Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Silence

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.

Silence

Final (95/0/1) ended 12:37, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept, with thanks. -Silence 11:27, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support

1. Support as nominator. ---TantalumTelluride 03:29, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Support per nom. DarthVader 13:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. Support, even though he disagrees with my awesome proposal =). Impressive maturity on the Sam Spade RFC, and valuable contributions. Gotta fix that country music thing though. --Spangineer^[es] (háblame) 13:52, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Support ForestH2
5. Support --
   e Ong 14:03, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply
   ]
6. Strong Support Genuinely shocking cliche moment for me -- if I'd realized, I would have offered to nominate! Xoloz 14:15, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
7. Support. An experienced editor who knows the project well. Zaxem 14:20, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
8. Support —
   T + C) at 14:28, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply
   ]
9. Support -Jflash 15:24, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
10. KillerChihuahua^?!? 15:29, 7 June 2006 (UTC) Glad you waited until I was back from wiki-break. KillerChihuahua^?!? 15:29, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
11. Support--digital_me^(t/c) 15:34, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
12. Strong Support Very patient user who explains his decisions in detail. Not trigger happy at all. As a mediator in the Sam Spade RfC he showed how effective he could be as a voice of reason and a calming force. We need more like Silence.
    David D. (Talk) 15:43, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
13. Support, happily - just my kind of candidate! Phædriel ♥ tell me - 16:13, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
14. Support, per nomination. --Mhking 16:46, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
15. Rfa cliché #1 and, judging by the names currently on the list, this won't be my only cliché support today. RadioKirk talk to me 16:49, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
16. Support offering my non-cliched support as I haven't run across Silence before, but on reviewing the contribution list, this is an obvious "yes". Gwernol 17:14, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
17. Yep, no problems there. MaxSem 17:32, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
18. Support. Tons of good edits and civil talking. --HughCharlesParker (talk - contribs) 18:04, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
19. Support. Very impressed by Silence's handling of the dipute at
    Talk:Vestigial structure. Good user.--SomeStranger (T | C) 18:21, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
20. Support A very experienced user. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 19:35, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
21. Support per the many positives of this candidacy. The one negative for me is a potentially insufficient community interaction, reflected in the kinda low level of User talk edits. -
    talk/contribs/email 20:23, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    My experience is that he interacts with the community of the article talk pages. I believe this is actually preferable.

    David D. (Talk) 20:34, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply

    ]

22. Support. Per all above. I too have had good experiences with Silence. Go gett'em tiger. -Mysekurity ^[m!] 20:52, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
23. Support, no problem here. --Tone 20:55, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
24. Support looks good to me. —Khoikhoi 21:15, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
25. Support. Just zis Guy you know? 21:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
26. Strong Support. I feel proud to even be permitted to sign my name on the support section to make Silence an admin. D. G. 22:00, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
27. Support. Experienced and interacts well with the community -- Samir धर्म 22:03, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
28. Strong support A good man. Shocked, shocked am I that I failed to nominate the man myself. On the same subject, I like staplers.
    (talk) 22:10, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
29. Support. Has left a good impression on a few encounters, and is being supported by other people I trust. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 22:28, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
30. Support. Qualified and experienced. Kalani ^[talk] 23:05, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
31. Support, looks good. Kirill Lokshin 01:00, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
32. Support: Already cleaning messes, needs a bucket to put them in. Geogre 02:44, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
33. Support: I don't think I ever expressed my appreciation to Silence for stepping up to help push Rosa Parks through FAC. Thanks. Looking back through this user's calm and knowledgeable posts to Talk:Rosa Parks, I have no concerns about his suitability for adminship. - BT 03:31, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
34. Strong Support
    ^{wat's sup} 04:21, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
35. Merovingian {T C @} 05:47, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
36. Support. Conscious 06:10, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
37. Support. Good and responsible contributor. Sjakkalle (Check!) 06:10, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
38. "Silent" support; no serious concerns after a thorough check. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 06:42, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
39. Weak support—not because I have any issues; I just don't know much about Silence (pun maybe intended [edit conflict—I came up with it first =p]) and so don't have a compelling reason to emphatically support. Ardric47 06:50, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
40. Support. User is active in the project space and, from all interactions that I've seen, civil. — TKD::Talk 07:23, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
41. Support – Gurch 11:35, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
42. Support.--Kungfu Adam ^(talk) 12:49, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
43. Support -- user talk pages show level-headed discussion and a willingness to help out wherever necessary. The sounds of Silence are nice and civil. --Elkman 15:18, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
44. Support with bells on -- recently encountered User's calm and effective methods. Skittle 15:57, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
45. Support. Wanted to leave this vote totally blank for the humour but that wouldn't work. Ah well! Sssshhhh.... (there I got my humour in) --Lord Deskana ^{Dark Lord of the Sith} 17:40, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
46. Support per the stapler pic — ßottesiηi ^(talk) 18:32, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
47. Support The King of Kings 18:33, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
48. Support RFA cliche 3 --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 19:48, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
49. Oh, I can't believe I missed this nomination. I actually wanted to nominate Silence myself, but he seemed to think this nomination would fail and I'd have a chance... the man is modest. Anyway, Silence comes with my highest recommendation and I believe he will be invaluable to the continued development of Wikipedia. Most strong support. Andre (talk) 20:08, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
50. Support A great user! Mr. Turcotte^talk 20:13, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
51. Support - Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 20:13, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
52. Support - I like his style. Humour and integrity are necessary qualities in an admin. I think he has both. --
    Guinnog 21:27, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
53. Support per your good qualities. Thetruthbelow 21:47, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
54. Support, enthusiastically. Good work, good personal style, good writing, good answers to questions below. Good good good! --Allen 22:52, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
55. Support. Kafziel 23:06, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
56. Support. Are you kidding me? Just have a look at Wikipedia:Vital articles for an example of his great work. Titoxd^{(?!? - help us)} 23:17, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
57. Strong Support It'll be nice to have someone to knows policy and won't abuse it. --D-Day ^{What up? Am I cool, or what?} 23:29, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
58. Support. This person will make a good administrator. Yamaguchi先生 00:35, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
59. Cleared for Adminship --Pilot|guy ^{(roger that)} 00:40, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
60. Silent Support
    (talk) 01:55, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
61. Support Saravask 03:17, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
62. Support. A very friendly user. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:24, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
63. SUPPORT!!!!!
    RN 06:18, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
64. Support Looks fine to me.--MONGO 07:38, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
65. Piling On Support seems to have every credential for moppery. MLA 08:13, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
66. Support Joe I 08:31, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
67. Yes.
    13 ^{T C} 14:40, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
68. Tony Sidaway 16:36, 9 June 2006 (UTC) Silence and I seldom see eye to eye but he has proven himself an innovative thinker. We need more people like this.[reply]
69. Support Excellent bed-side manner. Shell ^babelfish 16:38, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
70. Support Deserved. -- Szvest 17:44, 9 June 2006 (UTC) ^{Wiki me up™}[reply]
71. Support I would like to nominate this user as administrator because this user demonstrates good behaviour, and edits good articles. '''*Daniel*''' 01:41, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
72. Support Hate to pile on, but he certainly deserves my support per most above. Yes please. Rockpocket 07:23, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
73. Support Extremely good contributor. With around 10,000 + edits he deserves to be an admin.Jordy 11:52, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
74. Support, worthy of adminship.
    DVD+ R/W 04:15, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
75. Support --Jay(Reply) 17:49, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
76. Support Great and experienced editor; friendly and civil. --Zoz (t) 19:06, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
77. Support It'll sound strange, but the way Silence handled the lone oppose persuaded me to vote. You've got to like having someone as an admin who understands the importance of "little things." ~Kylu (u|t) 02:19, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
78. Support. Outstanding and helpful contributions, very well-balanced editor, has both quality and quantity on their side. Nothing wrong here.
    masterka 04:27, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
79. Support my observations of this is editor are positive.--
    talk 06:08, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
80. Adfirmo - I actually did think he was one already. -- nae'blis _(talk) 21:29, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
81. Support From what I've seen, Silence is exactly the sort of person who should be an administrator. His contributions have been uniformly constructive in nature, he is always civil and helpful, and goes by Wikipedia policy. I have no worries about him ever abusing admin powers. Kasreyn 00:39, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
82. Support Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 00:43, 13 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
83. Support - with pleasure. -- Avenue 10:30, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
84. Support.  Grue  11:36, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
85. Support.
    Talk) 14:32, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
86. I thought I already voted Support. Roy A.A. 16:20, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
87. Support. SushiGeek 01:23, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
88. Support enthusiastically. Erudite editor, great guy. Herostratus 04:04, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
89. Support. A truly qualified admin candidate. (Nice thesaurus work, Herostratus, by the way.)
    Talk?) 06:32, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
90. Support. I don't know many people who put as much time into the project. Comic 06:54, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
91. Support per his opinion on pie. αγδεε (ε τ c) 07:22, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
92. Support —Scott5114↗ 07:54, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
93. Support Nobleeagle (Talk) 08:12, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
94. Support per the usual cliches. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 08:14, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
95. Support. *drew 08:31, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Username               Silence
Total edits            9603
Distinct pages edited  5037
Average edits/page     1.906
First edit             06:19, 12 July 2004
 
(main)          2773
Talk            1460
User            827
User talk       170
Image           13
Image talk      2
Template        1010
Template talk   149
Category        1266
Category talk   60
Wikipedia       1599
Wikipedia talk  273
Portal talk     1