Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/the wub

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

the wub

FINAL (61/2/0) ending 20:07 24/10/05 (UTC)

1. Support! User:Zirka 12:22, 19 October 2005 (CDT) He focuses his attention not just on the larger, more widely supported pages, or the lightly supported pages, but both. I also approve of his stance on deletion.
2. Good editor Martin 20:41, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Extreme Non-Inclusionist Support. Good editor - why not support? --
   Talk Contribs
   15:48, 17 October 2005 (CDT)
4. Andre (talk) 20:48, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. Support good editor, and even reverted vandalism on my userpage once. Private Butcher 20:50, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. Support he deserves it. -Greg Asche (talk) 21:10, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
7. Support Good editor and vandal fighter. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 21:30, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
8. Michael Snow 21:47, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
9. Support Good Vandal Fighter --JAranda | watz sup 21:51, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
10. Support - after my extensive positive experiences with this user, I see no option but to support. --Celestianpower ^hablamé 22:11, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
11. Support. Very active and productive, from what I've seen.  BD2412 ^talk 22:12, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
12. Full, unequivocal, and unconditional support. -- Essjay · Talk 22:28, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
13. Supportate. ~~ N (t/c) 23:24, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
14. Keep and expand the wub's wikipowers by granting admin status. Grutness...wha? 23:40, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
15. Support, impressive record. Christopher Parham (talk) 00:31, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
16. I Love the Wub (Strikes Back) This user is the voice of reason in our community! Acetic'^Acid 01:07, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
17. You weren't?
    W_S 01:15, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply
    ]
18. Merovingian (t) (c) (e) 02:13, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
19. I thought you were already one ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 02:13, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
20. Support. Active, knowledgeable, good. -Splash^talk 02:34, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
21. Support. I've seen him around more than a few times, which is good enough for me. -[[User:Mysekurity|Mysekurity]] ^{[[additions | e-mail]]} _{03:28, 18 October 2005 (UTC)}[reply]
22. e (t) (c) (@) 04:17, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply
    ]
23. Support good contribution list -DDerby-(talk) 04:29, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
24. Support. Fine user. Sjakkalle (Check!) 06:10, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
25. Whaaaat? You mean the wub wasn't an admin already? Quick, we need more wubs as admins. — JIP | Talk 06:39, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
26. Support the General Secretary of the meta:AWWDMBJAWGCAWAIFDSPBATDMTD. Alphax ^τεχ 07:32, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
27. Support my mighty
    t c 12:51, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply
    ]
28. Support. I would have nominated him myself, if I'd known he wasn't a sysop.--Scimitar ^parley 14:44, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
29. FULL MEXICABAL SUPPORT -- (drini's page|☎) 16:40, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
30. Support come across him often. Dlyons493 Talk 19:42, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
31. Support
    S 20:57, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply
    ]
32. Wubport. Radiant_>|< 21:39, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
33. Good VFD participation. freestylefrappe 00:40, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
34. Redwolf24 (talk) 02:06, 19 October 2005 (UTC) Would have been willing to nominate him myself...[reply]
35. Support --MONGO 02:52, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
36. Support I wub this user! --
    Talk 05:55, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply
    ]
37. Support me too. encephalon 13:58, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
38. EXTREME DISK SUPPORT WITH EXTRA KILOBYTES!!
    T | @ | C 00:02, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply
    ]
39. Support—Gaff ^ταλκ 02:17, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
40. x 08:12, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply
    ]
41. Support. The Minister of War 10:30, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
42. Support.
    Thunderbrand 13:07, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply
    ]
43. Support. Sebastian Kessel ^Talk 20:11, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
44. Give-Him-The-
    Mop-And-The-Flamethrower Support. Titoxd^(?!?) 21:33, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply
    ]
45. Support without reservations. Hall Monitor 22:35, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
46. Support Pilatus 23:58, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
47. Support Good egg. Hamster Sandwich 19:24, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    #

    T | @ | C 21:06, 21 October 2005 (UTC) Thanks but you voted twice :-) the wub "?!" 16:06, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply

    ]

48. Furry Alien Support No doubt about it - seen lots of this editor's work, will be fine admin. Alf ^melmac 08:35, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
49. Support - I wub lub to hub him as wub-ministrator.--Jondel 13:43, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
50. S'port
    (?) 18:09, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply
    ]
51. Support. --
    talk} 21:57, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply
    ]
52. Support - a great editor! Pasboudin 22:23, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
53. Yes. I've liked everything I've seen. Ann Heneghan ^(talk) 02:21, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
54. Support. Comments (esp. reasons for self-nom) really earned my vote. --
    Communicate!) ^<Contribs> 07:33, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply
    ]
55. Wubbish Support His edits and communications with other editors are very nice. Bratsche^{talk | Esperanza} 18:10, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
56. Support Molotov (talk) 03:53, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
57. Support, Sure! I can show some lub for the wub...if it's not too late :>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 10:07, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
58. Support. -
    Mailer Diablo 13:44, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply
    ]
59. Support - wtf? He's not an admin? --
    talk) 18:14, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply
    ]
60. Overwhelming support --
    Francs2000 21:34, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply
    ]
61. He's our family... El_C 21:40, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

1. --
   Boothy443 | comhrá 21:03, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply
   ]

   File:Pikachu2.gif. Ëvilphoenix ^Burn! 20:11, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

2. I don't like his aggressive attitude --Kafuffle 22:53, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I find it very hard to assume good faith with Boothy's oppositions. Opposing nearly all potential admins. without explanation is essentially incivil, and without such explanation, in fact, he is not abiding by WikiGuidelines. Furthermore, I believe that these oppositions are a result of simple malice. I noticed that Boothy has 16,000 edits, but is not an adm - perhaps he is trying to hold others back. His contributions reflect a tendency of anger when people have only asked a simple question [1] or he is excessivley sarcastic [2]. I request that medition or arbitration be considered against this user. Him abusing the rights of RfA is harmful to the Wiki in my opinion - trolls, vandals and spammers are not allowed to continue in bad faith - so this user should also comport himself in a civil manner on these RfAs. He is abusing his rights here - and he is apparently making no attempts to stop. He has the right to vote, sure, but all the other Wikipedians have the right to a fair RfA. Something needs to happen! Molotov (talk) 03:51, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

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.)

A. Vandal fighting and newbie test reverting, which I do quite a bit of already. Actually being able to block the vandals, and delete the most obvious junk pages would be a great help. I also think I will close quite a few AfDs, I have plenty of experience in voting on them and have already done a few obvious keeps. Also keeping the Main Page up to date and fixing errors on it that are pointed out by non-admins.

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

A. I think my recent rescue of

featured list

status soon after having taken a bit of a break from it.

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?

A. I have come into conflict with Mike Garcia a few times in the past, which did cause me quite a bit of stress (though we were by no means the only participants in any of the conflicts). I tried to help resolve the situations through the talk pages. Otherwise I have only earned the ire of vandals that I can recall. In future I would remain civil, and ask for help from other uninvolved admins if needed.

The above 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 article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.