SmashWiki:Requests for adminship/Pikamander2 (2): Difference between revisions
From SmashWiki, the Super Smash Bros. wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
==== Neutral ==== | ==== Neutral ==== | ||
*'''Neutral'''. While I feel you have made great edits, I have not seen you handle user conflicts that much. If you can prove me wrong, please do, but until then, I remain neutral.[[User | *'''Neutral'''. While I feel you have made great edits, I have not seen you handle user conflicts that much. If you can prove me wrong, please do, but until then, I remain neutral.[[User:SZL|<span style="color:Green">S</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/SZL|<span style="color:black">Z</span>]] [[User Talk:SZL|<span style="color:gold">L</span>]] 19:47, 6 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
---- | ---- |
Revision as of 14:48, December 6, 2008
Pikamander2 (talk • contribs • edit count • RFA page)
On June 11, 2008, I requested adminship. Sixteen days later, I had five supports and three neutral votes, but SySop nominations were closed due to "an overflow in nominations." I am now requesting adminship once again.
Here are some reasons why I believe that I should become a SySop:
- I contribute to the wiki nearly every day.
- I never use foul language, on regular or talk pages.
- I don't melt or get angry under pressure.
- I have never been blocked.
- I have made over 2,000 edits to the main namespace since July 20, 2007, the day that I joined SmashWiki.
- I revert vandalism very frequently. If I was an administrator, I could ban troublesome IPs and delete joke/spam pages instantly.
- I have a colorful signature.
So, what does everyone think? --Posted by Pikamander2 (Talk) at 00:17, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
Support
- Strong support, you do a lot for this wiki and you are very active. You deserve it. Im Alex25, K? (talk) 00:23, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
- Strong support. you've been a great influence and help to this wiki, and you're often funny and serious at the same time. Xtrme Talk 2 X Wut X is doing 00:37, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
- Massive support. Ridiculous numbers of mainspace edits, rollback'r status acheived, even-tempered and anti-vandal... every reason says yes. Miles (talk - contribs) 00:55, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
- Support. So far, Pikamander is one of the few users here I've seen that "gets" wiki. I have moderate trust in his abilities not to fail, which- combined with little comparable opposition- has led me to support. --Shadowcrest 15:32, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
- Strong Support. I supported this man the first time he ran for adminship, and I still do. Integrity, experience, work, he's got everything an admin should have. - GalaxiaD (talk) 22:36, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
- Support The only thing keeping my vote from strong support is slightly low activity. He deserves my vote just from edit count alone. Cheezperson {talk}stuff 23:19, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
- Strong Support This dude is like an admin even as a regular user. His contributions are superb as well. He has my vote. Blue Ninjakoopa Talk to me 11:30, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
- Yes. No reason why not.O, Mighty Smoreking 00:29, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
- Strong Support There is no reason whatsoever for Pika to fail this. Great editing, deals with people nicely, and helpful contributions says it all. METEORITE (t) 23:51, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
- Support Now why would I oppose? I've seen this guy in action in reverting vandal edits, so he's pretty trustworthy. MarioGalaxy {talk} 17:32, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
- Beyond Support. If I said no, I'd be quite the weirdo. Dx Heh, but on a more serious note, he's done more than enough for this wiki and practically lives on here. He deals with those *cough*other users*cough* quite nicely, and for that he deserves it more than most anyone else here does. I think he'd make a great sysop. ~ TSON
- Weak support — I've nothing of especial consequence against Pikamander, and in fact actually had a look through his deleted contributions; he's got a handful of {{d}} taggings, so I can say that I think he'd use the tools. --Sky (t · c · w) 01:14, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Oppose
- ...
Neutral
- Neutral. While I feel you have made great edits, I have not seen you handle user conflicts that much. If you can prove me wrong, please do, but until then, I remain neutral.S Z L 19:47, 6 December 2008 (UTC)