Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/captaindansplashback

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/captaindansplashback

Voice your opinion *This appears to be a silly joke - can this nomination be speedily closed? Brookie :) - a will o' the wisp ! (Whisper...) 06:01, 6 December 2006 (UTC) This farce honored nomination should be sent to BJAODN. --ElaragirlTalk|Count 07:45, 6 December 2006 (UTC) (0/0/0/2); Scheduled to end 16:51, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Captaindansplashback (talk · contribs) � Captainsdansplashback has made various important edits mainly on music entries in Wikipedia. He is dedicated and hardworking and rarely feels the urge to vandalise Wikipedia pages. He requests adminship as this would give him the power to ban users who are using Wikipedia for the wrong reasons, he also would bring a strong democracy to Wikipedia unlike the dictatorship that is currently running Wikipedia currently Captaindansplashback 16:51, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I accept:


Questions for the candidate

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 do you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog and Category:Administrative backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
A: I would slave away at my computer for hours removing vandalists and the like and taking my time to edit pages. I will be quite strict with blocking users, if they use bad grammer or puntuation I will send them a warning to tell them if they ever do it again. They will be blocked because bad English is not tolerated.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I am pleased with my edit on We Are Scientists. I shows that I am willing to make serious edits aswell as comical ones.
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 conflict with the user, Brookie. I can say it caused me a vast amount of stress. He claims he is an admin but I beg to differ. If you gave me power I would immedietely block this Brookie from editing Wikipedia and make it clear he is not welcome. However the conflict with Brookie was short-lived as he was trying to pick a fight on me when I said I stood for equal rights but I informed him that I wanted none of that and told him not to use quotations as a weild of power as Wikipedia is not a warzone.
Optional question from ais523
4. You don't seem to have enough edits for me to gauge your opinions on policy, so I'll just ask instead. What is your opinion on WP:CSD#A7? Do you think that WP:N should be a policy, guideline, or essay? Do you think that WP:NOT is a needed basis to delete articles about non-notable things, or do you think that WP:V, WP:CITE, and WP:RS are sufficient?
A: Frankly I think that WP:CSD#A7,WP:RS and the like are a load of gibberish which if a user were to use I would block he or she for non notable nonsense. I feel that users should use the language, which people generally understand such as English however I would except French, Spanish and possibly German. I would discourage admins from using this derranged computer speak on Wikipedia and tell them to use it only in the privacy of their own homes where it is not exposed to innocent users who may become scared or offended by these phrases.
Optional questions from J.S.
5. I need to ask this question: Is this nomination serious? I made my comment in jest because I thought this nomination was in jest. However, if it's a serious nomination I'll change my comment to a serious one.
A: I assure you this is a serious application. Otherwise why would I apply? I feel I am worthy.
6. Assuming this is serious, what are your thoughts on the rules prohibiting the use of secondary accounts to sway a vote or discussion? What about the rule prohibiting attacking other editors?
A: I feel that secondary accounts can be just if they are for a good cause, say if I were to apply to become an admin and support myself that would be just as it is demonstarting my passion to become an admin and my hunger for authority...Which is a good thing. Attacking other editors is acceptable if you have a good reason e.g. if they were to delete your application for adminship. Some exceptions are if you were a higher authority than the user you have the right to attack others...Except if your name is Brookie.
General comments
  • See Captaindansplashback's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.
  • Just to let everyone know I have been blocked before but it was Wikipedia who was to blame. They were silencing my passion for freedom. Anyway I have changed my ways I have learnt that voicing an opinioon does not help, you must become an Admin and silence others opinons.

Discussion

Support

  1. MrFudge: I support this lad as he seems to be well versed in good english punctuation which is essential for an admin and he only seems to have good intentions. But we'll have to restrict him from attacking this Brookie person to an extent. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mrfudge (talk • contribs).— Mrfudge (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  2. I support Captaindansplashback's request for adminship. I have seen and been impressed with his previous edits especially the recent one on Art Brut which I found to be particularly well-researched and informative. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.131.109.95 (talk • contribs).— 81.131.109.95 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  1. I believe that Captaindansplashback has every right to become an admin. You lot are all oppressing him like the fascists you are. I also think that the optional question that you presented for him was grossly unfair as it is clearly in some kind of code which no person who is not in on your viscious plot could understand. I would also like to know why the username Ultimate Jihad! is unsuitable and suggest one of you admins (as you call yourself with your sly codewords) unblock him. Ride The Cheese Like A Horsey 15:37, 6 December 2006 (UTC) — Ride The Cheese Like A Horsey (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Oppose

  1. Captaindansplashback spends a lot of time trying to be funny. However, he may not be as humorour as he thinks he is. See: [[1]] Drunken Pirate 02:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  2. I can only assume that this application is a joke! Brookie :) - a will o' the wisp ! (Whisper...) 05:50, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  3. Strong Oppose (responding under the assumption that this is a good faith self-nom) Editor lacks the experience needed for adminship. Also hasn't demonstrated an grasp for the basic philosophy of the project. My suggestion is that captaindansplashback should spend time seriously editing and re-try in 6 months. ---J.S (T/C) 20:39, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  4. Oppose, of course, as if it matters. This is going nowhere. The self-nom couldn't even be formatted properly, and the threats have already doomed this nom, as well as the sock puppet brigade. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:25, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
  5. Oppose, speedy delete as patent nonsense / pure vandalism. BigDT 22:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

# I await the answer to question 6. ---J.S (T/C) 18:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Hams

  1. Definitely hams. -- mattb @ 2006-12-06T03:36Z
# Hams: Clearly. ---J.S (T/C) 03:38, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  1. This clearly portrays Captaindansplashback's point that all of you are in on some sort of fascist plot and are attempting to rule the world with your modern kind of Newspeak. If you do not talk in plain english how are we supposed to know what you refer to? I suspect that "Hams" is some sort codeword meaning "Brookie is god. Let's set the guns on Captaindansplashback and oppress his experience on wikipedia". You people disgust me.Ride The Cheese Like A Horsey 15:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
    You forgot to call us communists. :) ---J.S (T/C) 15:46, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
    Or to imply that we set you up the bomb. --ElaragirlTalk|Count 15:48, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
    Shhh, JS! Don't tell him anything about the cabal! Patstuarttalk|edits 16:14, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Listen punks. I support communism. I'm very open about it. All I want is for you to admit that you are running a nazist regime and that this is the reason you are not allowing captaindansplashback to become an administrator. Ride The Cheese Like A Horsey 16:58, 6 December 2006

Delete. User fails Godwin's Law. And we're running a cabalist regime. Nazi regimes are down the hall. --ElaragirlTalk|Count 18:39, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

WP:TINC

  1. Unconditional cabal support, on the condition the cabal exists. Which it does not. ^demon[omg plz] 03:39, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  2. Clearly the only reasonable solution, per the Dirac equations. Seriously, what IS this? -Amarkov blahedits 05:58, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  3. Arrr. Per Amarkov. riana_dzasta 06:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  4. As a member of the Children of America Building Another Light, I oppose this candidate. Allowing this editor administrator status could allow him to interfere with the workings of the Children, and prevent all of our "charitable work." Nos ire evinco orbis terrarum - operor non dico quisquam. --TheOtherBob 16:17, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I assure you your children are safe and when I become administrator I would ensure that their work is not ruined. Just out of interest how much will I be payed when I become administrator? I just wanted to state that I shall accept no less than £10.00 an hour or I will have to reject the offer. I believe that some are mocking my application claiming it is a mere 'joke' and that it should 'be deleted.' Of course I should have known I would have expected this from none other than Brookie. I believe he is probably still bitter about the edit war he was trying to achieve in which I maturely turned down. He is probably trying to prevent me from becoming an admin as he fears for his account to be blocked, however I am responisble and will only block him if he breaks any of the rules. I on the otherhand found this comment of his quite amusing, 'This appears to be a silly joke - can this nomination be speedily closed?' It shows his nervousness, hes cracking, I can tell. Trying anything to stop me from becoming an administrator. Doing whatever it takes. But I can see straight through him.Captaindansplashback 17:37, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

High Comedy

  1. Comedy of the highest caliber, but not ready for the mop just yet. --ElaragirlTalk|Count 03:40, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Giraffe and brightly coloured machine tools

  1. Nine article edits is fairly close to the 1000 or so I demand, but not close enough, pernickity editcounter that I am. So sorry, but no. Next candidate, please! Grutness...wha? 06:02, 6 December 2006 (UTC) this is getting close to BJAODN status...
  2. Only because I can't figure out if it's WP:TINC or High Comedy. Either the user feels genuinely repressed (for some reason), or s/he's just goofing around. Patstuarttalk|edits 06:29, 6 December 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.