Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Jamesday

See original

Jamesday

I would like to nominate Jamesday for adminship. He has been here since September and appears to have a good understanding of how Wikipedia works. He has put a lot of effort into the copyright violations page and other legal areas. I've had conflicts with him in the past, but he has always remained very civil throughout these, demonstrating excellent Wikiquette. I think he'd be a very trustworthy and capable sysop. Angela. 00:30, Jan 19, 2004 (UTC)

• Oppose. Jamesday seems to think that nothing is copyrighted. RickK 00:44, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)
  • That's not the impression I have gotten from talking to him on IRC. Dori | Talk 01:16, Jan 19, 2004 (UTC)
  • Please see my reply to you saying something similar on 6 Jan. I've been on both the receiving and writing end of copyright infringement notices. Largest single loss from the actions of an infringer in respect of something I've written exclusively myself is US$20,000 - at least, that's the largest I know about. Jamesday 16:01, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)
• Support. I say he's definitely been involved enough. But what is his legal background? --Jiang 01:03, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)
  • He said that he has been following copyright cases, but that he is not a lawyer. I better let him answer in more detail though. Dori | Talk 01:16, Jan 19, 2004 (UTC)
    • He's not a lawyer and I disagree with his views regarding the GFDL, but I don't think that precludes him from being a sysop. Angela. 02:11, Jan 19, 2004 (UTC)
  • I'm not a lawyer. I've been involved in managing online communities and using the law relating to them since the mid 90s, so I have a fair idea of what US law relating to them and copyright questions within them says. Jamesday 16:01, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)
• Support. Dori | Talk 01:16, Jan 19, 2004 (UTC)
• Support. -- Cyan 16:57, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)
• Support - appears to have a talent for puting up with the unputupwithable. -- Finlay McWalter 17:27, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)
• Support. Whether or not his legal views are accurate is something I can't really judge, and is not relevant in any case, as I believe he's a trustworthy contributor who will not use his sysop powers to do anything anti-consensus. --Delirium 23:28, Jan 20, 2004 (UTC)
• Support. As yet another non-lawyer, I am sometimes concerned that Jamesday's copyright opinions are not fully accurate (though never enough to be concerned about him as an editor--besides, I know far less than he does about copyright law), but I am always pleased by his thorough and generally clear reasoning in such discussions. Also, I do not believe that granting him sysop status will affect the copyright concerns at all--he will be no more or less likely to promote the stance that RickK objects to, and as noted above, I'm not convinced there's anything wrong with his stance. Jwrosenzweig 23:50, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)
• Support. Mr. McWalter, methinks thou havest une penchant pour le creatizzle of new wordages. ugen64 03:48, Jan 23, 2004 (UTC)
• Support. Optim 02:34, 24 Jan 2004 (UTC)
• Support. Jussi-Ville Heiskanen 10:24, Jan 24, 2004 (UTC)
• Support. Hemanshu 06:25, 25 Jan 2004 (UTC)
• Support. I have found him to be nothing but pleasent, friendly and helpful. Find a few more like him if you will, sharp eye Angela. Jack 11:27, 25 Jan 2004 (UTC)
• Support. - Hephaestos 06:30, 26 Jan 2004 (UTC)
• Support Dysprosia 06:22, 27 Jan 2004 (UTC)
• Support. Tannin 22:11, 29 Jan 2004 (UTC)
• Support. James F. (talk) 22:51, 29 Jan 2004 (UTC)