Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Dfrg.msc 2: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎Discussion: What has two thumbs, eleven tacktoos and the mop? This guy!
Riana (talk | contribs)
36,950 edits
cm
Line 1: Line 1:
===[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Dfrg.msc 2|Dfrg.msc]]===
===[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Dfrg.msc 2|Dfrg.msc]]===
<span class="plainlinks">'''[{{fullurl:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Dfrg.msc v2|action=edit&section=4}} Voice your opinion]'''</span> ([[Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Dfrg.msc v2|talk page]])
<span class="plainlinks">'''[{{fullurl:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Dfrg.msc v2|action=edit&section=4}} Voice your opinion]'''</span> ([[Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Dfrg.msc v2|talk page]])
'''(60/0/1); Scheduled to end 08:07, [[14 October]] [[2007]] (UTC)'''
'''(61/0/1); Scheduled to end 08:07, [[14 October]] [[2007]] (UTC)'''


{{User|Dfrg.msc}} - I am here, once again, to nominate Nick for adminship. Those who have been around for a while will recall that I nominated him (in conjunction with PeaceNT and Sr13 (now Singularity)) in May, and there was no consensus to promote. I will not dwell on the past - doing so is one of things that’s holding the project, and especially the RfA procedure, back these days - I will instead attempt to again justify why Nick is more than prepared for adminship, and why his promotion would have a positive impact on the project.
{{User|Dfrg.msc}} - I am here, once again, to nominate Nick for adminship. Those who have been around for a while will recall that I nominated him (in conjunction with PeaceNT and Sr13 (now Singularity)) in May, and there was no consensus to promote. I will not dwell on the past - doing so is one of things that’s holding the project, and especially the RfA procedure, back these days - I will instead attempt to again justify why Nick is more than prepared for adminship, and why his promotion would have a positive impact on the project.
Line 156: Line 156:
::Agreed, plus candidates must wear nothing but a dressing gown, a cheesy grin and a thumbs up. :) [[User:Dfrg.msc|Dfrg.]][[User talk:Dfrg.msc|msc]] 05:16, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
::Agreed, plus candidates must wear nothing but a dressing gown, a cheesy grin and a thumbs up. :) [[User:Dfrg.msc|Dfrg.]][[User talk:Dfrg.msc|msc]] 05:16, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
:::Changed to strong support per candidate's meeting my bathrobe [http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c250/the_undertow/thisguy.jpg criteria]. [[User:The_undertow|''the_undertow'']] [[User_talk:The_undertow|<font style="color:5bf8a9"><small><sup>talk</sup></small></font>]] 06:06, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
:::Changed to strong support per candidate's meeting my bathrobe [http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c250/the_undertow/thisguy.jpg criteria]. [[User:The_undertow|''the_undertow'']] [[User_talk:The_undertow|<font style="color:5bf8a9"><small><sup>talk</sup></small></font>]] 06:06, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
::::Is this the bathrobe cabal? Oh, I ''so'' want in! ~ [[User talk:Riana|Riana <font color="green">⁂</font>]] 06:35, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

'''Neutral'''
'''Neutral'''
#''"I participate in *fD debates, and would like to be able to close them"'' - upon review of some comments in XfD's made by the candidate around a month ago, I fear that the candidate does not understand the concept of [[WP:CON|consensus through discussion]], and (more concerning) [[WP:ATA]]. However, on the whole, I believe that Dfrg.msc could be a good administrator with some more reading and use of caution if/when he is made +sysop, so I won't oppose. '''[[User:Daniel|<span style="color:#2E82F4">Daniel</span>]]''' 01:56, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
#''"I participate in *fD debates, and would like to be able to close them"'' - upon review of some comments in XfD's made by the candidate around a month ago, I fear that the candidate does not understand the concept of [[WP:CON|consensus through discussion]], and (more concerning) [[WP:ATA]]. However, on the whole, I believe that Dfrg.msc could be a good administrator with some more reading and use of caution if/when he is made +sysop, so I won't oppose. '''[[User:Daniel|<span style="color:#2E82F4">Daniel</span>]]''' 01:56, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 06:35, 10 October 2007

Dfrg.msc

Voice your opinion (talk page) (61/0/1); Scheduled to end 08:07, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Dfrg.msc (talk · contribs) - I am here, once again, to nominate Nick for adminship. Those who have been around for a while will recall that I nominated him (in conjunction with PeaceNT and Sr13 (now Singularity)) in May, and there was no consensus to promote. I will not dwell on the past - doing so is one of things that’s holding the project, and especially the RfA procedure, back these days - I will instead attempt to again justify why Nick is more than prepared for adminship, and why his promotion would have a positive impact on the project.

I am sure many editors have heard my views on the relationship, or lack thereof, between significant mainspace contributions and adminship. One of the many flaws of that philosophy, in my eyes, is that it is very easy to write multiple good articles, and achieve multiple DYK listings, without having to partake in, or resolve, any significant conflicts, the kind of conflicts you would have to deal with if you undertook such areas of adminship. As an example, I took Starlight (song) from start class to GA class in a matter of weeks, and in that time its talk page was only edited by me adding {{GAC}}, and by a GA reviewer passing it. I don’t recall the talk page being edited since then. However, if I was to use that article in my Q2 answer in an RfA (not me, my RfAs are never a good precedent, but imagine if a generic candidate did), I would receive much less “mainspace needed” opposition. Especially considering that in my other four good articles, only two of them have actually undergone any serious, content related discussion - in both cases after the article was granted GA status. I could answer Q2 with “5 GAs” and be praised for mainspace work, without ever having actually solved a dispute, dealt with a POV pusher, etc.

Nick is not in the position I allude to above - he has a grand total of 0 GAs, 0 DYKs, and 0 featured items. However, as I just explained, this will have 0 impact on his ability to be an effective administrator. For the record, Nick has gnomed on multiple articles (recently, he’s been doing a bit on Parliament House, Canberra), so he has improved articles and bettered the encyclopaedia (a generic and totally unrelated to adminship standard that several users nonetheless undertake). He has uploaded many images, both to enwiki, and to commons, and has thus bettered the project and its articles through the imagery he has contributed.

Nick is an avid vandalfighter, and has been active in the vandalfighting arena for over a year. One would expect some editors who vandalfight for so long to either burn out, or to improve even more - Nick is surely the latter, and I’m sure there are many articles which are better for his vandalfighting efforts.

I’m sure many people will see the name “Dfrg.msc” and think many things, some relating to immaturity, others relating to a sometimes unorthodox sense of humour, and a few relating to “anti-encyclopaedic behaviour.” I challenge those who think these things to either show proof, or else show how they are a bad thing. How is the project damaged by a sense of humour? If anything, it strengthens it. To give another example, when Wikipedia reached 2,000,000 articles, it was Nick who sent celebratory messages to countless users’ talk pages. I personally was already aware of the upcoming milestone, as it had been promoted on IRC (and as a result, I was newpage watching trying to prevent it :P), but as we are all aware, not everyone uses IRC. I’m sure those that don’t, and thus those who weren’t aware of the milestone, would’ve appreciated Nick’s hilarious message (my favourite element was this image), and thus their moral would have been raised. News flash guys - high moral = positive contributions...and guess whose fault doing the high moral was?

If nothing else in this nomination has given you any reason to support Nick, in your eyes, I at least urge you to consider the fact that we really, really, need more admins willing to edit naked. When the going gets tough, when the vandalism gets strong, when every article has an image of a penis on it, it won’t be some guy in a cape who saves the day. I’ve sat here for about five minutes trying to word the next sentence, but I just can’t do it in a way that won’t get me blocked. I’m sure you know what I’m trying to imply. Vote for Nick. Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) 08:07, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I humbly accept this (beautiful) nomination. Dfrg.msc 01:13, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


In the time I have been a member of Wikipedia, I feel have a developed a use for admin tools, and enough experience to use them correctly. I hope have earned the trust of the Wikipedia community, and would thank you for giving me a chance to prove it.

The standards and dedication of the English Wikipeidan Administrators is excellent and I would be privileged to stand among them.

- Dfrg.msc 01:20, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?
A: Fighting vandalism would be tha primary use. I regularly do RCP and vandalism patrolling. WP:AIAV always seems to be backlogged, and I still look forward to helping there. The use of the blocking function and being able to protect pages (and images) that are under chronic attack, would bring a great advantage to my vandal fighting efforts. I believe that every tool available to combat vandalism should be implemented, compassion and tolerance among them. I participate in *fD debates, and would like to be able to close them, especially TFD. I'd also like to help out with the Administrative backlog. A few users have come to me under the impression that I was a sysop, and it's situations like those that Admin tools would also show their value.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I have created and built articles like Rone, created and worked hard on every page in the Melbourne graffiti artists category, become coordinator and breathed life into Wikipedia:WikiProject Graffiti and have completely built Portal:Graffiti, and Portal:Warhammer. I've also worked extensively with images with over 100 image uploads and created Image:Wikipedia Editor Review.png and Image:DFRAMA.png (now unused). Although I am proud of these particular edits, reverting sneaky and dangerous vandalism, re-instating whole pages and support my fellow editors can be equally as fulfilling, and just as important for the project.
3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
A: Yes. My early behavior led to myself being suspected as a sock puppet of User:Carbine. For the admins here who can see deleted history: Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Dfrg.msc. Early edits and confusion have dragged me down as have early talk page edits. I accept these edits, I did make them, but I hope they do not reflect on myself in the here and now. Since then, I feel I have proved myself against those reckless few months, to strive to be a force of good. All of the edits were made over a year ago, and I would ask you to consider me for what I am now. I do make mistakes, I'm a human first and a editor second. I make and admit to my mistakes, and learn from them. The more I have worked though, the less conflict I encountered. I learn't that co-operation and compromise are the strongest policies. I was a member of the AMA and closed four cases. I have gained experience though adversity and I know how to deal with, and better, avoid conflict. I have, and will always, apply these skills where necessary.
Completely optional question from CO
4. Do you intend to help with the image backlog on CAT:CSD? If yes, do you have a good understand of image licensing and policy?
A. Truthfully, no, I don't. I made a few mistakes when I was new with image uploads, and there are some pretty tricky elements with image licensing. I don't upload anything anymore unless I made it, but I have a an adequate understanding of the policy, and if I were asked to help out I'm sure I could do so. Cheers, Dfrg.msc 21:50, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Optional question from Eye of the Mind
5. It seems to via this, that your level of editing has dropped steadily per month since January of this year. This is not a area of concern, but I was curious if there is a particular reason for this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eye of the Mind (talk • contribs) 02:16, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A. Thanks for the question, it's no problem. Well, from when I really stared editing, my count was about 420 a month, then (because I had some time off) editing really spiked from 2006/11 - 2007/2 and it's just been dropping back to normal, except for 2007/9 (where I was making up for all that "time off" :). Cheers, Dfrg.msc 06:47, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Optional Question from Marlith T/C
6 What do you dream Wikipedia will be in the future? Will you fight to create a blessed world where the blood of vandals is the wine that we raise in our toasts?
A. For eleven hundred years I have fought and I have seen the darkness of our galaxy... I have seen all the evil the galaxy harbours, and I have slain them. I have seen what you must see, I have fought what you must fight, and I have slain what you must slay... Righteousness is your shield, Faith your armor and Roll-back your weapon. Ours is to be an empire of worlds, not merely of castes or nations, or races or peoples. To simply control the worlds which we claim as our own will not be enough – we must control the paths between them also, or be divided, and so fail. Dfrg.msc 05:03, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Optional question from bibliomaniac15 (talk · contribs)
7. What place do you believe humor and sarcasm has on Wikipedia?
A. Well, obviously, there is a time and place (like in the above question), and it's true that work is better when you're smiling. Humor can be uplifting, sarcasm can be constructive. However, there are many matters on Wikipedia that do deserve to be taken very seriously. At first, I was - not so good (see my early edits :), but I believe, that, after more than a year, I can make a distinction. Cheers, Dfrg.msc 05:13, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

General comments

RfAs for this user:

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Dfrg.msc before commenting.

Discussion

  • I find the argument in the nominating statement to be an unnecessary straw man. For one, Dfrg.msc appears to have done a reasonable amount of article work particularly with his interest in graffiti artists. For two, I've never seen anyone argue something along the lines that writing DYKs demonstrates conflict resolution skills. The purpose of wanting to see evidence of encyclopedia building is to demonstrate understanding that this is an encyclopedia. If you've never seen a hard-working article writer wonked off the project by some bureaucratic-minded "Metapedian" sysop then you're not paying attention. --JayHenry 15:15, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Support- From the start of my editing days right up till my peak and my lows, Nick has supported and helped me along as my wiki-father! He's a very helpful and smart contribution to the Wikipedia Admin team in my opinion! Good Luck Dfrg.Msc! Drizzt Jamo 06:43, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Per Dihydrogen Monoxide's awesome nomination. Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) 08:37, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Per Dihydrogen Monoxide's awesome nomination. @pple complain 09:04, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. ➔ REDVEЯS was here 09:05, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. I was about to oppose... but you're an Aussie so I can't do that... :p --DarkFalls talk 09:12, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support A very good user. I am confident that this user would make a fine admin. --Siva1979Talk to me 09:15, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support fine candidate. —Anas talk? 09:59, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support, it is an awesome nomination. Past issues, yes, but a lot to like. Deiz talk 10:45, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support. He has learnt and improved, and you can't say that of everyone. Sam Blacketer 11:03, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support. Has done good work. Recurring dreams 11:35, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support per work on WP:NCR. Neil ム 11:37, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support Seen this user around, no reason to oppose. NHRHS2010 Talk 12:18, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support i though he was already a admin; still great user give em' the mop -- (Cocoaguy ここがいい contribstalk) 12:33, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support I've come across dfrg.msc on multiple occasions, and I see no reason to oppose. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 12:53, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support Yay. RuneWiki777 13:41, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support - fine candidate. Addhoc 14:20, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support - review of contribs shows no red flags, overall solid contributor. Ronnotel 14:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support. I supported his first one, and I have not seen any problems develop since then. --Mark (Mschel) 14:26, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support. I've seen this guy's work and it's always been impressive. A dedicated and civil user who knows what he's doing. Useight 14:55, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Strong Support Community trust is a large part of a RfA, and I feel you have obtained through not only your proficient contributions to Wikipedia, but also your significant role in Wikipedia Community. Dfrg.msc deserves the mop by now! Perfect Proposal Speak out loud! 15:07, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support per Sam Blacketer. --JayHenry 15:18, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support just like last time. --tennisman 15:20, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Yep. — Dorftrottel⁠ 15:40, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support Have noticed your edits over the last year or so. An impressive contributor. And I love the example of a mistake in Q3. All in all, a good candidate. --Dweller 15:45, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  25. This editor is a good editor. From my personal experiences. Wikidudeman (talk) 15:45, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  26. I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message! - 16:03, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Seems like a good user. Acalamari 16:55, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support though I'm not sure what DHMO meant when he talked about Dfrg.msc's name. J-ſtanTalkContribs 18:46, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  29. the_undertow talk 18:48, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support Jmlk17 21:10, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  31. I'm quite pleased that you are honest with your answers, and you have improved a lot since your previous RfA. ~ Sebi [talk] 21:52, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support Seems like a good chap. He should find adminship useful, no doubt. – Aillema 21:53, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support Honest. Carbon Monoxide 22:05, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  34. This user has huge amount of community trust, and abuse of admin tools is unforeseeable. Great user all around; support. O2 (息 • 吹) 22:16, 08 October 2007 (GMT)
  35. Support --Hirohisat 紅葉 23:55, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support As per JayHenry and Track is good with nearly 5000 mainspace edits and over 7000 edits.Pharaoh of the Wizards 00:01, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support - Absolutely. Neranei (talk) 00:06, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Support. You've grown, mate. bibliomaniac15 00:11, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support. In my experience Dfrg.msc is a strong editor. No reason to believe he would abuse the tools. Rockpocket 01:33, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Support per substantially everything above. Qualified candidate, no concerns. Newyorkbrad 01:56, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support John254 02:08, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Support - No big deal. --Eye of the Mind 02:20, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Support - I trust Dfrg. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 02:22, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Strong Support I'm popping out of semi-wiki-break to post my strong support for Dfrg. He passed all my admin related tests with flying colours during our admin coaching sessions and exhibits a knowledge of policy and maturity to be a fine admin. Like all of us he's not perfect, but can I can say with 100% certainty he can be trusted with the tools. Fine candidate :) Glen 03:37, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support trustworthy, experience. No reasons to oppose. Good luck. Carlosguitar 06:39, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support {{subst:thoughtyouwereonecliche}}. Pedro :  Chat  07:23, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Super-ultra-über Tarragon Support ~ Riana ⁂ 07:39, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Pile on Support In Dfrg.msc we trust. Culverin? 07:52, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Support, looks ok --Herby talk thyme 10:45, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Support. The candidate appears to be a good, trustworthy contributor. Majoreditor 12:30, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Weak support. Unfamiliar with this user until now, but his huge number of edits, vandal-fighting (with scars to prove it), and trustworthy supporters lead me in that direction. Wanting to close debates honestly is one reason I wanted to be a sysop. Bearian 13:43, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Support - great candidate. Such a lot has been achieved. Keep up the awesome work! Lradrama 14:26, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Support - Why not? Sounds good to me Dustihowe 18:12, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  54. Support - will use tools wisely. Carlossuarez46 21:43, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  55. Support A good candidate. -Lemonflash(O_o) 22:28, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  56. Support Definitely! jonathan (talk — contribs) 22:52, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  57. Support He has much expierence and can be trusted well with the mop. Marlith T/C 00:31, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  58. Support Quite impressed with your edits, especially to Portal:Graffiti.--WriterListener 01:16, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  59. The sensible approach of the candidate towards the real, hidden point of my concerns and his decisive statement to dismiss all doubt convince me. Now I'm certain, 'Nick' can be trusted with a mop, a cigar or whatever. Accordingly, I switch my vote to Support. Congratulations! Gray62 02:51, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  60. Support Will not abuse powers. Good luck. --Banana 04:21, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  61. Will the candidate be celebrating the outcome of this RfA anywhere near the Reichstag? Oh, and I support. Resurgent insurgent 05:31, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. Oppose. Dfrg.msc nominates a candidate named 'Nick', but afaics 'Nick' never accepted the nomination. I'm only a n00b, but I'm sure there are some rules somewhere that say this is verboten. Also, I'm a very seriously concerned that Wikipedia could be "damaged by a sense of humour"! Gray62 00:47, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    This is nonsense. Dfrg.msg is Nick. Nick is Dfrg.msg. There are no rules prohibiting this, considering that it is extremely clear who Nick is. Also note that humour is often considered a breath of fresh air on Wikipedia. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 00:50, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Help! A.D. needs some rescue breathing! :D Gray62 00:56, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    [ec] This isn't a self-nom. Nick is Dfrg.msc's real name. EVula // talk // ☯ // 00:51, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, really, one and the same? Hmm, then how can this be not a self-nom???Gray62 00:56, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    This is a joke, is it not? Marlith T/C 00:52, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    The nomination? I'm not sure. Nothing against humour, but how am I supposed to know who 'Nick' is???Gray62 00:56, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Nick a.k.a Dfrg.msg was nominated by Dihydrogen Monoxide. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 00:57, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    OK, A.D., of course you're right. Not a self-nom. That 'Nick' constantly mentioned confused me. The joke's on me. Sry! Gray62 01:56, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Guys, don't feed the troll. 86.29.44.23 00:59, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Yummy yummy...Gray62 01:05, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Creep... 86.29.44.23 01:09, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, imho evidence enough that users don't appreciate "a sense of humour". I would be interested in the candidates' opinion on this now! Gray62 01:11, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Righty - from what I can discern, (???) Dihydrogen Monoxide nominated me and I accepted the nomination. I am not Dihydrogen Monoxide, I am Nick (Dfrg.msc). I agree a sense of humor has it's place and I'll always try to "lighten the mood", although I am prone to large periods of unwavering seriousness. Is this a serious Oppose?
    An I did not engage in sexual intercourse with that woman </Clinton>. Dfrg.msc 02:27, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
New requirement. ALL RFAs must have pictures in order to confirm validity of the identity concerning the user running and his nominee. :-P Miranda 05:04, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, plus candidates must wear nothing but a dressing gown, a cheesy grin and a thumbs up. :) Dfrg.msc 05:16, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to strong support per candidate's meeting my bathrobe criteria. the_undertow talk 06:06, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is this the bathrobe cabal? Oh, I so want in! ~ Riana ⁂ 06:35, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

  1. "I participate in *fD debates, and would like to be able to close them" - upon review of some comments in XfD's made by the candidate around a month ago, I fear that the candidate does not understand the concept of consensus through discussion, and (more concerning) WP:ATA. However, on the whole, I believe that Dfrg.msc could be a good administrator with some more reading and use of caution if/when he is made +sysop, so I won't oppose. Daniel 01:56, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Dfrg.msc_2&oldid=163513258"