Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Trevor macinnis

Trevor macinnis

Final (30/1/0) ending 01:39

1. Im the first :). Everything seems to be in order. Im a bit surprised that someone hadnt nominated you.

   Journalist ^C./ ^{Holla @ me!}

2. Support, looks reasonable enough. — JIP | Talk 06:58, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Support by all means Lectonar 07:23, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Have a mop. It'll come in handy.  Denelson83  08:25, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. Support his name pops up on my watchlist quite often, good editor. Martin 08:53, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. Merovingian (t) (c) 11:45, September 9, 2005 (UTC)
7. Support. the wub "?/!" 15:04, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
8. Support. This is my 2000th edit. You better make it worthwhile. Don't go all crazy on us now. :) --Lord Voldemort ^{(Dark Mark)} 20:00, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
9. Support, looks like a worthwhile contributer, no reason not to. -GregAsche (talk) 00:19, September 10, 2005 (UTC)
10. Support Would benefit with the rollback tool. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 04:18, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
11. Support. Normally I like to see more WP space edits, but his edit history looks good. --Alan Au 06:59, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
12. Support, has shown himself to be a trustworthy editor who would benefit from adminship. Rje 17:39, September 10, 2005 (UTC)
13. Support. Seems alright to me. mrholybrain 19:38, September 10, 2005 (UTC)
14. Support. --
    _{tɔk tə mi} 23:10, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply
    ]
15. Support. Impressive article-space credentials. Nandesuka 02:07, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
16. Ruairidi 02:53, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
17. Support. Christopher Parham (talk) 04:29, 2005 September 11 (UTC)
18. Support. Solid contribution record. -- BD2412 ^talk 05:15, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
19. ITHAWO.
    ^talk
    23:14, 2005 September 11 (UTC)

    Maybe I'm just ignorant about

    Trev

    This is wikislang. I Thought He Already Was One. -Splash 01:35, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Oh, thank you very much Ing.

    Well, the phrase is such a cliché I'm surprised an abbreviation wasn't used before, so I threw it in there. (And that's Ingoolemo to you; I don't just use the epithet for my health.:) )

    ^talk 05:11, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply

    ]

20. Support - Meets my standards. Simple as. --Celestianpower ^hab 15:19, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
21. Support--Jusjih 07:49, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
22. Cool. --JuntungWu 13:23, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
23. Support - I know this user from a mini caba...err...TINC... --
    talk) 15:08, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply
    ]
24. Support. Friday (talk) 15:30, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
25. Support a great contributor. -Lommer | ^talk 00:06, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
26. BRIAN0918 • 2005-09-14 02:49
27. Support Sure, everything looks good for this potential admin. Remember, there is no cabal. Really. Bratsche^{talk | Esperanza} 03:11, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
28. Support. I like how he organized his talk and archive pages so much, I boldly stole part of the format. Jonathunder 16:36, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    In all honesty I in turn "borrowed" that idea from

    Trev

29. Sure, I'll support. But, please add a user page template of some kind to the top of your user page, it's a bit too much like the Main Page IMHO. Andre (talk) 20:38, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Done. Currently overhauling the whole thing. I was getting bored of the old one.

    Trev

30. Support. El_C 04:06, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

1. --
   Boothy443 | comhrÚ 05:31, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply
   ]

   Any specific thing I should be improving on? We all strive for perfection. -

   Trevor macinnis

   Trevor, I am assuming that you have not been a recent frequent visitor to RFA. Perhaps you should read Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Boothy443. In short: that user opposes almost all RFAs to seemingly prove a point. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 18:28, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

   Not to get too sidetracked here, but Boothy has voted to support several candidates in the last month. He certainly does have criteria for support, he's just not sharing what they are, and is well within his rights in doing so.

   T/C 07:53, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply

   ]

   Actually, he revealed some of his standards to me a few weeks ago. [1] Acetic'^Acid 05:36, September 13, 2005 (UTC)

Neutral

Comments

Questions for the candidate
A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? (Please read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.)

I often do RC patrol, and would love to have rollback for fast

active vandals, and the ability to protect pages for same reason. Deletes (speedy or otherwise) according to the guidelines

would also free me from having to ask others to do it. The ability to edit protected pages (after any required discusions, of course) would also free me from having to bother an admin..

2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?

The majority of my edits are minor - I ususally do small edits to pages, and I haven't created many big ones either, but I did start the

Portal:Browse

page that I created has been linked to on the Main Page category browse bar..

3. 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 how will you deal with it in the future?

My edit to

Hawker Siddeley 748

, but I can't find it now), a few unnecesary edits, and I've also learned not to be too rash when doing vandalism patrol. What may look like a lot of vandal reverts may be an edit war in progress and I don't want to get involved without reading the background talk first. All these things I have learned from..