Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Arminius

(14/0/3) ends 00:47, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Arminius has shown himself to be very calm in helping to curb vandalism as well as improve existing articles by tweaking them for POV. In his 1,330 edits since he started here on June 4, he has proven himself to be a very prolific editor and writer, helping in (mostly) articles related to government, economy, and the United States unofficial "dynasties", although he edits in a wide variety of topics. He is well-versed and very trustworthy. I have the utmost faith in his ability to perform admin duties responsibly. Mike H 00:47, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)

I accept this nomination and hope to live up to the kind words given by the nominator. Arminius 00:58, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Support

1. Mike H 00:47, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)
2. Mike H's support is enough for me. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (talk)]] 00:54, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)
3. Antandrus 01:24, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC) Another one I've been impressed with here; good admin material.
4. David Remahl 01:26, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)
5. ffirehorse 02:35, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

   -- orthogonal 11:09, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

6. Gzornenplatz 11:34, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)
7. Andre 19:42, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)
8. Lst27 Of course! He's an excellent contributor.
9. MerovingianFile:Atombomb.gifTalk 04:59, Sep 11, 2004 (UTC)
10. An exemplary example of the type of person that a good Wikipedia contributor and would be a good sysop. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 03:01, 2004 Sep 12 (UTC)
11. [[User:Anárion| (Anárion)]] 22:12, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
12. Good person to have around - Tεxτurε 19:54, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
13. -- orthogonal 00:20, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC) I'll take a chance.
14. Danny 14:55, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
15. Too bad Chad Pennington will kill him before he gets to use any of his real powers. (Arminius will understand this). Support CryptoDerk 00:41, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)

Oppose

Neutral

1. Austin Hair 01:55, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)
2. I am very impressed with Arminius. I've been impressed with his work since I first saw it. I have nothing but support for the work he has done. I do feel, however, that simply not enough time has passed to vote for him as an admin. This isn't a matter of getting more of a record, but of going through some of the ups and downs of Wiki-involvement that just come along with time. I hope for a re-nomination in 4-8 weeks and a chance to vote for. Geogre 13:58, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

   To be fair (and I respect your vote), he started working at Wiki the same day I did, and I was just promoted. Mike H 15:19, Sep 11, 2004 (UTC)

3. Agree with Geogre. blankfaze | (беседа!) 22:31, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

   -- orthogonal 17:47, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC) Agree with Geogre; Arminius supports sysops unilaterally departing from policy.

Comments

Just some explanation for Mike H: Your case was unusual, for me, because of just how blinking active you were. Your edits were everywhere, and you were stepping in to be The Man for an area that Wikipedia needed someone. I have not one ill word for anything I have seen from Arminius, and he's getting much more active now (or more noticeable? and being noticeable is not a good thing by itself, since some folks get really noticed for the wrong things), and so I really want to vote for him soon. Indeed, I'll be happy to do the nomination. Just a little time, that's all, so that I can see, now that Arminius is going to face the buffeting winds, how he reacts to them. Geogre 15:48, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

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

1. Have you read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list?

A. Yes

2. Are you interested in, and do you think you'll have some time to perform, the chores that only sysops have access to do, to help keep Wikipedia up to date?

A. Yes

3. If you become a sysop, which sysop chore or chores (WP:VFD, recent changes, watching for vandals and vandalism, responding to editor requests for assistance, any other) do you especially think you would be able to help with.

A. I regularly view recent changes looking for new articles that need maintenance and looking for vandalism to correct.

4. In your opinion, what article have you contributed the most succesfully and helpfully to?

A.

5. In your opinion, what has your best contribution to the running and maintenance of Wikipedia been? (i.e., have you reverted a bad stretch of vandalism, done extensive work categorizing articles, helped mediate a dispute?)

A. I would have to say my best contribution is categorizing articles (which can be seen on my user page), although I hope to soon be able to say mediating conflicts.

6. 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 will deal with it in the future?

A. Yes I have had a few, and I'm happy to say in every case an agreement was worked out which satisfied both parties.