User talk:Val42

Welcome

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia.

You can help improve the articles listed below! This list updates frequently, so check back here for more tasks to try. (See Wikipedia:Maintenance or the Task Center for further information.)

Fix spelling and grammar

• Roomba
• List of Pennsylvania hurricanes
• Lohara dynasty
• History of animation
• János Statileo

More... • Learn how

Fix wikilinks

• Jang Jo-yoon
• Equestrianism in Qatar
• Valentino Rossi
• Mary Ann Swenson
• Arthur Japin

More... • Learn how

Update with new information

• List of programs broadcast by MTV2 (Canada)
• Kingstone High School
• Environmental epidemiology
• Movement for Democratic Change (1999–2005)
• Taxation in Luxembourg

More... • Learn how

Expand short articles

• Colégio Marista Dom Silvério
• Colégio Santa Catarina
• Scuola Italiana Eugenio Montale
• Colégio Polilogos
• Colégio Marista Arquidiocesano

More... • Learn how

Check and add references

• Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006
• Child corporal punishment laws
• Melbourne Storm
• Benjamin Mühlemann
• Nancy Vincent McClelland

More... • Learn how

Fix original research issues

• Reform Zionism
• Kurrama River
• Professional Putters Association
• Shankill, Dublin
• Standard Arabic Technical Transliteration System

More... • Learn how

Improve lead sections

• Effects-based operations
• 2009–10 Central Coast Mariners FC season
• United Ancient Order of Druids
• Business action on climate change
• Shape-memory alloy

More... • Learn how

Add an image

• Lotus River
• Large White Italiana
• Louisiana Air National Guard
• Lavelle Road
• Liverpool–Parramatta T-way

More... • Learn how

Translate and clean up

• Gaetano Saya
• Otto Adolf Weismann von Weißenstein
• Knulp
• Chang Fu-hsing (musician)
• La mamá del 10

More... • Learn how

Help counter systemic bias by creating new articles on important women.

Help improve popular pages, especially those of low quality.

You might find these links helpful in creating new pages or helping with the above tasks: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too.

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

• If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.

• You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.

• If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.

Again, welcome! - UtherSRG 04:54, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Salt Lake Comments

I have made some open-suggestions on Talk:Salt Lake City, Utah. If you get a free moment please review them and any added comments are greatly appreciated. Have a nice day. Apollomelos 23:40, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Mormonism and Christianity

I'm impressed. Your edits sound not only like well-stated Mormonism, but like ultimate truth. I guess Mormonism intends when well-stated to be ultimate truth. Mormonism really is amazing as an inspired revelation sometimes in spite of its human shortcomings. Particularly in the view of salvation, Mormonism, as you have expressed it here, has a very good way of expressing the inexpressible realities of the eternal purposes in a liberal and generous, but demanding way. Thanks for your contributions. Tom Haws 03:53, May 12, 2005 (UTC)

I'm curious why you reverted. Trodel put your version back. Apparently he liked it as much as I did. More info from the Val? Tom Haws 15:12, May 12, 2005 (UTC)

Joseph Smith, Jr.

I just encouraged our recent anon. editor to take his multiple concerns to the talk page. I copied his note there to start the discussion. FYI, that introductory paragraph is the result of many edits, discussions and compromises by the LDS user's group, now found in the archives of the article. I would encourage you to revert your last change and join in on the discussion page. Detailing why you felt it was important to follow the anon. editor's opinions would be a good start. Thanks. WBardwin 02:59, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks -- this lets us gather some opinions from the anon and other users. Look forward to working with you. WBardwin 03:06, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Val, on the recent edits to the article, do you see any reson not to simply quote the three witnesses statement? I also think the Harris quote later in his life should be quoted. To state that the three saw them in a vision is an interpretation of their statement and not what they said. I am not aware that the Church claims it was a vision. Do I believe it was with their human eyes? I guess I don't really care, but I know that many Mormons believe that they saw them with their acutal eyes and handled them with their hands. If the article does not inlclude the quotes now, I will wait and add them later. You have a more reason approach at the moment and would hope you would do if you think it is appropriate. Storm Rider 19:02, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

B5 info on DS9 page

I removed your information but would like to explain myself. I have no trouble believing it is true that there was some "borrowing" (I don't know if it was plagiarizing, since I've never looked into the issue), but I'd like to see a source for it, such as the usenet posts you mentioned. The bit about Worf being brought on to boost ratings is a good example of something else I agree with but would have removed had it been added without a specific source. Thanks! Jibbajabba 06:39, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

KTVX

You have received this message because you have edited a Salt Lake City media article in the past. We have recently had an edit war regarding the wording and inclusion of a paragraph on the KTVX article. In hopes of resolving this I have put together an informal survey. If you are interested, please stop by Talk:KTVX and add a vote. Thanks, A 09:15, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Spam warning

Please do not add commercial links — or links to your own private websites — to Wikipedia. Specifically I'm referring to the addition of links to BoardGameGeek.com to every board game article. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. They will be removed. If you should be so inclined, you might help. WAvegetarian ^(talk) (email) ^(contribs) 06:37, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I am not associated with Board Game Geek other than a user who appreciates the resource. I figured that other users would also appreciate the reviews. That is apparently not the purpose of Wikipedia any more, according to you. Val42 15:24, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

If you are referring to commercial interests being put above others, this never was the purpose. The reviews are inherently POV. There is a prominent, centrally placed ad on every page you linked to. The actual info on the games duplicates content that is/should be in the main article. If this isn't WP:SPAM, then it's commercial fancruft. In any event, it is innapropriate to place these links on every board game article. The link from BoardGameGeek is enough for someone trying to find them. We are not a directory, however, and shouldn't be making edits and additions with the purpose of driving more traffic to their site. WAvegetarian ^(talk) (email) ^(contribs) 15:51, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Then, according to your rules, you need to remove the Board Game Geek entries from all of the board game entries. (Links to BGG existed on a large percentage of the articles before I came along.) And I am personally looking for you to personally trim down the Scrabble list to less than half of its current size. We should take this to some board game page so that we're not the only ones discussing this important issue. I'll let you pick which board game page. Val42 16:14, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm sorry that I jumped to conclusions and called you a vandal. Please see the discussion, and an explanation of my reasoning at Wikipedia talk:Counter Vandalism Unit#HELP!. While I still do not agree with the style of the links, i.e. including the internal link, I now understand their addition to the articles. I had issues IRL which kept me from actually removing any links immediately. I will help to put back the ones that were removed as a result of my post if the consensus seems to go that way, which it currently is. WAvegetarian ^(talk) (email) ^(contribs) 18:09, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Help at Early life of Joseph Smith, Jr.

Early life of Joseph Smith, Jr. will be featured on the Main Page on the 23rd. Vandalism will probably be frequent that day. Could you help in monitoring the page? The 23rd starts at 7 pm ET on Dec 22nd, since wikipedia goes by UTC. Thx in advance. Trödel•talk 01:56, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Category alphabetizing

Hi Val. Can you tell me what it does when someone puts a person's name next to their category entry (like you've been doing)? I've been wondering this and trying to find the answer, but have not. It doesn't appear to do anything as it already is alphabetized in the category listing. --Jason Gastrich 01:40, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Usually, articles are alphabetized by their category names. This works well except for names. It is traditional in most countries to alphabetize by the family name, which in western cultures is the last name. Doing what I did tells Wikipedia to alphabetize in the order that is specified after the pipe ('|') symbol, forcing it to alphabetize by family name. I realize that this doesn't do much for Billy Barty right now, but it will if/when there are others in the B list in the same category. Val42 01:49, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I see now! Thanks for clearing that up. Do you happen to know if Wiki says somewhere that it prefers to alphabetize by last name instead of first name? On my web sites, I've done it both ways; different ways for different reasons. --Jason Gastrich 01:56, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if there is a Wikipedia policy on it. But it seems to be done without objections, so it is the defacto policy. Val42 02:00, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I see. I'm just concerned that it will defeat the purpose if everyone doesn't try and do it one way or the other. Having 1/2 the people categorized by first name and 1/2 of them by last name, in the same category, will be confusing. I bet there is an official word somewhere . . . --Jason Gastrich 02:04, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

LDS alert

Hello! As you have contributed to LDS/Mormon articles in the past, this is a friendly heads-up that Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_temples_of_The_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter-day_Saints is currently being discussed. Any comments you have regarding the issue would be appreciated. Thanks! —akghetto ^talk 11:04, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Define vandalism

here, you refer to the prior edit as "vandalism." I don't see a case for calling it. With the ArbCom elections presently happening, it seems to me that everyone is taking up the task of burning the vandals out of the community. Do you really feel that was vandalism? Avriette 09:12, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject LDS

Hello! I noticed you were on the list of members in the LDS WikiProject, and I was wondering if you were still interested in helping out there. You see, over the past few months, it appears that it has slowly drifted into inactivity. But you CAN help. Please consider doing both of the following:

1. Take ONE thing form the To-Do list and do it. Once you're done with it, remove it from the list, and from the<>{{Template:LDSprojectbox}}<>, so we know its done. Keep the page on your watchlist. We have a backlog going for more than half a year. Please help to work on it, and remove it.
2. Vote on the LDSCOTF, and work on it!
3. Tell your friends (esp. LDS friends, & esp. Wikipedian friends) about this WikiProject, and enocourage them to join (and be active).

Remember: your involvement in this WikiProject is just that - involvement! Please help us out.

(Note: I'm sending this out to everyone who's name was on the membership list, so I will NOT be watching this page for a response. If you want to contact me, do it on MY talk page, please.)

Thanks for all that you do -Trevdna 15:46, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey, just saying thanks for fixing my syntax at Talk:Mormonism(I forgot that crucial colon[:]). The Scurvy Eye 04:32, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. I wanted to follow the link, so the best way was to fix it. Val42 04:39, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Scouting Barnstarn

Did you see this proposal? Scouting Barnstarn --evrik 20:00, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

what are "prarie saints" ??

You've used this term a few times, and haven't responded anywhere where I've asked what it means / where it comes from. Wikipedia is the only place I've ever heard the term "prarie saint". --Nerd42 15:12, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

This is a term that was in use in the LDS articles before I started editing Wikipedia. Some of the academician among the LDS editors have seen this distinction used in academic articles, so they didn't originate the term either. When I rewrote the Latter Day Saint movement article, I just rearranged the information that was already there. Here is the fifth paragraph of the "Brief History" section of Latter Day Saint movement:

Following Smith's murder by a mob in Carthage, Illinois, these and other prominent members of the church claimed to be Smith's legitimate successor resulting in a Succession Crisis. This crisis resulted in several permanent schisms, the body of the church breaking in to several denominations. The two main branches of the movement are sometimes called the "Prairie Saints" (those that remained in the region) and the "Rocky Mountain Saints" (those who followed Brigham Young to what would become Utah).

I hope that this answers your question. Val42 03:00, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Mormon article

I appreciate your outline that you proposed, but I would probably not delve deeply into beliefs and differences. The differences between some of the groups is very different. For example, CoC have a very mainstream flavor where as LDS group's rejection of the Trinity causes major problems for the mainstream. Maybe just refer them to specific articles would work rather than attempting to explain all the differences in this article. Storm Rider 09:07, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Help Request

Val,

User:Enormousdude has taken up editing Mormon articles. His edits tend to consist of duplicating information from the controversy sections and then pasting them into other sections. I have pretty much reached my limit on reverting him. Any help you could give would be appreciated, particular with the Book of Mormon article. Thanks. --Hetar 06:06, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Joseph Smith, Jr.

re: If approved, this would set a bad precedent for any faith-based article directly, and any advocacy-based article (such as abortion) indirectly. Imagine if you will, if the proposal were written thusly: "Should pro-abortion editors be banned from editing abortion-related articles or should there be a limit on how many pro-abortion advocates can edit a single abortion-related page?" Perhaps the last three points on NPOV on faith-based articles should be split in to a separate RFM -- your note on Mediation page.

I've been "away" from Wiki on family business -- but have to some extent kept my eye on this situation. So I guess I'm an interested party. I think the proposal to limit editors on articles based on their affiliation/knowledge is simply ludicrous and smacks of bias, censorship and elitism. I think your example is a good one, but, really, if you plug in any other name -- Catholics can't edit Catholic articles, Jews can't edit Jewish articles, historians can't edit history articles??? -- it all comes out the same. Very anti-Wiki, in my perspective, and certainly it would limit the usefulness of any encyclopedia/article. So, if people outside the mediation group can express an opinion, I would be happy to contribute. Please let me know. Best wishes. WBardwin 03:43, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your support. I suggest that you watch the RFM page and see how the mediation goes on these thre NPOV points, and the last one (the major one) in particular. Then you should jump in where appropriate. Val42 03:49, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Mormonism and Judaism

Back on table for featured article, and getting same objects from same orthodox individuals, whom I believe don't ever want the article to see the front page of wikipedia. please jump in, help with the first two pararaphs if time affords, and enter a vote, maybe this time.

VChapman (15APR06) Mesa

Subst:ing

When using template tags on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:test}} instead of {{test}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template.

Thanks. :)

Hbackman 00:07, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Liahona

I've been reading this Russian's talk page and he says that in his religion, a moral compass is like a device called the Liahona. I saw that you edited this article, so I thought I would ask. Is the Russian right? Here's a link to his talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kaspersky_Trust

It's at the very bottom. Playmate 03:25, April 29, 2006 (UTC)

I read the discussion in the section that you've indicated. I don't understand the Russian, but he does have pretty good English. I would interpret his usage of the term(s) as more of a difference of presentation (way of saying what we mean) than him being incorrect.

I would have defined "moral compass" (for most of the world) as "the internal indicator that points to keeping within the boundaries of one’s morality". We (LDS) would also use a similar term, "The Light of Christ" which would mean "internal promptings by the Holy Ghost to do Right (absolute moral correctness)." (For most people, these will be very much the same thing, but in this day of "moral relativity" (in the United States and Europe), "one's morality" doesn't necessarily correspond to "Right".) In the Liahona article, the metaphor used by Alma to his son Helaman is that "it is as easy to give heed to the word of Christ ... to eternal bliss, as it was for our fathers to give heed to this compass ... to the promised land." In modern LDS usage, "Liahona" is used as a metaphor to follow both the "words of Christ" and the "Light of Christ".

I hope that this helps. I realize that this was a longer answer than you wanted, but I wanted to be as concise as possible while still being as correct as possible. Val42 16:59, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Reminder...

When using template tags on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:test}} instead of {{test}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template.

— Ian Manka Talk to me‼ 02:38, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Game

Hiya - you wanted "designer" adding to Template:Infobox Game - 'tis done. Percy Snoodle 18:47, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Anti-Mormonism

Hey Val42, thanks for your help on the Anti-Mormonism page! Hopefully we can work together to make it a great source of accurate, NPOV information! Please let me know if there are any sections you want to discuss or talk about, especially if it seems like the stuff I'm putting in (or taking out!) doesn't sit well with you. Thanks again! --Dlugar 23:25, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I have made the edits that I think are appropriate. I like that you shortened some of the sections; I thought they were too long when I was putting them in, but I didn't know how to shorten them at the time. I do think that it is important to list the other person who stood (and died) with the Mormons at Haun's Mill, that's why I added it back in. I'm sure that we'll go back and forth some while this article is being worked on, but I'm trying to work toward a NPOV article too. And I think that the give-and-take has worked well so far. I haven't like the previous revisions that have left out the historical aspects of the term, because it hasn't always been used for as benign activities as happens now days. I hope that you understand. Val42 23:35, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your edits! I know that with religious and political topics, behavior on both sides isn't as "benign" as we'd like--that's why I hoped to get a dialogue going with other users editing the article. I find it's much easier to be civil when there's real conversation going on (as opposed to just edit wars). Re: Haun's Mill, I didn't think the one other person was important enough to include in a relatively tangential article (although certainly it belongs in the main article), but if you feel it's important enough to include, it's not a big deal to me at all. :) Give-and-take is what it's all about! --Dlugar 00:03, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Mormonism and ANON

Well, now, aren't we in a pickle. I had stopped responding to 213's edits and all was quiet for a day or two. Then you stepped in and holy hannah if it did just blow up. LOL. I really don't know how to respond to the editor. I do find it difficult to follow their logic because of the language barrier. It would appear she/he is not really against Mormonism, but rather all religion. If you have a suggestion on how to proceed I would be happy to hear it. My first reaction is to just let it go and forget about it. Storm Rider ^(talk) 18:48, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm behind a couple of days in checking on the pages that I watch. To make sure that I got the entire thing, I went to the most recent version of the discussion and read it all in a few hours. It was difficult to follow because of the language barrier, but it seemed that the anonymous editor was repeatedly going over the same ground. It was either a severe misunderstanding that wouldn't go away, no matter how well treated or it was a troll. Either way, I judged that it would be best to confront it once, hard, then leave it alone. Tijuana Brass^¡Épa! seems to have also been bold and archived the discussion. There has been no follow-ups in the archive or on the talk page, so it looks like it is over either way. Val42 03:03, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

You did great. Don't misunderstand my post. I had tried really hard to understand the editor's position, but it was beyond me. I had to laugh when she/he answered you. There was just so much going on with the edit that I really did not know how best answer. Hopefully it is over and if she comes back, maybe we can take it one step at a time rather than address the whole thing at once.

Thanks for the complement. It does seem to be over. I don't see where Sophie replied to me. I you're refering to the part that starts with, "And some advice to Sophie which comes from Sophie," that was me, pulling portions from Sophie's own writings as advice for Sophie. Whatever the impetus, Sophie stopped writing. Good for Sophie, because of the reasons I said before. Val42 05:07, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

You forgot to knock on wood - Sophie's back. Maybe someone should contact the admins that dealt with him/her before when she/he was known as XAL and User:213.237.21.6. --FyzixFighter 17:01, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

LDS Project article template

I wanted to bring you up to date on a little project I'm undertaking. See the discsussion at Trodel's page: User_talk:Trödel/Archive_4#The_Project_and_template, and my own talk page.

I've yet created what will undoubtedly be another controversial, but much needed navigation template - let me know what you think: {{LDSproject}} -Visorstuff 00:18, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Article proposal

Val42, would you mind commenting on my proposal at Talk:Mormonism? Thx! --AuntieMormom 15:51, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Truck Gardens

As opposed to a home garden, a truck garden is a plot or farm where vegetables are grown for market or for distribution to those outside the gardener's immediate household. Too obscure for the Relief Society article? WBardwin 04:49, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I had no idea, which is why I made the change. I think that it is too obscure to not have a link explaining what it is. Val42 05:08, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

perhaps we could link it to existing (?) articles on urban community gardens or the truck farms popular with the organic movement. The RS gardens were much the same idea in those early years. WBardwin 05:16, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Fullerenes

Howdy. You recently editted Space elevator, citing "Reverted edit. "Carbon nanotubes" are a different structure than "buckminster fullerenes"." This is actually not true as both buckyballs and nanotubes are both types of fullerenes. I took out the "buckminster", though as that's not part of the name of the family of molecules. siafu 04:40, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I was half right then. When I read it, I thought something was wrong with it. I see that you fixed it. But I have one more change. I'll make it and see what you think. Val42 04:50, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Calling programmers

We need coders for the WikiProject Disambigation fixer. We need to make a program to make faster and easier the fixing of links. We will be happy if you could check the project. You can Help! --Neo139 09:20, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Looking for Ogden-area Wiki-folk

Val42, I work with the local newspaper, the Ogden Standard-Examiner. I am writing a story about local Wikipedia contributors and I would like to talk to you. Would you please contact me and possibly be willing to do an interview? E-mail is jmuhlestein@standard.net, and you can give me your phone or personal e-mail or whatever. Thanks a lot! Muletrain 18:26, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Atomic clock

mases from noun maser

masses plural of mass Arnero 12:42, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay. I just thought that I'd found a spelling mistake. Thanks for the correction. Val42 05:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Speedy deleted artist

Regarding [1] if the artist had 11 albums the artist likely met WP:MUSIC. Who was the artist? JoshuaZ 07:00, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

The artist is Robert Lund. He works for Citadel Broadcasting and has released eleven albums of parodies. His albums were available in national music chain stores, but only in the Salt Lake City, Utah radio market (as far as I know). The criteria for notability in WP:MUSIC for where he'd qualify (musicians, ensembles, composers and lyricists) is apparently some sort of national exposure. He hasn't reached this level (yet), so I had no grounds to oppose the Speedy Deletion. However, I did archive the page as it was, just in case there is a future reason to reinstate the information. It happenned with the Neleh Dennis article I create, it was deleted then later created by someone else and is still around. Val42 07:22, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, good luck getting him included then. He turns up a lot of google hits (the name seems common but doing "Robert Lund" + musician helps narrow it down). I wouldn't be surprised if he meets criterion 1 of WP:MUSIC. JoshuaZ 07:27, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the encouragement. I tried the Google search that you suggested and got 10,700 hits. In the future, I may look up some of those links and try to demonstrate notability using them. But I'm going to let it lie for a while. Val42 07:38, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

talkpage warnings

Please place new warnings at the bottom of talk pages. This helps reviewing admins to see if a particlar IP has been recently warned Agathoclea 18:43, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I placed it in the section that seemed appropriate, at the bottom of that section. I'll try to clean up such warning listings in the future so that the newest fit at the bottom. Thanks for taking care of this so quickly. Val42 18:53, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, I haven't yet, and sofar every admin touching WP:AIV has not touched this particular case as the vandalism is not "obvious" without knowing the subject matter. At the moment the best I can do is observe how the subject develops. Agathoclea 19:15, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Admittedly, the person isn't doing what normal vandals do. I've checked some other pages that he (the default English pronoun) has edited and found the same sort of thing. It is almost as if he is some sort of researcher testing Wikipedia for some article he is writing to see how long subtle vandalism is permitted to go on. Val42 19:25, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Advice

I've responded to your note on my talk page. Good luck and let me know when you accept the nomination. -Visorstuff 17:52, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't think anything is really changed fundamentally with regard to what an administrator is. Basically, an admin is someone who is given additional control as watchdogs over the Wikipedia. Because the additional admin powers can cause annoying-though-reversible problems if abused, the admin must have demonstrated a certain level of trustworthiness. Mostly what I do as an admin is watch for and quickly revert vandalism, which admins can do very easily with a single click. I also do a lot of page deleting and fixing of botched page moves. Occasionally, I will block an obvious anonymous vandal for 24 hours. I'm only active, basically, in the areas where I have a personal interest. I am very conservative about using my special admin powers, because I think that most problems don't require them, and can be solved through negotiation, mediation, or arbitration (which do not require admin powers, except for the enforcement of arbitration decisions, but arbitrations are rare). My view is that anyone who has been around for a while, has good contributions, has shown they can get along with people, is trustworthy, and agrees with Wikipedia philosophy should be an admin. COGDEN 22:54, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I will echo the advice of Visorstuff and COGDEN. Additionally, having recently become an admin, at first I took on an extra time commitment and monitored recent changes more, added block review to my dail activities, and issued a few blocks. I found that I was spending too much time on it and scaled back a little. Because I agree with Jimbo that it isn't that big a deal, I think that any respected and responsible user can be an admin (and in many case should be) because having more admins allows the work to be spread just like having so many editors. Additionally, I think there is great value in regular editors whos intent is to continue to focus on content creation also be administrators as they can add a sense of balance to the myopia that can sometimes afflict those that do the heavy lifting on vandal fighting - for which I am very grateful BTW. Mostly I find myself able to fix things up that I would normally have to ask others to help with - deleting unused pages, merging histories, editing esoteric templates, etc. I see the blocking power as a preventative measure as opposed to a punishment (but I think that the person receiving the block views it as a punishment) therefore, if the behaviour has stopped then I generally don't block since the desired outcome has been acheived. Good luck in making a decision. --Trödel 19:22, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

PS one thing I would be wary of if I didn't know you and was directed to your nomination is the short time that User:TheGreenFaerae has been on Wikipedia. He has less than 150 total edits. You might be better off waiting until someone else with a better history on Wikipedia nominates you. --Trödel 20:03, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Why should it matter how many edits I have? I'm not the one running, and there's no telling how many acutal pre-reg edits I have, you know...TheGreenFaerae 23:05, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Because normally the nominator is a respected user who has significant exprience and is frequently already an admin himself. I'm sorry you're taking offense at this, but that is how it is. --Trödel 05:12, 5 January 2007 (UTC)