Difference between revisions of "NSWiki:Admin nominations"
| Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
# Def votes for. --[[User:Defaultia|Defaultia]] 23:34, 4 Oct 2004 (GMT) | # Def votes for. --[[User:Defaultia|Defaultia]] 23:34, 4 Oct 2004 (GMT) | ||
'''Oppose''' | '''Oppose''' | ||
| − | # I am against; K is not neutral and incapable of being neutral. [[User:Pudding|Pudding]] | + | # I am against; K is not neutral and incapable of being neutral. --[[User:Pudding|Pudding]] |
| − | # As much as I am a friend of this individual, I would think it may be wiser to find a less controversial individual who's made it a point never to cross anyone on purpose. | + | # As much as I am a friend of this individual, I would think it may be wiser to find a less controversial individual who's made it a point never to cross anyone on purpose. --[[User:Galdago|Galdago]] |
| − | [[User:Galdago|Galdago]] | + | |
'''Neutral''' | '''Neutral''' | ||
Revision as of 18:01, 10 October 2004
|
See existing administrators.
To view previous nomination votes, see NSwiki:New admins.
Please use wikipedia:Requests for adminship as a guide for nominating and formatting.
Most importantly, an admin should have thorough knowledge of NSwiki and should visit meta pages often. It is preferred if the admin has had a large amount of edits (In the top 20% of editors), and contributes on a relatively regular basis.
As the Wikipedia guide linked to above indicates, only users who are registered and logged in can vote and/or be nominated.
If you don't know whether to nominate a user as a sysop or as a bureaucrat, go with "sysop" by default. If a user has been doing well as a sysop, then nominate him/her as a "bureaucrat."
Nominations for sysopship
Note: Nominations have to be accepted by the user in question. If you nominate a user, please also leave a message on their talk page and ask them to reply here if they accept the nomination.
Current time is 21:54, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Knootoss (5/0/0)
Granted provisionally by Goobergunch|? 20:17, 7 Oct 2004 (GMT)
I'd recommend Knootoss --Frisbeeteria 01:55, 4 Oct 2004 (GMT)
- Heh. Thanks ^_^;;;; - Knoot 08:44, 4 Oct 2004 (GMT)
Support
- I support. He's active and a good contributor. Crimmer 12:42, 4 Oct 2004 (GMT)
- Knoot accepts the nomination.
- What Crimmer said, very active and very helpful edits. Also very helpful on IRC. --Goobergunchia 16:34, 4 Oct 2004 (GMT)
- Meh. My vote belongs in the tally for Knoot. --Frisbeeteria 18:04, 4 Oct 2004 (GMT)
- Def votes for. --Defaultia 23:34, 4 Oct 2004 (GMT)
Oppose
- I am against; K is not neutral and incapable of being neutral. --Pudding
- As much as I am a friend of this individual, I would think it may be wiser to find a less controversial individual who's made it a point never to cross anyone on purpose. --Galdago
Neutral
Comments/Questions
Knoot: Well, I'm not sure how to count the votes here (I'd say Frisbeeteria counts as 'pro' too. The lesson of Florida: when in doubt, count the votes in your favour ;) Anyway I'll just wait untill people come and complain about my inherent bias and incompetence.
- Meh. I don't count the nomination as a vote, but I'm for letting Frisbeeteria vote - when I nominated Defaultia, I immediately voted "1. Goobergunchia As in nomination". --Goobergunchia 16:34, 4 Oct 2004 (GMT)
You are too kind ^_^ *is a happy elf] now*
Since it seems particularly pointless to wait a proper seven days, I'm granting Knoot provisional sysop status now - however, the vote will remain open for the full seven-day period and this status can be revoked if there's a shift in the voting margin. --Goobergunch|? 20:17, 7 Oct 2004 (GMT)
