The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.

Final (55/0/0) ended 00:41 November 6, 2005 (UTC)

Alai ( talk · contribs) – Alai has worked on Wikipedia diligently, currently with one of the highest number of edits, 16179, of any non-admin user. See Kate's evaluation. He has done vast work related to stub-sorting - check his contributions. Time to give him the mop. freestylefrappe 21:20, 27 October 2005 (UTC) reply

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Glad to accept, thanks very much for the thought. Alai 01:44, 29 October 2005 (UTC) reply

Support

1. Strong Support as nominator. freestylefrappe 23:54, 29 October 2005 (UTC) reply
2. Alai has made many useful contributions to WP:LDS and is a friendly and good editor. I'm happy to support this nomination. Cookiecaper 00:43, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
3. Support - of course. Can I vote twice? Can I, can I? Pleeease? Grutness... wha? 00:53, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
4. WeakStrong Support. He's a good guy and a great user (though I haven't seen him too much) but the nomination completely consists of his edit count. I'd like more elaboration ;-) but after reading his answers to the questions make that a Strong Support. R e dwolf24 ( talk) 01:31, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
5. Support see him often. Dlyons493 Talk 01:31, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
6. {{support-stub}} Kirill Lokshin 01:53, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
7. -- Rschen7754 ( talk - contribs) 02:39, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
8. Support will be a good admin -- Rogerd 03:30, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
9. Yes, Yes, Yes ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 04:16, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
10. Any time, any day! Alai's the man! Shauri smil e ! 04:58, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
11. Why not? -- NSLE _{( Communicate!)} ^{< Contribs>} 05:48, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
12. Support. Voice of All ^{Talk| @| Esperanza} 06:59, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
13. sure,-- Wiglaf 07:06, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
14. Support Holy smokes, that's a boatload of edits! Xoloz 07:52, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
15. Support because we have to put our clocks back. CambridgeBayWeather 08:41, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
16. It's a crime against humanity that Alai isn't a sysop already! -- Merovingian (t) (c) (e) 08:48, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
17. Fir e Fo x 10:24, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
18. Support. jni 12:45, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
19. Support excellent contribs. Very fastidious contributor. Marskell 16:13, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
20. Support - Sango 123 (talk) 18:15, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
21. Support. Everybody, get ready... "This person's not an admin yet?" - Kookykman ( talk • contribs)
22. Support, unlikely to abuse administrator tools. Christopher Parham (talk) 19:47, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
23. Support Needs to be supported and awarded for so many edits. gets my vote... Gryffindor 20:57, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
24. +6 Two-handed admin stick of Support. Linuxbeak | Talk 22:06, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
25. Support. Rob e rt ^{T | @ | C} 22:15, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
26. Surrealist support! :) El_C 22:30, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
27. Support Calm and conciliatory in disputes, would be an excellent Admin Chelseaboy 22:50, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
28. Support. With certainty! Great person, will handle the tools well. -[[ User:Mys e kurity| Mysekurity]] ^{[[ additions | e-mail]]} _{01:07, 31 October 2005 (UTC)} reply
29. Genuinely shocked that they weren't one already Support! -- Sean Black | Talk 03:57, 31 October 2005 (UTC) reply
30. Support. Archetypal admin. (No, no, I meant that as a compliment, honestly.) -- Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης) 15:02, 31 October 2005 (UTC) reply
31. Ahem-ahem <speechless>--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91 ($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 15:23, 31 October 2005 (UTC) reply
32. Support. -- Kefalonia 16:02, 31 October 2005 (UTC) reply
33. Support. Good edits, will likely use tools well. Jayjg ^(talk) 18:43, 31 October 2005 (UTC) reply
34. Support Privat e Butcher 20:35, 31 October 2005 (UTC) reply
35. Support Vsmith 00:26, 1 November 2005 (UTC) reply
36. Support user has done extensive stub building.   ALKIVAR ™ 04:56, 1 November 2005 (UTC) reply
37. Support Level headed, consistent, prolific editor Trödel| talk 10:27, 1 November 2005 (UTC) reply
38. Support. Briangotts (talk) 16:25, 1 November 2005 (UTC) reply
39. Support i bet he will make a great admin! [[User:Treacka|Trecaka] (talk) 17:36, 1 November 2005 (UTC) reply
40. Support as per nomination. Carioca 20:18, 1 November 2005 (UTC) reply
41. Support Another great admin candidate. SoLando ( Talk) 20:38, 1 November 2005 (UTC) reply
42. Strong support: I've interacted with Alai a few times, who has always been level-headed, pleasant, and thoughtful. Jonathunder 22:43, 1 November 2005 (UTC) reply
43. -- JAranda | watz sup 02:01, 2 November 2005 (UTC) reply
44. Sort up. Excellent work. +sj + 03:08, 2 November 2005 (UTC) reply
45. Furry Alien Support I found Alai had made corrections to articles I'd started, sound work. Alf ^melmac 12:42, 2 November 2005 (UTC) reply
46. Support Johann Wolfgang 18:41, 2 November 2005 (UTC) reply
47. Sure! Give him the mop:>-- R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 23:35, 2 November 2005 (UTC) reply
48. yet another where I already thought he was an admin. :) ♥♥purpl e feltangel ♥ ♥ 23:56, 2 November 2005 (UTC) reply
49. Support Of course. MONGO 00:27, 3 November 2005 (UTC) reply
50. Support. Nobrainer! The Minist e r of War ^(Peace) 07:59, 3 November 2005 (UTC) reply
51. Support I like the answer about page protection. SchmuckyTheCat 19:21, 3 November 2005 (UTC) reply
52. Support. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:08, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
53. Support. -- DS1953 ^talk 16:47, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
54. Support, didn't I vote already? Tito xd^{( ?!?)} 05:34, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
55. Support: -- Bhadani 11:49, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply

Oppose

Neutral

Comments

• Pleeeese fix your nomination ending time. And spell out the month. =Nichalp «Talk»= 08:38, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
• Editcountitis
• Total : 16471
• User  : 44
• User talk  : 709
• Wikipedia  : 690
• Wiki talk  : 230
• Image  : 1
• Article talk : 762
• Articles and the rest  : 14035

• October 2005 : 2990
• September 2005 : 3210
• August 2005 : 1952
• July 2005 : 111
• June 2005 : 1080
• May 2005 : 1176
• April 2005 : 1456
• March 2005 : 2299
• February 2005 : 1976
• January 2005 : 217
• December 2004 : 4

Tintin 14:32, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply

Questions for the candidate
A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? (Please read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.)

A. With stub sorting being probably my main current fixation, I'd first of all like to help out with 'closing' on WP:SFD. For a long time, this really only had one 'duty admin', and even now with a recent admin appointee working there too, it could probably do with another. (Firstly just as a matter of expedition, and secondly to avoid any appearance of too small a "clique" running any aspect of wikipedia operations (as fair-minded as the two doing the job currently are, I hasten to add), especially as there's otherwise the situation of an admin having to end up closing their own nominations.) Likewise, I'd be willing to help out on similar pages that seem to be apt to develop backlogs, such as WP:RFM. Certainly I'd make occasional use of the rollback function, though I currently rv/v only as it comes up on my watchlist, rather than doing any significant amount of RCing. (Though I think I have to trim my watchlist, as I'm apt to check it less often than I'd ideally like, as it's starting to increasing resemble RC...)

My philosophy about the best way to use the admin functions would be, "circumspectly". I'm especially wary about the use of page protection in anything other than the most clear-cut of cases, and for the briefest feasible period.

2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?

A. I'm a little unimpressed at my own contributions to the article space, having started out with fairly modest plans, and not made much of an impact in them. Must do better. I do take some satisfaction from my "gnomish" accomplishments, like having helped to bash some especially unruly categories of unsorted and undersorted stubs into shape, though these can seem a little Sisyphean at times. ("Repeatable" edits indeed, in every sense.) I'd also like to think I'd rowed in on the side of reasoned compromise in some disputes, and argued for consistency between policy, convention and guidelines on the one hand, and practice on the other.

3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?

A. I've certainly been involved in a few editing conflicts, some of which in hindsight seem to be bordering on the lame. The main moral I'd draw from such experiences is that it's best to take something of an "eventualist" approach to most editing disputes: if one is on the wrong end of a consensus about something, it's fruitless to simply argue (much less, to revert, etc) more and more feverishly; equally, if a consensus is going to emerge in favour, one might as well state one's point, go edit something else for while (or gasp, do something non-wikipedian -- as if), and wait and see if anyone else is inclined to agree.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.