User:Y0u

This is a Wikipedia user page. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated, and that the user this page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Y0u.

Wikimedia Foundation

Important WP-related

This user is an administrator on the English Wikipedia. (verify)

This user assumes good faith.

This user tries to do the right thing. If they make a mistake, please let them know.

{{t|1}}This user knows roughly how a template works.

This user subscribes to
The Signpost.

incl	This user is a Wikipedia inclusionist.

evenThis editor is an eventualist.

Wikipedia:Babel

enThis user is a native speaker of the English language.

es-1Este usuario puede contribuir con un nivel básico de español.

mw-1This user is a beginning MediaWiki user.

1337-0This user has no idea what 1337 is or prefers to contribute using proper words.

HTML-0This person does not understand HTML (or understands it with difficulties, or does not want to write HTML).

Search user languages

THIS PAGE IS OBSOLETE- MAY UPDATE LATER. SEE HISTORY FOR MY OLD PAGE<size>

Admin voting policy

First of all, I know that I do not vote in many RFAs that I would support by these guidelines. If I see an RFA that is obviously going to fail or (more often applied) pass, or I don't have the time to verify these, I'll skip it unless I know the user. Basically, I have three criteria that I look for in an admin, and yes, I know it's not much:

• Can the user be trusted to use the admin tools in good faith? (In other words, not do something like vandalize or unprotect the main page)
• Does the user know Wikipedia policy well enough to not misuse admin tools? (This does not mean that they have to know every single policy and guideline by heart.) Note that this does NOT cover mistakes that could be made by a non-admin; granting the user adminship would have nothing to do with these mistakes.
• Is the user at least reasonably civil? (In other words, they don't have to go out of their way to say friendly things at every possible chance, but I'd like to see that they don't have a record of violating no personal attacks.)

In borderline cases, the following are my secondary considerations ("extra credit" so to speak.) While they aren't really important themselves (and are by no means requirements to get my vote,) they may influence my vote in "borderline cases" and may influence my degree of support/opposition (strong support, weak support, etc.)

• Being exceptionally friendly and helpful.
• Being especially knowledgeable about policy.
• Experience with RC patrol, AFD, etc.
• Senority. Being here for over a year is a good sign.
• A high edit count. While I won't hesitate to vote for someone with only a few hundred edits if they fit my primary criteria, thousands certainly don't hurt and along with time spent here, they are a fair indication of general experience summed up in one number.
• Article development. Helping put a few articles up to FA status is great.

Barnstars

Here is the Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar for warmly welcoming so many new users. Being nice and going an extra mile to be kind won't hurt at all! — Stevey7788 (talk) 23:45, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I award you the plain barnstar for being a well rounded amazing wikipedian :) Redwolf24 02:47, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

For randomly fixing my spelling of "neutral", I, Matt Yeager, hereby award you, Y0u, this kicking Minor Barnstar Award. Have an awesome day. Matt Yeager 06:07, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Guestbook- Sign here if you visited my userpage

I don't have a registered username, nor do I have a huge amount of edits, but I love Wikipedia. Consider your guestbook signed. By a random number, but still. --69.145.122.209 00:06, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

• Hey, here's a real sig for you! --Mister Wiggles 04:04, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

• 

Here's a signature from New Zealand Blair 10:41, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

• I came, I left random numbers, and I left. 142.165.222.173 04:38, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

• Just wandered in! Colonial One 06:48, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

• Nice page, man. Son of Bríghde 05:23, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

• Hello.--Lkjhgfdsa 01:59, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

• it's a nice page. I didnt realise how much work actually goes into wikipedia. Made a donation today.

• pops head in* btg2290 19:47, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

• While fixing your outlier userbox, I might as well sign. Picaroon9288 02:41, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
• Just passing, may as well sign though... --CarrotMan 14:55, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

• Came up on my daily rummaging though the users. Wost I can do is sign here. Kaiser matias 09:04, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
• s d 3 1 4 1 5 final exams! 21:07, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

• Why do admins have good pages? ;)--[[User:Gravity|Gravity<small><float>[[|User talk:Gravity|Talk ]]]] 08:17, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

• I came here out of nowhere. I am a new user, and you've inspired me to make a user page full of stuff. --Powerfulmind 02:34, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

• Hey, this is an original idea to let everyone who visits your page sign it. It's a pretty good idea as well. I came across you because you were a person who is a theist. Backtable came here on July 1, 2007 at 8:24 PM Eastern Time.

• woo! signing your page nilsæn style. Evaunit666 05:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

• Evidence suggests that you're awesome. Don't stop, please! :D Quendus 15:07, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

• Robertimus Marley was here today, yesterday, and now forever. Peaches unto you my brethren. -The next to last day of the year, 2007.

• Check my first archive in my talk--Jan 08 et avant. You were the one who welcomed me. For a while, I wondered if you were the owner of Wikipedia, because site owners are always doing that sorta stuff. Hehehe. 21655 ^{ωhατ δo γoυ ωαητ?} 15:36, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License, and nothing else	File:Nomultilicence.png
I am content with licensing my contributions only under the GFDL. I have chosen to avoid further complicating the legal situation of Wikipedia by introducing other licenses, either more or less restrictive.