Wikipedia:April Fools/April Fools' Day 2005/Requests for de-Godkingship

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Requests for de-Godkingship (not to be confused with Requests for de-adminship at WP:RFDa) is a page to nominate yourself or others to no longer be a Wikipedia God, also known as "God-King". God-Kings have access to a few technical features that help with Wikipedian tyranny. Please see the reading list and how-to guide before applying here.

Rules[edit]

Administrator status is granted to known and trusted members of the community who are familiar with Wikipedia policies. God-Kings are none of these. God-Kings have special authority on Wikipedia, but are held to lower standards, because they are perceived by many, particularly new, users as the official wart of Wikipedia. Therefore they should take care to be courteous, and exercise good judgment and patience in dealing with other users. Nominees should have been on Wikipedia long enough for people to see whether they lack these qualities.

Nominations remain for seven days so the community can vote and comment on the nomination. Bureaucrats may extend this when consensus is unclear (because consensus is subjective, bureaucrats have some discretion, but the threshold on this page is roughly 80 percent support). Nominations which are clearly not going to gain sufficient support may be removed earlier to prevent discussions that generate ill will; however, as most editors don't visit Wikipedia daily, a reasonable amount of time should be allowed. Some people oppose early removal under any circumstances. If your nomination is rejected, please wait a reasonable period of time before applying again (at least one month is generally expected).

To add your vote, edit the section for that candidate. You may add a short comment to your vote, but discussion and responses to other comments belong in the Comments section below every nomination. When voting, please update the vote tally of the nomination that you are voting in. The vote tally format is as follows: (Support/Oppose/Neutral).

Anonymous users cannot be nominated, nominate others, or vote. They are allowed to comment.


Current nominations[edit]

If you nominate a user, please also leave a message on their talk page and ask them to reply here if they accept the nomination.

Please add new requests at the top of this section immediately below (and update the headers when voting)

April 1, 2005[edit]

Jimbo Wales[edit]

Vote here (0/1/0) ending 00:00 8 April 2005 (UTC)

God-Kings are supposed to be stuck-up snobby idiots who do not care about their subjects. Jimbo Wales is none of these, so I think he should no longer be our God-King. User:Luigi30 (Υσηρ ταλκ ΛυηγηΛ) 00:00, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Snort[edit]

  1. --Alterego 00:17, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)

Support[edit]

Oppose[edit]

  1. Insufficient grounds for removal of position. Also oppose the concept of a mechanism to remove such a position. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 00:06, 2005 Apr 1 (UTC)
  2. Let's give him some time, and see if he can grow into the position. --Allen3 talk 00:13, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
  3. Oppose until the powers that be donate urine to genuinely important world issues. Hedley 01:43, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  4. Oppose the removal of the mechanism to remove such a position. calS !pu kaeps 03:15, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  5. Oppose on grounds that the proposal was never submitted for opposition in the first place. It's a conspiracy anyway! --Habap 18:27, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Neutral[edit]

  1. I don't know. Maybe. But then, maybe not. RickK 00:39, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
  2. If I die, tell my wife, "Hello." AngryParsley 02:47, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

bIASED[edit]

  1. Yet Another Proud Troll!

Fnord[edit]

  1. Slowking Man 07:29, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)

Question existance[edit]

  1. Does this guy even exist? KirbyMeister 22:40, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Comments[edit]

  1. It should be noted that Jimbo discourages the usage of "Godking" to refer to his position and prefers instead the more politically-correct "Deitymonarch". Node 17:54, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

James X. Aardvark[edit]

Vote here (0/0/0) ending 00:11 8 April 2005 (UTC)

I'd like to self-nominate for de-Godkingship. I think I'd make an excellent non-Godking. I'd be willing to help out with non-Godking duties like reading articles and sometimes editing them. James X. Aardvark 00:11, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Support[edit]

  1. Jim sounds like the perfect candidate for Godkingship. No edit history, therefore is impartial in all matters. Support. RickK 00:38, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Slowking Man 07:28, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose[edit]

  1. Requires the position be held in the first place. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 00:22, 2005 Apr 1 (UTC)
  2. Oppose. Will support after fewer edits. calS !pu kaeps 03:19, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Neutral[edit]

Fancruft[edit]

  1. Adorable Vandal That I Am
  2. Looks too much like a Pokemon. Has odd socks. Hedley 01:44, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Comments[edit]

Who the hell are you, and why should I care? -- Cyrius| 04:25, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

127.0.0.1[edit]

Vote here (0/0/0) ending 00:25 8 April 2005 (UTC)

I'd like to nominate myself for de-Godkingship. Sure, I'm not a logged in user, but I'm still way too important. Why should I have special privileges just because I'm at a really powerful computer? After all, isn't the wikipedia about bringing power to the people? I27.O.O.l 08:34, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Support[edit]

Oppose[edit]

Oppose until such a time as User publicly annoucnes support for my proposal to redo all voting procedures, even though it has failed consensus at every turn. RickK 20:39, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)

Neutral[edit]