Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Husond

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.

[edit] Husond

Final (82/0/2) Ended Sat, 11 Nov 2006 19:19:30 (UTC)

Husond (talk · contribs)

I am honoured to be nominating Husond for adminship. He is an excellent editor and I have every confidence that he will make a fine administrator.

Husond has only been an active editor on the English Wikipedia since July 2006 (though he has also been involved in other language wikipedias), but he has already made over 7500 edits. They cover a wide range of articles, and he has also used User talk pages effectively, one of the main requirements for being a successful administrator. His user page speaks for itself about his dedication and commitment to Wikipedia. He is an effective new page and recent changes patroller, and makes good use of VandalProof. He is a member of Esperanza and Concordia. The reaction of vandals in attacking his user page and impersonating him shows how well he has dealt with them. Giving him the additional tools of an admin will make him even more effective in his work, which can only benefit the project.

I commend Husond unreservedly.--Runcorn 10:59, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Co-nominated by Mike1

Husond is a fantastic editor and about as active a user as I've ever come across. Last month alone, Husond made nearly 4,000 edits--an amount that I have not yet attained in over 9 months of active editing! Many of his edits have been fighting vandalism on RC Patrol. Obviously with the type of janitorial tasks he performs regularly, the block and protect buttons would be of particular use to him.

The main thing that impresses me about Husond is his willingness to be helpful to others. As demonstrated in some of my recent talk archives, Husond is clearly willing to go the extra mile to be nice and explain Wikipedia policy to ignoramuses like myself. Speaking of which, he has a very thorough understanding of all of the most important policies and guidelines, even those that apply only to admins such as the blocking policy.

Husond has never had any problems with civility or serious conflicts (as far as I can see) and always keeps his cool. I think that he has the experience and dedication to be an excellent administrator. - Mike | Happy Thanksgiving 01:43, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Co-nominated by riana_dzasta

It's a real pleasure to be co-nominating Húsönd for adminship. I first came across him when he reverted some vandalism on my userpage. Since then, I have been consistently impressed by his contributions; I'd like to give you a few examples below.

  • Prolific vandal fighter: [1] is just a small example of his willingness to get his hands dirty and make accurate and helpful reversions. While VP2 is a powerful tool, sysop privileges would undoubtedly assist with this work.
  • Extensive participation in AfDs, pages needing translation into English, RfAs and lately even requests for page protection, where he always manages to exhibit a sound knowledge of policy, while maintaining a level head (even in the noxious atmosphere of AfD). A good understanding of the procedural side of the encyclopedia will assist greatly in administrative duties.
  • While those following the 1FA principle may be slightly disappointed, Húsönd is the creator and main contributor to Portal:Iceland, which looks like it may be on its way to something very impressive. He's also active on Portal:Europe and Portal:Current events. Lastly, he's created some respectable stubs, listed here.
  • As for those who have an edit-count standard, Húsönd has made 7,000+ edits in the past 4 months.
  • Húsönd's well known for his kindness and willingness to help others. He's nice enough to go the extra mile and help out by explaining policy to others. Nothing ROUGE about this one! Since administrators present the public face of the encyclopedia, and are often the first people newbies become acquainted with, this pattern of extending basic courtesy to his peers should be an asset to his administrative duties.
  • As for the paperwork: e-mail enabled, short signature, clean and accessible userpage, 100% edit summary usage.

I request the community to assist our encyclopedia by granting Húsönd sysop rights. I've only seen good things from this user, and I believe he would make a very fine administrator. riana_dzasta 06:31, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept with most sincere gratitude.--Húsönd 19:00, 4 November 2006 (UTC)


Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
A: If I become an administrator, I anticipate helping with a vast array of sysop chores, although it'll be some time until I participate in every single one of them. Countervandalism would be my immediate application of the tools, as I'm very familiar with the circumstances under which vandals should be blocked (and I'm also very familiar with non-admin rollback). I'd be regularly checking WP:AIV and #vandalproof for vandal reports, and WP:RPP as well. I intend to close AfD discussions, and since I like working with portals I might offer to collaborate with the main page every now and then. I also intend to check CAT:SPEEDY regularly, although I would not delete images until I gain more experience in the image space.


2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I am not an outstanding article builder, and I regret that I focus too much on maintenance rather than trying to keep it even with article building. I have created some stubs though and, as Riana stated, I've created and maintain Portal:Iceland (which is probably the contribution I'm most pleased about). Apart from this and wikignoming, I also collaborate actively with WP:PNT, although I've only translated two articles so far, for many articles written in Portuguese or Spanish that are listed there turn out to be copyvio or fail notability criteria. I go there to translate but I end up tagging for speedy...


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 how will you deal with it in the future?
A: I had a bitter conflict in another Wikipedia. I was bashed when I was trying to help, and I ultimately abandoned the project. After that, I decided to devote all my contributions to the English Wikipedia, and I created this account as a brand new start. I'm very glad I did it because it's a totally different environment here. However, I learned a lot from that bad experience. I learned that sometimes presenting your arguments in a polite, civil way will have no effect on users who do not wish to embrace a peaceful, mature discussion. As a result, I now have a strict policy against feeding the trolls, and it's not uncommon for me to abandon a discussion when I realize that it is taking a nasty turn or leading nowhere.
Anyway on the English Wikipedia I've had no big conflicts, just some minor disputes (like this or this). I'm very calm by nature, and when I'm in the presence of civil editors then there are virtually no chances for a conflict to escalate. I always try to understand the other party's arguments, and it's not rare for me to be shown that I was wrong. Realizing my own mistakes represents absolutely no problem to me. On the other hand, if I am not convinced that I am wrong, then I will stay firm and stand by my position. But that doesn't mean that a conflict will have to be generated. Once again, I'm too calm by nature. :-)
Optional Question 4. -- your nomination indicates that you are active on other language wikipedias. How active are you as a member of those projects?
A: I am no longer active in other Wikipedias, I now devote all my contributions to the English Wikipedia. I plan to start getting more involved with Meta, Commons and the Galician Wikipedia though.
Optional Questions from bibliomaniac15 (talk · contribs)
1. Recently, there's been a great amount of dispute over AFDs about articles pertaining to subjects such as Web animation or Wikipedia games. In each, WP:NOT comes into play as a deletist argument. How stringently do you think WP:NOT should be adhered to? bibliomaniac15 Review? 02:11, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
A. Before I proceed with the answer, could you please provide examples regarding the web animation subject?
Sorry for the red link. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Demented Cartoon Movie (2nd nomination), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny, and The second AFD for Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny. bibliomaniac15 Review? 02:59, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
A.Yes, I have seen quite a few of those flash animation videos for deletion lately, as well as youtubes, etc. Although they might have considerable popularity at one time, most of them are ephemeral fads, and their articles are usually poor in content, crufty, and fail to assert notability. Nonetheless, I don't think that these are a case where WP:NOT applies mercelessly. If a reasonable number of Wikipedians are willing to keep them, then that's a sign the respective articles are indeed useful to some people and therefore should be kept at least until the fad wears off. As for the Wikipedia games deletion debate, I had already seen it but I am currently neutral as I agree with arguments from both sides. Although the games section seems to go against WP:NOT, I don't think that it's harming anybody. And, if they can help users to relax before/while/after doing serious contributions to Wikipedia, they might even prove useful for the project.
2. Do you believe that policies can be reformed, or are they set in stone? bibliomaniac15 Review? 02:11, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
A. They can be reformed, of course. If a policy is no longer proving effective and there is consensus to reform/amend it, I can't see why it shouldn't be altered.
General comments

Discussion

Support

  1. Support thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 19:14, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  2. Support at last! Good luck! --Alex (Talk) 19:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  3. Support. G.He 19:27, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  4. Strong Support He provided me with damn fine feedback on my editor review, which initially led me to think that he was already an admin. Given his positive attitude and keen knowledge of Wikipedia policies, I have no doubt that he would use a mop well. EVula 19:47, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  5. Support A great user. Plenty of afd experience, good amount of vandalism reversion (always followed by warnings, as far as I can tell), and very civil and levelheaded. When I learned he wasn't an admin (somewhere around a month ago, give or take two weeks) I was quite surprised. And in addition to all of that, Portal:Iceland looks very nice. Picaroon9288 19:57, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  6. Sustentação, Burðarstoð, Unterstützung and whatever else applies. ~ trialsanderrors 20:02, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  7. Support - good user, seen him on IRC and wiki, would be a good admin ST47Talk 20:11, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  8. Support He's a good Wikipedian. Sharkface217 20:23, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  9. Support as co-nom. - Mike | Happy Thanksgiving 20:34, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  10. Support, obviously, as nominator.--Runcorn 20:53, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  11. Support, top-notch vandal fighter. --Mr. Lefty (talk) 20:58, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  12. Shine On You Crazy Diamond. Quite surprised Husond isn't an admin already too. Heligoland 21:01, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  13. Support Why ever not? --210physicq (c) 22:00, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  14. Strong Support I have had a few run-ins with Husond before, and nothing to me suggests that this valued vandal-fighter would be anything less than a superb admin. Nishkid64 22:02, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  15. Support - great user. Khoikhoi 22:07, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  16. Support per noms. Rama's arrow 22:39, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  17. Support - great user has been very effective in vandal fighting active in AfD as well TheRanger 22:48, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  18. Support per answers given above and effective vandalfighting, something that can only be strengthened with the admin tools. (aeropagitica) 23:10, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  19. Edit-conflicted support! Given past experiences with him, I'll gladly look forward to working with Husond as an admin -- you could even say I've been waiting for it. And as I recall somebody saying quite simply in my own RfA: "vandalfighter needs tools." User is effective and reasonable. Luna Santin 23:11, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  20. Support per nom *shifty eyes* riana_dzasta 23:27, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  21. Support Seen a lot of good things from this editor. Good luck :) Thε Halo Θ 00:16, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  22. Very strong support. Vandal fighter, vandal fighter... We need more vandal fighters with admin powers --¿¡Exir Kamalabadi!? 00:58, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  23. Support. — CharlotteWebb 01:25, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  24. Support. Impressive vandal fighter. I have no problems providing tools for specialist editors when I am confident they would not misuse them in other areas. Rockpocket 01:51, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  25. Support. (edit conflict) per answers to questions and many of the above votes.--Grand Slam 7 01:56, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  26. Strong Support. Affable, committed, level-headed, civil, and an excellent vandal bopper. Dar-Ape 03:01, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  27. These things can't be closed early! Curse you, Captain Planet!;}  Jorcogα  03:51, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  28. Support Michael 03:54, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  29. Естественно, я поддерживаю етого кандидата. Потому что у него есть тараканы. Я поддерживаю всех с тараканами. - crz crztalk 04:44, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
    What he said. riana_dzasta 04:57, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
    Cockroaches as criteria? That's a new one. Picaroon9288 21:50, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
    lol... - crz crztalk 22:02, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
    Wishkres is up next, then? riana_dzasta 01:57, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  30. Support as per above. Patstuart(talk)(contribs) 05:00, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  31. Yeah? Hell yeah! An excellent user, and a pleasure to see around -- Husond will make a very high quality admin. Daveydweeb (chat/patch) 05:40, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  32. Support Not much else to say. KrakatoaKatie 07:26, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  33. Support Demonstrated knowledge of WIKI and will continue to grow. Storm Rider (talk) 07:53, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  34. Strong Support per all the above reasons. A very good editor. --Siva1979Talk to me 11:48, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  35. Support per noms -- Lost(talk) 11:49, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  36. Strong Support - I have just good experinces with him. Will make an absolutely good admin. NCurse work 12:29, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  37. Support per above, Addhoc 16:00, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  38. Support. - Mailer Diablo 16:21, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  39. Support no bad experiences with him.-- danntm T C 18:14, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  40. Support --Aguerriero (talk) 20:23, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  41. Support per the excellent nomination and answers. Normally I would look for a little more time on the project but the circumstances here make that much less relevant. Newyorkbrad 20:54, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  42. Support. Amazing noöne has opposed yet. I hope it stays that way. I haven't met this editor, per se, but I've watched him, and I see absolutely no reason to oppose. Per noms. —  $PЯINGεrαgђ  21:32, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
    Well, someone had opposed, but s/he changed to neutral. Picaroon9288 21:50, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  43. Unconditional Support: Civil and knowledgeable editor. He has done a great job so far on WP:RQM and other unpopular corners of wikipedia. Regards, Asteriontalk 00:46, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  44. Support Have had good interactions with him. Good house-duck to have around. Haukur 01:04, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  45. Support - As per my stricken neutral comment below... Spawn Man 03:30, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  46. Support - Per noms. Acs4b 07:53, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  47. Strong support, I have had frequent interaction with Husond, and he's extremely polite and civil. Would make a good mop-wielder. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 10:29, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  48. I agree to mopifying this versatile user. >Radiant< 11:51, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  49. Support, good user. --Terence Ong (T | C) 13:24, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  50. Support Three noms, thats a good thing --Ageo020 (Talk • Contribs) 16:47, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  51. Support per everyone above  Doctor Bruno  16:58, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  52. Support This is a great candidate. Give-em-the-mopTM JungleCat talk/contrib 18:10, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  53. Eu suporto. I believe this will be the first admin from Portugal. Correct me if I'm wrong. Grandmasterka 18:49, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  54. Super-Support, what a very kind user. A great help to the project the tools will only make him a better editor.--Arjun 21:18, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  55. Uber support(edit conflict) this guy helped me get my mop, and is a valuable asset to WP. Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 21:23, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  56. Support a good candidate --Steve 01:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  57. Support – I've seen him patrolling quite a few times, and he seems to have good judgment. "He's Not An Admin Already?" -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 07:38, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  58. Support As ridiculous as I think the "he's not already an admin?" support statement is, I actually was shocked to see this RfA. If anything, it's overdue. Plus, he used the word "honour" with the correct British spelling. How cool is that?! --NMChico24 10:22, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  59. Support: I've had to revert his user page more than once so he must be doing something right!  :) —Wknight94 (talk) 17:18, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  60. Super strong support: He's a nice guy, knows what he's doing, and is great on the anti-vandal front. This RfA is probably overdue. :) —Disavian (talk/contribs) 21:22, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  61. Support – Good editor, nice (helpful!) person; perfect mix. Will be a wonderful admin. — Editor at Large(speak) 21:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  62. Support, definitely. User has his act together and will use the tools well. Heimstern Läufer 23:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  63. Merovingian ※ Talk 01:00, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
  64. Incredibly strong support. ~crazytales56297 O rly? 12:55, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
  65. Support. Bucketsofg 19:27, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
  66. I see no reason to not support. DS 00:04, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  67. Of course I support I have seen him (or her) a number of occasions busily trying to better Wikipedia. I see no reason from the edit count and from the question answers to oppose him. (or her) Diez2 02:43, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  68. Support per Runcorn. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 03:20, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  69. Hmm. Thought I voted already a while back. Maybe I was edit conflicted by one of the many people who obviously feel he'll be a great admin like I do. Support Jcam 03:48, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  70. Support per nom. John254 05:16, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  71. Support. The coffee loungers say hi. bibliomaniac15 Review? 06:26, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  72. Support. European support from the EU member. - Darwinek 09:36, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  73. Support. Good editor! Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 12:21, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  74. Strong Support - Great wikipedian, has my support. Would do the job great. Chris Kreider 16:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  75. Support I've seen Husond around quite a bit, and have seen nothing but positive things from him. -- tariqabjotu 05:12, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
  76. Pile-on Friendly user, good guy, seems to place the best interests of Wikipedia at the forefront of his editing style hoopydinkConas tá tú? 06:06, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
  77. Support. Seems to be sensible and experienced. Jayjg (talk) 17:35, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
  78. Strong support. Great editor, very civil and experienced.--TBCΦtalk? 20:01, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
  79. Support passes my criteria †he Bread 01:44, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
  80. Support very kind user, has brought smiles to my face from some of his edits.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 04:37, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
  81. Support , pr nom.Mustafa AkalpTC 11:29, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
  82. Support He's very involved.. I don't actually know him very well, but I've seen his edits everywhere --lovelaughterlife♥ (user|talk) 17:26, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
    Belated, post-promotion support - I meant to add my support in here during the RfA, but was out of town for most of it and missed out — but I still want to add in my belated support of an editor who engaged me in a reasonable, friendly dialogue when we (gently) butted heads once. I think Husond has what it takes to make a great admin. Tijuana Brass 21:57, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Oppose

Neutral

Abstain --T-rex 04:17, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
weak oppose - per lack of time editing here, may change vote if optional question reveals significantly more experience --T-rex 19:42, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
He has considerable experience on another Wikipedia.--Runcorn 20:53, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
I guess I should note though that although I've edited the Portuguese Wikipedia for a couple of months, I gained all my WP maintenance experience on the English Wikipedia.--Húsönd 21:15, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Neutral→Support - I don't particularly like it when people get nominated here for their great work on another Wikipedia. However, Husond has many edits here & therefore has earned his salt on the English Wikipedia. Again, however, his average edits-per-article count is 1.33. So, that sounds to me like he either makes very small edits (such as spelling etc) over numerous articles or that he's some kind of savant who can write 50 lines in a single edit. In fact the most edits he's made on a single article is 10. I'd presume that for someone with around 3,000+ edits in the mainspace, that he'd have a better average than 1.33, or, like I said, he's a savant. I don't think he's written a featured article either. However, I have seen him around (or his signature to be more precise), & he seems like a pretty nice guy & capable to boot. I'd be more than willing to change my vote to support if Husond sees it fit to answer some of my concerns above... Thanks, Spawn Man 02:44, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi Spawn Man! Allow me to attempt to change your opinion :) I didn't co-nom Husond for his work on another Wikipedia, but for the simple reason that Luna Santin and Exir Kamalbadi state above - vandalfighter, needs tools. Husond is a hard-working and important vandalfighter, and would benefit greatly from the extra buttons. He doesn't pretend to be a great article writer. Different editors contribute to Wikipedia differently: you are one of our great article-writers, while Husond works his butt off trying to keep those articles clean! The granting of sysop rights is a purely technical issue, and it will assist Husond greatly in his activities. I'll let Husond follow this up himself, of course, but this is my $0.02. Cheers! riana_dzasta 03:20, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Husond replied on my talk, & as per my above comment, I will now change my vote to support. On one condition however; that sometime in the future Husond will try & work on his article writing skills (although he states this will happen when he creates the Sky scraper project.... you have to make it now I've said it ;)). Other than that, as I said, Husond is a nice guy & is very capable & I feel he would benefit from the extra tools... Spawn Man 03:30, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Incredibly strong oppose, I don't even know how such dictatorial, unfriendly, and unproductive Wikipedians get nominated!? --172.145.125.13 06:48, 6 November 2006 (UTC) (IP counts not voted) — 172.145.125.13 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Note: user appears to be sockpuppet of disruptive user Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles (talk · contribs) -Patstuart(talk)(contribs) 07:20, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
IP !votes aren't counted, anyway. riana_dzasta 08:23, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, but you're wrong on this one and no reasonable person would call me disruptive anyway. --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles 21:15, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  1. Neutral for now. I am concerned that he has been here only since July 2006. However, I do have a question for the candidate - If consensus is found to promote you, will you use the admin channel of IRC? If so - What do you feel you can discuss there which will positively benefit Wikipedia that cannot be discussed in an open forum? Giano 08:56, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    I would likely use the admin channel. Odd situations occur all the time and the admin channel would be a fast, effective way to seek immediate advice. Although advice can be sought in other channels, #wikipedia for instance has so much gossip that sometimes requests for assistance may go unnoticed.--Húsönd 13:05, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    and "that cannot be discussed in an open forum?" Giano 14:11, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    I can't think of anything particular "that could not be discussed in an open forum" at the moment. But if I have a particular request/query that can only be attended to by administrators, I reckon that it's pertinent to take it to #wikipedia-en-admins.--Húsönd 14:30, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  2. Neutral. I feel obliged to echo Giano's concerns. No evidence has been presented that the nominee has substantial experience in mainspace, other than vandal-fighting, and that he has been sufficiently involved in dispute resolution procedures. With recent instances of admins running amock, I don't think we should be so facile in entrusting tools to newbies. --Ghirla -трёп- 08:28, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
    I'm not going to change my !vote, but I somewhat agree with some of Ghirla's comments. It's hard to sift through your edits and find the editorial contributions. For the most part you stopped writing articles around September. While zapping vandals is certainly a useful contribution, you should eversooften remind yourself how hard it is to actually write good articles by trying your hand at it. ~ trialsanderrors 09:40, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
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.