Wikiquote:Requests for adminship/Tempodivalse

This discussion is finished. Please do not change it. You can add comments to another page, but not here. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closed as Successful (9/0). TheAE talk 20:44, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

---

Tempodivalse

Tempodivalse (talk • changes)

End date: April 26, 2009

Hello, everyone. I recently stumbled across this wiki while exploring some Simple English wikis, and decided to stick around, as I think it has some great potential. Basically, my main reason for wanting the admin bits would be to help out with the odd maintenance deletion/vandalism to help get this wiki moving. Also, seeing as this is a small wiki, and not well patrolled, there is a significant possibility of a vandal/spambot coming through on a rampage with no admins around to stop them. The more sysops we have, the less likelihood there is of such a scenario occurring.

I'm a rollbacker over at en.wiki and simple.wiki, and have been an active sysop over at en.wikinews for several months, so you can rest fairly assured that I won't do anything untoward with the buttons. I understand that I might not have all that many edits here, but checking some of the other RfAs going on currently, that doesn't seem to be a big issue with the !voters. In any case, thanks for considering, and rest assured that regardless of the result of this RfA, I'm here to stay. Tempodivalse ^@en.wikinews 20:05, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Candidate's acceptance: Self nom.

Support

1. Sure. PeterSymonds (talk) 20:07, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
2. Maxim | talk 20:08, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
3. Support – I believe you can be untrusted with the tools. One thing, would you mind creating a userpage, even if just a redirect to your usertalk page. It is very rare a new user, when needing an admin, will search for the user's talk page. So having a red link for a userpage can be confusing and unhelpful. Otherwise, you have my support. (I am thinking of writing an essay about adminship here, so we don't get RfAs from every user who makes 10 quick edits...). TheAE talk 21:07, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

   Hm. I didn't think of that. I'll go create a redirect now, thanks for suggesting this. Tempodivalse ^@en.wikinews 21:19, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

4. Looks like I started a trend! :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:09, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

   Looks like it -- four RfAs in two days! We're now busier than en.wikipedia! Tempodivalse ^@en.wikinews 21:19, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

5. Would prefer that you have edited here longer... but sure. — RyanCross (talk) 07:43, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
6. Okay. Shapiros10 (talk) 23:24, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
7. What Ryan said. --Dylan ^{Be heard} 02:24, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
8. Yep. MBisanz ^talk 06:06, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
9. Support Trusted user. GT5162 12:19, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Comments

• Comment - I think this can be closed already. It's been exactly a week to the day since the nom opened.  Tempodivalse  20:33, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

This discussion is finished. Please do not change it. You can add comments in another part.