Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Backslash Forwardslash: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
+edit count |
|||
Line 186: | Line 186: | ||
* 2 - War |
* 2 - War |
||
</pre> |
</pre> |
||
== General discussion moved from [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Backslash_Forwardslash#Oppose]] == |
|||
General discussion moved from [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Backslash_Forwardslash#Oppose]] |
|||
— <small><b><span style="border:1px solid #20406F;padding:1px 3px;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;">[[User:Aitias|<font color="#20406F">Aitias</font>]]</span></b></small> <span style="color: #999;">//</span> [[User talk:Aitias|''discussion'']] 21:19, 13 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
#: Another stellar rationale there. <small><span style="border:1px solid #993333;padding:1px;">[[User_talk:Garden|<font style="color:white ;background:#993333;"> '''GARDEN''' </font>]]</span></small> 20:43, 13 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
#::Does my opposition really need a rationale? Should I challenge all of the supporters for their rationales or are you planning to do that? --[[User:Malleus Fatuorum|Malleus]] [[User_talk:Malleus_Fatuorum|Fatuorum]] 20:48, 13 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
#:::Rationales are helpful in keeping this a discussion rather than a "call the question"-type vote. Even though some people don't like it, "per nom" or "per previous commenter" is better than nothing. [[User:davidwr|davidwr]]/<small><small>([[User_talk:davidwr|talk]])/([[Special:Contributions/Davidwr|contribs]])/([[Special:Emailuser/davidwr|e-mail]])</small></small> 20:51, 13 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
#::: Support on its own '''supports the nomination'''. Oppose on its own needs at least some contest. Stop being pointy. <small><span style="border:1px solid #993333;padding:1px;">[[User_talk:Garden|<font style="color:white ;background:#993333;"> '''GARDEN''' </font>]]</span></small> 20:53, 13 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
#::::Ah, I see. Well mirroring the first support my rationale is WHY, rather than WHYNOT. We're not short of administrators. I ''don't'' support the nomination. --[[User:Malleus Fatuorum|Malleus]] [[User_talk:Malleus_Fatuorum|Fatuorum]] 20:56, 13 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
#::::: There are two perfectly good nominations telling you WHY. Perhaps read them before giving a rationale-less oppose. <small><span style="border:1px solid #339933;padding:1px;">[[User_talk:Garden|<font style="color:white ;background:#339933;"> '''GARDEN''' </font>]]</span></small> 21:06, 13 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
#::::::Perhaps you ought to listen to what I'm telling you, instead of trying to badger me into submission. Good luck with that btw, you're going to need it. ;-) --[[User:Malleus Fatuorum|Malleus]] [[User_talk:Malleus_Fatuorum|Fatuorum]] 21:12, 13 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
#::Please, there is no reason we must have this discussion here. Such discussions over whether one is allowed to support or oppose without comment clutter all-too-many RfAs. If you have to, discuss it at [[WT:RFA]] please, not here... '''[[User:SoWhy|<span style="font-variant:small-caps; color: #AC0000">So</span>]][[User talk:SoWhy|<span style="font-variant:small-caps; color: #1F3F53">Why</span>]]''' 21:15, 13 February 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 21:19, 13 February 2009
General user info Username: Backslash Forwardslash User groups: accountcreator, rollbacker First edit: Aug 06, 2008 08:56:29 Unique articles edited: 5,342 Average edits per page: 1.82 Total edits (including deleted): 9,742 Deleted edits: 451 Live edits: 9,291 Namespace totals Article 3490 35.82% Talk 310 3.18% User 272 2.79% User talk 3198 32.83% Wikipedia 553 5.68% Wikipedia talk 90 0.92% File 24 0.25% File talk 1 0.01% MediaWiki talk 1 0.01% Template 631 6.48% Template talk 716 7.35% Help 1 0.01% Help talk 1 0.01% Category 1 0.01% Portal 2 0.02% Month counts 2008/08 262 2008/09 15 2008/10 1007 2008/11 4420 2008/12 2357 2009/01 836 2009/02 394 Logs Accounts created: 145 Pages moved: 25 Pages patrolled: 144 Files uploaded: 12 Top edited articles Article * 94 - Australia_Day * 91 - Bruce_Kingsbury * 40 - Melbourne_Airport * 37 - Cyrille_Pierre_Théodore_Laplace * 31 - Tess_Gerritsen * 16 - Frederick_Birks * 14 - Kumusi_River * 13 - Misc * 12 - List_of_Brownlow_Medal_winners * 10 - Brisbane_Airport Talk * 21 - Melbourne_Airport * 12 - Wasilla_Assembly_of_God/GA1 * 12 - Australia_Day * 10 - Kauhajoki_school_shooting/GA1 * 9 - Bruce_Kingsbury * 8 - Roxy_Ann_Peak/GA1 * 6 - The_Mansion_of_Happiness * 6 - Sigma_Rho * 6 - Three_Little_Birds_(Connie_Talbot_song)/GA1 * 5 - Uru:_Ages_Beyond_Myst/GA1 User * 43 - Backslash_Forwardslash * 26 - Backslash_Forwardslash/GAReviews * 22 - Backslash_Forwardslash/mainbody * 19 - Backslash_Forwardslash/Vanity_Board * 18 - Backslash_Forwardslash/awardtemplate * 16 - Backslash_Forwardslash/monobook.js * 12 - Backslash_Forwardslash/Karamu * 10 - Backslash_Forwardslash/Reviewing * 5 - Matthew_Yeager * 5 - Backslash_Forwardslash/Adoption User talk * 109 - Backslash_Forwardslash * 26 - Mvjs * 18 - Rjanag * 16 - SunDragon34/Adoption * 13 - Abraham,_B.S. * 11 - Yellow_Evan * 8 - Sunderland06 * 7 - Rocky1023 * 6 - Backslash_Forwardslash/Archive_2 * 6 - EugeSer_14 Wikipedia * 122 - Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism * 60 - Usernames_for_administrator_attention * 52 - Good_article_nominations * 25 - Huggle/Whitelist * 17 - Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents * 13 - Featured_article_candidates/Bruce_Kingsbury * 13 - Administrators'_noticeboard/2008_IWF_action * 12 - Administrators'_noticeboard * 11 - Recent_additions * 11 - Miscellany_for_deletion Wikipedia talk * 76 - Did_you_know * 3 - Articles_for_creation/Submissions/SKV * 2 - Copyright_problems * 2 - AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage * 2 - Good_article_nominations * 1 - Vandalism * 1 - Articles_for_creation/Submissions/The_Hobart_Charg... * 1 - Tutorial_(Talk_pages) * 1 - Twinkle * 1 - Flagged_revisions/Trial File * 4 - BruceSKingsbury.jpg * 2 - 6battalion03-07-17.jpg * 2 - KumusiRiverWairopi.jpg * 2 - Cooneycropped.jpg * 2 - Brucekingsburygrave.jpg * 2 - Maidenhead_bridgecropforDYK.jpg * 1 - Sydney1.jpg * 1 - Flag_of_Sri_Lanka.svg * 1 - Crown-macau-290407.jpg * 1 - AlfaHosts.png File talk * 1 - Wiki_letter_w.svg MediaWiki talk * 1 - Bad_image_list Template * 580 - Did_you_know/Next_update * 26 - Did_you_know/Next_next_update * 4 - User_WikiProject_Papua_New_Guinea * 3 - DYKsuggestion/doc * 3 - DYKsuggestion * 3 - UpdatedDYK * 3 - Did_you_know/Next_update/Clear * 2 - DYKNom * 2 - Continent-based_templates * 2 - UpdatedDYKNom Template talk * 714 - Did_you_know * 2 - DYKsuggestion Help * 1 - Contents/Editing_Wikipedia Help talk * 1 - Edit_conflict Category * 1 - Wikipedia_content_guidelines Portal * 2 - War
General discussion moved from Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Backslash_Forwardslash#Oppose
General discussion moved from Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Backslash_Forwardslash#Oppose — Aitias // discussion 21:19, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- Another stellar rationale there. GARDEN 20:43, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- Does my opposition really need a rationale? Should I challenge all of the supporters for their rationales or are you planning to do that? --Malleus Fatuorum 20:48, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- Rationales are helpful in keeping this a discussion rather than a "call the question"-type vote. Even though some people don't like it, "per nom" or "per previous commenter" is better than nothing. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 20:51, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support on its own supports the nomination. Oppose on its own needs at least some contest. Stop being pointy. GARDEN 20:53, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- Ah, I see. Well mirroring the first support my rationale is WHY, rather than WHYNOT. We're not short of administrators. I don't support the nomination. --Malleus Fatuorum 20:56, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- There are two perfectly good nominations telling you WHY. Perhaps read them before giving a rationale-less oppose. GARDEN 21:06, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- Perhaps you ought to listen to what I'm telling you, instead of trying to badger me into submission. Good luck with that btw, you're going to need it. ;-) --Malleus Fatuorum 21:12, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- There are two perfectly good nominations telling you WHY. Perhaps read them before giving a rationale-less oppose. GARDEN 21:06, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- Ah, I see. Well mirroring the first support my rationale is WHY, rather than WHYNOT. We're not short of administrators. I don't support the nomination. --Malleus Fatuorum 20:56, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- Please, there is no reason we must have this discussion here. Such discussions over whether one is allowed to support or oppose without comment clutter all-too-many RfAs. If you have to, discuss it at WT:RFA please, not here... SoWhy 21:15, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- Does my opposition really need a rationale? Should I challenge all of the supporters for their rationales or are you planning to do that? --Malleus Fatuorum 20:48, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- Another stellar rationale there. GARDEN 20:43, 13 February 2009 (UTC)