NSWiki:Rejected admins

<From NSwiki:Admin nominations

Liverpool England (1/4/1)

Closed by Goobergunch|? on 04:34, 20 May 2006 (GMT)

Self-nomination. This time, I'm nominating myself for adminship because I want to help with the linkspam. I've had to tag {{delete}} a lot of articles, and if I could delete thearticles outright it would make things easier. There isn't a need for this to be a permanent sysopship, I'm cool with a temp sysopship, but I won't abuse my powers - I'm an admin at the English Wikipedia. LE (WP) | Talk 05:10, 11 May 2006 (GMT)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:Self-nominated.

Support

1. We do need another sysop, and you've been helping out with a lot of linkspam, so I don't see why not. Ceo \ rant \ rave 12:50, 11 May 2006 (GMT)

Oppose

1. Given I've been deleted all the articles you've been tagging, I don't see the need. Opposed. ~Gruen2 11:29, 11 May 2006 (GMT)

   And yet there's a need for someone else? I get the sense you're biased. LE (WP) | Talk 05:43, 18 May 2006 (GMT)

2. Agreed with Gruen. Opposed. ^Je_y^° 12:56, 11 May 2006 (GMT)
3. I oppose, for previously stated reasoning. Dankism 15:07, 11 May 2006 (GMT)
4. Oppose, for previous reasons, and also because LE should be concentrating on the difficult job he already has at Wikipedia. Ever heard the phrase "bite off more than you can chew?" We need a permanent sysop, one who's committed only to this site so he/she can concentrate on what's happening here and not trying to do two major Wikis at once. (( Pacitalkia )) Time sent: 01:35, 18 May 2006 (GMT)

   The job I'm currently in negotiations to not lose due to an IP check that somehow linked myself with a vandal, you means? I don't think you need to worry, especially if those bastards go through with it. LE (WP) | Talk 05:43, 18 May 2006 (GMT)

   Suffice it to say your current attitude is a bit troubling as well. Especially your comments re: Gruen's vote in Jey's nom. You'll need to reconsider that if you want this vote to turn around, my friend. You'll also need to consider that you aren't presenting evidence to suggest he is biased. I see no reason why Gruen doesn't like you unless I'm not seeing much of your communication with him, and he favours the idea of somebody wanting to stick around. Your presentation, then, was incorrectly put together - who would YOU favour? Someone who wants to be here for good, or somebody who just wants to be here for a short period? We know you're capable, but it's the commitment that might be your problem. (( Pacitalkia )) Time sent: 06:27, 18 May 2006 (GMT)

Neutral

1. I don't know you to much. --swilatia 11:13, 11 May 2006 (GMT)

Comments

• I'm cool with this not being a permanent adminship, if necessary. LE (WP) | Talk 05:10, 11 May 2006 (GMT)
  • I really don't see the need for temporary adminships. I'll see what I can do about the linkspam, but I've already activated nofollow links on NSwiki - it's hard to deal with bots that are too stupid to realize that their spam doesn't do anything but annoy people. --Goobergunch|? 19:12, 11 May 2006 (GMT)
• 1329 edits since 10 October 2004. --Goobergunch|? 19:12, 11 May 2006 (GMT)

Questions for the candidate

1. What sysop chores, would you anticipate helping with?

A: Per above, dealing with linkspam.