Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Administrator/RossKoepke
From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.
I was opposed to becoming an admin because I didn't want to deal with all the political crap. However, a 45-minute long A-s P-s vandal attack at 3:30 in the morning changed my ideas on that. Thanks to Bo_Bluxo for that one. Anyways, we need more admins to fight vandals, especially at late night when most/all admins are gone, and there's no one to ban them. --RossKoepkeTalk 07:39, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Support --Dejan Čabrilo 07:54, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Support I'm not so much involved and normarlly only browsing, but RossKoepke seems to be a good candidate at my glance. And his fight agaisnt Blaxo in this day was really admirable. [Night, hmmm, it is just evening for me. You would like to recruit more Oceania/East Asia Wikinewsies...] --Aphaia 07:57, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. While we need admins for vandal fighting, we cannot forget the power of the privileges adminship bestows. Ross, for me, has not yet demonstrated that he fully understands, supports, and upholds our site policies, which any admin must. Dan100 (Talk) 12:20, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]- You know, it's not important whether it's me or someone else, but we do need an admin who we'll be able to contact in the "off-hours". I fully accept your opposal, but it would be a great help if you found someone who met your criteria who was around in the off-hours ;-) --RossKoepkeTalk 15:36, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- We already have 24 hour coverage. We need admins who have a track record of upholding the policy of NPOV, not winners of popularity contests. If you feel you have defended the NPOV at some point and I've just missed it, please tell me! Dan100 (Talk) 12:30, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- You know, it's not important whether it's me or someone else, but we do need an admin who we'll be able to contact in the "off-hours". I fully accept your opposal, but it would be a great help if you found someone who met your criteria who was around in the off-hours ;-) --RossKoepkeTalk 15:36, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Sorry Ross, I completely trust you and all, but knowing the rules and powers are extremely necessary for adminship. Admins have serious responsibilities, and I really don't think you are ready for it, or even want the responsibilities, from what I've heard. I like your proposition about a late-night-US-time or far-away-timezone admin, but they have to be trusted, know the rules, and want to be an admin. Ross, you are a great asset to Wikinews. -- NGerda 16:21, July 18, 2005 (UTC)
- Comment: Before CraigSpurier voted, he asked me an extremely important question that I think I need to answer for everyone. He asked me "Ross, before I vote, what do you belive admins are for?". Without hesitation I gave him this response: "Admins are around to fulfill multiple roles. Primary of which is acting as a tool for the community to enforce their consensus generated rules. In addition, they're here to provide extra guidance to new users; but mainly admins are a tool of the community. Basically Wiki's are based on government by consent of the governed - the community makes rules through consensus, and in doing so, give their consent to admins to enforce their rules. Sometimes I feel the USA has moved away from government by consent of the governed, and more towards a government by consent of the elite. This is something that would destroy WikiNews. Wikis aren't meant to be governed by admins. Admins are simply here to be used by the community as whatever tool is needed, be it a mop for cleaning, shredder for sensitive documents, or handcuffs for those who break the rules enacted by the community". I just want to be what the community needs - which a few nights ago, was a pair of handcuffs for one rogue member of our society. --RossKoepkeTalk 03:01, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. -- NGerda 01:51, July 23, 2005 (UTC)
- Support. I witnessed and assisted to some extent the vandal attacks last evening and the night before that. An admin can block the persistance of the attacks. That is the reason given RossKoepke. I support that. -Edbrown05 17:33, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. This guy's a leader and will lead.No matter what happens with this vote. Paulrevere2005 19:49, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. --Mrmiscellanious 13:27, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. An active, very helpful user, will make a great admin --Cspurrier 02:48, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. As Craig said, very active and very helpful. I think he deserves it. --TUFKAAP 04:35, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. We need more admins around here and RossKoepke seems like a perfect canidate for the job.--Ryan524 20:08, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Ross has provided me with a series of links that demonstrate both an understanding of the NPOV and effort to keep articles properly referenced. This is the kind of person we need as admins. (There's a lesson for me and maybe others too here: I should have asked Ross for evidence before voting, but it would not harm future nominees if they pro-actively provided links.) Dan100 (Talk) 22:07, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Support --Chiacomo (talk) 03:38, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.