Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Rhymeless

Rhymeless

A careful editor with diverse interests. Reserved and thoughtful in exchanges with other editors. About 1600 edits since April 2004. Someone I consider a solid contributor. Wile E. Heresiarch 14:46, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I accept this nomination. Rhymeless 19:03, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Support

1. Wile E. Heresiarch 14:46, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)
2. Neutrality 15:01, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)
3. Merovingian✍Talk 21:21, Aug 14, 2004 (UTC)
4. Hard-working contributor with a good deal of experience. He may only have registered four months ago, but that does not preclude him from adminship. And, anyone who makes 1600 edits in four months' time definitely seems devoted to me. --Slowking Man 22:48, Aug 14, 2004 (UTC)
5. Geogre 02:23, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
6. 172 03:00, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
7. Lucky 6.9 03:49, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
8. Acegikmo1 03:54, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
9. Guanaco 04:03, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
10. I can't see any issues with his becoming an admin. -- Grunt (talk) 23:42, 2004 Aug 15 (UTC)
11. Stormie 02:29, Aug 16, 2004 (UTC)
12. Andre 07:28, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
13. Strongly support. Ambi 09:56, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
14. Warofdreams 14:29, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
15. SWAdair | Talk 07:13, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
16. David Cannon 10:59, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC) Support.
17. [[User:Theresa knott|]] 11:21, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)
18. Mike H 15:40, Aug 21, 2004 (UTC)

Oppose

1. But would probably support at a later date, with more edits. blankfaze | (беседа!) 19:17, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Comments

• Oppose. This is almost certainly a sock puppet account of User:Mike Church. Metric Dollar 18:59, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

  And Metric Dollar is almost certainly a sock puppet account of one of Mike Church's enemies. Guanaco 19:06, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

  I doubt it. It's probably a sock puppet of Mike himself. Or perhaps it would be more appropriate to call him a straw man. Isomorphic 22:06, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

  Does Mike Church edit from AOL? This user does. Guanaco 01:21, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

  Wow, I've been called a lot of things, but never a sock puppet of Mike Church. You think I'd be the first to know. In all seriousness, if you have any proof at all, I'd be interested to see it. Rhymeless 20:51, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters, if you would kindly respond:

1. Have you read the section on Administrators?

A. Yes.

2. Are you interested in, and do you think you'll have some time to perform, the chores that only sysops have access to do, to help keep Wikipedia up to date?

A. Yes.

3. If you become a sysop, which sysop chore or chores (WP:VFD, recent changes, watching for vandals and vandalism, responding to editor requests for assistance, any other) do you especially think you would be able to help with.

A. Likely VFD and newpages, I should spend more time on cleanup as well.

4. In your opinion, what article have you contributed the most succesfully and helpfully to?

A. I'm not as sure on this one. Perhaps Australian Museum or Bill Veeck. Recently I've been trying to add some basic information to the Rambot city/town pages, working partially from a desk encyclopedia.

5. In your opinion, what has your best contribution to the running and maintenance of Wikipedia been? (i.e., have you reverted a bad stretch of vandalism, done extensive work categorizing articles, helped mediate a dispute?)

A. I really haven't encountered vandals as much; or rather, people seem to find them quicker than I do. I've done some work with cleanup and disambiguation pages.

6. 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 will deal with it in the future?

A. Most of the articles I've worked on have been rather non-controversial. Had a few minor disagreements on VFD, but these were solved quickly.

Thanks and good luck!