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

Rune.welsh

final (128/0/0) ending 00:31, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Rune.welsh ( talk · contribs) – Rune Welsh is an editor who has been helping Wikipedia since April 2005, and in that time period, he has been of tremendous help. His contributions to the article namespace have been concentrated in Mexico and Chemistry articles, and they include three Featured articles and three Did you knows, more than most editors have. Also, he is very active in the Wikipedia namespace, being a regular at Featured article candidates, Featured list candidates, Articles for deletion and Requests for adminship. In total, he has racked 4967 edits, and he is also very knowledgeable of Wikipedia and copyright policy, and always asks how to do something if he doesn't know it. I believe he would be a great addition to the corps of administrators, and counts with my complete support. Tito xd^{( ?!? - help us)} 05:58, 15 March 2006 (UTC) reply

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I do accept. -- Run e Welsh | ταλκ 22:18, 15 March 2006 (UTC) reply

Support

1. As nominator. Tito xd^{( ?!? - help us)} 06:02, 15 March 2006 (UTC) reply
2. Hah! Pre-official nomination support! — Nightst a llion (?) 13:00, 15 March 2006 (UTC) reply
3. Strong support. excellent editor Abögarp 16:42, 15 March 2006 (UTC) reply
4. Support. -- Tantalum T e lluride 00:32, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
5. -- Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 00:34, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
6. Pegasus1138 ^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 00:41, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
7. Support Leidiot 00:44, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
8. Support I know from working with Rune on a project for Esperanza, that he knows how to react when things do not go as planned. That is something admins encounter often, and I believe he is more than capable of being able to handle all the new tools. KnowledgeOfSelf 00:52, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
9. Support No bad faith edits. Trustworthy, and has many edits all over...well rounded. Voice-of-All ^{T| @| ESP} 00:58, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
10. Yes. NSL E _{( T+ C)} at 01:06 UTC ( 2006-03-16)
11. Support. of course psch e mp | talk 01:23, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
12. Support Excellent editor, cliche moment for me. Xoloz 01:33, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
13. Lucky #13 Support Excellent editor. Moe ε 01:41, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
14. Support. — Kirill Lok s hin 02:02, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
15. Support — Per NSLE :) deeptrivia ( talk) 02:03, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
16. Support, 1 ... 2 ... 3 ... thought he was one! fuddlemark ( fuddle me!) 02:07, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
17. Support -- Mmounties ( Talk) 02:19, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
18. Support -- Ter e nc e Ong 04:42, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
19. Support, looks good to me. -- Khoikhoi 05:40, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
20. Support Excellent editor (has loads and loads of minor edits) and vandalism reverter. -- Andy123 05:55, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
21. Support per nom. -- Rory 0 96 06:36, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
22. Support — per all the above-- Looper5920 06:51, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
23. Support. Good and responsible contributor. Sjakkalle (Check!) 06:57, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
24. Support per etc and whatnot. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:00, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
25. Support, but how can he be Welsh if he's Mexican? JIP | Talk 07:27, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
26. Support. Excellent editor and I have see a strong well-balanced contribution in chemistry articles. -- Bduke 07:29, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
27. Support.-- Jusjih 07:49, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
28. Support, I thought he already was an admin! — Kimchi.sg | Talk 07:52, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
29. Support; I already thought he was one™. smurrayinch ester^{( User), ( Talk)} 07:54, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
30. Support echoing KnowledgeOfSelf's comments, top notch. -- Alf ^melmac 08:33, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
31. Support' — Quarl ^{( talk)} 2006-03-16 08:48Z
32. Support, of course. - Mailer Diablo 08:58, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
33. Support. -- Sam Blanning (formerly Malthusian) ( T | C | A ) 09:15, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
34. Support =Nichalp «Talk»= 09:19, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
35. Support Gizza ^{Chat ©} 10:58, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
36. Happily support. I feel a bandwagon growing... Harr o 5 11:06, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
37. Support Ugur Basak 11:37, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
38. Support per nomination. -- CTSWyneken 12:04, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
39. Support: ditto. -- Bhadani 12:08, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
40. Support per nom - Aksi great 12:44, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
41. Support. Solid candidate. ProhibitOnions 12:47, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
42. Support - I know his good work in FLC, he deserves this. Afonso Silva 13:39, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
43. Support Ahonc ( Talk) 13:55, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
44. Support without hesitation. Essjay ^{Talk • Contact} 14:02, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
45. Support It is time to give him the mop. -- S iva1979 ^{Talk to me} 14:17, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
46. Strong Support seen this person around, very good user. I can't believe so many people beat me to the punch!-- Alhutch 14:26, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
47. Support good work here. -- Syrthiss 14:33, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
48. Support. This editor shows outstanding depth and breadth of edits. youngamerican ( talk) 14:39, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
49. Support yes, per nom. -- a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 14:53, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
50. Support per everybody! - W e zzo (talk) (ubx) 15:59, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
51. Flcelloguy ( A note?) 16:27, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
52. Support Hells yeah! Hamster Sandwich 17:41, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
53. Support. Indeed. SoLando ( Talk) 19:24, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
54. Support, will be a fantastic admin -- Nataly a 19:28, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
55. Support. -- F a ng Aili 19:49, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
56. Support per above, keep up the good work! Prodego ^talk 19:52, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
57. Strong support, he isn't already? Computerjoe 's talk 19:55, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
58. Strong Esperanzial support! Great editor. haz _{( user talk)} ^e 20:08, 16 March 2006
59. Support. You seriously haven't been nominated before? This is an example of how we all need to be on the lookout, we are missing lots of good candidates. - Taxman ^Talk 20:09, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
60. Extreme "Sorry I'm late" support! Fantasmogorical user. -- Cel es tianpower ^háblame 20:29, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
61. Support per all above. Hiding talk 20:40, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
62. Support as per nom. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 20:57, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
63. Support as per nom. -- Ton e 21:09, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
64. Support Excellent user. Marskell 21:17, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
65. Support.    GUÐSÞEGN   –  U T E X – 22:44, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
66. Support Excellent. Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 23:33, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
67. Support. Indirect interactions and observations from afar have been good and reliable and thorough. No worries on length of service or activity and involvement and has model usage of edit summaries (oh come on, I'm just being trendy). Plus, with Titoxd as a nominator you'd need a seriously good reason not to. - Splash ^talk 00:09, 17 March 2006 (UTC) reply
68. Support good admin candidate -- rogerd 00:44, 17 March 2006 (UTC) reply
69. Rob ert 03:06, 17 March 2006 (UTC) reply
70. Support Seems like a good editor, good edit counts, 100% summaries, no conflicts, enjoy your mop. I bet this will hit WP:100 as well. Mike _{( T C)} 04:57, 17 March 2006 (UTC) reply
71. Support per nom. Let's go for WP:100. Grandmasterka File:Blend Flag.jpg ^{Impart wisdom} 06:50, 17 March 2006 (UTC) reply
72. Support. Good editor, engaged in important processes. - Tangotango 07:21, 17 March 2006 (UTC) reply
73. Support. A good Wikipedian who will carry the mop and bucket proud. Jedi6 -(need help?) 07:52, 17 March 2006 (UTC) reply
74. Support. Definitely someone worthy to be an admin. Brisvegas 09:46, 17 March 2006 (UTC) reply
75. Support. All the right ingredients Deizio 15:44, 17 March 2006 (UTC) reply
76. Support. Thunderbrand 18:16, 17 March 2006 (UTC) reply
77. Support Rama's Arrow 19:13, 17 March 2006 (UTC) reply
78. Support. Mo0[ talk] 20:28, 17 March 2006 (UTC) reply
79. Support — It seems tome that he is the right guy for the job. _{→ Aza Toth} 21:45, 17 March 2006 (UTC) reply
80. Pile on support Titoxd isn't Durin-level nomwise (yet?), but his noms are always good. ++ Lar: t/ c 22:25, 17 March 2006 (UTC) reply

    What is that supposed to mean? :P Tito xd^{( ?!? - help us)} 05:12, 18 March 2006 (UTC) reply

    Intended as a compliment... I suspect some of us (well, maybe only me?? I dunno...), on seeing a Durin nomination, feel comfy with supporting the nominee without even needing to do any research of their own. His noms are that well researched and his candidates that solid. Your candidate noms are almost that well researched. Helps clear it up? ++ Lar: t/ c 18:23, 18 March 2006 (UTC) reply

81. Support -- Latinus 00:22, 18 March 2006 (UTC) reply
82. Support. Seems like a very well-rounded editor. Glad to support. Weatherman90 00:29, 18 March 2006 (UTC) reply
83. Support. Simply the best. -- Jay( Reply) 00:40, 18 March 2006 (UTC) reply
84. Support :) — Ilyan e p (Talk) 01:11, 18 March 2006 (UTC) reply
85. Support without reservations - one of the kindest user user around. Earned my support long ago. Renata 02:13, 18 March 2006 (UTC) reply
86. Support - this one's a no-brainer (um... the vote, that is...). Grutness... wha? 05:32, 18 March 2006 (UTC) reply
87. Support. Mushroom ( Talk) 06:00, 18 March 2006 (UTC) reply
88. Support-- MONGO 14:48, 18 March 2006 (UTC) reply
89. Support, He really deserves for sysop. Shyam ^{( T/ C)} 14:59, 18 March 2006 (UTC) reply
90. Support per everybody, great editor. Staxringold 16:59, 18 March 2006 (UTC) reply
91. Support! Sango 123 (e) 17:03, 18 March 2006 (UTC) reply
92. Support Good Luck! -- mm e inhart 17:51, 18 March 2006 (UTC) reply
93. Support and then some. No question. ➨ ❝ R E DVERS ❞ 23:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC) reply
94. Support everything looks great. Happy 5,000th edit, by the way. Johntex\ ^talk 02:43, 19 March 2006 (UTC) reply
95. Damn it. How come everyone's getting so much support votes nowadays? Oran e (t) (c) (e) 02:50, 19 March 2006 (UTC) reply
96. Support I disagree with Rune's attitude about how to handle conflicts, but that's pretty minor. Overall, a very good editor. JoshuaZ 04:16, 19 March 2006 (UTC) reply
97. Support... chalk this up to "you mean he isn't one already?" ... Matt Yeager ♫ ( Talk?) 05:33, 19 March 2006 (UTC) reply
98. Support -- Ixfd64 06:26, 19 March 2006 (UTC) reply
99. Support. 99-getter. Now lets see who gets 100.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91 ($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) 07:18, 19 March 2006 (UTC) reply
100. Support 100! :D-- Shanel 07:32, 19 March 2006 (UTC) reply
101. Support - ahh Shanel beat me to 100! -- Tawker 07:58, 19 March 2006 (UTC) reply
102. Support When I saw him in the list of current RfA's, my jaw dropped to the ground. I can't believe you weren't one already, Rune!-- Violin G irl ^♪ 18:02, 19 March 2006 (UTC) reply
103. sure, why not. DS 18:36, 19 March 2006 (UTC) reply
104. Support Very good contributor, should already be an administrator. - M ^o P 22:25, 19 March 2006 (UTC) reply
105. Support, of course. Sarge Baldy 00:09, 20 March 2006 (UTC) reply
106. Support Robert McClenon 01:19, 20 March 2006 (UTC) reply
107. Support per above -- Masssiveego 04:48, 20 March 2006 (UTC) reply
108. Support, one of the best × Meegs 05:34, 20 March 2006 (UTC) reply
109. Support per above -- Nephron 07:17, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
110. User:Go for it!/Vote Support BTW, that's a nice tool collection you have. -- Go for it! 17:55, 20 March 2006 (UTC) reply
111. Support. -- DS1953 ^talk 18:12, 20 March 2006 (UTC) reply
112. Support, forgot to vote days ago, kind of feels like voting again, well, enjoy. feydey 20:12, 20 March 2006 (UTC) reply
113. Support. Jonathunder 20:21, 20 March 2006 (UTC) reply
114. Support Definite :) Joe I 00:03, 21 March 2006 (UTC) reply
115. Suppport - very good user. -- HappyCamper 05:02, 21 March 2006 (UTC) reply
116. I know Rune very well and I can stand up and say Rune Welsh RULES! Great user! GO FOR IT ,RUNE! —This unsigned comment was added by Tdxiang ( talk • contribs) .
117. Support. Might as well join the pile on. Also one of the few occasions that I can personally use the well known cliché- I thought you were... Petros471 16:19, 21 March 2006 (UTC) reply
118. Support. Another obviously good candidate. Jayjg ^(talk) 21:55, 21 March 2006 (UTC) reply
119. Support - Ganeshk ( talk) 21:58, 21 March 2006 (UTC) reply
120. Support Of course he should have the mop. ςפקι Д Иτς ☺ ☻ 03:31, 22 March 2006 (UTC) reply
121. Support per cliché. Alphax  ^{τ ε χ} 06:22, 22 March 2006 (UTC) reply
122. Support Wow, 122-to-zero has to be some kinda record. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:12, 22 March 2006 (UTC) reply
     • Actually, according to User:Zzyzx11/RFA_nomination_records, it's third. Or second... I don't know exactly how it's calculated. Still, this one is close to being a record! ςפקι Д Иτς ☺ ☻ 16:04, 22 March 2006 (UTC) reply
123. Support -- seems like a lovely person. Thumbelina 13:49, 22 March 2006 (UTC) reply
124. Support, that'll be a WP:100 then. Stifle 15:24, 22 March 2006 (UTC) reply
125. Support -- Agathoclea 20:59, 22 March 2006 (UTC) reply
126. Support Excellent contributions, no reason to oppose. OhNo itsJamie ^Talk 21:19, 22 March 2006 (UTC) reply
127. Support, superstar -- Samir (the scope) 23:07, 22 March 2006 (UTC) reply
128. Support. the wub "?!" 00:08, 23 March 2006 (UTC) reply

Oppose

Neutral

Comments

• Edit summary usage: 100% for major edits and 100% for minor edits. Based on the last 150 major and 150 minor edits in the article namespace. Mathbot 00:45, 16 March 2006 (UTC) reply
• See Rune.welsh's edit count and contribution tree with Interiot's tool.
• Statistics as of 06:04, Wednesday March 15 2006 ( UTC) using Flcelloguy's Tool:

Total: 4967
Main: 2286
Talk: 225
User: 452
User talk: 828
Wikipedia: 794
Wikipedia talk: 37
Image: 159
Template: 50
Template talk: 6
Category: 54
Category talk: 1
Portal: 66
Portal talk: 9

Overall statistics

Total edits: 4967
Minor edits: 3346
Edits with edit summary: 4672
Edits with manual edit summary: 4265
Percent minor edits: 67.36% *
Percent edit summary use: 94.06% *
Percent manual edit summary use: 85.86% *
* - percentages are truncated down to the nearest hundredth.

Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer 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. I'd like to deal with the backlog in Copyright problems and Gmaxwell's live reports ( [1] [2]) dealing with images for speedy deletion. I also keep an eye already at Administrator intervention against vandalism and would assist in blocking "certified" vandals and fixing up their mischief. -- Run e Welsh | ταλκ 14:00, 15 March 2006 (UTC) reply

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

A. Raney nickel was the first article I started in Wikipedia and is now a Featured Article with the kind help of the folks from WikiProject Chemicals. I'm also particularly proud of biographies on relatively obscure individuals like Enrique Alciati, Camillo Agrippa and Murray Raney. I also enjoy very much drawing structures of chemical compounds and have even set up a small tutorial to assist other editors with this task. -- Run e Welsh | ταλκ 14:00, 15 March 2006 (UTC) reply

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. Probably the most stressful conflict I've been involved with was a POV dispute in Andrés Manuel López Obrador with an anon user (it's in the article's talk page, for all to see). After much arguing against what I think were too many pro-POV additions by the anon, I asked other editors to look into this matter and left the article. I do believe it's better to stay away from matters once things get highly stressful. The encyclopedia is too big and wide to lose sleep over what are ultimately trivial matters. -- Run e Welsh | ταλκ 14:00, 15 March 2006 (UTC) reply

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 talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.