User:The undertow/RFB

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for bureaucratship. Please do not modify it.
Result: Based on the candidate's pure awesomeness, and that of his nominator, this Request for Bureaucrapshit can be closed no other way than SNOW success. Plus, ÜβЄЯ ŞÛρρʘŖ† carries the weight of like a zillion supports. Srs. I'm srsly. ClosingCrat 06:43, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] the_undertow

Voice your opinion (talk page) (14/6/2); Scheduled to end 23:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

the_undertow (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights) - It is with great seriousness on this day of great silliness that I present for your consideration the_undertow. He has been with the project since its first day, editing as an IP. I would show proof, but he is very private about his personal information,[1] so I don't want to reveal his IPs. He's been an admin for four years, but that is on his super sekret sock account. But do not be alarmed! He only uses that one for controversial stuff and to support the arguments of this account, under which he has had admin for almost a year, not really, but I am rounding up to the nearest year just to make things easier.

Image:Chip puppet.jpg
the_undertoes

Hokay, so the following are the reasons I believe the_undertow would make a wonderful addition to the Bureaucratic team:

  1. He has experience with RFA and he once requested an USURPation, I think. Whatev. He's seen the page. And I told him about BOTs in a yahoo messenger convo the other day, so he's set there, too.
  2. He doesn't have the time to help. He's got more important real life shit to deal with. Considering we don't really need anymore 'crats, this is a perfect match. Srs, think about it.
  3. He is hawt. Everything is better with beautiful people. Just ask Hollywood or Brazil.
  4. He is a survivor, overcoming tragic illness to return to Wikipedia to edit another day.
  5. He is srs about his work here. This is evidenced here and here.
  6. He is stable as shown here, here and here. And by stable I mean consistent.
  7. He is a prolific writer for the project. Creating such vital articles as those about rogue knitters and "risque" swimwear.
  8. He drives a Benz and uses it to prove his online identity, which shows great deditcation to the project... or something.

Okay, so that should be plenty enough reason. Srsly. So support this great candidate so that he can promote all members of the cabal to burrowcat in a rogue fashion and wear the title proudly. better assist the project with his small amount of free time. Lara❤Love 19:28, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:


[edit] Questions for the candidate

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

1. Have you read the discussions on when to promote and not promote? What do you understand the criteria for promotion to be?
A. No. I'm at work right now. But as a crat and accountant, I can figure out how to read RfAbot, which is the bulk of the work that crats do.
2. How would you deal with contentious nominations where a decision to promote or not promote might be criticized?
A. I would look at the RfAbot. Then I would look up the word 'contentious.' Then I would make the most benign decision possible, as to appease all sides, because again - crat.
3. Wikipedians expect bureaucrats to adhere to high standards of fairness, knowledge of policy and the ability to engage others in the community. Why do you feel you meet those standards?
A. I often engage others in the community; those on the mailing lists can attest to that. As far as fairness, life is not so much about being fair as it is about appeasing the minority, because the squeaky wheel always deserves the grease. As far as knowledge of policy goes, I don't see any reason to learn it. Policy can change through consensus, as can medical procedures. If I learn them, and then they change, I just wasted a shitload of teim. kthx.
4. Do you have the time and do you have the desire to visit WP:RFA, WP:B/RFA, and/or WP:CHU on a regular basis to attend to those requests?
A. I barely have time to throw down a six pack before work, so WP:CHU shouldn't expect much from me.

Optional question from Animum

5. Boxers or briefs?
A:Image:Couch2.jpg

Question from Acalamari

6. Are you just caught in the undertow? Acalamari Bellatrix! 23:54, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
A. Nyet. More likely to be entangled in other activity.

[edit] General comments

  • See the_undertow's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. Comments that are not approved by the cabal will be removed.

[edit] Discussion

[edit] Support
  1. ÜβЄЯ ŞÛρρʘŖ† per nom. Lara❤Love 19:35, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  2. Support per WP:HOTTIE. нмŵוτнτ 19:37, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  3. Strong Support Great user, high trust. —αἰτίας •discussion• 20:10, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  4. He'd make a rubbish bureaucrat, but then again, so would most people. Majorly (talk) 20:22, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  5. There's a severe lacking in drama in regards to bureaucratic actions; Danny's promotion was one of the most universally-accepted decisions I've ever seen, and the decision to not promote Riana was almost as equally non-contentious. We need to add some spice. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:30, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  6. Support on the condition you send me your car. VERY NICE! Mønobi 22:17, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  7. Strong support just kidding Yahel Guhan 22:23, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  8. Have a plushie! Little Stupid (talk) 22:34, 1 April 2008 (UTC).
  9. Support   jj137 (talk) 23:44, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  10. Support. Very dreamy and has a cute butt. Mike H. Fierce! 01:52, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
  11. Strong Support - Per the above, except for Mike Halterman's comment. --Chetblong (talk) 02:40, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
  12. Support (what, I didn't before? Dammit!) Sceptre (talk) 03:14, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
  13. Strong Support per Mike H. Orane (talk) 03:55, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
  14. Strong Support - This user is an excellent person dedicated to Wikipedia. He obviously is dedicated to the project, but in a different fashion than many others. He provides an alternate view on many different things and I feel would be an excellent addition to the beuracratic (spelling?) staff. <3 Tinkleheimer TALK!! 05:48, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Oppose
  1. (ec and mine's funnier) No more hawt than I am, and possibly less, BRC membership or no. Passes the "heard of bots" test though. ++Lar: t/c 20:23, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  2. I fear the hands that revert vandalism. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not love) 20:43, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  3. Oppose. Does not have my minimum of 25,000 Category Talk edits.--Fabrictramp (talk) 22:18, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
    Wouldn't it be incredibly ironic if he did? ScarianCall me Pat! 22:20, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
    I did check first. And it wouldn't be ironic, just very, very scary. :)--Fabrictramp (talk) 22:21, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
    Alanis would disagree. 75.183.127.68 (talk) 01:39, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
  4. Oppose Anyone posting an RfX on 1 April should be gently flogged. If one is seeking a legitimate RfX, one is woefully inattentive to the calendar; if one is aiding the perpetuation of a very old joke, one is woefully humor-impaired. :) Xoloz (talk) 22:30, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
    Hey, the Main Page still cites it as April 1st, so game on. :P EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:33, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
    Go flog LaraLove then, Xoloz. I dare you. ++Lar: t/c 23:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
    Oh, yes, please! I double-dare you. Lara❤Love 01:39, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
    If Lara really wants me to, I'm sure we can work something out. ;) Xoloz (talk) 02:50, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
  5. Oppose I'm worried from his answers to the questions that this user will rely too heavily on "strength of argument" in determining consensus and will not look closely enough at the numbers. --JayHenry (talk) 23:28, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  6. Oppose Per answers to questions, terrible. --Charitwo talk 05:51, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Neutral
  1. Neutral I don't see you closing any Portal talk: MfDs, therefore you don't have the judgement to be a crat. MBisanz talk 20:11, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  2. Neutral, pending answer to question 5. —Animum (talk) 23:17, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
The above 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.