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

[{{fullurl:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Deltabeignet 2|action=edit}} Vote here] (22/4/1) ending 18:52 21 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Deltabeignet ( talk · contribs) – When I first applied for adminship (see here), I wasn't ready. Since then, I've logged in a big chunk of time, fought many more vandals, experienced editing disputes, and saw my adopted article reach FA status. In short, I think I'm a little more ready. Deltabeignet 18:34, 14 December 2005 (UTC) reply

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I humbly accept. Deltabeignet 18:52, 14 December 2005 (UTC) reply

Support

1. Support I totally agree. I hope you get it. Gator (talk) 19:07, 14 December 2005 (UTC) reply
2. Support, I've had a quick look at your contributions, and they seem all OK. — JIP | Talk 19:13, 14 December 2005 (UTC) reply
3. Support. Would have been a good admin months ago. The Land 20:45, 14 December 2005 (UTC) reply
4. Support, unlikely to abuse the admin toolbox. Christopher Parham (talk) 21:19, 14 December 2005 (UTC) reply
5. King of All the Franks 23:51, 14 December 2005 (UTC) reply
6. Support Olorin28 03:07, 15 December 2005 (UTC) reply
7. Support no objections.-- MONGO 03:28, 15 December 2005 (UTC) reply
8. Strong support. Got great satisfaction out of the success of working with him at Layla (a featured article largely due to his work) and feel he can only get better as a user when given a mop. I wish I'd gotten around to doing the nom myself! Harro 5 03:31, 15 December 2005 (UTC) reply
9. support. Looks mopworthy to me... Grutness... wha? 06:21, 15 December 2005 (UTC) reply
10. Support, aye. ナイトスタリオン ✉ 09:38, 15 December 2005 (UTC) reply
11. Support good edits. Izehar ( talk) 21:50, 15 December 2005 (UTC) reply
12. Support admin is no big deal so I'm happy to vote for you. Gator (talk) 21:59, 15 December 2005 (UTC) reply
13. Support if only objection is lack of edits in Wikipedia space. — Simetrical ( talk) 03:11, 16 December 2005 (UTC) reply
14. Support fellow guitar player support -- rogerd 06:03, 16 December 2005 (UTC) reply
15. Support Good edits, admin material - Wezzo 14:16, 16 December 2005 (UTC) reply
16. Rockin' Support! the wub "?!" 00:21, 17 December 2005 (UTC) reply
17. yep Derex 21:53, 17 December 2005 (UTC) reply
18. Support Experienced editor with a good attitude. Gflores ^Talk 04:47, 18 December 2005 (UTC) reply
19. Support. El_C 12:49, 18 December 2005 (UTC) reply
20. Support, looks fine to me. -- Kefalonia 13:01, 20 December 2005 (UTC) reply
21. Support, different admins deal with different things. BD2412 T 02:46, 21 December 2005 (UTC) reply
22. Support. -- DS1953 ^talk 05:24, 21 December 2005 (UTC) reply

Oppose

1. Oppose, lack of contributions in Wikispace (e.g. [1]) imply a lack of experience with process. R adiant _>|< 12:45, 15 December 2005 (UTC) reply

   What type of process are you concerned about? I'd like to think I understand policy and process pretty well, but I'm always willing to learn. Deltabeignet 20:21, 15 December 2005 (UTC) reply

   • I'm happy to hear you understand process, but looking over your contribs log for the past half year I note no actual participation in e.g. FAC, RFC, ANI or any other major process. You don't need to be an admin to help out with process, and an admin's work is likely to touch upon some of them frequently, so some experience before becoming an admin is in my opinion desirable. R adiant _>|< 15:58, 16 December 2005 (UTC) reply

2. Oppose per Radiant. Sorry to have to do this, but the spareness of the record does suggest more time is needed to be able to judge your qualifications. Xoloz 19:56, 15 December 2005 (UTC) reply
3. Oppose Lack of wikispace edits. -- Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 23:38, 15 December 2005 (UTC) reply
4. Oppose as per above. – ugen64 06:34, 21 December 2005 (UTC) reply

Neutral

1. Neutral leaning towards support Even though I agree with Radiant and Aranda. Great contributer. — Moe ε 16:58, 17 December 2005 (UTC) reply

Comments

• Just for the record: I've been registered since February 2005, with about a month of anonymous editing before that. My count shows about 2400 edits, not counting about 250 deleted ones (mostly speedy deletion and AfD tags). Deltabeignet 18:52, 14 December 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 check out Category:Wikipedia backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.

A. RC patrol with the rollback sounds fantastic, especially when I have a slow connection. I'd love blocking vandals, as much fun as listing them at WP:AIV is. I don't do as much Newpages patrol as I used to, but speedy deletions (and AfD) will be priorities.

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

A. Layla, of course. Helping out at the help desk and reference desk is fun, and I try not to be too busy to fix up the ugly ducklings.

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 helped out with an edit war at Irish American. Over at IPod, I had a low-level dispute; as soon as I was reverted twice, I went straight to the talk page, where we settled it amicably. Basically, my approach is covered here.

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.