Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Administrator/Ironiridis 1

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a withdrawn request for adminship.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

User:ironiridis

Ironiridis edits have established that he/she has an enthusiasm to wikinews and a good acceptance of the goals. I think he/she would be an asset to the community by been an admin. Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 01:44, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I skeptically accept, with much appreciation. irid:t 01:49, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am withdrawing my nomination pending a 15 day waiting period to satisfy existing policy of a 30 day waiting period from account creation. Thank you for your support and criticism. irid:t 05:24, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Great work. --MrMiscellanious (talk) – 19:46, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hesitantly support - I think s/he's a great editor, however s/he's just been here for a total of 17 days as of this writing. (started mar 2, todays mar 19 - 234 edits). However s/he definitly knows policy, so I'm unsure. Then again acording to his/her user page s/he was an IP for a little while. Bawolff ☺☻ 22:26, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment "He". ;) As a clarification, I have been around for a long time anonymously, however, that is largely unprovable and shouldn't count specifically towards my nomination. For the purposes of this discussion, perhaps it is best to focus only on my actions and experience for the last 17 days. irid:t 22:31, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On the other hand, 234 edits in the first 17 days is quite an acomplishment. Bawolff ☺☻

00:02, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Doldrums 05:02, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. It's a helluva lot easier to get them in than it is to get them out. I'm not voting for anybody who has been here less than a month. Neutralizer 05:12, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The guidelines (above) indicate that you must have been here a month. This is no barrier to an RfA, I don't think, but, were I a bureaucrat, I wouldn't actually create this user an Administrator until xe's been here a month. --Chiacomo ^(talk) 05:16, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The guidelines state that you're ~~eligible~~ probably eligible if you meet that criteria, not that you're ineligible if you don't. ;) irid:t 05:18, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment; now I'm more content with my vote. The last thing we need is another admin. who breaks the spirit of policies and then argues some technical pseudo-legalize to justify the breech. Neutralizer 05:28, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neutralizer, the spirit of the guidelines is that they aren't concrete. They are worded specifically to be vauge, not to be an endless string of "except" "otherwise" "unless" nonsense. They are left to interpretation, and you are free to interpret. I am not here te break the spirit of the policies. See above; if what you are implying is true, then the policies should have been worded "No user with an account with fewer than 30 days of age shall be allowed Administrator nominations", because that is the "spirit" you're inserting into it. irid:t 05:33, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved the discussion portion of this over here. irid:t 06:04, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I can neither support this user's administratorship (due to the thirty day guideline) but I can also not deny the request due to their work on the site. Having looked at their mainspace edit history they have been tagging articles, fixing mistakes, etc - something that would be valuable to the administration team. If the same request is made when the time has passed I will have no hesitation to support it - Cartman02au (Talk)(AU Portal) 11:33, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Less then 30 days is much to short, however Ironiridis seems to understand the guidelines and policies fairly well. --Cspurrier 15:55, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Has done some good work and has made a lot of good edits. Good grasp of the NPOV Policey and seems to know a good deal amount about policy. Jason Safoutin 16:02, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose While I like what I have seen of Ironiridis so far, it does not strike me as that extraordinary that I would not want to observe the user for a little longer. What's the rush anyway? --vonbergm 05:15, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment You know, I agree. Can I withdraw for a period of 15 days or so? irid:t 05:18, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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.