Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Backslash Forwardslash: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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>&nbsp;[[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;">&nbsp;'''GARDEN'''&nbsp;</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;">&nbsp;'''GARDEN'''&nbsp;</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;">&nbsp;'''GARDEN'''&nbsp;</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#OpposeAitias // discussion 21:19, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Another stellar rationale there.  GARDEN  20:43, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]