Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/CSTAR

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] CSTAR

final (21/1/1) ending 19:04, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)

CSTAR is a very responsible editor. I have not always agreed with the high academic style he uses, but have never seen him do anything but attempt to make positive contributions. - Taxman 19:07, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)

• Yes, I accept the nomination. Thank you.CSTAR 20:19, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

P.S. I'm a little confused about the meaning of ending 19:04, Nov 16, 2004. You mean the voting process is over? Did it get approved? Or is the ending date a mistake? CSTAR 18:35, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It's supposed to last one week, looks like it was a mistake, now fixed. --Michael Snow 18:51, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Support

1. Taxman 19:07, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)
2. Strong support. A high-class contributor who sets himself perfectionist standards in an impressive range of areas (from quantum computers to economics through logic). Intellectually tough but peaceful. Charles Matthews 19:15, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
3. —No-One Jones ^(m) 19:17, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
   • At the time of writing, the votes show 3/0/0, although 4 people have voted. Possibly the wiki-hacking on Mirv's vote is confusing the counter ---- Charles Stewart 20:23, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
     • I'm afraid you're mistaken – there is no "counter"; it's only plain text that is manually updated. BLANKFAZE | (что??) 08:46, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
       • Thanks, and I just figured that out myself as well. I'm a virgin WP-voter... *blushes* ---- Charles Stewart 09:22, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
4. Charles Stewart: Strong support. I'm here on Wikipedia principally because I want to turn logic and its related pages into something of real quality, and CSTAR has, without doubt, been the person who has done more than anyone else to get this slow process underway (Charles Matthews and siroxo also deserve honourable mentions wrt. this) ---- 19:22, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
5. I don't know him/her that much, but as far as I can see, CSTAR is a great contributor and deserves my support vote. --Lst27 (talk) 00:01, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
6. 172 06:01, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
7. Wile E. Heresiarch 06:53, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
8. Sure. -- Grunt   ҈  19:03, 2004 Nov 17 (UTC)
9. Good contributor. —siroχo 22:24, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)
10. Yes. CSTAR is one of the more able mathematicians among regular Wikipedians. Michael Hardy 23:46, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
11. Andre (talk) 03:51, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)
12. Wolfman 01:42, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
13. Well, I don't have any objections, maybe I'll find one and wish I had've before. Everyking 06:25, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
14. Geogre 20:12, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC) I can count to 20, if I take my shoes off.
15. Slowking Man 01:34, Nov 20, 2004 (UTC)
16. [[User:MikeX|MikeX (Talk)]] 12:57, Nov 21, 2004 (UTC)
17. Antandrus 23:44, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC) Looks good.
18. RSpeer 23:49, Nov 21, 2004 (UTC) Kudos for not being a VfD addict.
19. Ambi 02:28, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
20. Andris 06:24, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC) Good work on mathematics, quantum mechanics and related subjects.
21. Cribcage 05:08, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Oppose

1. I'm sure I'm an odd man out, but I think the user page together with the strange user name give hints that do anything but evoking my feelings of confidence. Sorry! /Tuomas 15:10, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Neutral

1. - Amgine 06:01, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Comments

Questions for the candidate
A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? (Please read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.)

A. Of course, rapid revert of vandalism. Besides that, I don't anticipate doing anything too noticeable right away until I have a better sense of how to use admin privileges.

• Just a comment on why I think CSTAR getting admin privileges would be good for the logics pages: at the moment, the only person I know who is both well-informed about logic and has admin privileges is Charles Matthews, and he has his work cut out with mathematics. So if, as is looking rather likely, CSTAR gets sysop privileges, he will be a much better person to do the little things that need these, (eg. undoing inadvisable moves). I'm quite sure this would be a good thing for Wikipedia ---- Charles Stewart 12:14, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?

A. Quantum circuit. There doesn't seem to be any online resource for this, so I think it fills a critical need. I also like Economic model. This was actually initiated by Taxman, but I made various contributions to it. I considered this as an important foundational element in articles relating to economic reasoning (i.e. logical argument applied to social science).

3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and will deal with it in the future?

A. Articles involving any aspect of American foreign policy are sometimes difficult to balance (see for instance Operation Just Cause), although I've never had a conflict that resulted in an edit war. The EPR Paradox article was another delicate one due to the divergent views of one contributor. I think eventually got resolved in a satisfactory way by contributions mainly from CYD, Lethe and myself who were always in agreement on all the substantive issues. The talk page of that article by the way I think is a gem of collaboration. CSTAR 05:16, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Re: Username and user page. Individuals that vote or express an opinion on this page can use any criterion they like and in fact choice of username or style of homepage (as mentioned by tuomas above) is well within the range of perfectly reasonable criteria. For instance, I almost certainly wouldn't vote for somebody that incorporated a name for genitalia in his/her username, or even worse, advocated imperialist policies in the name. However, my username is actually not as devoid of meaning as tuomas suggests. Indeed it refers to C*-algebras, which is my preferred mathematical structure for understanding quantum mechanics. As far as the user page is concerned, it is in part a belief that it is possible for a user's identity in wikipedia (and the net in general) to be completely detached from his/her identity in the brick-and-mortar world. It does free the intellect from the shackles of academic conventionalism. Anyway it's clear tuomas is a bit of a contrarian (as am I by the way) so I don't expect to change any votes, and moreover I am not running for anything. At least we don't use Diebold voting machines to count the votes.CSTAR 23:13, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)