Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Archer7
From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful permissions request. Please do not modify it.
I'd like to nominate myself to become an administrator mainly to block vandals, and revert vandalism with a rollback button that actually works (I'm currently using godmode light). I've been here since December 2005, and I've got over 1700 edits according to Interiot's tool and I think I now have a firm idea of how this project is run. I'm also part of the Counter Vandalism Unit on en:, although I have more or less given up editing over there and focused my energy over here. Archer7 16:34, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Support: Archer7 is a regular contributor. Sometimes I really have trouble matching the high quality of his edits. I fully endorse his candidacy -- Eptalon 21:37, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong support. Good interaction with Users (see blue segment on Interiot's stats). Good usage of edit summary. He'll be a good sysop. --M7 22:12, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, I think you would be as good a sysop as any. But same with Eptalon, your 3 month anniversary is still 6 days away! Looks like you two both made your first edit on the same day! And now I have voted 3 times in one day! Blockinblox 22:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. GFJ 14:30, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. A very good, active contributor, who will only be more able and active as an admin. Of course, vandal-blocking isn't the only thing admins do, but it is certainly a valid focus to have. In the same way that edit count should only be a secondary consideration, I think that exactly how long a person has been editing here should also be secondary. This goes for Eptalon, too, of course. If someone has well over 1000 edits, let's not be so worried about time since their first edit. However, the reverse is not true: if someone has been here a long time and has very few edits, that does not reflect a high level of interest in or commitment to the project, so that should be considered as well. Primary considerations (for me) are quality of edits, good faith, sustained interest in the project, and understanding of what being an administrator means and does not mean. --Cromwellt|talk 18:05, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. As Netoholic said, the big thing to remember is not to use your abilities in any conflicts (editing or otherwise) that you're directly involved.-- aflm Talk 20:56, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Diligent editor; would be a good janitor. Freshstart 01:00, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.