, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

• Support. He's a wikignome too.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 21:05, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

• Support. --Nzgabriel | Talk 08:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

• Support PVJ^(Talk)_{(Articles I have written)} 15:24, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

• Support . Jacques Divol 16:04, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comment its intreasting who's voting herre... Bawolff ☺☻ 22:44, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. User has not been around long enough. My vote now does not mean an opposition vote in the future. Jason Safoutin 22:52, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

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

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

I would like to nominate user Stevenfruitsmaak for administrator. Contributes regularly, and gives the impression of being someone who can be trusted with the extra buttons. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 14:53, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I accept. I don't promise to be the most user-blocking, article-deleting, archiving, using-the-mop-and-bucket person around, I still prefer just to write, and will probably request accreditation some day. However, since I'm a wikiholic who hates leaving things messy and unfinished, I'll probably use the buttons from time to time.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:11, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

• Support and Comment - Yea! I'm your first. By the way, since you were talking about this, could you take a look at Template:Archive? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thunderhead (talk • contribs) 19:14, 11 October 2006
• Neutral The question is if we make this user admin will he ever use his admin tools? I truly do not understand the need to rush an admin nomination through as we have quite a stable of janitors as it is, imo. FellowWikiNews (W) 21:26, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

I'll probably use them from time to time once I would have them, but I'm not an RC-patroller etc. I agree that there seems to be no lack of maintenance at the moment.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 22:10, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikinews Admin's arent that scare, but I'll still support. I spend like 1 hour per day on WN:RC. lol Thunderhead(talk) 22:51, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

I would gladly respond to any WN:ALERTs you post while patrolling RC.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 17:34, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

• Support-- Although I do agree that we have enough Administrators already. PVJ^(Talk)_{(Articles I have written)} 05:59, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
• Support. i trust Steven to use the buttons fairly and well.  —Doldrums (talk) 09:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
• Just in case the nomination doesn't count... Support. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 20:18, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

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

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

Not to be standoffish, but I am nominating myself for Adminship. I don't really expect complete support, since I've only been here for a while, but I feel that I have made quite significant edits to the wiki, and that I have been marking articles for quite a while. I have launched the Wikinews Humor project, and I have made anon edits at work, school, and home. I also admin the Ace Combat Wikia on w:Wikia, so I have some knowledge of the admin tools. Thunderhead(talk) 22:38, 17 October 2006 (UTC) I was once known as User:Urameshi2

Accept Just in case nomination doesn't count. Thunderhead(talk) 22:38, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Questions

I know I'm doing something more wikipedia-like but I don't think a little structure can harm.

I'm a bit confused by your account rename, that's why I have some questions, to make sure that I understand your level of experience here correctly.

1. How long have you been on Wikinews? Have you been on other Wikimedia projects as well (besides wikia)?
2. Which articles have you started or made major contributions too? Any ones you're particularly proud of, or that show your understanding of Wikinews and how it works?
3. Have you ran into any conflicts with other users before? How was the problem resolved?
4. What sysop chores would you like to do?
5. What are your strong sides and your pitfalls here on WikiNews?

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 18:13, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

No problem! I'd be happy to answer your questions!

1. At least a year, with my recent edits being in the past two months.
2. Yes, I am on Wikipedia, Wiktionary, and Wikibooks, although I have not made major edits except on News or 'Pedia.
3. Check here. I have started Wikinews:Humor, and I have been a Wikignome for most of my career here.
4. Nope. No conflicts ever. :)
5. I would just like to be able to help Wikinews in the best way I can, and I have found that I would like to be an administrator to help with my gnome edits.
6. Well, I have always tried my best to be helpful, I haven't really run in to any problems, and I have alot of knowledge of Mediawiki I also consider myself to be polite.. My pitfalls are that I tend to ask fairly obvious questions sometimes, and that I have occasionally copy/pasted before I was reminded to not to do so.

Any other questions? Go ahead! Thunderhead(talk) 20:50, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

1. Exactly what stories have you written as an anon? It's hard to find if the ip-address changes a lot... Although you have some confirmed. And which did you start when you where logged in, only the latest Al-Qaeda 9/11 story?
2. Do you still make anon edits? Why is that?

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 21:29, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

1. Well, my last logged-in was the latest FDA E. coli (I think), although a few were deleted for Template:copyvio, although I did write a temp article. I never recieved anything on that. Another one I wrote is US Air Force chief proposes using non-lethal military weapons domestically, and Sharapova takes U.S. tennis title. One more I wrote is Child abuse case in West Virginia ends in jail time
2. My school does not allow us to login to anything, so I have to make anon edits on WN at school, although i will say unlogged @ school on mine.

[edit] Comments

• Usage of edit summary seems rather low.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 18:13, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
• AAAAAAAAA! Hang in there <cough cough> remember Rosey <splutter splutter> and sign in often <even when they treat you like a dog> -Edbrown05 08:40, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Support

• Support. Bawolff ☺☻ 22:41, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

• Support. Seems like a sensible chap---Eloquence 01:49, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
• Support Certainly deserves it. By the way, Erik's comments on Wikinews are not representative of the Board of Trustees in any way. I know that should sound obvious, but it's gotten Erik slapped around a bit I believe. —this is messedrocker (talk) 20:56, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
• Support Jason Safoutin 21:02, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
• Support --Nzgabriel | Talk 19:09, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Neutral

• neutral, yes, i feel more neutral for that case,i don't agree with some PVJ actions but i do not think it's the solution. PVJ59 shown us something we must manage. But he must also understand that categories, that are usefull and meaningfull as topics used to describe articles, are not involved to insult or critics anyone. Have you read phylosophe Terry Pratchett Discworld books ? The last (or something) called "Thud!" is about war between Trolls and Dwarves, about racial intolerance (and coppers and Where's my cow™). But to understand it fully you'ld read the 29th previous!!! :) Jacques Divol 20:05, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, thank you for the comments. Trust me, I will be applying for adminship later (because I sure won't get it now :P). Thanks again! Thunderhead(talk) 21:13, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

i apologies very much. I write my comment on the wrong place, it was about PVJ59, not you, sorry ... Jacques Divol

[edit] Oppose

• Oppose We have more than enough Administrators already. Besides, some of this user's actions have led me to doubt whether he will be capable of handling the responsibility of being a sysop. PVJ^(Talk)_{(Articles I have written)} 08:16, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Can I ask what I did wrong? I understand that we have alot of Admins, but what did I do wrong? Thunderhead(talk) 13:40, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I would not be comfortable revealing exactly what you did to influence my opinion of you in this manner. However I can tell you that I do not think that users who go "behind the backs" of other users should be allowed to have Administrator privileges. Transperency is a must on Wikinews, as anywhere else. Best of luck with your RfA. PVJ^(Talk)_{(Articles I have written)} 14:12, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for telling me that. I will do my best to "be bold" on Wikinews. Thanks! Thunderhead(talk) 17:48, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

PVJ...and you're the pot calling the kettle black. Jason Safoutin 21:03, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Ummm, I've seen a lot of people (basicly almost every admin, besides well, Karen is the only exception I can think of. Note I'm including myself in that list.) go behind peoples back at one time or another (I'm not saying Everyones done major stuff behind someone elses back, but most people have dones something minnor at one point.) I know you don't want to reveal specifics, but I'm really curious as to what happened Bawolff ☺☻ 02:38, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

It was just my personal judgement that if he is given sysop access, he may use it in a way that is not compatible with the level of openness that we except from our Administrators, especially when dealing with blocks of users. PVJ^(Talk)_{(Articles I have written)} 02:59, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay. Bawolff ☺☻ 03:12, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose: This user has obvious good qualities: humour, friendly, helpful, knows MediaWiki... Although I'm sure this is admin material because he loves gnome edits, this user has a such a high level of those edits with very few (only one? I'll change my opinion if I'm mistaken here) story he started. I believe you learn how this place works by writing news stories, which might explain the "obvious questions". Also, usage of edit summary seems rather low, which I think is a kind of Good Admin Practice. I really don't want to sound pretentious since I'm quite the newbie-admin, but maybe it's better to wait a month and a few stories?--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 23:53, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for your comments! Thunderhead(talk) 20:02, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose Stevenfruitsmaak has it down exactly. Thunderhead has alot of good qualities, but also a lack of any major story writing. With no real urgent need for adminship, I think it is best to wait a bit. --Cspurrier 01:51, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand why thats such a problem. Lets look at Admin tasks: Fixing images that commons deleted, Gnome like edits to archiving, Archiving, Deleting, protecting edit war zones, Blocking. These Are all Matinance/Gnome like tasks. Also Some other admins, have made very few articles (my grand total is 2 - which wern't very good, I don't think Karen has made very many either (don't quote me on that)) Bawolff ☺☻ 03:12, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

A lack of story writing can be made up for by a lot on talk pages or community pages, by a urgent need for new admins (iirc when you became an admin we were still getting off hour vandalism) or by am overwhelming amount Gnome tasks (like Karen). Since Thunderhead has not done any of these, I can not say I know him well enough to trust him with adminship.--Cspurrier 17:47, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for your comments! Thunderhead(talk) 20:02, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose, no real criticisms but try again when you've more edits and given people time to build a better picture of you as a contributor. I don't think we should refuse on the grounds of "enough administrators", but less than 100 edits in the Main namespace isn't enough to form an opinion. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 18:24, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for your comments! Thunderhead(talk) 20:02, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks, I don't want to discourage you as a contributor because you do useful work. However, I want to see you being more involved by doing things like rescuing poorly sourced articles instead of tagging them. Best summed up as, "Practice random acts of kindness". Nobody can do it all the time, and some things just need tagged, but contributing at a level where you get more feedback on - or more viewing of - your contributions will build people's trust. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 13:33, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for the advice. I am pretty sure I'm not going to get it this time, although I do see that I have earned the trust, and support from many contributors (including some who oppose). I will try again in a while, but until then, thanks for the advice. Thunderhead(talk) 16:23, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose, based on [1]. Why the hell is there a) a need for a NS wikia when there's already an individual NationStates wiki, and b) a need to advertise this RFA there? NSLE 05:22, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

What are you talking about, and how can you base a decsision off that? Wikia is an entirely seperate Wiki, and has nothing to do with my Wiki status here. Thunderhead(talk) 05:24, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't think desicions for this should be allowed to be based on actions at other wikis, unless it directly has to do with Wikinews. Bawolff ☺☻ 17:26, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

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

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

As much as I appreciate PVJ's efforts to make Wikinews more neutral, I can't say that I can trust him as an admin. Admins are expected to be civil, yet PVJ in the whole Category talk:Israel debacle made very intimidating comments towards people of Israel. In fact, a contributor from Israel pointed out these highly incivil comments he has made. Additionally, PVJ has violated 3RR too many times (for an administrator), and has at one time unblocked himself so he could make a comment. I would still like PVJ59 to be a contributor, but I think he should spend some time without his admin tools so he can regain the trust of the community. —this is messedrocker (talk) 17:22, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

PVJ59 has posted a message regarding this RfDA.  — Doldrums(talk) 18:09, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

If my contributions to Wikinews are repaid in the form of my Admin access being withdrawn, I will quit the project. In case the RfDA passes, I ask that my user and user-talk pages be deleted. Thank you. PVJ^(Talk)_{(Articles I have written)} 03:55, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

In light of the several messages I am getting regarding my decision to leave if this RfDA passes, I though I should clarify my stand on this matter. Most of the concerns raised by MessedRocker (whose judgement I trust) seem to have more to do with my status as as editor, than as a sysop. Hence, I think that the best way to address those concerns would be to either change my behaviour a bit (that might be tough, but I'm willing to try) or quit (that's pretty much a surefire solution). The part about my temporary unblocks do concern my Administrator status, and I understand why they may be cause for me to lose Admisistratorship-but, like I said, losing sysop status will lead me to (regretfully) retire from Wikinews. Just, in case I do have to leave (i.e if this RfDA passes)I would just like to state that I bear no ill-will to anyone I have worked with on this project, and have no cause to regret a moment of the last six months I have been around here. It truly has been fun-both through the good times and the not-so-good ones. PVJ^(Talk)_{(Articles I have written)} 16:26, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

I have decided to quit the project with immediate effect. PVJ^(Talk)_{(Articles I have written)} 09:32, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Questions

• Question: What other possibilities are there? "At their discretion, lesser penalties may also be assessed against problematic administrators, including the restriction of their use of certain powers or placement on administrative probation." ¹ Is this an option?--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 00:29, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

In certain cases, Wikipedia policy is transwikied to Wikinews. We are permitted to use their policies where ours is lacking. In this case, however, there doesn't appear to be any facility to implement administrative probation unless the ArbCom becomes involved. --Chiacomo ^(talk) 05:27, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comments

• Comment: Since it always is an issue in RfDAs, remember Support means remove adminship and Oppose means he should keep his adminship. Also this is PVJ's second RfDA, his first one ended with 6 opposes and 2 supports. --Cspurrier 17:31, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: Note that PVJ59 is currently blocked and will not be able to respond on this page.  — Doldrums(talk) 17:40, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
  • PVJ is welcome to comment on his talk page. —this is messedrocker (talk) 17:42, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: I generally oppose the RfDA process and will not vote, but will comment. I also think that PVJ's stance on Adminship being a requirement for his editing is unfortunate. Adminship is supposed to be about duties of cleanup, maintaining policy, and being a trusted user to take care of some tasks that we don't want to offer to every editor. It is not supposed to be a function to help a user edit on Wikinews. -- IlyaHaykinson 05:09, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: After I get about ten support votes (or a difference of ten in favour of me being de-sysoped), I shall retire from the project. I do not, however, wish to imply that I am quitting (it is only a matter of time now) out of any ill-will toward my fellow contributors. It is just that I do not wish to burden Wikinews with my presence if the community does not wish to have me on as an Administrator. I once again urge the community to vote as they please-remember that my departure will not have any catastrophic impact on the project, and thus there is no need for the voters to exercise any sort of restraint while voicing their opinion in this regard. I hope that this unpleasant business will be sorted out quickly so that we may all go back to doing what needs to be done. PVJ^(Talk)_{(Articles I have written)} 16:29, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Please reconsider that stance, I'm afraid tha the RfDA should make it clear to you that there are a number of people who are losing trust in you using administrative powers appropriately. I count at least 2 times you've unblocked yourself and two times you've blocked yourself, I'm not going to look for other breaches but I suspect they exist. You can't do that, if you're going to breach the rules you must not breach the ones that normal editors can't. In addition to that, you should only break the rules when you're prepared to take the consequences. It better be a hell of a good point you're trying to make.

Right now you probably still have a good degree of sympathy for some aspects of the POV you've expressed, were you to bring the Israeli recognition issue to any article involving one of the countries that does not recognise it, then you'd get sympathy for working the detail into the story. Beyond that you're questioning the right of the majority of contributors to defer to Wikipedia on the status of Israel. I'm not going to reach for analogies, they been beaten to death in an effort to get you to accept the reasonableness of using a category Israel. As you are repeatedly reminded, the countries who wish it didn't exist have to refer to it in some way, and they frequently use "Israel" with choice adjectives.

Finally, there are ways to express your POV on Wikinews and stay within project guidelines. Through your choice of story submissions you may express your POV, provided that each story is within the project guidelines. So, you ignore U.S. "propaganda" and concentrate on reports from other countries. That way you can look for news that relates to what you consider the under-reported POV and bring them to light alongside the more mainstream coverage that you may not be so happy with. You may have to live with what other contributors add, but if you can't work with that you shouldn't be on a wiki. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 17:52, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I have breached the rules before but I believe that it was a combination of circumstances and bad judgement that made me do so. I did not breach policy to harm the project or the community.

The POV of the 24 countries that do not recognise Israel does not necessarily mirror my own. I was only trying to achieve NPOV (perhaps at the cost of hurting some sentiments) in the truest sense of the term. The fact that the Israel issue has led to this point saddens me very deeply.

I keep the "activist" side of me seperate from the "writer" side of me. I do not and will not write articles with the express purpose of representing POVs. PVJ^(Talk)_{(Articles I have written)} 18:06, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't mean report to represent a POV, but to highlight its existence. As an example, the Canadian story has no congruence with the 24 states that don't recognise Israel, so most people think it is wholly inappropriate there. But the Israel-Lebanon conflict involved Hezbollah, who you've quoted, and was commented on by a lot of countries. Israeli government officials even brought up the non-recognition issue relating to where peacekeepers might come from. I'm sure some of those points should've been given more prominence, so try and stick around and calmly represent that when these issues invariably surface again. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 18:33, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

• Comment; Is this really happening? An admin. (MR) who just admitted to facilitating/advising Neutralizer on how to evade a block [2] is now starting an RfDA another admin for evading a block? Is there sense of fairness whatsoever on this page? 70.48.204.32 00:47, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Technically speaking it's allowed -- it's one of the loopholes of being banned. Also, it wasn't Neutralizer, and I have since withdrew the deal. —this is messedrocker (talk) 00:48, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Is it not true you thought it was Neut you were helping? Isn't helping someone evade a total ban worse than evading a short term block? Give me a break. 70.48.204.32 00:58, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
      • Not at all. He came out, admitted it, and we thanked him for admitting it. You know, you sound alot like Neut, from what I've heard. Thunderhead(talk) 01:02, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
        • Any non-biased person would feel that an admin who is advising/helping a troll get around a permanent ban is committing a much worse offense than an admin who unblocks himself once or twice which, as you know, many admins did here on a wheel unblocking war awhile back. Any new user who had witnessed that wheel war of admins unblocking themselves would not be supporting this RfDA. MR I am very surprised that you would start this RfDA on such a minor infraction which ,imo, is much less of an infraction than your own. 70.48.204.32 01:05, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
          • Well, know I know it's you. Put it this way: MR has his opinions, and you have yours. Leave it at that. Thunderhead(talk) 01:09, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
            • MR is an honest guy; I'm sure he'll change his mind about this RfDA once he has some time to think about it; or else, he'll quit himself; to do neither would be quite hypocritical and MR is not a hypocritical guy; period.

• +[3]

03:01, 20 April 2006 Chiacomo (Talk | contribs) unblocked User:Chiacomo (contribs) (Blech)

03:02, 20 April 2006 Chiacomo (Talk | contribs) unblocked Chiacomo (contribs) (Blech)

09:05, 14 April 2006 Brian New Zealand (Talk | contribs) unblocked Brian New Zealand (contribs)

06:32, 19 April 2006 Karen (Talk | contribs) unblocked Karen (contribs) . 70.48.204.32 02:08, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

02:59, 20 April 2006 Mindspillage (Talk | contribs | block) blocked "Chiacomo (contribs)" with an expiry time of infinite (wheel-warring... er, I mean, testing.)

02:59, 20 April 2006 Mindspillage (Talk | contribs | block) blocked "User:Chiacomo (contribs)" with an expiry time of infinite (wheel-warring... er, I mean, testing.) If you look at the log a bit more you will find the reason for the blocks of Chiacomo was testing, unblocking himself in this case was ok --Cspurrier 12:18, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Didn't we set arbcom up to stop this deadmin crap deadminships? I would suggest this goes to Arbcom, and arbcom member’s recluse themselves if there’s a conflict of interest Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 05:43, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, and the last case, dealing with MrM, got thrown back into this forum: Admin or deAdmin -Edbrown05 06:08, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

As I have already mentioned on Messed's talk, most of the concerns raised seem to be related to my comments about Israel, and my habit of temporarily unblocking myself. First, about the temporary unblocks, I (erroneously) though that unblocking myself for a few minutes to make a comment was not too serious an offence, and did not do so with malicious intent. This has been the first time that I havebeen warned that temporary unblocks constitute block-evasion, and I ask that I be given another chance in this regard. As for the fact that the way I express myself is sometimes a bit too direct, that is something that I shall find difficult to change, since it is part of my personality-even in real-life (I have recieved more than my share of black eyes and cut lips). In this case, I was very straight forward in my comments on Israel. But, had I been campaigning againt a "Palestinian recognition POV", I would have been just as direct, and would (I am sure) have made very clear my views on the existence of Palestine. The same applies to any POV that I might have held, and it is a matter of my own behaviour rather than a case of my being intentionally disrespectful in my comments. Yes, sometimes I am too direct in my criticism, but am just as open with my praise. I have never (intentionally) used POV disputes to hurt users and have always been on good terms even with editors who disagree with me on certain issues. The fact is that if this RfDA passes (which seems likely) I shall retire from the project (that is a certainty). However, I would hate to quit just as much as I would hate to lose my sysop status. Hence, I ask that some alternative be proposed (if possible) to this RfDA. Again, I realise that it is almost certain that I will not be here as an Administrator after the 28th, and would not hold any grudge against those who initiated this process or supported it, do not hold them, in any way, responsible for my departure. PVJ^(Talk)_{(Articles I have written)} 13:59, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Support

• Support as nominator. —this is messedrocker (talk) 17:22, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
• Sorry, but I gotta Support. Thunderhead(talk) 17:36, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
• Sadly gotta Support removal of adminship too. He was blocked for these infractions, but RfdA is the more adult & appropriate venue. However, a double wammy is no good. So I'm unblocking him. And this support vote is conditional upon him not being reblocked for these specific infractions. Nyarlathotep 02:45, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
• Support, doesn't inspire trust.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 13:12, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
• Support. (attack removed) --Daniel575 18:16, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

This user has personally attacked me on many occasions, has recently joined Wikinews with the declared intention of "joining a fight" and has contributed close to nothing to the project. If it will not affect the result, I ask that his vote be discounted. PVJ^(Talk)_{(Articles I have written)} 19:13, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Comment: I tend to agree in this aspect and is very suspicious like. Has the user been checkusered? Jason Safoutin 22:37, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

What you think he is Neutralizer or MyName? I doubt it. You don't just "checkuser someone" unless you have a reason. Nyarlathotep 10:01, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

You haven't been paying attention. Blueline did nothing wrong or suspicious at all and she was checkusered and permanently banned. Checkuser is now being played with like a power tool. 65.95.151.190 21:32, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

What's with all of this Neutralizer or MyName stuff? Do you all fail to see that Neutralizer IS MyName? 148.233.159.57 21:38, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

• Support. PVJ59 is a prolific and valuable contributor to this project and i appreciate the articles he's written, bringing expanded coverage of events around the world and his attempt to broaden the range of povs Wikinews articles present. I do, however, find his use of administrator powers violate policies too frequently (see below) and i see too little an attempt to change it to overlook them.
• user has been blocked 4 times (7 July, 16 July, 21 September, 19 October) in the last 4 months for violating 3RR.
• unblocked himself 5 times (20 October, (22:38) 19 October 2006, 21 September, (18:11) 8 July, (12:27) 8 July) for either either not agreeing to the block or to post alerts, apparently does not appear to know or appear to care that the same result can be obtained by posting to his talk page, e-mailing an admin or getting on IRC, which doesn't involve breaking policy.
• unblocked himself and then blocked user he was involved in editorial dispute with:

22:31, 20 October 2006 PVJ59 (Talk | contribs | block) blocked "Doldrums (contribs)" with an expiry time of 24 hours (3RR-see WN:ALERT)

13:35, 20 October 2006 PVJ59 (Talk | contribs | block) unblocked PVJ59 (contribs) (I was not "avoiding" anything, please reblock with a proper reason)

• speedied a sourced article

11:58, 17 October 2006 PVJ59 (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "Islamic Republic Government Banned Internet" (Nonsense article, should have been speedied.)

• another speedy which was subsequently restored, sourced, expanded and published.

20:51, 13 June 2006 PVJ59 (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "Feminist Gathering in Tehran Violently Interrupted by the Police" (No sources.)

• protected an article he was involved in a dispute in

21:31, 12 October 2006 PVJ59 (Talk | contribs | block) protected "Small aircraft crashes into NYC building - Alert to remain unchanged" (Prevent unilateral POV-pushing by IP vandal. [edit=autoconfirmed:move=autoconfirmed])

• edited article (more pov dispute) after unblocking himself.

14:19, 20 October 2006 PVJ59 (Talk | contribs | block) (Rv POV-pushing)

13:35, 20 October 2006 PVJ59 (Talk | contribs | block) unblocked PVJ59 (contribs) (I was not "avoiding" anything, please reblock with a proper reason)

01:28, 20 October 2006 Cspurrier (Talk | contribs | block) blocked "PVJ59 (contribs)" with an expiry time of 1 week (replaced 'Block avoidance' block)

i am prepared to consider alternatives to da-admining him if i am convinced that there won't be continued infractions from this administrator. i do note, though, that even as this RfDA is underway, he has twice blocked a user he is in dispute with, apparently for echoing his own comment about "annihilation", despite saying "I will also not threaten users with blocks except in cases of obvious violations".

09:05, 25 October 2006 PVJ59 (Talk | contribs | block) blocked "Daniel575 (contribs)" with an expiry time of 24 hours (Persists in being incivil and attacking the community and individual users despite several warnings)

19:01, 24 October 2006 PVJ59 (Talk | contribs | block) blocked "Daniel575 (contribs)" with an expiry time of 3 hours (Continued personal attacks and incivility despite multiple warnings)

I only blocked this user beacuse of his allegations of "anti-Semitism" against certain users. PVJ^(Talk)_{(Articles I have written)} 09:31, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Neutral

• yes, i feel more neutral for that case,i don't agree with some PVJ actions but i do not think it's the solution. PVJ59 shown us something we must manage. But he must also understand that categories, that are usefull and meaningfull as topics used to describe articles, are not involved to insult or critics anyone. Have you read phylosophe Terry Pratchett Discworld books ? The last (or something) called "Thud!" is about war between Trolls and Dwarves, about racial intolerance (and coppers and Where's my cow™). But to understand it fully you'ld read the 29th previous!!! :) Jacques Divol 20:04, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
• Several of PVJ’s actions have bothered me greatly. His many violations of the 3rr show a disrespect for the community. His unblocking himself and his many threats of blocks for those he fights with, are both also highly inappropriate for an admin. However, PVJ’s editor related contributions are many and quality. I would hate to see us lose PVJ. If he is willing to commit to stop violating the 3rr and stop threatening users with blocks, I would be willing to change this vote to oppose (keep adminship). --Cspurrier 20:35, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I did not mean to disrespect the community or the project by violating 3RR, and did so in the heat of the moment. I assure you that it will not happen again. I will also not threaten users with blocks except in cases of obvious violations. PVJ^(Talk)_{(Articles I have written)} 03:25, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Oppose

* Oppose- seems overreactive to me. Blueline 16:43, 22 October 2006 (UTC) to explain; I believe in forgiveness and peaceful solutions to disagreements so I do not want him to be kicked off the administrative job. A sports arena is a good place for fights but I do not see his actions as being very different from several other administrators so I think they are all doing good work for no money so I want them all to stay as long as they want. Blueline 16:52, 22 October 2006 (UTC) sock of Neutralizer --Cspurrier 17:53, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

* Oppose-By DeAdmining PVJ we risk losing him, as he stated. If this happens, Wikinews will stray to an even further pro-western bias than it already has. This would be detrimental to Wikinews. Remember how Wikinews' popularity falls when Neutralizer is banned? The same loss of popularity will occur when PVJ resigns because of this. Think people think. Tohstsalstuen 17:04, 22 October 2006 (UTC) New user using an open proxy, using a sock and is a probbaly sock of Neutralizer --Cspurrier 17:45, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

• OpposeMessed and Cspurrier supported MrM and Amgine when they committed much worse and more frequent misuse of their admin powers.This is simply an attempt to silence the one administrator who is willing to fight the anglo-american pov which is (perhaps unknowingly) being pushed by many of our admins. It would be very harmful to the Wikinews project if this indirect form of censorship is successful. Paulrevere2005 17:29, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

COmment: Have those users been added to the list of Neutralizer socks? Jason Safoutin 22:38, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

IDemand that Cspurrier use checkuser on Tohstsalstuen or else withdraw his allegation that it is"probably" a sock of Neut. Also, Cspurrier when supporting MR said it's ok for banned users to come back if they behave [4] yet he bans Blueliner when she did nothing wrong at all. This seems like selective rule enforcement which should not be allowed here,imo. 70.48.204.32 00:56, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

There was a CheckUser. It matched. And stop pretending to not be Neutralizer, Neutralizer. You've been banned. —this is messedrocker (talk) 00:57, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

NO ask Cspurrier; he'll tell you he did NOT do a checkuser on Tohstsalstuen which showed him to be a sock of Neut. That's just not true....so it is wrong for him to say above it is "probably" a sock of Neut's. 70.48.204.32 01:09, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

The above referenced user was editing from an open proxy. See M:WM:NOP for more information on the prohibition against editing from an open proxy. This is not the proper venue for this discussion. WN:ALERT might be better. --Chiacomo ^(talk) 05:25, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Giveus a break; it was Cspurrier who brought the false accusation that Tohstsalstuen is a sock of Neut's into this discussion andyour(Chiacomo)'s unblocking of yourself twice with no penalty at all is certainly part of this discussion;

- 03:01, 20 April 2006 Chiacomo (Talk | contribs) unblocked User:Chiacomo (contribs) (Blech) - - 03:02, 20 April 2006 Chiacomo (Talk | contribs) unblocked Chiacomo (contribs) (Blech) 67.71.121.73 10:30, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

If you'll look at the block log you'll see that we were testing block behavior -- the actual blocks say things like "test" and "testing". I've never been blocked "for cause" on Wikinews -- only to test features. --Chiacomo ^(talk) 22:41, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

SInce being unblocked in June my only socks are: User:Neutralizer and User:MyName. ANY MORE QUESTIONS? 148.233.159.57 21:40, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

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

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

Current Count: 6/2/2

I am nominating myself for en:Wikinews adminship as I feel that I would be able to make a good contribution to the community in the admin field, whether it be helping with chores, menial tasks, or vandal-fighting (although we thankfully get very little vandalism compared with Wikipedia, where I am primarily a vandal fighter).

I was originally drawn to Wikinews by a link on the Wikipedia homepage. I have no idea why I have chosen to stay - but I love the project and what it provides and offers, and I hope that this somewhat shows through my contributions. I am especially proud of the articles I have written, all the way back from my very first article at Pelicans held on suspicion of being drunk up to my most recent article (published today) at Two children killed by carbon monoxide poisoning in Corfu. I have also dipped into the Original Reporting pool with my article PDPC President Rob Levin has died. My full article list is available here on my User page.

While my edit count is not high by any means (at sub 200 edits at just over 200 edits at just over 300 edits) I feel proud that every one of my edits has been constructive, and I, to my knowledge, have never done anything detrimental to the Wikinews community, such as become involved in article wars. I feel that my previous experience on en:Wikipedia, as well as on my own three wikis that I administrate (using the MediaWiki software), will assist me in assisting the Wikinews community in any way I can and/or am called to do so.

I ask that you vote truthfully, and give reasons for your vote. I will gladly accept any Oppose votes with any constructive criticism of myself or my articles, and/or with suggestions on how to improve for the future so that one day I may renominate myself for adminship. Various links that may assist you in voting are placed after this statement. --Skenmy^{(t•c•w•i)} 10:45, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

(Contributions • Edit Count)

Accept as nominator - just in case nomination doesn't count. --Skenmy^{(t•c•w•i)} 10:45, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

• Support--Article and edit-count seems to be a bit low, but Skenmy has a clean record and is an experienced RC Patroller. PVJ^(Talk)_{(Articles I have written)} 11:50, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
• Support. User quietly gets on with chores that need doing. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 12:16, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
• Neutral. Well, although his is a great user, I think that his small edit count is not fitting for an administrator, although I can't talk, can I, Brian? Thunderhead(talk) 23:21, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Brianmc mutters something about reading tea leaves and personally needing another 266 edits. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 21:30, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

• Support User seems like he knows how to handle his admin tools :) —FellowWikiNews (W) 23:10, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose Need more trust and activity on the site. Jason Safoutin 00:11, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
• Support, Trustworthy contributor, Shyam ^(T/C) 19:20, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
• Neutral: seems ok, but 84 edits in main...--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 20:00, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
• comment/abstain User is active on IRC, which I think is a good thing for an admin. Bawolff ☺☻ 23:37, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
• comment His wikipedia page is quite impressive. He is part of many different anti-vandal type activities which is to be applauded. Hopefully he will do the same on wikinews ~The bellman | Smile 04:14, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. While I find the user to be a good contributor, I don't think that we're suffering from a lack of administrators. Given that I'd rather have a better opinion of the user's application of policy as a non-admin. With so few edits it's tough to judge. I would support another nomination in a couple of months. -- IlyaHaykinson 02:56, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
• Support. little low on Wikinews experience, nonetheless.  — Doldrums(talk) 06:25, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
• Support --Cspurrier 16:06, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

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

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

I would like to nominate Nicholas Moreau, Zanimum (talk · contribs), for adminship. I thought he already was one, and I feel this is an overall level-headed, well-established and respected user.

Zanimum is an accredited reporter with experience as a local journalist who has written 72 105 articles according to his user page (making him a staff lead reporter), mainly since August 2005 and somehow linked to Category:Culture and entertainment (he has an interest in art). His contributions are both original, based on press releases and compiled from news articles. Recently he was appreciated for his interviews on the Regional Council elections in Canada with a trophy and barnstar. His edit count tells us he has over 1200 edits in main, and edits across all namespaces totalling near 2000 edits (when I wrote this). He discusses the project and proposes new ideas, such as meta:Scheduled attendance for Wikinews or Commons. His usage of edit summary seems low but I'm sure this could be improved in the future.

Reading his talk page, I get the impression he is a well appreciated community member who collaborates nicely and never had troubles with anyone.

He's an admin on the English Wikipedia and a member of the Wikimedia Foundation's Communications Committee. He's been active on Wiki's since 2004. For some more impressive facts about Zanimum on pedia, see w:User:Zanimum/archive. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stevenfruitsmaak (talk • contribs) 17:59, 11 November 2006

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept. -- Zanimum 21:40, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

1. Have you ran into any conflicts with other users before? How was the problem resolved? One user has scheduled to do original reporting on an event of national significance to Canada. The event was televised, and could be reported on from home, provided the user had cable or (legal) satellite service. What was ultimately needed was a photographer. I only found out they were going to event, after emailing the organizers asking to attend as a photographer. The user didn't even end up going in the end. As a result, I've created the "Scheduled attendance for Wikinews or Commons" page on Meta.
2. What sysop chores would you like to do? Deleting spam, retro-adding categories to archived articles.
3. What are your strong sides and your pitfalls here on Wikinews? I am a professional copyrighter for a website, as of last Monday, so I am actively brushing up on my literary ability. My article sometimes are too focused in interest, like ad industry and feminists, prairie newsjunkies, and talk show viewers.
4. If you become a sysop, do you plan to use your admin powers often as you edit, or not as often? Why? Well, as often as I see spam come along, or I create a category that seems to be warranted due to a volume of articles. (recently I have created the category "World record" and the subcat "Elections in Canada".

Votes and Comments

1. Support as nom.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 17:59, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
2. Support --Cspurrier 18:32, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
3. Support  — Doldrums(talk) 18:35, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
4. Support, assuming candidate accepts. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 18:51, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
5. Support, Not able to fully comprehend the answers to the questions but seems like a good user. --Skenmy^{(t•c•w•i)} 18:55, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
6. support Definitly should be an admin. Bawolff ☺☻ 20:59, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
7. Looks like I gotta Support! Man, everyone is RFAing! Thunderhead(talk)^{(Check out my RFA test}) 21:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
8. Support. -- IlyaHaykinson 22:26, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
9. Support Jacques Divol 09:18, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
10. Support, a well-established user on wikinews. Shyam ^(T/C) 09:26, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
11. Support Thought he was one already. Zeest^(Talk)_(Newpages) 10:29, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
12. Support per PVJ. —FellowWikiNews (W) 17:56, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
13. Support Crimson 01:25, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
14. Support --Nzgabriel | Talk 00:52, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

    Okay, I'm running for adminship after this one is done. Thunderhead(talk)^{(Check out my RFA test}) 00:59, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

15. --Nearly Headless Nick 11:54, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

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

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

I am going to nominate myself for another RFA as per my RFA test.

I may not have written but a few articles, however I feel that my contributions to Wikinews have been significant enough that you may trust me with administrative privlages. I missed consensus by two votes which were both oppose. I have, however worked things out with PVJ. I feel that Wikinews may not be short on administrators, that we need to continually maintain anti-vandal administrators so that we can continually fight the War on Vandalisim. I hope that the Wikinews community will recognize Special:Contributions/Thunderhead my contributions to the project. If I do not recieve adminship this time, I will try again in February 2007. To avoid confusion, my previous username was User:Urameshi2. Questions are always welcome. Thunderhead(talk)^{(Check out my RFA test}) 23:24, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

1. Support There is nothing bad to say about you or your edits. I trust you to be admin. FellowWikiNews (W) 23:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

   Comment I wrote on your test Good luck in February, since this is not February. I implied that I would support you in February (since that's when you said you would run again). You lied Thunderhead! In case you don't know it, this is November, February is 3 months away. I stand by my decision on your test. Good luck in February terinjokes _{User Page} / ^Talk 03:07, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

2. Support-- Zeest^(Talk)_(Newpages) 07:30, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
3. Neutral - I honestly believe that the user needs to place far less importance on becoming an admin (per RfA Test, Peer Review, previous nominations) and slow down - concentrate on getting some more good articles done before ladening yourself with admin tasks. I would support a nomination in February. --Skenmy^{(t•c•w•i)} 09:49, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
4. Support--Nearly Headless Nick 16:14, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
5. Oppose. Thunderhead has been an enthusiastic contributor, particularly active in discussions. but i don't see contributions to articles, project pages or discussions that highlight his understanding of policies (have i missed something?). the user's relatively low proportion of contributions to main and project space and relatively high prop. on user and user talk pages has also weighed in my take on this. perhaps the user can point out contributions he feels are notable or demonstrate his ability to use the buttons well.  — Doldrums(talk) 15:10, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

some rather odd edits as well, [5], [6], [7].  — Doldrums(talk) 15:26, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

1. Oppose : to early, need some months of fun on wikinews !Jacques Divol 09:02, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

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

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

In honour of Brian New Zealand being up for adminship over on wikipedia. I've decided to nominate myself for adminship. I've been a Wikinews contributor for about 2 years, with an undisclosed amount of user edits (well, the tool is currently offline...) Terinjokes is a major supporter of Audio Wikinews and Wikinews Network projects, even creating Audio Wikinews Newsline (currently looking for someone to host an asterisk server, contact me on my talk if your interested!) Terinjokes would be a great addition to the Wikinews Admin Team. terinjokes _{User Page} / ^Talk 07:23, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

It has come to my attention Craig Spurrier is up for Stewart as well terinjokes _{User Page} / ^Talk 20:29, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Questions from Steven Fruitsmaak:

1. Is Terinjokes going to list himself in Category:Admins open to recall?
2. What does Terinjokes think about User:Mrmiscellanious/Admin Code of Conduct? What would he add to it? --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 20:01, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Answers 21:16, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

1. Since I strive for teamwork, as well as trust, I'll gladly add myself (not like anyone would actually need to put me up for reconfirmation). Again, if anyone has any has any comments for me (reguarding, well anything) there are many ways of contacting me. I'm always open to what other people think, and treat each one with the respect it deserves.
2. Most of the Admin Code of Conduct make natual sense. The only one I disagree with is Enjoy editing Wikinews, and have plenty of WN:TEA. The first part I totally agree to; however, not so certain about the second half. I would probably add a suggestion for people to visit the WikiBistro.

• Support Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 07:26, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
• Support Brian McNeil / ^talk 08:55, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
• Support --Jacques Divol 10:01, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
• Support Icelandic Hurricane 15:03, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
• Support Good contributor - should probably try to stop speaking in the third person though! --Skenmy^{(t•c•w•i)} 15:17, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Terinjokes deems that too boring. terinjokes _{User Page} / ^Talk 20:29, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

• definite support. He's been behind the scences forever, which means he know's the project well. I think he'd make an excellent admin. Bawolff ☺☻ 06:57, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
• Support. Should probably sign posts though.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:50, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose(Bawolff crossed out this oppose, as Fellowwikinews is opposing twice, and he has one vote. This is to make sure the votes don't get miscounted. Please see his entry near the bottom. the user is still opposing.) Some disturbing comments have been made towards my user page and how it bothers him "Every freaking time". It is a violation of WN:E for a user to nominate my user space for speedy deletion. It is more appropriate to discuss it on my talk page than nominate my own user space for speedy deletion. There are many other reasons why I am voting oppose. Also, I believe this may be too early of a nomination for the user as he does not have enough article edits, for me. I have reviewed all of his edits. In the future I might vote Neutral or even Support. —FellowWikiNews (W) 23:07, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Today, December 11th, 2006. I, Terinjokes made a few irrational decisions while sugar high.
One of these decision resulted in offending a fellow wikinews user, FellowWikiNews. 

After visiting FellowWikiNews's user talk to leave a comment in response to Wikinews:Administrators,
I was informed that I had new messages, or so I thought.
Turns out I, again, fell pray to FellowWikiNews's practical joke. In a rather dry response,
I sarcastically nominated one of FellowWikiNews's user pages for speedy deletion.
Despite not using the official template, and removing the categories,
I still realise that I broke some Wikinews policies, and breaking the trust of FellowWikiNews.
Its the latter that saddens me more.

It takes a long time to gain the trust of a community, and it hurts me to lose the trust of FellowWikiNews.
My tasteless joke backfired, destroying the very thing I made the joke upon.

I hope FellowWikiNews excepts my apology, as I prepare for the long road of regaining his trust.
I, after breaking policy and vandalising another user's userpage,
deserve whatever consequences I've brought against myself.

terinjokes _{User Page} / ^Talk

Comment I believe we all need a quick review on our Etiquette terinjokes _{User Page} / ^Talk 03:56, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

• Neuteral - While I cannot fully support you, I will change my vote from Oppose to Neut. Sorry about this! Thunderhead(talk)^{(Check out my RFA test}) 04:06, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to have to disagree with your statement there Thunderhead. Being admin material ≠ large edit counts. Some of the best admins don't edit like crazy. Yes, they edit. But edit count is only one part. Pulling RfA out of the archives, Amgine was elected an administrator to Wikipedia, despite not editing for almost an entire year! And even with that, a low edit count. I've been here for 2 years; whereas digging through the archives here, Amgine nominated MessedRocker only after 3 months of being a user! terinjokes _{User Page} / ^Talk 03:50, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose Honestly, I found that your decision making while on "sugar high" were inappropriate and your appoligy reminded me of a six year old trying to get out of trouble. It's irresponcible decision making and shouldn't be rewarded by you receiving adminship. Momodamonkey 01:33, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

There is truth to what you write. It was a very inappropriate decision. However my apology came from the heart. I'm not the type of person to make such irrational decisions, as I believe anyone who knows me knows. I'm probably one the the best people for the job; some of the Admins here consider me (and have for awhile) Admin material. Yes I made a stupid decision, of which I'm paying the consequences for. However, that is not who I am, it was one mistake, one that I regret. But don't we all make a mistake every once in a while? We're all humans, now aren't we? terinjokes _{User Page} / ^Talk 03:38, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

• Comment I think Terin would make a great admin. He's involved, hard working, and seems to have the interests of the project at heart. --Chiacomo ^(talk) 04:12, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment, I've seen much worse from people who were already admins. This is one isolated incident, he said he was sorry, he sounded very sinceer in his apology, I don't think he's going to do it again. Often times people say things, hit save, and it ends up being a lot harsher then they meant to say it. (90% of people misinterpet what they read online article comes to mind) I honestly think theres been a bit of an overreaction. Bawolff ☺☻ 06:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

• Support only a wikinewsian would write Morning polling causes late students. I regard myself as a wikinewsian, and appreciated that story very much. - Edbrown05 09:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh thank you for pulling that out of the archives! My first Orginal Reporting, and almost killed too... :D terinjokes | Talk | Come visit the WikiBistro 10:24, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Oppose Right after offending me by nominating my user space for speedy deletion you insult me again by putting "Interesting twist on OR". Please do not accuse me of "twisting with the rules". FYI, I have done more OR than you have done. Morning polling causes late students is your first OR article, it is a very short article especially when it comes to OR. I would exept more from you because you are an accredited reporter. I truly belive that you are not sutable yet to be admin. There are many other reasons why I am voting oppose. —FellowWikiNews (W) 22:37, 12 December

2006 (UTC)

Feel free to elaborate on those reasons, so we can form our own opinion on that.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 13:15, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I too support the elaborations, in my response to Stevenfruitsmaak's question I wrote: "I'm always open to what other people think, and treat each one with the respect it deserves." (bawolff has this really cool template he uses for quoting...might have to ask how he does it). I continue to stand by my words, in which I stand by here on WikiNews, over on Wikipedia, to the Trillian Discussion Boards, back to the Wikinews IRC, it even extends into real life. I always like to hear what others think of me, so I'd rather have them said to my face, so I may make neccessary changes, then whispered behind my back. terinjokes | Talk | Come visit the WikiBistro 20:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

By the way, thats MrM's template, and its template:quote. Other alternitives are template:q and template:cquote (In wikipedia style). Bawolff ☺☻ 00:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

• Support Jacques Divol

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

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

Withdrawn. I've been away for a while, and in that time, many of my Wikinews colleagues have left. Many new editors do no know me, so I will just have to prove myself. My original application stemmed from the fact that I often couldn't contact administrators when I needed them. --Munchkinguy 17:46, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I, User:Munchkinguy would like to nominate myself for adminship. I believe I have always tried to be friendly and help with this project to the best of my ability. As an admin, I will strive to help keep the front page accurate, up-to-date, and free of fraudulent articles. --Munchkinguy 06:36, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Questions

• You don't need to be an admin to edit the frontpage (well most of it anyway). Do you have any thing else specific you wish to do. Bawolff ☺☻ 08:29, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Maybe he means working with articles that are unduely published.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 16:44, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes. There are many new contibuters coming to Wikinews, but some are putting in articles that are biased, false, or copyvios. I will (on one hand) welcome these people and help them understand the rules, and (on the other hand) make sure the aforementioned poor articles are dealt with swiftly. --Munchkinguy 17:12, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Of course, you can do that without admin rights, you could nominate for speedy, for deletion...--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 20:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

• Could you provide an overview of your contributions here? When you started, what work you're particularly proud of...--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 16:46, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

My biggest Wikinews achievement was shaping the future for Audio Wikinews. I participated in many conversations on the subject, and was a faithful early contributer. I plan to resume doing this in the future. I also have worked hard to build consensus among contributers. Whenever I make a new article, I run the headline by the IRC channel for input. When "big" news stories are happening (like Sadam Hussein's execution), I try to ensure that other important (but less sensational) stories still get the coverage they deserve. --Munchkinguy 17:29, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

• Are you open to recall?

Yes --Munchkinguy 17:29, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Votes

• Thupport Good user, great contributions. Thunderhead - (talk) ^{Congrajulations to Kat!} 06:44, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support. Hégésippe | ±Θ± 06:42, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support. (more edit summaries wld be nice, though) — Doldrums(talk) 06:50, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Comment. Yeah, I'll try to do that more. --Munchkinguy 17:30, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

You probably know that there is an option in the preferences that automatically warns you for this, which helps most editors to reach 100%.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 20:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

• Weak oppose with possible change of mind. Not that I think this is a bad editor at all. This seems to be a long time member who wishes to return and become more active, and I can only applaud that. But for me, he hasn't been active enough lately. Seems to have few edits in the article namespace. I suggest you prove what you're worth and convince me that we can trust you with admin tools, by indeed doing all you can already do now to "keep the front page accurate, up-to-date, and free of fraudulent articles", joining the Wikinews:Welcommittee, and helping out on Wikinews:Audio_Wikinews. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 21:40, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
• Weak support, Mostly weak as you have not been active recently, but still support as you are: active in IRC, (were) Active in sub-projects which I personally think is just as important as being active in writing articles, and I remember from a while back when you were more active that you were a good contributor. Also I personally believe that giving adminship should be fairly lax. However I would still like to see more recent contribs. Bawolff ☺☻ 22:08, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose: User has not earned my trust yet. User is too new, although he seems to have been contributing well and keep up the good work. This vote does not setermine future nominations etc... DragonFire1024 00:55, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Comment: I've been here since February 2005. My situation is as Steven Fruitsmaak has described. I've been away for a while. --Munchkinguy 02:33, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

• Uncertain Munchkinguy is a long standing user here on Wikinews, he even pre-dates me by 4 months. For such a long time, I'd expected you to have more then 500 edits. Munchkinguy, I guess I'll just like to see you more active. I thank you for your support with Audio Wikinews, and of course invite you back. terinjokes | Talk | Come visit the WikiBistro 04:32, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose This user is too new. You should not want to be an admin just to edit the main page, etc. We already have enough admins who can, and will, edit the main page, etc. This user needs more experience on Wikinews. This is just WAY too soon. —FellowWikiNews (W) 16:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

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

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

[edit] User:Thunderhead

This RfA has ended. I am awaiting administrator / bureaucrat confirmation.

I think it's time for Thunderhead to join the admin team now. To boost everyone's memory: Thunderhead already requested adminship twice (see Wikinews:Administrators/Archive). Since then he has written more stories, such as NYC students attempt to revive stoop culture and Wikinews interviews Florence Devouard, chair of the Wikimedia Foundation, but he also does gnome edits. He has experience on Wikia and a game wiki as an admin. Thunderhead definitely has humor, I can't remember him being negative anywhere.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 14:29, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Do you accept? Sure! --Thunderhead - (talk) 23:04, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Questions

1. What is the meaning of life?

The meaning of life? 42. --Thunderhead - (talk) 03:21, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Wrong! Clearly that is the meaning of life, the universe, and everything is 42 (google calculator never lies), However just life in itself is a much different thing. Bawolff ☺☻ 05:09, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I always thought that was funny how Google did that. Just life in itself, eh? To serve Jimbo Wales, master of the Cabal...

--Thunderhead - (talk) 05:12, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

The second commandment - "Thou shalt have no other benevolent dictators before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee a graven image of sysops." — meta:Ten Commandments. Bawolff ☺☻ 05:18, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Votes:

Comment please accept, I think you've done enough now to earn the community's trust whereas before you may not have. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 16:50, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

• Support --Brian McNeil / ^talk 08:46, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support Thunderhead would make a great admin! After all, this is his third nom. —FellowWikiNews (W) (sign here!) 20:45, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support. Fully engaged with community goings-on. -Edbrown05 09:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support as nominator.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 10:47, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support - Dedicated community member. ★MESSEDROCKER★ 11:51, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support - I've only been here a short time but i have noticed your edits - all very good!!--Markie 22:24, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support supported last time, and I still support. Bawolff ☺☻ 23:06, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support last time I didn't support, because I said I would support in February on your test. Well, with only hours remaining, I'm full-filling my promise :P terinjokes | Talk | Come visit the WikiBistro 23:45, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Hours remaining? I thought RfA's lasted for seven days? --Thunderhead - (talk) 23:47, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

They do :) --Cspurrier 01:41, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Good, thought I was going senile. --Thunderhead - (talk) 01:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Hours remaining in Feburary |||terinjokes | Talk 11:17, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

• Support I had a few doubts before, but I think Thunderhead is now ready to be an admin.--Cspurrier 01:42, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
• Comment I thought only other admins could vote here. At least two voters are not admins (according to the latest list [8]) --SVTCobra 02:06, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Anyone can vote (though technically if you have less the 100 edits or have been registered less then month, your vote does not count for much)--Cspurrier 02:12, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Yep, anyone can vote, except if you're very new, or a sock, or if you're blocked. Bawolff ☺☻ 03:08, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, OK, well I guess that the 'common people' could vote in someone. It is not like a country club. Which is good. I will still refrain from voting.--SVTCobra 03:28, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Yep, TINC. Bawolff ☺☻ 04:08, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

TINC - thats what you think :) Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 18:53, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Unless they want you to think, that's what you think! Bawolff ☺☻ 05:00, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

But if they want us to think what they want us to think which is what we are supposed to think, then doesn't that mean there is a cabal? --Thunderhead - (talk) 05:06, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

sshhh!, you're confusing the cabal's tiny little head. Bawolff ☺☻ 05:13, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Although Meta has a confirmation process in which only administrators can vote. --Thunderhead - (talk) 02:50, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

• Support hell yes Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 18:53, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
• Support DragonFire1024 18:57, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
• Support Jacques Divol 13:42, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

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

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

[edit] User:Markie

I'd like to nominate Mark for Adminship. He has been a great editor for the last three months, and I think he could be trusted with the tools -if he wishes to. You can consult his edit profile here: Interiot. Ever since his first edit, he has demonstrated random acts of kindness. Like his user page says, he doesn't write that much articles (examples are Snow causes disruption in UK and (started) Colts win Super Bowl XLI), but he corrects, moves and uploads with good edit summary usage and a minimal amount of swearing. He also seems to be a double redirect fixing freak with email enabled. So, what more could we ask for? --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 13:15, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

• Nominee, do you accept?

• Yes sorry i have and will be away for another 2 days (sorry need a rest sometimes) but will be back and raring to go soon. Thanks for this and all the nice comments and sorry for the late reply. Thanks and YES.--MarkTalk 10:36, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Votes

• Support as nominator.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 13:15, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
• Support - if user accepts. Markie just keeps popping up in RC doing wikignome tasks; I think its time he had tools to take on vandals and do other work that may need the magic buttons. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 13:55, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
• Support - assuming acceptance. No reason to not grant adminship, good user who gets on with the Jobs We Hate^tm --Skenmy^{(t•c•w•i)} 15:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
• Support —FellowWikiNewsie 15:23, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
• Support--Cspurrier 15:41, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
• Support Changing to Support. See my user page for details.  Thunderhead  ►  08:16, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Support - if user accepts. Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 22:11, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
• wondering when he would show up here. support. Bawolff ☺☻ 22:55, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
• Support IF user accepts.DragonFire1024 08:19, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

By the way, what happens if the user doesn't accept by the 6th?  Thunderhead  ►  08:20, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I would assume we wait until he says yes or no. Bawolff ☺☻ 08:43, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Email sent. —FellowWikiNewsie 17:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Trying to run away from his adminship...Maybe he's holding out for a motorcycle. Well the mansion is cool and all, but the car is a bit outdated. No one wants to drive arround in a car, when they can be cruising along in a motorcycle. Bawolff ☺☻ 23:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

• Support (just passing and enter as light was on, i am so busy :( ) Jacques Divol 18:08, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support my one encounter with Mark was pleasant and produtive --SVTCobra 22:46, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support Modesty is a good admin trait. --+Deprifry+ 08:30, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Comment Markie's RFA is finished. Shouldn't a b'crat come to give him his special powers? —FellowWikiNewsie 17:49, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

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

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

[edit] User:Dark Squall

Our cadre of sports contributors is starting to run up against limits like our archiving policy. Dark Squall was the first to sign up on the Sports contributors page and has nearly 1,000 edits. I think he'd be a good addition to the Cabal admin team. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 10:09, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

• of course i will accept! thank you for the consideration. I look forward to hearing your votes/opinions.—Dark_Squall 20:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Questions

I see that this is normally commonplace on RFA's, so if anyone one has any i would be happy to oblidge. —Dark_Squall 04:30, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Are you going to be open to recall?--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 15:29, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Definately, from what i understand this is in case other editors in good standing believe i am not doing a good job as an administrator, and it would only be fair to be open to this. —Dark_Squall 13:56, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Votes

As a note, this RFA has closed. Do not add any more votes.

• Support - if user accepts. How can I say no, one good user. Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 10:13, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support - In my opinion, we have enough administators, but many are still inactive. My apologies for opposing in the beginning.  Thunderhead  ►  19:14, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support as nominator now candidate has accepted. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 20:33, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support - I haven't been here very long, but Dark Squall left me feedback on my first few articles, helped me improve them, and got me involved in the community. He's got my support. :) —Zachary ^talk 11:07, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support - Yup very good sports writer and think he would also make a good admin. --MarkTalk 20:52, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support - Seems like a good user. We are not in chronic shortage of admins but I think he could use the tools well. --Skenmy^{(t•c•w•i)} 21:27, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose I see that Dark Squall is all around a good user, but I need to oppose for now. I'd like to see this user edit more main space and show more edits on community discussion pages. Like other users have said, we are not really lacking admins. I would probably support in the future though. —FellowWikiNewsie 22:50, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Why Oppose? Wikinews has never set a high bar for admission to the admin club. Sure, we jest about there being a Cabal, but being open to new administrators dispels that myth. Those of us already "in the club" have an interest in more mainstream news which keeps you editing in main namespace. Sports is different, there's lots of tables and statistics involved. Keeping the sports portal relevant involves what you might see as wikignome work, but so is putting up infoboxes for every country on the planet. I'd rather see the user challenged to answer some questions if you're concerned about his political views or the length of his edit history. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 23:29, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Well Said Brian. Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 05:22, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

• Support - a note to the side; I was supported fully in my RfA and I all I was doing was NZ articles. --Nzgabriel | Talk 00:07, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support DragonFire1024 06:55, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support I hope the system of statistical organization brought by sports people (thinking Zachary) can be applied here to other news categories. -Edbrown05 10:53, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

• Depends on what needs to be done, Edbrown. I could essentially write a script to do anything (except walk the dog ;)). —Zachary ^talk 11:27, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't think we have anything automated creating the various day articles, I'll try and figure out a list of menial tasks on the water cooler, which once set up should perhaps be moved to the toolserver. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 11:49, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

• support Bawolff ☺☻ 19:30, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support--Cspurrier 15:40, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

• Support - I'll tell you what, I've only been here a few months, but Dark Squall's coverage of the Cricket World Cup is pretty good, for how many games there are. Squall's always doing good in the Sports section. I'll support Squall's nomination for administrator. --wjmoore 15:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I really appreciate the support, but i do not do cricket, in fact, i've only been reading the cricket articles in order to learn how the game works. I'm the football (soccer) guy, i hope this does not alter your feelings, but if it does, so be it. I believe it is Shyam who works diligently on the cricket, and he does an amazing job.—Dark_Squall 02:41, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, my bad. I got that mixed up. Soccer/football is what I meant. I get them mixed up because there are always a ton of new articles from each in the sports portal. Still, my vote remains the same. --wjmoore 03:12, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

• Support.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 15:29, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support in the nick of time. –Doldrums(talk) 20:59, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

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

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

[edit] Zachary

I would like to nominate Zachary.‎ I think his edits over the past month have demonstrated a dedication to the project and a good understanding of the goals. He is a valuable member of the community and I feel he would be a valuable addition to our administration team Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 11:20, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I accept! Thanks Brian and everyone else who has supported me! :) —Zachary ^talk 11:46, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

• Support as nominator, now candidate has accepted. Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 11:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support, user is already running up against limits that adminship would get round. Has, albeit being here for less than a month, already racked up a good count of edits - all good-faith contributions. I'm happy to say this user has gained my trust, and support for adminship. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 11:56, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support-, Good user with great skill in sports writing. I would be more than happy to administrate sports with him. —Dark_Squall 21:57, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose as per SVT's reasons, wow... it took me three times to get adminship. Course, I'm impatient (self-nomed self)  Thunderhead  ►  22:08, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

You're young and impatient. :) I can't comment on the age of our current candidates, but I'd hope you agree with me in saying that these people have earned the community's trust. We should always be open to new contributors and welcome them into the admin team. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 22:36, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. I'm actually the youngest administrator on any Wikimedia project :)  Thunderhead  ►  23:43, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Interesting, I would be very surprised, how old are you ;)

And I believe, personally, just because you had 3 RfA's, is not a good reason to oppose, I believe the community would be interested in this case, why you use your right to oppose.

I also lost my first wikinews RfA, and that was a selfnom, so... Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 08:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose - I have nothing bad to say about Zachary, but a rubber stamp for someone who has only contributed on a regular basis since April 2 (just over a week) is not cool. There are less than 500 edits and not one of these edits have been a new article. Sorry, Zach, --SVTCobra 23:56, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Well yes that true, but if you look at admin history, we should not be giving out admimship as every (or nearly every) admin's article count has gone down, and in many cases died after receiving adminship. Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 08:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, but still only less than 10 days here. My comment on no articles may have been in error. I looked at Zachary contribs and saw no edits with the bold "N" indicating new page. But now I think that only works on the recent changes page. Is that true? --SVTCobra 12:52, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

• There are some irregularities in the editing of this section, and I do not see them as being in good faith. Would those who have edited the votes of others care to explain themselves? --00:24, 11 April 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Brianmc (talk • contribs) 00:24, 11 April 2007

I think it has been squared away. I have been in contact with both Thunderhead and Dark Squall. Thunder accidentally changed Dark Squall's vote when meant to change own. --SVTCobra 00:39, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Exactly. Dark Squall's vote (directly above my own) was accidentally edited when I meant to change my own support to an oppose.  Thunderhead  ►  00:42, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, i'll just post to note that the above statements are correct, it was just a mistake. —Dark_Squall 01:31, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

No need to apologize, SVT, but I have to ask what you mean by "not one of these edits have been a new article"? I have actually written a few articles, though not necessarily international news stories, they are articles. —Zachary ^talk 09:12, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I looked at Zachary contribs and saw no edits with the bold "N" indicating new page. But now I think that only works on the recent changes page. Is that true? --SVTCobra 12:52, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I never noticed before, but now that you mention it, it appears that this is the case. It seems as though the only way to see pages created by a particular user is to go to Special:Newpages and enter the username. —Zachary ^talk 14:54, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

• Support. I took a shot at this user and the person never flinched. -Edbrown05 04:34, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
• OpposeHis first edit was less then a month ago. If he keeps up with what he has been doing I have no doubt he will receive adminship soon, but he is a bit too new right now. --Cspurrier 15:39, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Define to new, I have seen less qualified users receive adminship Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 02:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose Keep on editing and work your way up to adminship. Don't rush... —FellowWikiNewsie 19:32, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
• abstain sorry, not at this time. You're on the right track though. Bawolff ☺☻ 22:42, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
• Neutral A good user I can see doing brilliant things. But the user is very new - take some time before ladening yourself with admin tasks. --Skenmy^{(t•c•w•i)} 20:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support, looks trustworthy.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 15:22, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support DragonFire1024 18:21, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

• Comment I've not tallied the votes on this, but I would like some of those who've voted oppose to reconsider their position before the vote closes. Failing that, will one of those who opposes take it upon themselves to re-nominate in a month or so? I trust Zachary to continue his good contributions and win over the doubters. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 07:48, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

• I still say "too new." What is the rush/need for Zach to be an admin? If you can demonstrate a reason, then maybe I'll reconsider. I contribute a fair amount and for longer than Zach, but I don't think admin would make my existence here much greater. Sure I could delete some spam instead of just tagging it speedy. Is Zach desperate to do some arduous archiving? --SVTCobra 23:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
• With all due respect, I still think two months is a little short, if he doesn't have a specific reason why he wants to be an admin. If there is a specific thing he wants admin buttons for then it'd be a different story. Bawolff ☺☻ 00:36, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Zachary has already set up two bots - one of which would require admin permission to go through archived pages, and also protect pages such as Category:April 1, 2007. I am not comfortable granting a bot admin status unless the owner already has that status. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 07:59, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose Per Craig and Cobra. He is to new, I mean there were 4 edits in March and he's been on a non-stop editing rampage since April 2nd, but he's still too new. I waited a few months before I applied for adminship here. Re-apply in a month or two I say. --TUFKAAP 00:07, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

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

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

[edit] TUFKAAP

So, I've recently become active again and I feel I haven't been living up to my administrative duties plus we have alot more new users since I dropped off the radar to cool my heels and I want to see what they think of me. ;) --TUFKAAP 00:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• Support TUFKAAP staying an admin. DragonFire1024 00:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Neutral Great user when I've seen him around.  Thunderhead  ►  00:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support: the under review policy proposal is for people who have left planet wiki -Edbrown05 01:16, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

"planet wiki", I like that terminology :) -Edbrown05 01:39, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps that's why the blog aggregator (sp) is called Planet Wikimedia? Anyways Ed, you're Wikinews ' "Resident Witty one-liner speechwriter" ;) --TUFKAAP 03:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• Support - Once an admin, always an admin (unless you do something to get your privileges revoked). I oppose WN:IPOL. --SVTCobra 03:12, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Support votes mean to DE-ADMIN. See the top of this section. DragonFire1024 06:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

No it doesn't. This is the reconfirmation section.

• Support reconfirmation. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 07:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Supp. reconfirmation. –Doldrums(talk) 02:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support reconf., definitely has my trust and support.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 16:31, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support I joined after this user became admin and I see that he has not abused his admin privileges. I oppose WN:IPOL. —FellowWikiNewsie 17:25, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support reconfirmation.Jacques Divol 16:30, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support You have done nothing to warrant the removal of your privilages. --Skenmy^{(t•c•w•i)} 17:17, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
• support. Bawolff ☺☻ 19:24, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support Good User, I remember him well from my early times here. WN:IPOL would not apply in this case anyway. That reminds me, we better hurry up and get that good policy adopted. Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 00:33, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

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

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

[edit] Jcart1534

Jcart1534 has written up an impressive collection of articles in the two months the user has been on Wikinews, including Bacterial outbreak forces closure of Toronto hospital neo-natal unit written about a week after creating a Wikinews account, and Canadian inspectors to test food ingredients from China, the most recent.

i think the user knows news and wikinews policies well enough to be able to use the buttons. i'm happy to nominate Jcart1534 for adminship. –Doldrums(talk) 17:27, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Nominee, do you accept?

Yes, wholeheartedly. (feels like a wedding!) Jcart1534 21:48, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Questions

1. Are you going to put yourself in the Category:Admins open to recall?
2. What are your good and bad sides as a future admin?
3. What do you want to contribute with the admin buttons?

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:06, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Answers

1. Yes.
2. Good sides: patient, like to see balanced reporting, good editor. --> Bad sides: not so technical for things like javascript and IRC (but quick to learn)
3. I would like to keep on top of vandalism where I can. Jcart1534 21:48, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Votes

• Support (beat the nom.; normally I wait but user has accepted on talk page). Nominee's article list is impressive, and edits suggest that he knows what he's doing.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:06, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support Now, I can support!  Thunderhead  ►  22:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support Trustworthy user, has earned his tools. —FellowWikiNewsie 22:12, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support --Brian McNeil / ^talk 07:48, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support Helped finish my UVF article, that's good enough for me. --TUFKAAP 23:31, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support No reason for any other vote! --Skenmy^{(t•c•w•i)} 15:31, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

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

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

[edit] DragonFire1024

I was here then I wasn't...Now i am and I just want to see if I am still trusted as an Admin. Sometimes, I feel as though I am not. So I am doing this to confirm or deny my suspicians. DragonFire1024 09:10, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

• Absolute Support  Thunderhead  ►  09:57, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 12:02, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support —FellowWikiNewsie 14:06, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
• support When your you not here. I don't remember you taking any significantly long wikibreak since you started. Bawolff ☺☻ 22:04, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support --Nzgabriel | Talk 09:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC).
• Support --MarkTalk 09:41, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose This may seem radical and against popular opinion however I have seen Jason behave in a manner that I consider unbefitting of an admin (a member of the community who has been voted into a position of power and trust by the community members) over various topics, at one point declaring on IRC that "If [Wikinews] wants a rebellion, then you got one", or words to such an effect. This is completely unacceptable, in my opinion. I have witheld filing an RfDA purely because I do not have the time to source and cite the behaviour I have seen.
  Jason appears to not understand policies before becoming enraged over them (re: Image Licensing), and does not appear, to me, to have the best interests of the community as a whole at heart, rather wishing to push Wikinews in the direction he feels it needs to go. (reading: Wikinews talk:Image use policy/New Wikimedia resolution for image licensing) This is not the job of a sysop, and I do not feel that Jason understands what is expected of him as an administrator of the community - calm, rational behaviour that is in the interests of the community, not the individual.

--Skenmy^{(t•c•w•i)} 19:59, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Comment: I voice what I see will do great harm and damage to Wikinews. I never threatened revenge myself, I simply stated that other users might seek to do that. Also IRC statemnts are not supposed to be used as bait or whatnot in Wikis. There is a rule somewhere. I think fighting for something that will damage Wikinews greatly, is most definitely in "the best interest of Wikinews." Anyone who fights in a cause that could damage a project is IMO "acting in the best interest for wikinews", or whatever project they are on. DragonFire1024 05:47, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

There is no such rule. IRC may not be publically logged, however small, relevant quotes may be used in events such as this. --Skenmy^{(t•c•w•i)} 06:24, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

whats the idea behind banning logging anyways? I've never really understood why. All that is ever really written about it is that it is punishable by crushing by an elephant. Bawolff ☺☻ 06:27, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I have always understood it to be so that third parties (i.e. Daniel Brandt) cannot use the logs to their "advantage" - even though he has started taking his own logs of it. I'm not 100% sure myself. --Skenmy^{(t•c•w•i)} 06:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Whose he? DragonFire1024 06:37, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Main guy in wikipedia watch. He used to try to track down where varouis wikipedia admins live, and post that on the internet. His wikipedia article has more info. Bawolff ☺☻ 06:44, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Why'd he do that? DragonFire1024 06:46, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't know, I think he got mad at the wikipedia admins because they wouldn't let him edit his article or something. Perhaps he is just crazy. (I've read his site, I think that is a fair suggestion. for ref[9]) Bawolff ☺☻ 06:55, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Chiacomo can add detail IRC log use for Wikinews. -Edbrown05 06:49, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Private logging is allowed, but he or his bots havn't been there for a long time. Bawolff ☺☻ 06:55, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

• Support --User:Terinjokes proxied by Skenmy^{(t•c•w•i)} 21:01, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

terinjokes | Talk 00:46, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

• Support. Lots of admin tasks get performed by this user, and done well. Admins do and plz do sometimes express opinions, and maybe those expressed don't work out for them. Oh well, + he's a prodigious reporter. -Edbrown05 04:51, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support —Zachary ^talk 05:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support -- Not sure if you have to be an admin to vote, but I would support. Jcart1534 10:26, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

you don't need to be admin to vote. all users can. –Doldrums(talk) 11:59, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

• Support- Good User, Good Admin. Just remember, only use rollback as a result of vandalism. Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 04:55, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

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

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

This user now has near 1,500 edits and has been diligently dealing with vandalism, redirects, and the like since he joined nearly 2 months ago. I likely instigated his earlier candidacy through discussion with BNZ, and I think that with things like the bots he's set up he will make very effective use of the extra buttons and access available to admins. Just this morning I was busy making Karl Rove look bad by categorising all his articles, and Zachary was busy fighting off our "Journalist on Wheels". --Brian McNeil / ^talk 09:46, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Acceptance speech

Thank you, I accept. First I'd like to thank my mom and dad, without them I wouldn't be here. I also like to thank the Academy and I'd like to thank Santa Claus, and Jesus, and ---music plays--- wait I'm not done yet! ;) —Zachary ^talk 09:55, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comments/Questions

1. Without peaking, what is the capital of Somalia?--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:23, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Somalia City! —Zachary ^talk 23:22, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, so sorry. It is Mogadishu. But you can still stay alive by answering this question: Who is leading MLB in home-runs this season? --SVTCobra 01:25, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

It could be A-Rod still, but I have not checked lately. He did hit six in his first seven games. —Zachary ^talk 01:36, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Do I have to answer these in the form of a question? :) —Zachary ^talk 01:48, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

That is correct. A-Rod. Bonus Question: What other American athlete is also sometimes referred to as A-Rod? (sorry, I may be taking this joke too far) --SVTCobra 02:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I must admit that I learned this answer when looking up A-Rod on WP after answering your first Q, so I know that it's Andy Roddick. :P I'll yield to a different question though. —Zachary ^talk 02:31, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

• Comment:Zach's nom seems to be going well, so I'll add a point that's been in the back of my mind. His bot writing skills are a valuable attribute for the wiki. I suspect some of his bots could do a lot more for us if they could edit protected pages. I expect one of the things this user will do once he has the buttons is request the same for things like Calendarbot. This should be temporary adminship for one-off jobs and a time limit should be specified. On the other hand, a bot to protect pages like day/month categories would need indefinite access to the buttons. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 11:39, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Votes

• Support, provided candidate accepts. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 09:46, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• It's about time! Support  Thunderhead  ►  10:07, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Supp. –Doldrums(talk) 10:32, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support - Zach has certainly kept his nose to the grindstone in the past month since his first nomination. He also spends most of his time with Admin type of activities, so I think the additional powers will make him even more effective. --SVTCobra 15:47, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support--Cspurrier 16:07, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support --Skenmy^{(t•c•w•i)} 18:09, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support DragonFire1024 18:12, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:23, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support —FellowWikiNewsie 19:46, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support --Jcart1534 23:23, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support. trivia escapes me, Mickey Mantle for President. -Edbrown05 04:11, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support you'll get it this time :) Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 19:37, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support -Wpktsfs 20:38, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support -Blum 13:38, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support --Blivit 16:49, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support terinjokes | Talk 16:53, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support. Hégésippe | ±Θ± 17:05, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

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

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

has been active in Wikinews since August last year. he's written a diverse set of good quality articles (see user page). i find him helpful and well-informed about editorial matters in discussions. i'd trust him to use buttons fairly and well. –Doldrums(talk) 16:22, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I accept the nomination. It is an honor just to be nominated. As you can see by my activity here, I rededicated myself to the project in early March of this year. Most of you who have been active in the last few months, have probably run into me in one way or another. I hope it wasn't too unpleasant .

I see myself remaining active in providing content, editing other articles, while taking on administrative duties. I will not shirk things like archiving, but I would like to still have time to write. Thank you for your consideration. --SVTCobra 17:44, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comments/Questions

• Comment, I'd say stick to content and use the admin buttons when you need to. There are loads of admin jobs that improve the site but don't contribute content. We are more in need of contributors who write news articles than people like me who sit in the cheap seats and periodically do a spate of edits. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 17:56, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Without peaking: the Tamil Tigers are an opposition group in what country?--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:23, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Sri Lanka of course, I wrote several a few articles about them. They are the only rebel group in the world known to have both a navy and an airforce. Any other questions.--SVTCobra 19:26, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood? —Zachary ^talk 02:31, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I'll go with 700 pounds or approximately 320 kilograms. --SVTCobra 13:49, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

• Question: Who is the world's longest serving living monarch? --Brian McNeil / ^talk 11:26, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I believe it is Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, who is visiting the United States currently. But I may be mistaken. She is definitely the longest reigning monarch in Europe. --SVTCobra 13:49, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Yep, I was wrong. It is His Majesty King Bhumibol Adulyadej of Thailand. --SVTCobra 15:03, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

There was a clue in who asked the question. :-) --Brian McNeil / ^talk 20:08, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Votes

• Support. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 17:16, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support!! He wasn't an admin already!?! --Skenmy^{(t•c•w•i)} 18:09, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:23, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support —FellowWikiNewsie 19:49, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support --Very knowledgeable, productive, and helpful. --Jcart1534 23:26, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support Hardworking and helpful. —Zachary ^talk 23:31, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• support I've been waiting quite a while to see when you'd be nominated. Bawolff ☺☻ 02:32, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support -Edbrown05 04:11, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose per Davodd below Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 19:37, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support -Wpktsfs 20:39, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose - User tends to be too judgemental and agressive in jumping to conclusions without fully investigating less confrontational options. Not really an example of the wiki spirit; therefore not admin material. -- Davodd | Talk 03:07, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Not that you have to, but could you give an example of such behaviour?--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 06:57, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I trust this user to ask the opinion of the existing admin community as he learns the ropes in the role. Getting admin can change the way you look at the wiki, you become one of its caretakers. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 22:50, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

• Support Blum 13:39, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support --Blivit 16:54, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support. Hégésippe | ±Θ± 17:05, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

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

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

[edit] User:Brianmc

I'd like a reconfirmation prior to adding Category:Admins open to recall to my user page. Yes, I've been a slacker on the news front - but I'd like to think I still have the support of the community for the work I do do. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 17:59, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comments/Questions

As an elaboration [to my vote below], I see you primarily as a facilitator within Wikinews, doing the Jobs we Hate (tm). It's jobs like these that need doing, as much as writing the news. --Skenmy^{(t•c•w•i)} 18:06, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I didn't get admin on my first nomination and the community has - almost totally - changed since then. I started out with the "this is neat - and easier to find somewhere to 'play' than Wikipedia" approach and settled on researching Thailand and covering articles for there. I think I did a good job of covering the troubles in the south of the country until I discovered that there were huge administrative backlogs on some of those - as you say - Jobs We Hate (TM). Starting on the archiving process probably changed my focus on the wiki to how it can act as a historical archive - hence things like people categories. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 18:17, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Votes

• Support You have done nothing to warrant any removal of privilages. --Skenmy^{(t•c•w•i)} 18:05, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support DragonFire1024 18:11, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support --MarkTalk 18:15, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Supp. –Doldrums(talk) 18:34, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support. Couldn't do without you as a nearby colleague, it's nice to know that I'm not working totally isolated here in Belgium.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support —FellowWikiNewsie 19:50, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support - Brian is essential to Wikinews. --SVTCobra 19:52, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support 100% --Jcart1534 23:32, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose We cannot have good users as admins Strong Support :) Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 20:08, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Totally, absolutely, 110% Support —Zachary ^talk 23:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• support Bawolff ☺☻ 02:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support --Nzgabriel | Talk 03:25, 9 May 2007 (UTC).
• Support. Sometimes my love of disagreement gets the best of me. From that comes understanding. -Edbrown05 04:11, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support --Blivit 16:59, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support. Hégésippe | ±Θ± 17:03, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support, most certainly. Wikinews needs predominantly-janitors as well as predominantly-article-writers, especially those we can trust and who have a proven record like you. Daniel 06:21, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support off course Jacques Divol 17:19, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

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

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

An admin flag would greatly improve the functionality of this bot, by allowing it to protect calendar-related pages and categories, as well as giving it the ability to edit those that are already protected. —Zachary ^talk 22:19, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

• support —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bawolff (talk • contribs) 04:34, 27 May 2007
• Support --Brian McNeil / ^talk 08:30, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support since it has an emergancy block button  Thunderhead  ►  21:08, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support--MarkTalk 21:10, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
• Weak Support I want a report in a months time, showing if there has been any errors etc, if no major errors are detected, in can keep its flag Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 01:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
• Weak support if you check on your bot very often, make sure it doesn't have glitches like Craig's bot did.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 09:31, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support, however I'd like it to have a programmed shut-off function for administrators to enact (as far as I'm aware, administrator accounts can still use their buttons when blocked), just to be sure. If I'm wrong about being able to un/block, un/protect etc. whilst being blocked, ignore this and consider it a straight support :) Daniel 06:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Thats an interesting question, I know that admins can block/unblock people well blocked (wheel wars haven proven that quite well), but I'm not sure about deletions. Bawolff ☺☻ 05:22, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Nope, you can't alter protection or delete things well blocked, so as long as the bot doesn't become intelligent enough to unblock itself we should be fine. Bawolff ☺☻ 05:26, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

All righty, thanks for the note (you learn something every day!). Straight support, as promised :) Daniel 03:49, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

• Support No issues with a support here. Just keep a check on the bot and all will be fine! --Skenmy^{(t•c•w•i)} 15:03, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
• Support Since the operator is an admin, the bot should also have the same features. —FellowWiki Newsie 15:18, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
• neutral, i don't like that in fact. Jacques Divol 09:08, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

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

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

I was just prompted to look around for a bureaucrat to contact and noticed that we could perhaps do with some more bureaucrats. Of the four bureaucrats currently listed as active on this page we have Brian who has stated he is unlikely to be active for 6 months to a year, IlyaHaykinson who isn't terribly active, and Chiacomo who whilst has been reasonably active as late has a contributions history with large breaks. Also, of the three active bureaucrats listed as active (excluding Brian), all seem to reside in North America which means they are likely to be active at similar times of the day so any issues might not be dealt with as promptly as if we had a better spread of bureaucrats across timezones. On this basis, I consider my request to become a bureaucrat is justified and appropriate.

Whilst I have been editing Wikinews for a relatively short length of time since joining in early/mid 2007, I feel I quickly became a useful contributor and since becoming an administrator I think it would be reasonable to suggest that I'm amongst the more active admins. I'm also an admin on Wikimedia Commons and the English Wikipedia, and an OTRS volunteer, which has been useful both in terms of the experience it has given me and practically in dealing with issues which cross between the WMF projects. Whilst I've had numerous disagreements, I have at all times remained civil, and I'd suggest that not being afraid to speak up where I have concerns is a good characteristic of any user.

I have a good knowledge of the operation of bots on WMF projects and operate AdambroBot to update the weather map every hour which I think puts me in a good position to, if I become a bureaucrat, review requests for bot flags.

I'd invite everyone to assess my request and welcome comments or questions. Thank you for your time. Adambro 19:44, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Questions

• You claim that it would be better to have an even spread of B'crats across time zones to provide a prompt response, what would this be to as theres is rarely anything that requires quick responses from b'crats. (i'm stuggling to think of anything)
• Why do you feel that your contribution to other project (such as commons etc) has any relevance here?
  • Do you feel that these contributions should be considered to show relation to this project with respect to your low (comparitive) edit count and time spent here?

--MarkTalk to me 10:14, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

• On your first point, I would accept that there is unlikely to be the same urgency to deal with any issues as there would be in respect of admin rights but I still feel it is in the interests of the community that our bureaucrats are, not only in different time zones to enable requests to receive a more timely response, but also to better reflect the mix of different cultures from which the Wikinews community draws its contributors.

• With reference to your second question, I feel very strongly that experience gained on other WMF projects is beneficial to me and the community and also feel that this should be taken into consideration with respect to my relatively short length of time participating in this project. When I started contributing here, I was already very familiar with how WMF projects work and their common policies, and as a result was able to quickly establish myself on the project needing only to take time to understand the variations in policies and the unique aspects of the Wikinews project whereby it differs from other WMF projects. Adambro 17:30, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Comments and votes

• Neutral. I agree that we need another active Bureaucrat for when User:Brian is less active, and possibly someone from another time zone. I think you have an excellent admin record, your contributions have been valuable and copious and your adminship on other wikis and your OTRS work are a real plus. However, I feel that there are more suitable candidates on the site who are still very active but have been around for a lot longer. The only thing holding me back is that I feel that you are still relatively new for Bureaucratship; I would personally expect something like 2 years of experience. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 22:01, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
• Neutral. Same reason as Steven, no reasons to oppose, just too new. Thunderhead - (talk - email - contributions) 22:58, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
• Comment As I've noted, I appreciate I haven't been active here for terribly long but I've been involved in WMF projects since mid 2004 which I feel makes up for this. I may be relatively new here but I've been able to rapidly turn myself into a valuable contributor because of my familiarity with WMF projects, their policies and their conventions. Adambro 23:05, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
• Neutral. Nothing against your qualifications, Adambro, but I feel that for this position there are some longer-tenured admins that I would like to see given consideration. --Jcart1534 01:36, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose Appears to have strongly held opinions on process. Plus bureaucrats do almost nothing, they don't need to be active. Nyarlathotep 11:29, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

  Nyarlathotep, can you explain what you mean by "strongly held opinions on process"? What opinions might he have? Can you show us examples of what you mean? --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 12:12, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

  I'd also invite Nyarlathotep to clarify his point. Of course I have opinions but before I express an opinion I make sure that I'll be prepared to stand by it. Are bureaucrats expected to have no opinions or immediately withdraw their opinion when any opposition to that is made? I don't consider having strong opinions a bad thing but more importantly, I don't believe I've ever let my opinions negative impact on my actions as an admin. Adambro 12:45, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose —FellowWiki Newsie 18:14, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose It's not a bad thing that potential bureaucrats have strong opinions. It is, however, a bad thing when said potential bureaucrat can be seen as combative when expressing those opinions. So, for me? I'm good, but thanks. TheCustomOfLife 04:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

  Okay, fair enough. I appreciate that this request is going to fail anyway now but I would like to make the most constructive use of the comments I've received. In particular, I'd ask TheCustomOfLife to expand on his point that I could be seen as combative in my approach to some discussions, could you point to some examples where I should have taken a different approach. Adambro 07:24, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose There is a world of difference between having a strongly held opinion which you assert and having a strongly held opinion which you use as a basis for persuading other users to see an issue from your side. I don't expect Adambro would have misused the buttons, but the community has shown little eagerness to give him the dust-buster as well as the mop. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 16:37, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

  Could you explain what you mean by your first sentence, I don't understand. Thanks. Adambro 17:56, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I mean what I say, although to put it more bluntly I could say you stake out a position then invite others to challenge it. This is a somewhat confrontational approach although I can understand it might not seem so when you are confident of the foundations for your belief. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 18:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

• Neutral per Steven, Brian. --Skenmy^{(t•c•w•i)} 17:21, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
• Support Adambro would make a fine Bureaucrat. His particular proclivities, to which some have objected, are actually valuable in this position. Bureaucrat is a pretty simple job and those entrusted with it should follow the rules, for which Adambro is a stickler. This is not a job for someone is trying to be bold and it doesn't carry the more sweeping powers, with which Stewards are entrusted. --SVTCobra 00:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

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

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

[edit] Markie

Markie is experienced and a regular contributer. I'm not going to write a long description because all of you have seen his excellent contributions. --Anonymous101 (talk · contribs) 17:08, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Questions/Comments

Do you accept this nomination? --Anonymous101 (talk · contribs) 17:08, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

of course :-) --MarkTalk to me 17:18, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Markie was previously an administrator who asked this his rights be removed[10], why was this the case and what is to say we're not going to find ourselves in this same position in the future? Adambro - (talk) 20:05, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

i requested the removal of my sysop flag after this event (the comments tab stuff). the reason i requested removal was because i felt that i had let the community down by doing something that had affected many users. the aftermath of this, shown on AAA, was not at all good, and further re-iterated the point to myself that what i had done was wrong. therefore i decided to ask for the permissions to be removed, kinda like a recall vote, but decided this on my own.

i would like to think that i have learnt from this, and in the future try to avoid making errors of judgements in the same way, such as editing things which will affect many users if i am not 101% sure i can fix any breakages. also i would like to think that i could, now i know the community more, accept the fact that i have broken/done something wrong and just move on from it. --MarkTalk to me 23:26, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

What is the average wing velocity of an unladen swallow? --TUFKAAP - (talk) 10:09, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

hmmm, wikilinker says " Error with your calculation.", however we can conclude that you should navigate your way to http://www.style.org/unladenswallow/ for a very thorough answer :-p --MarkTalk to me 12:26, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Votes

• Support --Anonymous101 (talk · contribs) 17:08, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support - I swear I thought he was an admin already. This wiki is sending me crazy. --Skenmy^(t•c•w) 17:26, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

i was, remember?? :-p --MarkTalk to me 17:31, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

• Support Adambro - (talk) 17:28, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 17:53, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support ~Planoneck~ 18:00, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support obviously. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 18:29, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support Could have sworn he was an admin. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 18:35, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

  He was. Adambro - (talk) 20:06, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

• Support. --Jcart1534 - (talk) 23:03, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support ... hoping you will make good use of categories ... --SVTCobra 23:54, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

heheh :-) --MarkTalk to me 16:32, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

• Support Jacques Divol - (talk) 07:36, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support --Brian McNeil / ^talk 07:50, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
• Thupport™ --Thunderhead - (talk - email - contributions) 09:49, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support --Cometstyles 10:40, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support --David Shankbone - (talk) 18:56, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support --Cspurrier - (talk) 19:46, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support --TUFKAAP - (talk) 10:10, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support would've qualified for speedy re-instatement, as you were a previous admin who asked to be de-sysoped. (→Zachary) 22:22, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

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

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

[edit] Planoneck

Hope it's not too arrogant of me, but I'ma go ahead and request adminship. I figure the worst that could happen is to be rejected and go back to doing the same stuff I've always been doing. Then maybe I can even improve myself and make my editing not suck as bad, so that I won't be rejected the next time.

The thing is, I'm more interested in creating articles than the technical stuff that admins usually do. But if I become an admin, I'll probably find myself doing more of the technical stuff, since I'll have access to more tools. Maybe I'll even find time to (gasp) participate in a community discussion!

So give me your honest opinion, and don't be afraid to tell me I suck. Believe me, I'm used to it. ;) ~Planoneck~ 02:20, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Questions/Comments

• Why do you need the tools? What admin tasks will you help with?

When I'm not writing articles, I usually watch recent changes, looking out for vandalism and the like. I can revert most vandalism, but sometimes it takes an admin a couple of minutes or longer to notice a vandal page and delete it. That's the kinda stuff I want to help out with. I might also be involved with archiving, if it happens to be a slow news day. Oh, and being able to make requested edits to protected articles would be pretty cool. ~Planoneck~ 00:29, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

• Will you put yourself Category:Admins open to recall?

Sure, I guess. Just in case I do suck as an admin. ~Planoneck~ 00:29, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

• What do you think should be the minimum age for admins?

I don't think there should be a minimum age. If someone is trusted by other users and they have made good edits, their age shouldn't matter. Of course, I may be just a tiny bit biased... ;) ~Planoneck~ 00:29, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

• What is your greatest personal weakness with regards to adminship? And your greatest strength? --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 23:02, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

My greatest weakness would have to be my age. No matter how nerdy and wiki-oriented I may be, I'm still a teenager, and teenagers by definition do stupid things. Hopefully I won't do anything too stupid. My greatest strength is my life - or rather, my lack thereof. This means that I have a bunch of time to waste on wiki stuff. Expect this to change next year when I enter high school, and I have to suffer the self-imposed workload of too many Advanced Placement classes. I'll probably still find time to edit at 3:00 in the morning, though. Don't worry about me. ~Planoneck~ 00:29, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Votes

• Support. And I assume by "suck" you mean having the ability to assemble a portfolio with dozens of extremely well-researched and well-written articles such as you have? :) --Jcart1534 - (talk) 21:55, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support, was waiting to nominate you, excellent user! --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 23:02, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support, absolutley! Glad to see that you've nominated yourself. Thunderhead - (talk - email - contributions) 19:52, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support I can't imagine you doing anything stupid. Be more self confident! For "suck" read "kick ass". Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 20:48, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support --David Shankbone - (talk) 01:45, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 01:51, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support - as far as your worries about the AP courses, I'll say that in my experience (admittedly many years ago), they are less repetitive (thus more interesting) and fewer people will try to copy your test answers. That's the main difference. --SVTCobra 01:58, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support --Anonymous101 (talk · contribs) 16:58, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support leaning towards oppose because you make me feel old. --Skenmy^(t•c•w) 17:26, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support Adambro - (talk) 17:29, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support Well, whaddya know? Reverse psychology really does work. :-P --Brian McNeil / ^talk 18:08, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support Jacques Divol - (talk) 07:37, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

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