Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Rettetast

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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

Contents

[edit] Rettetast

Final: (43/0/2); ended 22:49, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Rettetast (talk · contribs) - Quite simple: Rettetast is with us since September 2006, having done something like 15.000 edits. Wikipedia can only benefit from giving the tools to such a prolific and trusted editor. Snowolf (talk) CON COI - 22:36, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept. Rettetast 22:49, 6 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?
A: As an administrator I would keep an eye on WP:AIV and help when its needed. I have reported a lot of vandals here and would be able to block them myself if I become an administrator. I would also work on the never ending backlog at CAT:CSD. Although I have not been active in XFDs I feel that I know the criteria for speedy deletion to determine when to speedy delete since I have nominated many pages for speedy deletion. I also expect to do some work at CAT:NC.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: My best contributions to Wikipedia are my vandalism work but I have gradually become more active in improving articles. I don't write a great prose in English and therefore don't do that to much. I fix the minor stuff and replace images and do general cleanup. I keep an eye on the S.K. Brann <POV> The best team in the world</POV> related articles and templates and updates them whenever it's needed.
3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
A: Not really. I have not bin in any big controversies and I don't believe I will be in any. Maybe I am not bold enough, but that is how I am. If anyone is angry because of my contributions I deal with it by using Wikipedias policy's. In most cases they give the answer.
A question from bainer (talk)
4. Under what circumstances should one ignore a rule?
A:I am sorry for the late answer. I have bin busy IRL. It is vital to remember what our goal, writing an encyclopedia. If ignoring a rule will help achieving this goal there is no need to follow the rule just because it is a rule. However, where there are different opinions on what will benefit our goal. In such cases consensus should be reached through discussion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rettetast (talk • contribs) 17:04, 7 May 2007 (UTC).
5. Optional question by Snowolf (talk) CON COI - : Is your password alphanumeric? Formed by at least 8 characters? Not by words in the dictionary? Not in the weakest password list? (just answer yes plz)
A: No need to worry. Rettetast 21:43, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Question from T
6. Do you help out on other projects?
A: Yes, I work on other projects. Most on the Norwegian (bokmål) Wikipedia, some at Norwegian (nynorsk) and lately I have also done some editing in Commons to learn more about image policies. There are also some other accounts with very few edits. Rettetast 21:43, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] General comments

Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Rettetast before commenting.

[edit] Discussion

Support

  1. Support → The first support comes free with the nomination ;-) Snowolf (talk) CON COI - 22:37, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
  2. Support seems like a decent editor we can trust with the mop. Although you may want to work on talking with other editors. I looked at your last 200talk and user talk pages and they were pretty much just vandalism reverts and warnings. As well as having low wikipedia talk edits. Otherwise, you seem like a pretty good editor :) --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 23:05, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
  3. --U.S.A. cubed 23:22, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
  4. Support I agree with Malvious on communication. Nonetheless, this user is a no nonsense wikipedian who deserves the mop, or should I say the sledgehammer considering his large quantity of vandalism fighting. --Random Say it here! 00:09, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  5. Support Low amount of discussion-style edits on talk pages can be a problem, but judging from this user's activities, I have no problem giving this user my support. Nishkid64 (talk) 00:26, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  6. Support Good vandalfighter, just needs to up the contributions to the policy space. (aeropagitica) 00:29, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  7. Finally, a candidate has shown real dedication to the project (time and edits). Strongest support I've given in a while. Daniel Bryant 00:58, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  8. Support - No doubt that I trust the user, and that the user would make for a fine admin. Cool Bluetalk to me 01:02, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  9. Support. The answers may be a little short, but the contribs say it all. Sr13 (T|C) 01:51, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  10. Support. His work at the Wikimedia Commons is good, and it seems like he can be trusted. Kjetil r 01:56, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  11. Support. Good experiance, no aparent problems. -Mschel 02:14, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  12. Yes please - great candidate. Ryan Postlethwaite 02:21, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  13. Support Looks good to me. JodyB talk 02:31, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  14. Support, no second thoughts. —AldeBaer 02:54, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  15. Support Experienced and responsible editor. the_undertow talk 03:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  16. Support, quite a respectable number of edits collected in a short period of time for what appears to be a very dedicated person. --Phoenix (talk) 05:04, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  17. Support, a trustworthy and effective antivandal. (With a fitting nick, as "Rettetast" means "Backspace", or more literally "Correction key", in Norwegian) - Soulkeeper 06:20, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  18. Support Just the kind of admin we need around here. Jmlk17 07:15, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  19. Support- --Nina-no 08:25, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  20. Uhh... wasn't he one already? :o – Rianaऋ 09:29, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  21. Support, competent antivandal. Cnyborg 09:45, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  22. Support looks good to me. James086Talk | Email 10:20, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  23. I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message! - 11:14, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  24. Support per all above. Walton Need some help? 15:54, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  25. Support - per Walton_monarchist89..----Cometstyles 16:00, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  26. Support - A qualified candidate. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 17:49, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  27. Support, great contributor. Jon Harald Søby 19:34, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  28. Support I've only seen good contribs from you. Can't imagine any problems here. Valentinian T / C 20:10, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  29. Support Passes my standards. TTalk to me 21:50, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  30. Support--Agεθ020 (ΔT • ФC) 00:08, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
  31. Support not likely to abuse the tools; experienced enough. —Anas talk? 06:41, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
  32. Support -- Gogo Dodo 20:38, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
  33. Support: Has plenty of experience, also edit summary usage is good as well. Should be an asset as an administrator.  Orfen User Talk | Contribs 21:53, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
  34. Support Great --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ walkie-talkie 14:16, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
  35. Support Good candidate with a good nominator. Acalamari 23:06, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
  36. Support John254 00:02, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
    Support - No reason to oppose. James086Talk | Email 05:30, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
    Double vote. —AldeBaer 07:54, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
  37. Support Wikipedia space count is acceptable due to high level of experience. Captain panda 13:14, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
  38. support very good history and experience with wikipedia to have administration tools yuckfoo 00:07, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
  39. Support, looks good.--Wizardman 04:25, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
  40. Support. PeaceNT 10:52, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
  41. Support 100% O.K.! --Infrangible 18:10, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
  42. Support Very good!! --PaulVIF 19:10, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
  43. Support try as I might, I can't find any reason not to support enthusiastically!--Taxwoman 22:24, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

Neutral

  1. Neutral for now You are clearly a great editor, but you have done very little work in WP space.DGG 03:58, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  2. Per DGG, and the <pov> comment is niggling me a bit. I know it's a joke...sorry, I just can't support. ~ G1ggy! Reply 09:01, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
    With respect, I really, really don't understand how the <pov> comment could be a reason to oppose. It was quite clearly made with humorous intent. Walton Need some help? 15:54, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
    With all the appropriate respect: It's a downright idiotic reason not to support. —User:AldeBaer / User talk:AldeBaer 16:06, 8 May 2007 (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.