Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Vague Rant

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Vague Rant

final (53/1/0) ending 01:30 20 January 2005 (UTC)

I hereby nominate Vague Rant to be an administrator. He's done very good work with copyvios, as well as some stuff with VFD. He has 3033 edits as of this writing, and has been contributing since July 1, 2004. He's been quite active since July 31. I've talked to him on IRC, and he's a very decent guy, and I think that he'll be a great help to Wikipedia if he's an admin. -Frazzydee|✍ 01:30, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Strongly accept. Thanks, Frazz. - Vague | Rant 01:53, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)

Support

  1. Definitely. -Frazzydee|✍ 01:32, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  2. All hail the Copyvio King. Harsah! →Reene✎ 01:33, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
  3. Good contributor, good history, good talk page. CryptoDerk 01:34, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
  4. User has excellent taste in women. Oh, and he's a good contributor, I guess. ADH (t&m) 01:35, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
  5. About time. --Slowking Man 01:35, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
  6. Good user. Andre (talk) 02:00, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
  7. Hail to thee, thane of copyvios. Hail to thee, thane of speedys. Hail to thee, King of Wikipedia! Wholeheartedly support; user is a great editor and will be a great sysop. Neutralitytalk 02:05, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
  8. Support, has been doing some wonderful work. --fvw* 02:35, 2005 Jan 13 (UTC)
  9. Wholeheartedly support. Ambi 02:35, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  10. Support. gcbirzan (talk) 02:43, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  11. Sure. ugen64 03:10, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  12. Strong support GeneralPatton 03:18, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  13. Support. Carrp 03:32, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  14. Support. SWAdair | Talk 03:46, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  15. Support. Good work w/copyvio and cleanup. --MPerel 05:02, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
  16. Willkommen im Kabal! ;) --Conti|✉ 05:29, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
  17. Michael Snow 05:38, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  18. Support with extreme prejudice. utcursch 06:14, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
  19. Support -- Rhobite 07:29, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
  20. Support - of course. Dysprosia 09:40, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  21. Support -- quite proud to stand behind you, Vague! -SocratesJedi | Talk 09:44, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  22. Support. I don't know you personally but such strong support is good enough for me. --JuntungWu 11:52, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  23. Support. I thought he was a sysop already. jni 12:30, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  24. Support. I did too. Hoary 15:11, 2005 Jan 13 (UTC)
  25. Support. -- Ferkelparade π 15:59, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  26. Support. --Lst27 (talk) 20:46, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  27. Support. I'm very impressed with how much work the vagrant does in keeping our encyclopedia free of copyrighted materials. Now if only we could figure out how to stop people from just dumping web sites into articles... — Knowledge Seeker দ (talk) 22:43, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  28. Support. Kingturtle 23:53, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  29. Support it's not often I vote, but for Vague... -- sannse (talk) 01:43, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  30. Support. Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 05:18, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  31. Polite, well-behaved, does a lot of dirty chores...why not? Johnleemk | Talk 08:01, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  32. Yes, more janitors! Noel (talk) 16:39, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  33. Support of course. Sietse 20:32, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  34. 172 21:19, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  35. A true custodian of this site in every honorable and praiseworthy sense of the word. Jwrosenzweig 22:42, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  36. I've seen Vague Rant around. Support. - RedWordSmith 23:23, Jan 14, 2005 (UTC)
  37. Support, very hard working. Rje 00:37, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)
  38. Mackensen (talk) 01:44, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  39. Support. You have a very impressive list of supporters here. Keep up the good work. - Taxman 04:12, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)
  40. Support, definitely. Great user, never had a bad experience with him. [[User:Premeditated Chaos|User:Premeditated Chaos/Sig]] 05:01, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  41. Support, truly respect his work. PlasticBeat 18:26, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  42. David Gerard 20:39, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  43. Support. -- Infrogmation 03:00, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  44. Support Tuf-Kat 22:24, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)
  45. Proteus (Talk) 23:29, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  46. Support. Try not to be too cynical though :P - Ta bu shi da yu 05:13, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  47. Support, although we really need less of the vague ranting in the admin ranks. :) Netoholic @ 05:22, 2005 Jan 18 (UTC)
  48. Jordi·✆ 09:02, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  49. Another support vote for this great contributor will not hurt. JFW | T@lk 21:14, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  50. It's always good to have more reliable people willing to work on VfD-and-related maintenance. -Aranel ("Sarah") 21:30, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  51. Obvious. Strong support. Everything I have seen is good. Antandrus 02:05, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  52. This point may be moot, but I'm givin' the Rantster the Official Lucky 6.9 Holy Mother of support!! - Lucky 6.9 23:30, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  53. Support. Seems to fit right in -- Chris 73 Talk 05:42, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Ollieplatt 08:25, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC) Until Rhobite withdraws his vote.
    That's no valid reason to oppose! utcursch 12:35, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
    Ollie, could you please judge candidates on their own merits and NOT on who supports them. thanks. Kingturtle 23:53, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Neutral

Comments

  • I make a lot of minor edits. Therefore, my edit count may be deceptive. - Vague | Rant 01:53, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
  • Rhobite is the subject of a Request for Comment for abusing his admin powers, should he vote in those circumstances? Ollieplatt 08:25, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    • RfC's do nothing but call the community's attention to an issue and asks for feedback. Even if there was a problem that is no reason he could not vote, and it's rude to project whatever you have against Rhobite onto someone else "just because". →Reene✎ 08:37, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
    • For the record, Rhobite voted here before Ollieplatt created the (currently uncertified) RfC. The RfC (against a voter, not the candidate) is only an allegation and clearly has no conceivable bearing whatsoever on Vague Rant's fitness for adminship. To disregard a candidate's track record and vote against them because you don't like someone who voted for them is mind boggling. SWAdair | Talk 11:08, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    • Rhobite is not the subject of an RFC - the RFC was deleted uncertified - David Gerard 20:39, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
      • I can confirm that, having been the person who deleted it after it was uncertified after 48 hours. Ollieplatt would do well to give proper criteria for voting on admins. His vote as it stands is invalid, and will be treated as such. - Ta bu shi da yu 05:16, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
      • I don't know how relevant this is, but I was actually nominated for Adminship (and made an Admin) while the subject of a (later rejected) RfC. Being mentioned at RfC isn't in and of itself any cause for concern, though of course it doesn't hurt to investigate the circumstances. -Aranel ("Sarah") 21:30, 18 Jan 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. As Frazzydee mentioned above, I report a lot of copyvios, which I find, for the most part, via Special:Newpages, which means I also come across a lot of speedy candidates. I'd do the obvious deletion of them, and I'd also be willing to work on Wikipedia:Copyright problems and Wikipedia:Votes for deletion. I could make a generic remark about the rollback feature here, but it's nothing you're not already aware that I will do.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. Tony Sheridan and his album My Bonnie were both articles inited by me, and I'm unsure of which I like more. A lot of work went into the researching of My Bonnie, while I think Sheridan displays probably the highest quality of writing I've done here. I'd like to see them get some editing done by other people, though. It seems no one's noticed them, yet. I also liked my changes to "Jealous Guy", where I added some info on its grounding in the Get Back sessions [1]. I was trying to get it to mirror Wikipedia's excellent article on "Yesterday", and while I don't think I achieved that quality, I definitely think my contributions greatly improved "Jealous Guy". I'm really more of an editor than a writer however, and I do a lot of cleanup (not Wikipedia:Cleanup, just Special:Randompage and clean style).
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. I had a minor bit of conflict on Autobiography, but it was soon sorted. I've, of course, had a bit of trouble with the copyvio side of things--it seems people aren't so impressed when their hard work copying and pasting comes to nothing. I've tried to help with explaining the process by leaving messages on users' talk pages and placing a boilerplate on the top of my user and talk pages to help with queries.