Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Skomorokh: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate metadata rfa" style="background-color: #f5fff5; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a '''successful''' [[wikipedia:requests for adminship|request for adminship]]. <strong style="color:red">Please do not modify it</strong>.[[Category:Successful requests for adminship|{{SUBPAGENAME}}]]''
===[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Skomorokh|Skomorokh]]===
Line 133:
#'''Strong support''' - I wonder what took him so long! He probably doesn't remember interacting with me, but we did once, and it left me the impression that he would be a good admin. [[User:Master&Expert|'''<span style="color:Blue">Master&</span>'''<span style="color:#00FFFF">Expert</span>]] ([[User talk:Master&Expert|<span style="color:purple">Talk</span>]]) 17:26, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
#'''Support''' Enthusiastic support, had a good impression from when seen you around (cliche but had thought you must already be an admin). Know of nothing to make me think you will misuse the tools. (Oh and nice nomination) [[User:Davewild|Davewild]] ([[User talk:Davewild|talk]]) 18:15, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
#'''Support''' - Source of many valued contributions. Intelligent and clueful editor. Truly deserving of the tools, he earned it. -- [[User:OlEnglish|<
# As clichéd as it is, I thought that you were already an admin. Good luck! '''[[User talk:Garden|<font style="color:#9999CC;">weburiedoursecretsinthe</font><font style="color:#000099;">garden</font>]]''' 18:48, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
#'''Support'''. Seen him around, and I don't have any problems with giving him the administrator right. Best of luck, '''[[User:Malinaccier|Malinaccier]] [[User:Malinaccier Public|P]]. ([[User talk:Malinaccier Public|talk]])''' 19:09, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Line 227:
#'''Support''' – I remember one time thinking that Skomorokh was an admin, then checked and was surprised to find 'twas not so. Not too long after that, I started making the same assumption and didn't check, and have since been carrying around the idea that this excellent communicator is an admin. Now I come across this RfA. It looks as if my confused little mind will soon be a little less confused. That's good. [[User:Paul Erik|<span style="font-family:Comic sans MS;">Paul Erik</span>]] <small><sup>[[User_talk:Paul Erik|<span style="color:blue;">(talk)</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Paul Erik|<span style="color:green;">(contribs)</span>]]</sup></small> 04:05, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
#'''Support''' Civil, conscientious, courteous, well-informed, a consensus-builder – the editor has an great knack for “walking away from a fight" if the editing environment becomes too heated and personal. I wish that I had his patience. I admire him. [[User:J Readings|J Readings]] ([[User talk:J Readings|talk]]) 05:09, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
#'''Support''' per TRMan. [[User:Tony1|<
#'''Support''' Good content contributor and a decent amount of edits unlike the usual 4,000 been here 4 months lets grab some tools tyoe of candidates.[[User:Dr. Blofeld| <span style="border:1px solid blue;padding:1px;"> <font style="color:#fef;background:black;">'''''Dr. Blofeld'''''</font>]]</span> <sup>[[User talk:Dr. Blofeld| <font size="-4"><font color="Black">White cat</font></font color> ]]</sup> 11:15, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
#Support. The candidate appears to be here to do what is necessary, what is compatible with the goal of the project, and what is clueful. —<strong>[[User:Anonymous Dissident|<span style="font-family:Script MT Bold;color:DarkRed">Anonymous Dissident</span>]]</strong>[[User_talk:Anonymous Dissident|<sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;color:Gray">Talk</span></sup>]] 14:27, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Line 341:
::Well, if nothing else this is as interesting a discussion as I've seen in the neutral section of an RfA. I don't advocate taking action against editors in group number 1 (those who hold a view), and in any case we couldn't - how would we identify them? In the specific cases that prompted your original comment a year ago, the editors involved had openly professed their views (including a man-girl love userbox and many discussion comments for the PPA, and anti-Semitic comments on noticeboards and elsewhere for the denier) and were involved in editing articles in the areas of dispute. As with any subjective decision making process, its impossible to draw a clear line between acceptable and unacceptable - but [[Potter Stewart]] knew how to deal with that problem, and so do we. I respect your position, though I disagree, and since my vote in any section will not effect the outcome I'll remain neutral. [[User:Nathan|<strong style="color:#0033CC">Nathan</strong>]][[User talk:Nathan|<sup><strong style="color:#0033CC"> T </strong></sup>]] 15:20, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
:''The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either [[{{NAMESPACE}} talk:{{PAGENAME}}|this nomination]] or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.''</div>
| |||