From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.

Final (56/0/0) ended 05:45 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Demi ( talk · contribs) – I have been here for a little over a year, editing with varying degrees of activity. Once or twice people have offered to nominate me for adminship (probably to stop me bugging them to perform admin tasks), but as I recently encountered a few situations where admin privileges would have been useful, I thought I would do it myself. Demi T/ C 15:17, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: This is a self-nomination. Demi T/ C 15:40, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply

Support

  1. Duh with a capital D! Alex Schenck (that's Linuxbeak to you) 15:43, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  2. Keep. Notable, verifiable, extensively sourced, and widely linked to. BD2412 T 15:51, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  3. Support not an admin? Unbelievable.  Grue  16:07, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  4. Support. Looks like a valuable admin. Arguably we're under-represented with admins who want to use their powers to restore articles with value and unblock accidentally blocked users. The Land 16:13, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  5. Sigh. RFA cliche #1. Maybe it's because you look like User:Denni. I should know better than to make assumptions by now. — Cryptic (talk) 16:23, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  6. As one of the people who has previously offered to nominate him, of course I support. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 16:28, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  7. Support And glad to do it, engaged and intelligent. Rx StrangeLove 16:31, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  8. Extreme "It's a travesty that he isn't one already" support -- Cel e stianpower háblame 16:46, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  9. Support, of course. Antandrus (talk) 16:48, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  10. Support no brainer. Gator (talk) 17:41, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  11. merge into Denni. Wait, wrong page. Er, support. Alphax  τ ε χ 17:48, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  12. Extreme Support of course -- Jaranda( watz sup) 18:13, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  13. Support --FireFox 18:49, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  14. Support. Thunderbrand 18:52, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  15. Support I also like your comments on your userpage regarding Questionable or Offensive Images-- MONGO 19:31, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  16. Support. My compliments for your extensive and clear use of edit summaries, particulalry the quality! And about the images: just ask Toby, no? The Minister of War 21:19, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  17. Speedy Promote, patent awesomeness :)-- Sean| Bla ck 22:07, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  18. Support: I honestly assumed Demi already was one. Jonathunder 23:08, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  19. Support. Whaaat Demi's not already an admin. Jtkiefer T | C | @ ---- 23:15, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  20. Support -- Rogerd 23:45, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  21. Support R e dwolf24 ( talk) 00:00, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  22. Support, will be an invaluable addition to the <censored>. Always glad to support someone who will really benefit from the tools. Rje 00:34, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  23. Support looks like a good candidate. Matthew Brown 00:38, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  24. n00b support ∾ Mrs. Kutchner has been extremely helpful to me as I slowly begin to navigate my way through the underbelly of Wikipedia, and is a very level-headed individual to boot. → Ξxtreme Unction { yakł blah} 02:11, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  25. Support, very helpful user, extra points for the selfnom. Bishonen| talk 02:14, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  26. Merovingian 05:49, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  27. Support. Good contributor. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:30, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  28. Support. Experienced user with strong contrib's. Marskell 10:29, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  29. Abso-bloody-lutely, support. fuddlemark ( fuddle me!) 14:02, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  30. Support -- Duk 17:23, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  31. Undelete, this article was improperly speedied, clearly asserts notability, and is identified as one of the essential subjects of Wikipedia by the WP:1.0 team. Huh? Oh, shoot, this is RfA... Support, same reasons: clearly notable, as I see him often in Wikipedia, and has been identified as an essentially good editor by everyone above and me. Tito xd( ?!?) 18:17, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  32. Support, passes the lightning admin test, and sometimes helps out resolving disputes (my 2 criteria). Kim Bruning 20:49, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  33. Support: this user is unlikely to abuse admin tools. Christopher Parham (talk) 20:58, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  34. Support: It's great to see someone wait a bit and then ask when the toolset is actually useful. Geogre 21:22, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  35. Support. Per above, I think Demi would make a good admin; also a bit shocked you're not one. Ral315 (talk) 21:52, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  36. Support. People like Demi make me wonder if we should have a WP:CSD-esque speedying for noms, he absolutely deserves it, he's helped me several times after asking on IRC. And oh yeah, his helpfulness that i've seen waives my opinion of the negative aspect of self-noms here. Karmafist 22:45, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  37. Support: -- Bhadani 16:35, 19 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  38. Support - fine answers to the stock questions, good edit history - perfect candidate. ➨ REDVERS 17:17, 19 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  39. Un Demi, s'il vous plâit. — JIP | Talk 18:31, 19 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  40. Support -- pgk( talk) 18:33, 19 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  41. Support. El_C 23:40, 19 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  42. Support. - Splash talk 03:19, 20 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  43. Support. See no issues here. Jayjg (talk) 07:36, 20 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  44. Oran e (t) (c) (e-mail) Make Céline Dion a FA! 00:56, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  45. Desperate, clamoring support an eminently reasonable fellow, a great Wikipedian, and OMG he's not already an admin?! Babajobu 04:58, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  46. Support. - Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 08:43, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  47. They put a gun to my head and made me Support, those bastards. Fahrenheit Royal e 17:07, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  48. Support. No coercion was necessary here. Hall Monitor 17:38, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  49. Yeah. JFW |  T@lk 01:47, 22 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  50. Support! Sarge Baldy 03:35, 22 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  51. Support. Yet another obvious case. -- MarkSweep  (call me collect) 05:58, 22 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  52. I-thought-he-was-an-admin-already Support -- VileRage ( Talk| Cont) 06:06, 22 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  53. I would like it known that I was the fifty first person to vote in support of Demi. I would also like an explanation why this did not happen months ago?! Thryduulf 08:30, 22 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  54. Support. Obvious admin fodder. -- GraemeL (talk) 16:41, 22 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  55. Duh. - Mailer Diablo 23:52, 22 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  56. Support Kefalonia 18:31, 23 November 2005 (UTC) reply

This vote was made after the deadline:

  1. Support. utcursch | talk 03:37, 25 November 2005 (UTC) reply

Oppose

Neutral

Comments

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. Well, a lot of my editing has been done in association with cleaning out the Wikipedia cleanup categories, so it's fair to say I'm attracted to backlogs, and I would take turns at those associated with WP:CP and the various deletion pages. A few times I have noticed articles like Witty worm, The Boatniks and Bobinogs get speedied, it would be nice in those cases to be able to view the deleted page to see if real articles can be made from them. I have helped revise blocks for legitimate users caught by autoblocks or IP blocks, and it would be nice to be more responsive in this area. I've also tackled the occasional technical and formatting task, so it would be useful to correct edits in the interface if necessary.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. I would say I'm pleased with my overall contributions more than any particular piece, though I find turning deleted or otherwise "hopeless" substubs into real articles, such as with Witty worm, very satisfying. I'm happy about cases where I've been able to "unbite" a newbie or otherwise help out a fellow Wikipedian, even if it's a one-character edit. I believe in the "free" aspect of Wikipedia, so am pleased with having generated free media such as spoken Wikipedia articles and photographs.
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. Yes, I have edited contentious articles such as those related to Adolf Hitler, and conflicts have arisen over the proper usage of the {{ Spoken Wikipedia}} template. My first and default reaction in almost any kind of conflict is to gather the opinions of other participants--I figure the more people looking at an issue and offering input, the better. Civility is very important to me, and if I feel myself getting upset about things, a break is in order.
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.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.

Final (56/0/0) ended 05:45 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Demi ( talk · contribs) – I have been here for a little over a year, editing with varying degrees of activity. Once or twice people have offered to nominate me for adminship (probably to stop me bugging them to perform admin tasks), but as I recently encountered a few situations where admin privileges would have been useful, I thought I would do it myself. Demi T/ C 15:17, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: This is a self-nomination. Demi T/ C 15:40, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply

Support

  1. Duh with a capital D! Alex Schenck (that's Linuxbeak to you) 15:43, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  2. Keep. Notable, verifiable, extensively sourced, and widely linked to. BD2412 T 15:51, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  3. Support not an admin? Unbelievable.  Grue  16:07, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  4. Support. Looks like a valuable admin. Arguably we're under-represented with admins who want to use their powers to restore articles with value and unblock accidentally blocked users. The Land 16:13, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  5. Sigh. RFA cliche #1. Maybe it's because you look like User:Denni. I should know better than to make assumptions by now. — Cryptic (talk) 16:23, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  6. As one of the people who has previously offered to nominate him, of course I support. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 16:28, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  7. Support And glad to do it, engaged and intelligent. Rx StrangeLove 16:31, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  8. Extreme "It's a travesty that he isn't one already" support -- Cel e stianpower háblame 16:46, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  9. Support, of course. Antandrus (talk) 16:48, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  10. Support no brainer. Gator (talk) 17:41, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  11. merge into Denni. Wait, wrong page. Er, support. Alphax  τ ε χ 17:48, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  12. Extreme Support of course -- Jaranda( watz sup) 18:13, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  13. Support --FireFox 18:49, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  14. Support. Thunderbrand 18:52, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  15. Support I also like your comments on your userpage regarding Questionable or Offensive Images-- MONGO 19:31, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  16. Support. My compliments for your extensive and clear use of edit summaries, particulalry the quality! And about the images: just ask Toby, no? The Minister of War 21:19, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  17. Speedy Promote, patent awesomeness :)-- Sean| Bla ck 22:07, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  18. Support: I honestly assumed Demi already was one. Jonathunder 23:08, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  19. Support. Whaaat Demi's not already an admin. Jtkiefer T | C | @ ---- 23:15, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  20. Support -- Rogerd 23:45, 17 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  21. Support R e dwolf24 ( talk) 00:00, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  22. Support, will be an invaluable addition to the <censored>. Always glad to support someone who will really benefit from the tools. Rje 00:34, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  23. Support looks like a good candidate. Matthew Brown 00:38, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  24. n00b support ∾ Mrs. Kutchner has been extremely helpful to me as I slowly begin to navigate my way through the underbelly of Wikipedia, and is a very level-headed individual to boot. → Ξxtreme Unction { yakł blah} 02:11, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  25. Support, very helpful user, extra points for the selfnom. Bishonen| talk 02:14, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  26. Merovingian 05:49, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  27. Support. Good contributor. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:30, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  28. Support. Experienced user with strong contrib's. Marskell 10:29, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  29. Abso-bloody-lutely, support. fuddlemark ( fuddle me!) 14:02, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  30. Support -- Duk 17:23, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  31. Undelete, this article was improperly speedied, clearly asserts notability, and is identified as one of the essential subjects of Wikipedia by the WP:1.0 team. Huh? Oh, shoot, this is RfA... Support, same reasons: clearly notable, as I see him often in Wikipedia, and has been identified as an essentially good editor by everyone above and me. Tito xd( ?!?) 18:17, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  32. Support, passes the lightning admin test, and sometimes helps out resolving disputes (my 2 criteria). Kim Bruning 20:49, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  33. Support: this user is unlikely to abuse admin tools. Christopher Parham (talk) 20:58, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  34. Support: It's great to see someone wait a bit and then ask when the toolset is actually useful. Geogre 21:22, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  35. Support. Per above, I think Demi would make a good admin; also a bit shocked you're not one. Ral315 (talk) 21:52, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  36. Support. People like Demi make me wonder if we should have a WP:CSD-esque speedying for noms, he absolutely deserves it, he's helped me several times after asking on IRC. And oh yeah, his helpfulness that i've seen waives my opinion of the negative aspect of self-noms here. Karmafist 22:45, 18 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  37. Support: -- Bhadani 16:35, 19 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  38. Support - fine answers to the stock questions, good edit history - perfect candidate. ➨ REDVERS 17:17, 19 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  39. Un Demi, s'il vous plâit. — JIP | Talk 18:31, 19 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  40. Support -- pgk( talk) 18:33, 19 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  41. Support. El_C 23:40, 19 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  42. Support. - Splash talk 03:19, 20 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  43. Support. See no issues here. Jayjg (talk) 07:36, 20 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  44. Oran e (t) (c) (e-mail) Make Céline Dion a FA! 00:56, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  45. Desperate, clamoring support an eminently reasonable fellow, a great Wikipedian, and OMG he's not already an admin?! Babajobu 04:58, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  46. Support. - Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 08:43, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  47. They put a gun to my head and made me Support, those bastards. Fahrenheit Royal e 17:07, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  48. Support. No coercion was necessary here. Hall Monitor 17:38, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  49. Yeah. JFW |  T@lk 01:47, 22 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  50. Support! Sarge Baldy 03:35, 22 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  51. Support. Yet another obvious case. -- MarkSweep  (call me collect) 05:58, 22 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  52. I-thought-he-was-an-admin-already Support -- VileRage ( Talk| Cont) 06:06, 22 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  53. I would like it known that I was the fifty first person to vote in support of Demi. I would also like an explanation why this did not happen months ago?! Thryduulf 08:30, 22 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  54. Support. Obvious admin fodder. -- GraemeL (talk) 16:41, 22 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  55. Duh. - Mailer Diablo 23:52, 22 November 2005 (UTC) reply
  56. Support Kefalonia 18:31, 23 November 2005 (UTC) reply

This vote was made after the deadline:

  1. Support. utcursch | talk 03:37, 25 November 2005 (UTC) reply

Oppose

Neutral

Comments

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. Well, a lot of my editing has been done in association with cleaning out the Wikipedia cleanup categories, so it's fair to say I'm attracted to backlogs, and I would take turns at those associated with WP:CP and the various deletion pages. A few times I have noticed articles like Witty worm, The Boatniks and Bobinogs get speedied, it would be nice in those cases to be able to view the deleted page to see if real articles can be made from them. I have helped revise blocks for legitimate users caught by autoblocks or IP blocks, and it would be nice to be more responsive in this area. I've also tackled the occasional technical and formatting task, so it would be useful to correct edits in the interface if necessary.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. I would say I'm pleased with my overall contributions more than any particular piece, though I find turning deleted or otherwise "hopeless" substubs into real articles, such as with Witty worm, very satisfying. I'm happy about cases where I've been able to "unbite" a newbie or otherwise help out a fellow Wikipedian, even if it's a one-character edit. I believe in the "free" aspect of Wikipedia, so am pleased with having generated free media such as spoken Wikipedia articles and photographs.
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. Yes, I have edited contentious articles such as those related to Adolf Hitler, and conflicts have arisen over the proper usage of the {{ Spoken Wikipedia}} template. My first and default reaction in almost any kind of conflict is to gather the opinions of other participants--I figure the more people looking at an issue and offering input, the better. Civility is very important to me, and if I feel myself getting upset about things, a break is in order.
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.

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook