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

final (39/1/0) ending 19:49 24 December 2005 (UTC)

FayssalF ( talk · contribs) – I would like to nominate FayssalF (also known as Svest) for adminship. For benefit of those with editcountitis, Svest has 4099 well spread edits. He has made plenty of contributions to Wikipedia articles in many areas. He has been helping with Wikipedia chores, most notably translating between English, Arabic, French and Spanish. He even has a c. 99% usage of edit summaries. Svest is courteous, aware of policy and I'm sure he would make a great admin. Izehar ( talk) 19:49, 17 December 2005 (UTC) reply

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Thanks for the nomination. Also, because the closing of this vote will happen on the 24th than I accept. Cheers -- Svest 20:46, 17 December 2005 (UTC)  ^{Wiki me up™} reply

Support

1. Support: Bien sûr! Awesome editor. Unbiased, courteous, really aware of the policies, makes great use of edit summaries, and really nice contributions. deeptrivia ( talk) 20:58, 17 December 2005 (UTC) reply
2. ε γκυκλοπαίδεια * (talk) 22:02, 17 December 2005 (UTC) reply
3. Strong Support I thought he was a admin already. Excellent choice -- Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 22:24, 17 December 2005 (UTC) reply
   I did too! ε γκυκλοπαίδεια * (talk) 22:43, 17 December 2005 (UTC) reply
4. Support as nominator. Izehar ( talk) 23:24, 17 December 2005 (UTC) reply
5. Strong Support a fair and good editor. -- a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 02:00, 18 December 2005 (UTC) reply
6. Support Seems like a good editor to me. -- Gflores ^Talk 02:14, 18 December 2005 (UTC) reply
7. SUPPORT: Unbiased, courteous, aware of policies AND THINKS FOR HIMSELF in a positive way - Vote for him, improve Wikipedia :D -- Mistress Selina Kyle 02:53, 18 December 2005 (UTC) reply
8. Support knowledgable and experienced. freestylefrappe 03:10, 18 December 2005 (UTC) reply
9. Strong Support one of the most curteous editors I've come across.-- Shanel 03:34, 18 December 2005 (UTC) reply
10. A helpful and conscientious editor. Worthy of our trust. Dmcdevit· t 04:27, 18 December 2005 (UTC) reply
11. Support no reason not to.-- MONGO 07:32, 18 December 2005 (UTC) reply
12. Support very corteus & reasonalble . So much work in so many languages . F.a.y. ^{تبادله خيال /c} 08:54, 18 December 2005 (UTC) reply
13. Good stuff. El_C 12:49, 18 December 2005 (UTC) reply
14. Support. Very friendly and open to new ideas and concepts. - Darwinek 12:52, 18 December 2005 (UTC) reply
15. Support, unlikely to abuse administrator tools. Christopher Parham (talk) 17:13, 18 December 2005 (UTC) reply
16. Support, very friendly and fair, unbiased, very good choice. Daryou 19:27, 18 December 2005 (UTC). reply
17. Support, wakull 3am wa inte bikhair (in case I don't check back before 24 December). Palmiro | Talk 00:30, 19 December 2005 (UTC) reply
18. Support good editor, will be good admin -- rogerd 01:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC) reply
19. Support - agreed. Raven4x4x 06:11, 19 December 2005 (UTC) reply
20. Support, yeah. ナイトスタリオン ✉ 09:25, 19 December 2005 (UTC) reply
21. Support, sound judgement. -- JuanMuslim ^1m 12:11, 19 December 2005 (UTC) reply
22. King of All the Franks 14:55, 19 December 2005 (UTC) reply
23. Support good editor deserves the tools. Gator (talk) 19:28, 19 December 2005 (UTC) reply
24. Support I first met Svest back when he was a wee Wikipedian (one month old). He's now ready to tackle the adminship tasks. Bratsche ^{talk | Esperanza} 04:10, 20 December 2005 (UTC) reply
25. Support Yuber ^(talk) 06:36, 20 December 2005 (UTC) reply
26. Support -- MPerel ^{( talk | contrib)} 20:43, 20 December 2005 (UTC) reply
27. Support. Holy crowley support! BD2412 T 04:02, 21 December 2005 (UTC) reply
28. Support. Per BDA ;-) Tom e r ^talk 08:40, 21 December 2005 (UTC) reply
29. Support. Good nomination. -- Ian Pitchford 10:18, 21 December 2005 (UTC) reply
30. Support. Ian ¹³_ID:540053 22:11, 21 December 2005 (UTC) reply
31. Support. Fad (ix) 16:53, 22 December 2005 (UTC) reply
32. Support Unbehagen 18:16, 22 December 2005 (UTC) reply
33. Support Tuf-Kat 18:23, 22 December 2005 (UTC) reply
34. Support. Jayjg ^(talk) 20:45, 22 December 2005 (UTC) reply
35. Support. Sarge Baldy 23:06, 22 December 2005 (UTC) reply
36. Support of course. - ulayiti (talk) 11:25, 23 December 2005 (UTC) reply
37. Support seen this user doing good work.-- Alhutch 02:42, 24 December 2005 (UTC) reply
38. Support: -- Bhadani 12:52, 24 December 2005 (UTC) reply
39. Noticed-this-just-in-time-wholehearted-support -- Dvyost 17:26, 24 December 2005 (UTC) reply

Oppose

1. Oppose, lack of activity in WikiSpace processes, other than RFA/AFD voting. R adiant _>|< 21:26, 18 December 2005 (UTC) reply

   Eh, different admins do different things (and we learn quick). BD2412 T 04:02, 21 December 2005 (UTC) reply

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. Most important of all, fighting vandalism would be one of my main chores. It should be noted that it would not be more important than mediating between wikipedians. Apart for that, I consider that Portals are still being mess. I noticed that only a few users are involved and unfortunately, no dedicted administrator is taking care of what's going on there. The first thing to be done first is to engage more participatants, at least to discuss serioulsly about setting up some policies dealing with portals and the confusion caused for users and visitors between categories and portals.

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

A. At my user page, I explicitly name the topics and articles that are getting my attention more than others. My edits as well as my watchlist concern a panoply of articles, ranging from MOSE Project, Philippe Starck, John Coltrane, Atlantis, Chip Berlet to Wow! signal. Also, I keep on revising and monitoring, especially articles related to Africa (I am an active member of Wikipedia:Africa-related regional notice board), Morocco and all related articles (created and also the maintainer of Portal:Morocco), Spain (same as with Morocco), Microsoft .NET and all articles related to the .NET platform (though the project is making slow steps), etc... After all, I have no specific choice to make and therefore I have no answer to why.

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 am one of the proudest members that never have been into an arbitration, RfC or anything. I've never been blocked and never edit with an IP. However, I experienced two long conflits with the same user over the article Ali Sina. The conflict is mainly about notability. During the first phase, where many users and administrators were involved, we could than fix the problem and go back to normality. Two months later, the same user is back and again we had to go through the same procedure and again the same story. The point is that during the 2 ocasions, I had to hear many personal attacks and lately including hate speech. I don't like to name anyone but if you need more explanations about this please feel free to approach me.

Regarding the hypothesis (in case that is to happen in the future), I believe that nothing will change regarding this aspect. I'd act according to the policy, going through the same procedure, acting with same behaviour and having the same strenght.

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.