Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Evercat 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Evercat

final (44/0/0) ending 00:11, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

It's me. I have repented my sins and promise not to use blocking powers in a questionable manner again... Evercat 00:12, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Support

  1. Of course. —Charles P. (Mirv) 00:18, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  2. Well yeah. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 00:28, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  3. Merovingian (t) (c) 00:32, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
  4. For sure. SlimVirgin (talk) 00:53, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
  5. Support. Long-time, excellent and very active contributor. --MPerel ( talk | contrib) 01:05, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
  6. Support.-gadfium 01:40, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  7. Support. A combination of previous experience and the support of some rather well-respected users works for me. Very nice to see you back. - Lucky 6.9 04:46, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  8. Has always seemed like a good editor/admin to me. Sam Spade 09:13, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  9. Support. Everyone deserves a second chance and I'm sure you won't let yourself get so badly bitten again. Grace Note 14:35, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  10. Support. Guettarda 16:18, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  11. Support. Naturally. -- Cimon 16:26, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
  12. Support, we all make mistakes. Rje 19:13, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
  13. Support. No reason to suspect any future abuses of admin powers. Jayjg (talk) 22:08, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  14. Support. Taco Deposit | Talk-o to Taco 22:47, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
  15. Support. You deserve a second chance. Zzyzx11 | Talk 23:10, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  16. Oppose - will support when user has 2 Mediawiki, 3 Category, and 5 Help namespace edits. (Disclaimer: thisvoteisajokevote. Iamnotliableforanyemotionalorphysicaldamagecausedbythisvote. Thankyouhaveanicedaykthxbye.) ugen64 00:02, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    I disagree, I don't think this contributor will be ready for adminship unless at least one positive comment has been made on a steward's talk page or contributor participates in the Wikipedia:No Pants Policy discussion. — oo64eva (AJ) (U | T | C) @ 23:14, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
  17. Support, glad to have you back on the team. --fvw* 00:40, 2005 Apr 28 (UTC)
  18. Support: for sure. I agree with Sam here, you always seemed great to me. Shit happens, and we all screw up sometimes. As long as you've learnt from your mistake, I see no reason to oppose. Welcome back :-) -Frazzydee|✍ 00:54, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  19. Support; welcome back; we need good people doing this job. Antandrus 01:36, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  20. Support. Absolutely; I was hoping you'd return. Mackensen (talk) 04:24, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  21. Support. Kingturtle 06:28, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  22. Support. +sj + 06:48, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  23. Sì. --M7it 11:14, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  24. Support. Charles Matthews 12:46, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  25. Support. I disagreed with your decision to step down in the first place :) -- sannse (talk) 17:39, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  26. Support. PedanticallySpeaking 18:31, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)
  27. Support. Even cuter than Slim's poodle.--Chammy Koala 19:22, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  28. Support -JCarriker 22:54, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)
  29. Support. I'm positive he learned from the experience. Mgm|(talk) 12:47, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)
  30. Support, welcome back. --Bishonen | talk 19:57, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  31. Support Oh goody. I get to be Number 31 in the queue to say of course, Evercat. Glad to have you on board. FearÉIREANN 04:32, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  32. Support. Evercat has showed enough grace to deserve a second chance. JuntungWu 08:19, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  33. Support --ShaunMacPherson 12:10, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  34. Andre (talk) 18:28, Apr 30, 2005 (UTC)
  35. Support. Great Wikipedian, and his sense of accountability is to be admired, too. Now, welcome back! Mindspillage (spill yours?) 13:45, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
  36. Support. James F. (talk) 15:50, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
  37. Neutralitytalk 15:59, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
  38. Geogre 19:04, 1 May 2005 (UTC) This is what I get for not checking RfA very often: I get to be one of the last to vote support on an obvious "Yes."
  39. Support. This Wikipedian has my vote. — oo64eva (AJ) (U | T | C) @ 23:14, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
  40. Rmhermen 12:54, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
  41. Support - good enough for me! - Ta bu shi da yu 02:51, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
  42. Support - He promised me a hamburger. - Tεxτurε 03:05, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
  43. Another "of course" case. Strong support. David Cannon 05:15, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
  44. I feel obligated to tip the scales in favor of support. It's not every day that someone "repents" on RFA. DropDeadGorgias (talk) 21:19, May 3, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose

Neutral

  1. My first inclination was to oppose but the quality of support has given me pause. Any chance of you giving diffs so that those who are not completely au fait with your transgression can look it up? I'm not inclined to hand out second chances to rogue admins, and I'm probably not alone in feeling that, so it's worth being clear just how "roguish" you were ;-)Grace Note 01:23, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC) Okay, it would be churlish to oppose an editor who shows such good grace.Grace Note 14:35, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    There are no diffs; it was a block of someone with whom an argument had become rather personal. I interpreted repeated requests to remove something from my user page as a sort of trolling; I was also accused of "stalking" said person and posting personal information about him/her, which is kind of true: at the request of another user who was wondering if said person was a previous troll, I did once post which country he/she was from, which I found from his/her IP address in a logged-out edit. There was a big blowup on IRC with the two of us trading insults, and, in a rather emotional state, I made the block. I consulted with the mailing list and stood down as a sysop within a day or two, as I recall. Evercat 11:36, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Comments

  • Evercat currently has 10391 total edits: 6925/927 to articles/talk, 346/1325 to User/talk, 551/89 to Wikipedia/talk, 182/8 to Image/talk, 26/4 to Template/talk, 5 to Help, 2 to Category, and 1 to MediaWiki. —Korath (Talk) 00:50, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)

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. Speedy deletions, vandal reverts, obvious vandal blocks.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. The Buddhabrot is pretty. The problem of Hell is a page where I tried to present both sides' arguments without giving away what my own view is (though that would be obvious enough from my userpage...)
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. No never. Well OK, a few times in my year or two of loyal service. :-) Mostly they've worked out alright, and I've learnt from the one time it really didn't...