Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Froth
User:Froth
run at Fri Mar 9 16:54:50 2007 GMT
Category: 1
Help: 1
Image talk: 10
Image: 40
Mainspace 604
Portal: 15
Talk: 153
Template talk: 20
Template: 47
User talk: 382
User: 666
Wikipedia talk: 530
Wikipedia: 2463
avg edits per article 4.55
earliest 17:55, 11 July 2005
number of unique pages 1084
total 4932
2005/7 55
2005/8 0
2005/9 0
2005/10 0
2005/11 0
2005/12 0
2006/1 8
2006/2 5
2006/3 6
2006/4 77
2006/5 33
2006/6 111
2006/7 31
2006/8 101
2006/9 340
2006/10 395
2006/11 221
2006/12 734
2007/1 1564
2007/2 1158
2007/3 93
Mainspace
57 Counter-Strike: Source
53 Nintendo NSider Forums
27 MapleStory
14 Half-Life 2 controversies and criticisms
11 Age of the Earth
8 Progress Quest
7 Counter-Strike culture
7 SteamID
6 Halo: Combat Evolved
6 List of Microsoft Windows components
6 Mickey Mouse
4 Source engine
4 Cedarville University
4 Sum 41
4 RateMyTeachers
Talk:
17 MapleStory
15 Age of the Earth
9 Nintendo NSider Forums
9 Nintendo NSider Forums/Archive 1
6 Absolute terror field
5 Counter-Strike: Source
5 Bullshido
3 Ken Blackwell
3 SkiFree
2 Wish-Bone salad dressing
2 Flaming (Internet)
2 Rejected
2 FlashGet
2 FLCLimax
2 Mew glitch
Image:
4 Counter Strike Source2.png
4 Egeskov Slot spejling FOCUS.png
4 Flcl-flclimax.png
3 ISS.jpg
2 US Penny 2.PNG
2 Aerospike Engine Focus 2.PNG
2 Torre Agbar - Barcelona, Spain - Jan 2007 (edit 1).jpg
2 Aerospike Engine Focus.PNG
2 Vista Disk Mgmt.png
2 Ajaxf.JPG
Image talk:
2 Zipper animated.gif
Portal:
6 Computer science/Did you know
3 Computer science/Selected article/archive/1
2 Computer science/Selected article/archive
2 Computer science/Selected article
Template:
6 Counter-Strike series
6 Half-Life topics
6 Valve Technology
4 Day of Defeat series
3 Team Fortress series
3 POTD caption/2007-01-20
2 FPCdel
Template talk:
9 Half-Life topics
3 RD header
2 Please leave this line alone
User:
115 Froth
100 Froth/notes/Wikipedia:Reference desk/header
86 AmiDaniel/VP/Approval
62 AmiDaniel/VP/L
45 Froth/notes/Wikipedia:Reference desk/header/leftside
36 Froth/monobook.js
24 Froth/notes
21 Froth/notes/Wikipedia:Reference desk/header/toc
17 Froth/notes/Wikipedia:Reference desk/header/nav
12 Froth/notes/Wikipedia:Reference desk/header/howtoask
11 Froth/notes/mockup
11 Froth/test1
7 Froth/notes/Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous
7 Froth/notes/Wikipedia:Reference desk/header/otherrd
6 Froth/notes/Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing
User talk:
35 Froth
29 Prodego
15 Freshgavin/Sandbox/Reference desk
11 Betacommand
11 AmiDaniel/VP/L
7 Schgooda
6 Friday
6 Hipocrite
5 Tellyaddict
5 MacGyverMagic
5 Fir0002
4 218.214.70.16
4 Freshgavin
4 Ardo191
4 Mapletip
Wikipedia:
742 Reference desk/Computing
696 Reference desk/Miscellaneous
63 Reference desk/Science
50 Reference desk/RD header
35 Reference desk/Mathematics
34 Help desk
33 Reference desk/How to ask and answer
33 Reference desk/header
28 Featured picture candidates/Bezier curves
23 Reference desk/header/nav
20 Reference desk/Entertainment
18 Featured picture candidates
16 Reference desk/header/leftside
15 Requests for comment/User names
14 Reference desk/header/otherrd
Wikipedia talk:
443 Reference desk
27 Requests for comment/StuRat 2
12 Reference desk/guideline
10 Reference desk/guidelines
10 Reference desk/style change
7 Reference desk/RD header
3 Reference desk/colors
2 Reference desk/RD header/Archive
2 Reference desk archive/Computing/Early
2 Reference desk/purpose
2 Requests for comment/StuRat
2 Reference desk/rules
Edit count from Interiot's wannabe Kate's tool. Angus McLellan (Talk) 16:57, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
It will be interesting...
[edit]... to see how the crats determine consensus on this one. I personally find the oppose votes rather unimpressive. – riana_dzasta 01:19, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
- I, personally, agree that the "oppose per Q1" argument is weak. However, its not uncommon for opposes to be made on the basis of a "need for tools" or "poor answer to questions" argument. When such a significant proportion of the !voting community are in agreement, its hard to see how a 'crat could discount them. We'll see, however. Rockpocket 01:54, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
- I agree too, but regardless of how many people have used it, there is a difference between an argument that isn't accepted by everyone and an argument that's just frivolous. And I don't think it's really frivolous, wrong or not. -Amarkov moo! 02:59, 12 March 2007 (UTC)+
- I think the point is that adminship is a privilege and admins should be expected to earn that privilege by helping out with some of the dirty, tedious chores around here, not just using the tools for their own personal area of interest. It's perfectly fair for the community to ask at an RfA what do we get in return for giving this candidate the tools. We need more admins to clear backlogs etc. Ironically, it seems those RfA candidates who have actually got stuck into the dirty work are more likely to fail to be elected because they've made enemies dealing with borderline trolls and vandals. --Folantin 09:31, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
- I agree too, but regardless of how many people have used it, there is a difference between an argument that isn't accepted by everyone and an argument that's just frivolous. And I don't think it's really frivolous, wrong or not. -Amarkov moo! 02:59, 12 March 2007 (UTC)+
Even if it was for the "wrong" reasons, the outcome was apparently as it should be, as recent serial cut&paste page moves[1] [2] [3] indicates a lack of familiarity with proper Wikipedia procedures. People shouldn't become admins if they don't know the basics. Seattlenow 21:58, 9 August 2007 (UTC)