Wikibooks:Requests for permissions/Archive 1

From Wikibooks, the open-content textbooks collection

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

[edit] Requests for adminship

User:Taoster For some reason, my request was purged (most likely in error). --Taoster

User:Karen Johnson Can I put in a request please? I'd like to have admin rights here so I can fix up my own boneheaded naming-mistakes in the cookbook instead of leaving a mess for other people to clean up... I haven't broken the en:wikipedia yet and I've been an admin there for a long time :) KJ 07:46, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Support Dysprosia 08:08, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Support Gentgeen 09:28, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)
TUF-KAT 15:13, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Perl 17:24, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Karen should be an admin on this wiki now. --mav 03:40, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

[edit] User:Fleminra (1/0)

please. Perl 23:31, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Support:

  1. Perl

Guanaco — I would like to help keep the Wikibooks project free of spam and other garbage. I have been a sysop on the English Wikipedia since May 15. I also am working on images, and the ability to delete exact duplicates would be very helpful.

Support TUF-KAT 08:22, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
User now a sysop. TUF-KAT

User:Furrykef -- I may be a bit late on jumping on the Wikibooks bandwagon, but I have confidence that I know what I'm doing. :) I'm a sysop (and currently primary creator of content) at PTWiki, and a regular user and editor of Wikipedia (I haven't requested adminship there because I felt I don't really need it).

Support TUF-KAT 06:55, 31 May 2004 (UTC)
User now a sysop. TUF-KAT

Reytan - I would be the first Polish sysop on Wikibooks and sysops's opportunities are very useful (I'm a sysop on Polish Wikipedia) (sorry for my English)

Support. --Furrykef 19:38, 30 May 2004 (UTC)
Support TUF-KAT 06:55, 31 May 2004 (UTC)
User now a sysop. TUF-KAT

[edit] AlbertCahalan ( talk | email | contribs )

I'd like to delete things according to exception 1 (No meaningful content or history) and 4 (Very short pages with no definition or context). For example, a page goes in with the wrong name and is immediately renamed, leaving behing a redirect like Coobkook:Barbecueing is. (look closely; there is a typo) Another example would be dead categories... the cookbook has a way of collecting cruft. AlbertCahalan 05:38, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Note that, despite the above, I am clearly not a deletionist. Just the opposite: I have an additional need to see deleted pages; pages with real content sometimes disappear (in clear violation of policy) without even a vote. For some strange reason, admin rights are required for this. AlbertCahalan 23:53, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
For the record for this discussion: Perhaps you can let us know that you wouldn't persue an "anti-deletionist" agenda in the event you are granted admin rights? For example, the process does allow for some entries to deleted (in addition, the deletion process can expand, and has been expanded in the past, in order to exclude entries that do not belong on wikibooks). Would you be willing to let that process continue, despite perhaps ideological differences you'd have with it? MShonle 21:24, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
It all depends on what you mean by that. Obviously I will make efforts to prevent needless destruction of pages with actual content. An awful lot of that seems to go on around here. On the other hand, when a strong majority feels that something does not belong, it must go. Note that, statistically, it is an abomination to count a handful of votes and call it a consensus. AlbertCahalan 01:50, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
It depends upon what you mean by needless. Nobody here at wikibooks, as far as I've seen, has ever needlessly deleted a page: further, undeletion is a forum for addressing those concerns. Basically, I trust the wiki spirit, and if there are good reasons to keep something, those reasons will shine from the discusion and people will do the right thing. So, I disagree with your claim that "an awful lot of that seem to go on around here." For example, you voted to keep the Getting a girl book, but Jimbo and most of the other administrators believed it should be deleted. Does that qualify as a "needless" deletion to you? MShonle 02:07, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • I oppose. You are uncooperative and argumentative with others and you seem to believe "anything" can be a wikibook, no matter how against the spirit of the project. If you want to have short pages deleted I recommend that you simply post them on candidates for speedy deletion. MShonle 02:22, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    • It should be noted that MShonle is one of two users with personal reasons to argue with me and oppose adminship. MShonle has in fact argued with me against undeletion of an article that was destroyed in violation of policy (it had content, and did not go to a VfD -- it needs to be restored in VfD status). He has also proposed to delete a legitimate Cookbook ingredient that I added (maybe it offends him), persisting even though he is not a Cookbook contributer and I am one of the most serious cookbook contributers. The other user I expect opposition from is the one who deleted in violation of policy, but perhaps he will abstain or do the right thing. AlbertCahalan 04:10, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong support. We need more good anti-deletionists like you! --Node ue 04:16, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    • Note: this user's contributions are slim: possible sock puppet. MShonle 04:31, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
      • Oh my that's sinking low. You can find him over on wikipedia, same user, with a history of over 2500 edits going back to 12 Sep 2003. (for your next objection, note my comment on his wikipedia talk page which verifies that he is the same user on both wikis) You have 701 edits here, and 428 there, and you only go back to 18 Jan 2004. Now I'm sure you'll say that I must be the sock puppet for him, so... would a sock puppet provide over two dozen original recipes? Also, if you have a Linux box, type "man ps" and email the maintainer -- that's me, and do note that I use my real name. Heck, I probably wrote code in the kernel running on en.wikibooks.org even. You should not have indented Node_ue's vote as if it were a comment applied to your own. Why did you do that? Seriously, you'd better explain yourself. I have restored his original indentation, and adjusted follow-ups to match. AlbertCahalan 06:22, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Support: I'm not endorsing any agendas here but AlbertCahalan seems like a regular and proficient contributor. -- mattrix 20:03, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Support - I'm new here, so don't know much, but AlbertCahalan seems to have made a good number of edits. makiaea 19:21, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Note that this user was not granted admin status. - Aya T C 21:29, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The bellman ( talk | email | contribs )

I would like to be able to have admin status, mainly because im sick of chinese wikispam on wikibooks that i am editing (mainly quechua, and wikijunior). I am active on lots of different wikis (most active on en.wikipedia), and 3 mailing lists. I have never been in an edit/revert/flame war, and i dont think anyone could doubt that i am a good-faith contributor. My only real wikisin, is that i sometimes forget to do summaries of my edits. thanks. The bellman 10:32, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC) i withdraw my request due to a lack of reacent activity on this wiki on my behalf. The bellman 02:34, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Huh? You got support 21 Jan 2005, and no opposition. While this is statistically lame, adminship can be granted and revoked without destroying anything really. As far as I can tell, you simply need to remind a bureaucrat. AlbertCahalan 02:42, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • It's silly, but I oppose for as long as this user's user page is an interwiki redirect to wikipedia. Setting up such a redirect makes it difficult to leave wikibooks specific messages, or check wikibooks related edits. Gentgeen 23:23, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    • Oh, i didnt realise that anyone had any prob with that. I just did it so that i would be able to check just one talk page. (so that for example if someone comments on something that i did on wiktionary or another (god only knows how many) of the other projects (or languages) i can know of the message as soon as possible.) Of course all of this wont matter as much when they introduce universal login. The bellman 00:51, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
      • I wouldn't object if the content of the user page and talk page were simply, "Leave me a message at my wikipedia user page, because I'm there more often." Gentgeen 01:57, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
        • Fixed. Sorry, didnt realise it was a prob. The bellman 10:32, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
      • Thanks, now I support. Gentgeen 19:00, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Note, this user was admin'd, but not recorded here. - Aya T C 21:29, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Boit ( talk | email | contribs )

I would like to become an administrator in the English Wikibooks Site. Although I have not contributed much to the world of the Wikibooks themselves, with the exception of German , I am responsible for the famous square blobs, whose created was prompted by the need for small, clear indicaters usable by colourblind or visually impared users (Image:75%.png, Image:100%.png, etc) used not only in English Wikibooks but also in many of the foreign language versions of Wikibooks (Including: Spanish, Estonian, Italian, Portuguese, Russian, Finnish, Tamil and Traditional Chinese).

Note that this user was not granted admin status. - Aya T C 21:29, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Omegatron ( talk | email | contribs )

I'm an admin on en. I've been writing in wikibooks: Electronics since March 2004. I just use it for spam rollbacks and deleting my own experiments. - Omegatron 15:21, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

  • Support MShonle 17:46, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Support Besides a good history of edits, this user pitched in to deal with User:Gumba gumba. If Omegatron had admin rights, he could have been far more effective. AlbertCahalan 21:56, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Note, this user was admin'd, but not recorded here. - Aya T C 21:29, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Andreas Ipp ( talk | email | contribs )

I'd like to apply for admin status in order to be able to edit the main page. I know I am a relatively new user here, but I am also a very careful editor - first reading through talk pages to see how things have been working before, which ideas were rejected, which were accepted, partly going through the "history" of pages, before I make changes.

As an example, I initiated the voting for the book of the month (February) not without prior studying the German Wikibooks "Buch des Monats" ("book of the month") that is working successfully there, and studying different voting systems on MetaWiki and Wikipedia, before adjusting a set of voting rules for our purposes.

I also created the new {{stage|...}} templates Development stage: 100% (as of Jan 17, 2005) (Jan 17, 2005) which in the ALT text show a description and the assignment date when placing the mouse Development stage: 100% (as of Jan 17, 2005) above, added the Help:Development stages page, and did numerous minor correction contributions to various books. I unified the cycling process on the main page of the "Featured Wikibooks", "New Wikibooks", and "Struggling Wikibooks" templates (such that all entries contain a date with the newest book first - I went through each template's history to set the correct dates!), and reverted a dozen "Chinese" vandalisms.

I would need admin status to more prominently and correctly place the voting link on the main page (right now it is in the Featured template since this is not blocked), and to prominently place the Book of the month once it has been elected.

All of the edits will be in the spirit to present Wikibooks not only to writers, but also to readers. When I came here the first time, not so long ago, I was quite disappointed when clicking on a few books of the main page to find that they are no more than what Wikipedians would call a "stub". Only after spending some time, starting to reevaluate development stages and time-stamping them, I noticed what marvellous books are hidden in Wikibooks. I would like to promote those diamonds of treasure to the casual reader who might not spend as much time to browse around, while keeping the open character of Wikibooks to still attract writers. "Book of the month", rotating "Featured books" or "most active books" is only the beginning of a very gradually introduced set of changes to enhance the Wikibook experience - both for readers and for writers. --Andreas Ipp 17:28, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

  • Support, while he is certainly quite new, he has more than shown good faith towards our lil library, and he has initiated quite a few good inititaves. I also agree with Jimbo, in that adminship shouldnt be that big a deal. The bellman 07:12, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Support: He's done great work and he has my trust. MShonle 23:08, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Done. Dysprosia 07:30, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thank you very much. --Andreas Ipp 08:44, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Yann ( talk | email | contribs )

I would like to become administrator in the English Wikibooks. I am already Administartor in the French Wikibooks, Wiktionary and Wikipedia, as well as Wikicommons and Wikisource. Thanks. Yann 12:47, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

  • Support This user has only 325 edits, but has been here sense September, 2003, and seems to be a valuable contributor. Gentgeen 23:18, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Support Davodd 09:52, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Support TUF-KAT 23:56, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Support 82.69.58.117 04:23, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Note, this user was admin'd, but not recorded here. - Aya T C 21:29, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks to all. I will do my best. Yann 10:34, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] KelvSYC ( talk | email | contribs )

I'd like to apply only because it appears that the admin ranks on this wiki are woefully undermanned. Deletion decisions on VFD take too long, and relatively little action is taken against vandals and spammers. Also, the lack of any hard policy standards with regards to book naming, fair-use images, among other things, is a serious issue that needs to be addresssed. I believe that I can contribute to this, and perhaps make existing Wikibooks conform to such a standard when it is made. Some would argue that I could do this even if I was not an admin, but as an admin, it would have a sense of legitimacy.

As for my contributions, I am the founder of two Wikibooks, the largest of which is the Pokémon family of books. I was listed as the contributor with the most amount of edits in February 2005 trying to upload all of the data to that book.

I am not an admin on any other Wikimedia wiki, nor do I have an intention of applying as an admin at any other Wikimedia wiki. I feel that I can add a lot more to this wiki if I were an admin.

KelvSYC 17:57, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

  • Support TUF-KAT 16:47, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Support Gentgeen 22:00, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Note, this user was admin'd, but not recorded here. - Aya T C 21:29, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ryan524 ( talk | email | contribs )

I know i am new, but just please hear me out, i am already a sysop on the english wikinews and have fot an award for fighting vandalism their, see wikinews:User:Ryan524, and i got 0 oppose votes when i nominated on Wikinews, see wikinews:Wikinews:Administrators/Archive#Ryan524 i had techniacally ony 4 votes i know, thats couting the bureaucrat that made me a sysop, cause the final say on wikinews goes to a bureaucrat). And i would like to extend the scope of my work to here, i am already creating two wikiversity schools, writing many books for the classes/lessons of each and also i fight vandalism, and I find while admins powers are't needed, it makes my job of doing it easier, and with the frequency i do it (atleast on wikinews, it gets stressfull when i don't even have the rollback button, muchless when i have to find a sysop online to block them).

Response to request verifying i am also the owner of User Ryan524 on Wikinews: wikinews:User_talk:Ryan524#wikibooks.--Ryan524 05:17, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Support: Ryan524 has been very active in eliminating vandalism over at Wikinews over the past month. If even half as active over here, it would be a great help. Most importantly, Ryan524 is a administrator over at Wikinews already. I didn't see any of the abruptness that one supporter of his adminship commented on. One slight reservation that I have, is Ryan524's relatively low numbers of edits, especially on Wikibooks (with 364, 295, and 17 edits on Wikipedia, Wikinews, and Wikibooks respectively; 676 edits in total, if that is important to you). (Donovan|Geocachernemesis|Interact) 11:08, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • I'm slightly concerned that Ryan524 hasn't contributed to Wikibooks in almost a month. I had hoped the he would assist with fighting vandalism here. Consequently, my enthusiasm for his promotion has waned somewhat. (Donovan|Geocachernemesis|Interact) 00:22, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
      • Sometimes people have rather busy schedules that come in cycles. We can give Ryan some more time and see if he is still interested. MShonle 02:40, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
        • I'm not withdrawing my support, I want to give Ryan some more time too. (Donovan|Geocachernemesis|Interact) 03:23, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose: While we certainly could use some more admins... and somebody with admin experience could be useful in some situations here on Wikibooks, I think Ryan524 should gain a little experience trying to actually write a Wikibook here first, and get to know the situation here from an ordinary user viewpoint first. Mind you, I don't oppose him due to any specific issue, but I feel that somebody who is going to be given the power to delete content and in general get some "stripes" in terms of having more "privileges" here should get to know some of the policies more carefully. For instance, involvement in the VfD discussion is a way to test a user to see if they understand deletion policies. And writing a Wikibook is hard, as everybody who has been here for awhile can attest to. Wikinews is a very different environment than Wikibooks, and you have to be considerably more patient with new users here and let them experiment much more than is tolerated over at Wikinews... for a good reason. A random news article like Harry Potter dies in Wizard duel is likely going to get deleted immediately, but a Harry Potter "news article" of a similar nature would not only be tolerated but encouraged here (provided it was a part of a larger Wikibook). If he gets involved with Wikibooks even to a small degree...writing his own Wikibook (like for instance a guide to using Wikinews even) with some of the common frustrations of trying to get content organized into a book, I would support him instead. --Rob Horning 23:16, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

I'm tempted to agree with Rob on this one, so I'm going to deny this request for now. As you may already know, I'm trying to cut down the length of time it takes to get a definite response for such requests, so I'd rather make a decision now, than let the guy hang on forever in anticipation.

After having chatted to some of the Wikimedia founders, sysadmins and other veterans on IRC, the consensus seems to be that being an admin on one site should not have much bearing on becoming an admin on other sites. In fact, if he spends most of his time on Wikinews, he's probably not going to spend much time on here.

Also, having looked thru his edit history on this site, I don't think he's quite had enough experience with this site to be admin'd just yet. Wikibooks is without doubt the most awkward site to manage due to its rather unusual naming policy. After Ryan has gained a bit more editing experience, he is free to re-apply (although more likely I or another admin will nominate him when this is the case).

I shall archive this section approximately one week from today. - Aya T C 01:59, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Garrett ( talk | email | contribs )

Hi (understatement of the century). As many of you are aware, the structure and organisation of Wikibooks is a mess. Right now I see a backlog of Vfds and recurring IP vandals and such, and am itching to help sort them out--but, darn, I don't have my deletion tab here! I'm already an admin at Wikipedia (see w:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Master Thief Garrett for more) as well as the fledgling Academic Publishing Wiki, and I'm eager to have similar more efficient cleanup powers here too. So, um, what else can I say? Oh, I know... vote for me!!! :) GarrettTalk 04:05, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

  • Support - Garrett is a familiar face around the place, and is really helpful in fighting vandalism. We need someone around here who knows what they're doing (that's a criticism of my own teething troubles, and not anyone else's ;). (Donovan|Geocachernemesis|Interact) 06:13, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Support - You're not an admin already? I know that Wikipedia suggests that admins don't nominate themselves, but for right now I don't see a problem with active Wikibookians who have been engaged in edits for some time (like Garrett) from nominating themselves. There is a serious backlog on what should be occuring, and right now we need some more admins. With more of them around, they can police themselves as well if they get out of control. --Rob Horning 06:55, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Support - Definately trustworthy and active, but also the more selfish reason that, since this user is one of the few who actually marks junk for deletion, it would save me (an the other admins) time if he just deleted it himself. :-) It's ridiculously easy to undelete stuff should something go wrong. - Aya T C 19:16, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Support - Familiar, trustworthy, friends...what other reasons required for someone who has proven themselves to be dedicated to getting rid of vandalism and nonsense. - Serge 11:27, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
  • Support -- MShonle 17:59, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Done - Will archive one week from today. Aya T C 23:29, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cspurrier ( talk | email | contribs )

Hello, I think Wikibooks is a great project, with a great future. I think I can be helpful to the project as an admin. While I only registered my username recently I have been browsing on Wikibooks for several months. Even though I am new here, I am not a newbie to the Wikis, I have been editing for about a year on Wikipedia, and I am very active on Wikinews. I have been editing on Wikinews since mid-March and have made 2713 edit according to Kate's tool. I have been an Admin on Wikinews since 25 May 2005.

While most of my writing is for Wikinews, I plan to help as much as I can with clean up tasks here. I monitor the recent changes IRC channel for Wikibooks and I have caught several vandals. I have read as many of the policy documents as I can find on Wikibooks, and I believe I fully understand the areas in that Wikibooks policy differs from Wikinews policy. --Cspurrier 02:26, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

  • Support - It's true, he sits on the RC channel, and reverts vandalism as it happens. I think he at least deserves the rollback feature. :) - Aya T C 02:53, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Support - Why not, the more anti-vandals the better. Cspurrier's contributions here are relatively few, but they haven't been concentrated in only one place. Geo.T 03:11, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment - (Neither for nor against this particular request) This is nothing personal against you, Cspurrier, but something to note in general. I would not like to see people becoming admins that are trying to "pad their resumes" and claim that they are an admin on X projects, letting a fact like that get them a swelled head. If this is a request for adminiship for such a reason, it would be better if you just lie low and get a feel for this project first and try to help out where you don't need admin authority. A tremendous amount of work can be done by an ordinary editor/contributor, including quite a bit of general cleanup. If you become an admin, particularly from Wikinews, you need to remember to go extra light here and avoid deleting any content unless it specifically is against the stated policies here on Wikibooks. Even then, err on the side of caution and certainly don't delete things that are still trying to be started. Stubs are very reasonable to happen here, and there are also going to be a bunch of mistakes from new users trying all sorts of things. Obvious vandals, of course, need to be dealt with swiftly and strongly, but I have no doubt you can help out with that sort of issue. I hope that your experience here on Wikibooks is a good one regardless of wheither you get this admin position. --Rob Horning 12:42, 15 August 2005 (UTC)


  • Comment - I can't say I really know much about Cspurrier enough to make a decision. While I trust Aya that he's probably the same guy who is very helpful I'd rather wait and vote for someone with a longer history. And I think it's important for that trust to be gained by more than just one person, it should be gained by several people in the community. (For just one example of what I mean: I could set up IPs in two different domains. With one I vandalize the wiki, with the other I sit on IRC and then undo what I just did an hour before. I've gained the trust of those sitting on IRC and boom, I'm an admin.) Now, I don't think that's likely the case at all here, because of his admin status on WN, but it does show the importance of gaining trust. For example, I don't think anyone could possibly "fake" all of the hard work AlbertCalhan or Kellen have done on the wiki... that's only something you see in true devotion. Perhaps there needs to be a policy that if someone becomes an admin on WB primarily because of the status of being an admin on another wiki that, should they do anything to be removed of admin privileges, they are stripped of the status on all wikis? MShonle 21:22, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Done - Aya T E C 16:22, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Derbeth ( talk | email | contribs )

I noticed there is a number of vandalisms being not reverted in English Wikibooks (I once caught one in Wikibooks:About remaining there for about a month). Also, sites marked for speedy deletion wait for long time. I think I'm able to help fighting with vandalism.

I don't have many contributions to English Wikibooks, but I've been an active sysop of Polish Wikibooks for 8 months [1]. I think I might be useful, because I live in Poland and have completely different timezone then people in US, so I can catch vandalisms when other sysops are f.e. sleeping. --Derbeth 09:21, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

  • Support - After having reviewed this user's edit history, it seems they have put in a lot of effort keeping Wikibooks clean and tidy. - Aya T E C 18:58, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Support - Though my vote is moot, I think the other-language WikiBookians could help nip some spammers in the bud before they get to spam too much (because their IP can be blocked here quickly too). --MShonle 22:14, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Done - Although I was hoping for a few more votes from other users. - Aya T E C 16:58, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Well, if you'd waited for me to get off my butt and check his edit history there probably would have been another support vote! AlbertCahalan 03:09, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
Aya, perhaps in the future you could give us a day's notice, just in case? That could help show consensus and motivate people like Albert and me to respond. --MShonle 04:09, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
Well. The text above gives the impression that a decision will be made in a week, to prevent the problems we had previously when there was no strict deadline, and Wikibooks was slowing running out of active admins. The user made the request on the 23rd Sep, so the decision should've been made on the 30th Sep, although I didn't actually implement it until the 3rd Oct. Still. It all worked out okay in the end. - Aya T E C 18:24, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Whiteknight ( talk | email | contribs )

After a good amount of time to think it over, i decided to request adminship. My primary concern (and primary expertise) is in the area of Electrical Engineering, a subject that wikibooks currently has a dirth of information on. I have added 2 new books on the shelf, Circuit Theory, and Circuit Theory 2, and would like to add more in the future once these first two become self-supporting. I would also like to work towards a series of standard Engineering Templates, and perhaps even start preparing some general guidelines for future Engineering Wikibook writers and contributers. --Whiteknight 18:13, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Support -- Although you're relatively new to our fair project you do have the knack for writing, and we need to get more contributors like you. MShonle 21:18, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
  • support -- He seems to care about the project, and we still don't have enough admins. AlbertCahalan 00:49, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Support - A fine-looking edit history. Can't see any problems here. - Aya T E C 18:27, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Support, good contributors get the rewards they deserve. I wholeheartedly stand by Jimbo's proclamation that adminship should be "no big deal". GarrettTalk 01:34, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Done - Aya T E C 11:36, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ђорђе Д. Божовић ( talk | email | contribs )

I'm developing the Serbian language learning textbook, Serbian Grammar, and Serbian History modules. While working on these books, many vandals will certainly appear. Sysop rights can allow me to block and stop them. I could erase inproper pictures and articles that can appear, too. I already am an administrator at Serbian and Serbo-Croatian Wikipedias. I came to English Wikibooks two months ago, and I've got about 500 edits now, but that number increases by every day, as I'm writing Serbian lessons and texts... --Ђорђе Д. Божовић 18:24, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Are sysop rights necessary for you? Do you want to use them only at Serbian books? What about your knowledge of Wikibooks policies and Wiki formatting? --Derbeth 21:31, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
    • I've been at Wikimedia projects, including Wikipedias, Wiktionaries, Wikisources and Wikibooks for a nice time. I shall use sysop rights properly. Developing Serbian textbook will last about two or three years at least, even more. I first came to Serbian Wikipedia to write a few articles about Zlatibor Mtn., tourist destination where I live, and since then I've contributed to tozens of other articles, and I've became an every-day member of Serbian Wikipedia community. Just like here: I'm starting with Serbian textbook, but I hope to stay and contribute more to Wikibooks.--Ђорђе Д. Божовић 21:38, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: I'm leaning in favor of support for this request, but I'm not quite prepared to formally give it yet. Gaining adminship is not supposed to be that big of a deal, and certainly it appears as though you are working hard on what is a tough subject, and not everybody can get everywhere at once. My only major concern is not the number of edits but the very short time that you've been here participating. Often (and I've done this myself... so I have some experience with this) an author will work very hard for a few weeks and then "burn out" real quick. An ordinary registered user can do quite a bit to block vandals, reverting pages, and even place the IP address or user name of the vandals in the Vandalism in Progress pages, where they are going to get some significant attention from the existing base of admins here. On the other hand, if there is some significant vandalism going on with these pages, they can be "protected", and this user given admin privileges to edit the protected content. My question is if the vandalism appears to be politically motivated or is it just random idiots who think they've found a dark corner of Wikibooks and just want to make mischief? There is a certain group of vandals who think Wikibooks is a cool place to hang out because vandalism tends to last a little bit longer here than on Wikipedia. We are getting better, and there are now enough admins to keep most of them in check now, but it is still a weaker project than Wikipedia. The issue of protecting the pages for this Wikibook is a seperate issue from giving you adminship, BTW, so let's not confuse the two issues. --Rob Horning 02:16, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
  • I do agree with Rob that new writers can burn themselves out quickly, and that we need to worry that our contributers are spreading themselves out too thinly by gaining sysops for many wikiprojects. However, I see no reason why a contributer with long-term plans for their particular niche, and with a contribution history that is growing at a nice rate, should be denied adminships on the premise that they might burn out. I vote in Support here because we do need more admins, but we mostly need more admins with vision and determination. That, and it's "No Big Deal". --Whiteknight 19:37, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Support - Solid edit history. - Aya T E C 15:58, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Done - Aya T E C 15:08, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Thank you!--Ђорђе Д. Божовић 17:37, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Lord Voldemort ( talk | email | contribs )

Okay, I realize this might be premature, but I feel it is the right time to ask. Hopefully in the following statements, I can calm any reservations about having me as a sysop. I don't see any official template to set up this nom, so I feel I can best express myself in this way.

Reasons I want to become an Admin:

  • The main reason I would like to be an Admin is to be able to rollback vandalism more effectively and efficiently.
  • I am an active participant in VfD, and would like to be able to complete the deletion process.
  • There doesn't seem to be enough Admins to keep up with vandal blocking and RC Patrol.

Possible reasons to vote Oppose:

  • Relative short time here on Wikibooks (Since November 2, 2005).
  • Relative low edit count compared to other Admins. (Roughly 420 edits as of 22:16, 14 December 2005 (UTC)).
  • A couple of heated debates with fellow editors over policy (specifically content policies).

Possible reasons to vote Support:

  • Although I have only been here a month and a half, I know Wikibook editing and policies, and am a strong proponent of updating and enforcing certain policies... see my user page for more info.
  • Admin tools would not allow me to enforce any policy. I wouldn't "abuse my powers". Remember, almost all Admin actions can be undone anyways.
  • Adminship is supposed to be "no big deal", and I don't see it as such either.
  • I am dedicated to Wikibooks and want to make this project as best as it can be.
  • I am helpful to other editors, and am generally here M-F for a great portion of the day (420 edits in less than a month and a half).
  • I take part in RC Patrol and the rollback button would be helpful.
  • My use of edit summaries is superb and really helps when doing RC Patrol. I encourage everyone else to make sure they use their edit summaries.

Please just don't look at my name, remember me from the textbook debate, and vote oppose. Take some time in my contributions. If you feel you must vote oppose, I will understand. You are entitled to vote the way you please. I won't go away crying if this is unsuccesful. Thank you for taking the time to read through all of this. Feel free to ask me any questions you please. --LV (Dark Mark) 22:16, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Votes

  • support LV is doing great job reverting vandals, he helped me many times. IMO we need people like LV - patrolling recent changes, reverting and blocking vandals, deleting unneccessary pages and generally doing the whole dirty job. I think LV is ready to become an sysop now. --Derbeth talk 22:22, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
  • support. you had me at hello. I have to admit, your credentials are much nicer then mine were when i asked for adminship, and on top of that, your little presentation here is certainly more impresive then mine was (mine was just like 1 paragraph). I think that wikibooks can only benefit from having more sysops in it's midst. --Whiteknight (talk) (current) 22:36, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Support I was going to wait until January to nominate you, but I think you are pretty familiarized with Wikibooks and everything going on here to take on this job. Becoming an admin is really not that big of a deal, you just have to prove you won't become a vandal and abuse the admin privileges and have a desire to help make this a much better project. You have some strong opinions on some stuff here, and the best word of advise I can give is to simply be patient when you deal with other users. We also need active admins here, and participating in the RC Patrol is especially welcome. Admin privileges will allow you to take steps like blocking vandals early that you can't do otherwise. --Rob Horning 11:46, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Support - What Rob Horning said. Your previous experience on Wikipedia has translated well to Wikibooks. The advancements in policy you've orchestrated here are especially helpful. -Matt 19:27, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Support --Cspurrier 19:40, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Support This user has worked at Wikibooks:No personal attacks and Wikibooks:No legal threats, and participates in other debates on policy, so I have a better idea of what to expect. This user seems to be very interested in Wikibooks. However, I did wonder if this user had any experience with adminship on another MediaWiki. --Kernigh 05:23, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Support --Krischik T 08:31, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Support Hey, I probably disagree the most with your opinions. But you know the difference between your opinion and the official policy, so I don't see it as a problem. --Dragontamer 05:21, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
Done. Dysprosia 13:17, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Artur Nowak ( talk | email | contribs )

22:43, 12 November 2005 (UTC) Reason: I started a book about Reaktor, now (I'm glad about that) new people started to add content, but some just copy texts from Reaktor User Forum - this should not happen. I want to be able to delete these pages

Questions

  • You're contributing only to this book, you don't have any editions in Wikibooks namespace, you don't vote, we even don't know if you know current policies. You have just had 4-month break from Wikibooks - it's not ok for a sysop. Are you sure you need sysop rights? You can always insert {{delete}} if you want a page to be deleted. Apart from this, you don't need other user rights - as you are not willing to patrol recent changes. Am I right? --Derbeth talk 23:09, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
  1. No. For the reasons that derbeth described. you have, by my count, around 270 edits in the space of 1 year. Also, you seem to only contribute to a single book. Even though it is admirable that you would like to have more power to improve your book, it hardly seems reasonable to give sysop rights to every user with a pet project. This is not to say that edit counts or books influenced are the only metrics for determining sysop votes. However, you also arent very involved (at least not that i have seen) in policy discussions or votes, fighting vandalism, etc. If you do become more involved in the community, we will certainly have no problem voting to give you adminship. My advice is this: explore wikibooks, and see what all is here. Get involved in the policy discussions. See if you can add more to other books, on other bookshelves. If you prove that you understand and can execute policy throughout the entire site, you will have my vote. --Whiteknight TCE 03:15, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment - Having a 4 month Wikibreak is just fine as a sysop. Do not let that be a reason to stop somebody from becomming an admin. The willingness to expand beyond the single Wikibook, however, is a good reason to support becoming an admin. The #1 reason I would see for becoming an admin that would be useful for a single project is to edit protected pages and to protect/unprotect those pages, presumably in concert with a larger group of users where you are taking on a leadership role and changing content on protected pages with community concensus of those working on that Wikibook. In order for me to support this request for adminship, I need to see some more clear plan of what this user is going to try and accomplish with the additional options only available to an admin. Marking pages with the {{delete|<reason>}} tag is sufficient for removing content. You can even blank the page first except for this markup tag if you want to emphasis the point, and that is something an ordinary user can do without admin privileges. There are now enough admins on Wikibooks to clean up the speedy delete category, although we could use some more help in general and I don't want to discourage anybody from trying to become an admin. You also have to show some trustworthiness to prove that you won't vandalize other protected pages elsewhere on this project. IMHO 270 edits is plenty sufficient to become an admin if the user is willing to take on the general responsibility associated with being an admin. General project participation is beneficial to advocate becoming an admin, but it is not the sole criteria for acceptance. --Rob Horning 17:50, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Votes

  • Oppose - Artur Nowak should read Deletion policy. This user has good intentions, and I might support adminship for this user in the future, but I think that this user should become more familiar with Wikibooks first. I hope that this user continues to improve Wikibooks by working at Reaktor or other books. --Kernigh 04:50, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Let us just finish this issue. --Derbeth talk 01:25, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose - I gave some reasons why this user might be permitted to become an admin, and that user has neglected to come up with a "mission statement" as to what they intend to use the admin authority to accomplish. In addition, the last edit was on November 12th, and doesn't appear to be active in the policy discussions, even partially with just voting and demonstrating knowledge of Wikibooks policy. This is no prejudice against this user applying for adminship in the future, but at the moment I don't see him ready to take on the duties. --Rob Horning 06:31, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
Rejected in consensus. --Derbeth talk 22:55, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NCurse, Dubaduba and Gubbubu

We requested for adminships in Hungarian Wikibooks. NCurse wanted to be an admin, I'm an admin now, but wanted to be a buerocrat. We have support (with no opposition). I translate the environment and help system now, but I need help, it is too much amd too slow for only one admin. Please a developer or steward enter in action (because our official buerocrat, Grin will be inactive now, probably for weeks). I must remark that we are respected admins in other projects (Dubaduba in huwiktionary, Ncurse in huwikiquote, me in huwikisource). It is enough to change my buerocrat flag, cause, in fact, I strongly would like to appoint the two new admins :-)). Thanx: Gubbubu 09:41, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but even if we could, we cannot do this. You have to find stewards to do this. Use meta:Requests for permissions. Good luck! --Derbeth talk 11:44, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dragontamer ( talk | email | contribs )

Well, I had a speech with pros and cons typed up, and then IE messed up on me. So I'll keep it short. If you guys don't know me, then I probably shouldn't be an Admin anyway. Wikibooks is small enough for all admins to know each other right now.

I may be sticking to game guides right now, but I am willing to help out with vandals and so forth. I go through recent changes at least once in my "wikibooks routine", and use random module every now and then to check up on pages. Sysop rights would cut down my time a lot, especially with all these vandals in my video-game book/guide.

As far as why I'd like to be an admin... I like the one-click reverts that I can get (in combination with that IRC channel with the stuff in RC, it'd be nice). Banning seems a little too powerful to me :) But I'm sure I'd understand when to ban after a while.

Thanks for hearing me out. --Dragontamer 06:03, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

IMO, if I can't convince 100% of you guys, I'm not to be trusted as an admin yet anyway. Like said before, this place is small enough right now that 1/2 people on a vote counts for a lot. So I'll withdraw my request, and I'll see if I can do anything in the next few months to change your opinion. Ick, it was in the lost post that was lost that had my worries about being premature :-/ (*kills IE*) --Dragontamer 02:21, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Votes (no more votes, user withdrew request)

  • Support - This wiki needs more admins to revert things. For example, look at the history of the Project:Community Portal... hidden WikiSpam stays at that page for hours. I wonder if Dragontamer has any experience being admin/sysop at another MediaWiki. (I have no such experience.) Experienced or not, you can start by using the quick-revert feature, and not worry about banning anyone until later. --Kernigh 04:55, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
    • No, if I become a sysop here, this will be my first time as a sysop at any MediaWiki. --Dragontamer 14:10, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose - You mention that you mostly work on game guides and after looking at your contribs that's basically all I see. I really don't see work anywhere else. I'm opposing this because as of now I think there's work to be had. Actually go around and make a significant effort with RC or something similar. You say you want to do it, so do it. Yes, it saves time to have admin rights but by what you've done now I don't see much of a time savings anyway. I don't really see any action and until I see more I oppose. -Matt 17:57, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Support - While he is very active in the game guides (and trying to help develop the gaming guide policies), I have seen his contributions elsewhere on Wikibooks as well. My only concern is a worry he may "burn out" from trying to do too much too soon, but this is certainly a user that can be trusted to make Wikibooks a better place, and has made meaningful contributions already that in general support the whole project. --Rob Horning 03:59, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Support --Cspurrier 23:37, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose - I think your request came too early. In fact, you haven't done much reverts and most of them are done in your own book. We don't need another admin who cares only about a single book. Even as an ordinary user you can still fight vandalism using "three-click-revert". Compare yourself to Lord Voldemort - don't you think you are not active enough to convince us you will be a good sysop? --Derbeth talk 01:25, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Don't you think it would be a bad precedent to set to compare nominees to other nominees? I would encourage all contributors here to base their judgment on the specific editor's contributions. I am not making any value judgment on Dragontamer, I'm just saying that comparing nominees can sometimes be like comparing apples and unicorns. --LV (Dark Mark) 15:34, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
No consensus to give sysop rights. --Derbeth talk 18:22, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jguk ( talk | email | contribs )

Although a relatively new Wikibookian, I have much experience with the MediaWiki software through more than 20,000 edits on wikipedia dating back to September 2004. Initially I was reluctant to put myself forward for sysop access rights so soon after joining a new project, but I have begun trying to bring more organisation into Wikibooks (see my contribution history), and this tends to end up leaving lots of useless redirects. At present, I have been nominating these for speedy deletion (having checked that all links to the page have been adjusted for). Sysop rights would allow me to do this instantly, which is why I am seeking sysop rights at this early stage. Of course, if I was unsure of anything, I would seek a second opinion. On Wikibooks I am developing a magnum opus, Taxation in the United Kingdom. I'd also hope to contribute to Wikijunior and I am currently working up a first page on Wikijunior Kings and Queens of England prior to nominating the proposed book to be added to the Wikijunior canon. Further evidence of my bona fides can be taken from my being appointed Treasurer of Wiki Educational Resources Limited, the company that will act as the UK Wikimedia chapter (see m:Wikimedia UK, and my contributions on wikipedia, which have included numerous featured articles and featured lists, as well as the first featured portal, Jguk 16:10, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

  • I don't know, just two weeks on the project... I'm not fully convinced. --Derbeth talk 19:14, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
    • I agree it's early, and if the view is come back in two month's time, I'll understand. I'm only asking now as I find that whilst trying to do some organising of WB's content, I'm creating redirects that should be deleted or finding other stuff that can clearly be deleting. I'm ok with just marking them up for speedy deletion, but it would be quicker and easier to do it myself, Jguk 19:57, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Votes

  • Support --Cspurrier 16:11, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. This isn't a strong opposition, but i definately think you could stand to wait a little while before seeking higher access privledges. I was made into a sysop relatively early in my wikibooks career, so i don't think that there should be a large time requirement. I think what people want to see is some kind of indication that you are here to stay for a while, and if we make you an admin, that you won't get "burnt out", and stop contributing. We do need more admins, but we don't need to make people admins, and have them only work on one book, or to contribute for a month and leave forever. Prove to us that you will be here for a while, and I will definately vote for you next time. --Whiteknight (talk) (current) 21:30, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
After reviewing his contributions, I'm inclined to change my vote. I will vote Support now, under the assumption that he is a member who is here to stay. --Whiteknight (talk) (current) 14:26, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Too new. Not enough experience around Wikibooks. To me, having a long list of accolades at other projects doesn't improve status here. It may be good to know in some cases, but in many others it just looks like fluff. We don't want "souvenir" admins. Spending more time here first will look better. -Matt 22:09, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Support - I hope he keeps with it. 1600 edits in less than a month is insane. Just take it at a decent pace so you don't get overwhelmed and leave the project. The main reason I'm changing my vote is because I think he will keep with it and provide a large amount of help with cleaning up a lot of the mess here. I wish I could do more of it myself. -Matt 04:07, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose - I agree somewhat with the above statements. You just need to prove yourself a little more within Wikibooks, and show that you plan to stick around a little bit. You can still help with vandalism, and even the vandals aren't as active as they are on Wikipedia. Request this again in a couple of months, and I will likely vote to support you instead. --Rob Horning 16:44, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Support -- Jguk, you need the ability to delete pages. --Kernigh 06:04, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Support I changed my opinion, we need somebody to delete candidates for speedy deletion - they wait for deletion too long now. I don't think Jguk will overuse sysop powers. --Derbeth talk 10:35, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
IMHO this is not a reason (the speedy deletion candidate bin overflowing) sufficient to granting everybody admin status. I completely emptied the category several times this month myself, before the big bru-ha-ha over Wikimania content took up my time to have to work on stuff elsewhere on Wikibooks, or at least respond to the birrage of questions. Still, we could use a few more administrators here. --Rob Horning 13:11, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Support -- John N. 20:24, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Made sysop. --Derbeth talk 20:43, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nominations for adminship

[edit] Perl (2/0)

Pearl is a great contributor to the English Wikipedia and is cool under fire. --mav 06:23, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I accept this nomination. I promise to use my powers only for good. (I am an admin and bureaucrat on the maori language wikipedia and have never abused my powers there.) Perl 12:49, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Support:

  1. mav
  2. Theresa knott

Comments:

  • comment I will be supporting pearl in a little while but I think we should be a bit cautious about sysopping people here based on their contributions to other wikis. As accounts are seperate,what's to stop a troll creating an account here with the name of a respected user on wikipedia? I'm not suggesting for a minute that perl is really someone else, but we should establish a policy now. Theresa knott 06:35, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
      • I have edited my userpage on wikipedia [[2] to prove that I am the same Perl. Perl 22:51, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
        • Good enough for me - I support Perl's nomination. Theresa knott 11:34, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] User:Traroth (2/0)

Traroth seems like a good contributor from the French Wikipedia. Perl 22:11, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Why not. I'm already admin and bureaucrat on fr:. It could be interesting. It doesn't seem to be a hell of a job here :-) Traroth 16:00, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Support:

  1. Perl
  2. Dysprosia
User now a sysop. TUF-KAT

[edit] Mshonle ( talk | email | contribs )

I nominate Macneil Shonle for admin status. He's done a lot of good work on the Algorithms textbook. --Waxmop 02:41, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The user accecpted on their talk page. Gentgeen 22:39, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. - SamE 03:49, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. - Yeah totally, he's done good work Gkhan 01:13, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. - Gentgeen 23:37, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It is done. Dysprosia 10:48, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Geocachernemesis ( talk | email | contribs )

This user has been helpful in reverting newbie tests, vandalism, and the ever-persistent Chinese spammers. It's about time that Geocachernemesis, a user since September 2004, is given the keys to the big mops and guns. Guanaco 03:18, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the nomination Guanaco, I accept.:) I had noticed the amount of vandalism that had been getting through, and felt that someone needed to do something about it. I contribute mainly to Wikibooks, Wikipedia, and Wikimedia Commons, with 465, 418, and 343 edits respectively (1426 in total). Additionally, I've contributed significantly to the Cookbook, adding 42 of my own images. (Donovan|Geocachernemesis|Interact) 05:19, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • support: Somehow I thought Geocachernemesis was already an admin! MShonle 06:59, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • oppose: He seems to have something personal against me, probably because I have disagreed with him on numerous occasions. A good admin (like MShonle for example, to note one who impresses me) can put aside even very large disagreements over wiki content. I'd rather not have an admin with a grudge against me. AlbertCahalan 14:59, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I don't have anything against you personally Albert. But, the reason that I (and probably the three others) didn't support your nomination for adminship is not because of stylistic differences. But, instead, because of the terse manner in which you have dealt with others in the past (you admit to this in your nomination below). I'm sure that we will support you if you continue to be courteous to others, as you have been recently. (Donovan|Geocachernemesis|Interact) 05:17, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Support: Gets to the source of the problem before I do, and that says a lot. KelvSYC 01:24, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • oppose: User reverted a correction without any knowledge of the language/topic. Unacceptable for an admin candidate. --messi 16:46, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC) abstain: --messi 13:11, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    I believe you're referring to his revert on German: Lesson 9, in which he changed "passt" to "passen". If you check the logs off the other edits user 62.180.31.25 made [3], you'll see that two were rather juvenile vandalism to the cookbook, and one to the main German page. This user also added something which looks ok to the programming languages page, but I think Geocachernemesis can be forgiven for assuming this user's edits to that page were spam/noob experiments, and especially forgiven because he just did a revert, not a willy-nilly edit. Kellen 17:20, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    I think you don't understand me. This is not about a specific revert. I don't want any admin to just assume a user's edit is wrong without knowledge (of the topic) or consultation from others. Wikibooks.org has many users who watch over their articles. This just looks as if Geocachernemesis wants as many edits as possible for his/her candidacy. My opinion, my vote. --messi 17:59, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I think there are a lot of assumptions that have to be made. I think Kellen brings up a good point that once an IP address loses its credibility the recent changes should be reverted. But you should try to assume good faith instead of jumping to the conclusion that Geocachernemesis is somehow on a mission to inflate edits; that is just not reflected in the reality of all the good Geocachernemesis has done for wikibooks. MShonle 18:41, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Also, for what it's worth, Messi reverted that very same user! [4] (And, with good cause: they were a vandal.) So, tell me, how much would you trust someone who made anti-German jokes who also edited one of the pages? I probably would have reverted it myself. MShonle 23:32, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Don't get me wrong. Geocachernemesis does a good job and I don't think he's "on a mission", but he's a bit overzealous for my taste. He should have known better. I won't change my mind on this, but it's only one vote. --messi 00:15, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I'm sorry you feel that way Messi. But, I can't help but feel that you are making a mountain out of a molehill. I don't understand why you didn't bring your concerns up on my talk page first. The edits by 62.180.31.25 were mostly childish vandalism. So, obviously, all of their edits were now suspect. I decided to trust the first edit (because it made a significant contribution), but because the fifth edit was an anti-German slur, I decided to revert the second (minor) edit (it would have been a simple matter for a fluent German speaker to revert my change if I was mistaken). I could have, however, simply rolled back all of the changes by that user without even looking at the diffs, but I didn't.
I'm really surprised that nobody has complained about any of my reverts in the last month, up until now, because I have made quite a few. It's always a fine line between fighting vandalism and undoing good edits, and it's sometimes hard to tell, but I do make mistakes (because I'm only human). If I wanted to inflate my edits, I would have made spelling corrections and other trivial changes, finding and reverting vandalism is really very time consuming (look at the timing of my edits). Additionally, I would have updated my edit stats, above. (Donovan|Geocachernemesis|Interact) 02:16, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • support: Attentive to linkspam, vandals, and still doing textual edits on the Cookbook. Kellen 17:20, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Tentative Support: Geocachernemesis has consistently contributed to the well-being and existance of many Wikibooks. He should be given access to the necessary tools to assist in his efforts. This is a tentative support as I have seen cases where newly-promoted admins run amok, but then again nothing much we can do short of getting Geocachernemesis to submit a psych analysis report.... ^_^

    Truth is, if we have more admins to keep up with the linkspammers and block them, perhaps our lives would be easier. Other than this, there's really nothing to stop us common users from doing a little bit of civic policing on our own. Lynx7725 05:31, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I wouldn't have picked you as being one to have reservations about my adminship. You are the only one whom I advertised my adminship to directly. Thanks for the (tentative) vote of support Lynx7725. I wasn't intending to become an administrator for Wikibooks. But, as Guanaco nominated me, I though it would have been rude not to make a concerted effort to succeed.
As far as I can tell, being an administrator doesn't give you significantly more power than a regular user. You can immediately delete pages if they contain junk (and you don't have to wait ages for others to do it), that would be very useful on RC (recent changes) patrol. But, in other ways, being an administrator is a disadvantage, because your conduct is held to a higher standard than others'.
I agree that we do need to get more regular users involved with fighting spam than they currently are. I'm often surprised when a new registered user asks for an administrator to remove vandalism, possibly not understanding that they can easily do it for themselves (not you Lynx7725 ;). At the moment I'm virtually alone on RC patrol, and often find vandalism on the RC list that's over 12 hours old. It would be great to see more users take time away from their books, and run down the RC list for a few minutes now and then.
At the moment, I'm too busy to welcome new users. I'm too busy fixing their experiments. With a few more hands on board, I hope to spend more time on welcomes (that's far more rewarding). (Donovan|Geocachernemesis|Interact) 06:18, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)


The reservation is not aimed at you specifically, it's just that a long time ago I had a bad experience with a over-ego'ed Sysop on a BBS. :)

Yes, Adminship looks to be more of a recognition than a true position of authority. The only major item is blocking (which is major). The ability to delete is actually not that major, since we can batch all the speedies together and wait for an admin to detele, and anything up for VfD is going to take this side of forever to resolve anyway. :) Lynx7725 07:55, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Yes, it would have been good if one of us was able to block Henry the 88th just before. I'm obviously not alone on RC patrol, because Lynx7725 made significant contributions today (along with a couple of other users).:) (Donovan|Geocachernemesis|Interact) 08:08, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Support: Can't believe there have been objections. Definitely a support. Geocachernemesis is one of our biggest weapons against vandalism as far as I can see. Serge 10:39, July 26, 2005 (UTC)
  • Support: In fact I'd probably support anyone who isn't obviously a vandal. Yes, he may have made some mistakes, we all do, but he's always prepared to discuss things rationally, and admit that he can make mistakes. That's the only important characteristic an admin requires. Obviously being active might be considered another, but even though that may be true now, will it be the case in a year, 5 years, 50 years, etc.? Point is, you're never gonna know, so what does it matter?
The only thing I have against the guy is that the username he chose takes me too long to type. :-)
And just what the hell does it mean? 'Geo-' pertaining to the earth, 'cacher' someone who hides things away, and 'nemesis' an enemy of. So the guy is the enemy of people who like to hide the planet earth? What?!? ;-) - Aya T C 18:43, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
See www.geocaching.com. (Donovan|Geocachernemesis|Interact) 22:06, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Support: He may be a little bit zealous in a number of ways, but should it really be this hard to gain adminship? Generally the "edit wars" I've seen him involved with are mainly to protect Wikibooks, and he has done an outstanding job of most of the places I've seen his sig and name involved in page histories. Certainly he has a good grasp of Wikibooks policies and a desire to enforce them. As far as "running amok", I hope he doesn't go and ban all our IP addresses (I seriously doubt that would happen). There is some cleanup that only an admin can take care of, and it looks like he can help with some of that. --Rob Horning 08:47, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

This user seems to have enough support, and since the only opposition was for 'personal reasons', I have granted sysop access to this user. This section will be archived one week from today. - Aya T C 00:49, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Makiaea ( talk | email | contribs )

Besides a good history of edits, this user pitched in to deal with User:Gumba gumba. If Makiaea had admin rights, he could have been far more effective. AlbertCahalan 21:56, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for nominating me Albert! I'm a bit new right now so I don't mind waiting and enjoying my freedom from the responsibility of adminship :) I'm sure it'll probably be a while before people get to know me well, but I'll be happy to know when everyone does! warmest wishes, makiaea 18:15, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
User is quite new, so I'm hesitant. Are you active on Wikipedia or Wiktionary or another Wikimedia project? TUF-KAT 16:54, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • comment - This user hasn't made an edit since April 22nd, and was really only active in April as well. I think this discussion has run its course and perhaps should be archived. --Rob Horning 19:09, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

It doesn't sound like this user feels that they are quite ready for this nomination, so I shall deny this request. I hope this user feels free to reapply when they've had a chance to make a few more edits. This section shall be archived approximately one week from today. - Aya T C 02:09, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] AlbertCahalan ( talk | email | contribs )

In cleaning up this page, I decided that there was no consensus for Albert's adminship. It was a tough call, but I decided against it, but I am re-nominating him now to give another chance. FTR, the last time User:Mshonle objected with reasons that Albert defended himself against, and User:Node ue gave "strong support". meta:User:Mattrix also supported, but as he apparently doesn't have a Wikibooks account, I gave his vote little weight. User:Makiaea also supported, but admitted to being new and apparently voted only because of a high number of edits (I don't think this is appropriate) so I gave his vote little weight as well. Even if Makiaea and Mattrix's votes did count, I'm unsure if three supports and one (perhaps) substantive objection should be considered consensus.

My nomination is partly procedural, however I consider myself neutral, leaning towards support for the actual nomination. TUF-KAT 16:47, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

  • support. I do think that a high number of non-vandal edits is a good reason to grant admin rights, partly because it indicates someone who cares about wikibooks content and partly because frequent contributers often struggle with being unable to move pages over trivial stubs and edited redirects. Also, given the currently severe vandalism and spamming problems, the adminship standard should be set fairly low until there are enough admins to watch over wikibooks 24 hours a day. AlbertCahalan 17:32, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • support: Too many vandals, I say we need someone like Albert on board. MShonle 03:46, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC) hold (not an oppose: just a placeholder for either an oppose or an abstain). I'll retract my oppose vote if I could be reassured that Albert would not become an "anti-deletionist". If we allowed every insane edit and article to go through simply because "people delete too much" then wikibooks would become mush. Part of the wikispirit is that there is editorial guidance and that, when people vote and discuss items for deletion, typically good information will come through and thus most votes are well-informed. MShonle 03:10, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    (Further, what's the business with strong support and leaning support? Is this eBay, where someone being an A++++++++ seller means more than being an A++++ seller?)
  • 83.92% support ;): I do have an account here (User:Mattrix), it's just that my userpage is only on meta. -- mattrix 21:16, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • support: I support Albert's adminship. He shows genuine concern about Wikibooks and would make a good admin in my opinion. Reubenbarton 19:27, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • oppose for many reasons, including this dif.