Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Andrevan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.
(20/0/0) ends 05:50, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Andrevan has shown hirself to be an excellent Wikipedian. It is clear to me that Andrevan can be trusted with the privileges and responsibilities of adminship. Sie is hard-working and trustworthy and as an admin will undoubtedly be able to contribute much more to Wikipedia. Node 05:50, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thank you, I accept the nomination. For what it's worth, I have 1325 edits up to this point. Andre 06:01, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
An update: I now have 1618 edits. At this rate, I should be able to hit 1800 in time for Blankfaze to vote for me! :) Andre 19:28, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I now have 1801 edits. Victory! Andre 01:02, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Support

  1. Node 05:50, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  2. Absolutely. Longtime contributor, and a fellow video game aficionado to boot! --Slowking Man 06:13, Sep 11, 2004 (UTC)
  3. MerovingianImage:Atombomb.gifTalk 06:50, Sep 11, 2004 (UTC)
  4. Norm 12:11, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  5. Ана́рыён 13:30, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  6. Mike H 15:20, Sep 11, 2004 (UTC)
  7. Neutrality (talk) 15:21, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  8. Lst27 16:56, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  9. Zchangu 18:00, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  10. -- orthogonal 19:51, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  11. We can always use more grunt workers. -- Grunt   ҈  03:04, 2004 Sep 12 (UTC)
  12. Guanaco 22:00, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  13. Beau99 22:51, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  14. ffirehorse 00:51, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  15. I oppose anyone who's so confrontational that they can start arguments over articles about invented, non-existent deities. Listing my vote in the support category is a valid surrealist technique. --Michael Snow 01:27, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  16. Tεxτurε 19:49, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  17. FriedMilk 05:01, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)
  18. Ah, what the hell, might as well. You should feel special, because, having evactuated for Sir Ivan, I am without a broadband connection, and am using some of my precious time on this dreadfully slow dialup connection to support YOU. Fie. blankfaze | (беседа!) 05:38, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  19. Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 13:56, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)
  20. squash 07:34, Sep 18, 2004 (UTC) Good user with good edits.

Oppose

Sie? I don't know what a sie is, and as such, I'm not sure a sie would make a good admin. Will support after 1,800 edits. blankfaze | (беседа!) 03:46, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
You are opposing someone because Node used a gender neutral pronown? Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 23:56, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Blankfaze, believe me, I'm a he, not a sie. Node just used gender neutral pronouns because he wasn't aware of my gender. If you want to oppose me because of my lower-than-your-standard edit count, do so, but please don't oppose me because my nominator referred to me in a gender-neutral manner. Andre 03:29, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I kid, everyone, I kid! blankfaze | (беседа!) 03:46, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • "Sie" is a neologistic gender-neutral third person singular pronoun, analogous to "he" or "she" but without specifying gender, but also without, like "it" implying the referent is non-human. -- orthogonal 23:58, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
    • It's also, uh, the German word for "she". Who came up with this nonsense? john k 02:17, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
      • In German Sie (with capital S) is also third person M/F single or plural for a polite form of 'you' (like 'Usted' in Spanish, 'Vous' in French or 'U' in Dutch). English does not have this form at all. (Hint: john, brush up your German) 213.51.209.230 21:55, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Through Wikipedia, I found out about Spivak pronouns, which I think I prefer. E, em, and eir sound much better to me than sie and hir, besides which, I like sounding slightly Cockney. func(talk) 00:14, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Ladies and gentlemen, you all seem to forget about hu! Oh, that political correctness silliness!--Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 13:56, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)

Neutral

Comments

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

1. Have you read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list?
A. Yes, and I read it again just now to refresh my memory.
2. Are you interested in, and do you think you'll have some time to perform, the chores that only sysops have access to do, to help keep Wikipedia up to date?
A. Yes, very interested, and I'm sure I'll have time to do them.
3. If you become a sysop, which sysop chore or chores (WP:VFD, recent changes, watching for vandals and vandalism, responding to editor requests for assistance, any other) do you especially think you would be able to help with.
A. RC patrol is mainly what I think I can help with... vandalism, speedy deletes, and other maintenance that shows up on RC. Of course, I will respond to requests and do VfD as well.
4. In your opinion, what article have you contributed the most succesfully and helpfully to?
A. I'm a big fan of No soap radio, which I wrote most of myself. However, it's hard to pick one contribution that was the most helpful.
5. In your opinion, what has your best contribution to the running and maintenance of Wikipedia been? (i.e., have you reverted a bad stretch of vandalism, done extensive work categorizing articles, helped mediate a dispute?)
A. I try to add a lot of new, interesting, and appropriate material, but I've also done NPOVing and vandalism revertion.
6. 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. Just one on Talk:Invisible Pink Unicorn, but that was hardly a conflict, and everyone was satisfied with the end result.
The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.