Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/JRM

JRM
[ Vote here] (70/1/0) ending 00:06 8 May 2005 (UTC)

JRM is an amazing editor. He's well known among admins, as he has been helping on policy issues since forever. He has razor-sharp insight, and the patience to track down obscure information from around the wiki. His dedication to the project is unquestioned.

He enjoys being told of his greatness, and the calls of "WHAT? I can't believe you weren't already an admin" have long brought warmth to his heart. Because of this, he has turned down offers to nominate him for adminship not once but several times, preferring to be "the perennial newbie".

But he's not getting away this time!

Kim Bruning 00:08, 1 May 2005 (UTC) (nominator 1)

Bishonen | talk 00:13, 1 May 2005 (UTC) (nominator 2 (All together now: "You mean he wasn't an admin already? I can well believe it!"))


 * In recognition of the dogged persistence Kim has shown in getting me to accept, and in recognition of the patience Bishonen had to show while sitting on that joke, I accept. I've sold my soul to Wikipedia anyway; let's make it final. JRM · Talk 09:58, 2005 May 1 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) Absolutely.--Bishonen | talk 00:09, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Mos def. BLANKFAZE | (&#1095;&#1090;&#1086;??) 00:10, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Mike H 00:11, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Support; good choice. Antandrus 00:22, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) First time I felt I could judge someone's actions enough to vote. Level head, excellent adminny goodness. Demi T/C 00:27, 2005 May 1 (UTC)
 * 6) If he accepts. &mdash;Charles P. (Mirv) 00:55, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Hey NO FAIR! Other folks managed to get in their support ahead of me! Kim Bruning 01:00, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) Support-gadfium 01:01, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 9) I can think of few more deserving, assuming he wants it. Rje 01:03, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * 10) Yay! ugen 64 04:31, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 11) Finally. ;-) --MarkSweep 06:58, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 12) Support before he escapes again ! -- Rama 10:22, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 13) M e r o v i n g i a n  (t) (c) 11:39, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * 14) Support. Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy)  13:08, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 15) Strongest possible support. JuntungWu 13:30, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 16) Strong support. Absolutely yes. One must be as a newbie to enter the cabal-kingdom of Wikip... er, I mean, JRM is trustworthy, diplomatic, perceptive, and has for a "perennial newbie" an awfully good idea of what Wikipedia's about. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 13:38, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 17) naturally. dab (ᛏ) 14:05, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 18) Very much so. &mdash; Dan | Talk 14:49, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 19) of course older &ne; wiser 14:50, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * 20) naturally silsor 15:04, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * 21) Support KTC 15:14, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 22) Support, of course. James F. (talk) 15:50, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 23) About time! jni 15:53, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 24) Support: JRM is one of the most precise, educated, and careful of those who work to make Wikipedia a useful and reliable encyclopedia, instead of merely a social club.  (But remembering someone else's grudge only sustains it.)  Geogre 18:58, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 25) Support. You're trapped now.  Kelly Martin 19:34, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * 26) Support sannse (talk) 21:13, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 27) Support. Proteus (Talk) 21:51, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 28) Support. Theo (Talk) 22:37, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 29) Support. Of course; he's a great editor. SlimVirgin (talk) 23:09, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * 30) Support. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd 03:16, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * 31) Support! -- Hoary 03:57, 2005 May 2 (UTC)
 * 32) Andre ( talk ) 04:14, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * 33) Support. Excellent user. Sjakkalle 06:22, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 34) Just Rocks Me. violet/riga (t) 13:14, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 35) Support --jag123 13:51, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 36) Support. Familiar name, reliable editor. &mdash; mark ✎ 16:04, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 37) Support. --Weyes 20:43, 2005 May 2 (UTC)
 * 38) Strongest possible support. One of the really good ones who makes this site so much fun! - Lucky 6.9 21:17, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 39) Support. Jonathunder 22:19, 2005 May 2 (UTC)
 * 40) Support - wow, both Bishonen and JRM up for adminship... glad I checked the admin page today :-) Ta bu shi da yu 02:50, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 41) Support of course. You said yes, you are in ;-) 03:30, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 42) Support. -Willmcw 04:19, May 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * 43) Support.  It is a pleasure--and, to show the proper frame of mind, I must say, "Because the Queen insists."  :)  Do you remember the Duke and the Lady in the white dress in Le Roi de Coeur?  ---Rednblu | Talk 04:45, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 44) Neutralitytalk 05:01, May 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * 45) Strongly support. David Cannon 05:05, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 46) Support. What more is there to say? -- M P er el ( talk 05:46, May 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * 47) Support.  --Tony Sidaway|Talk 06:59, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 48) YES!  Grutness|hello? [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]] 07:03, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 49) Strong Support. utcursch | talk 05:29, May 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * 50) Very Strong Support. For among other things, for attempting to add some sanity into the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Transclusion costs and benefits (and Orange (word), of course).  Blank Verse   ∅   10:52, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 51) Support, a responsible editor, I thought he was already an admin- L33tminion (talk) 21:05, May 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * 52) Yes in oranges. Smoddy (Rabbit and pork) 22:15, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 53) I'll support, even if he's too jumpy when someone gets off the A16 at 130! Páll 22:56, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 54) Support. Fine admin material. &mdash; Trilobite (Talk) 23:09, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 55) Support. Easy decision.  SWAdair | Talk  01:17, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 56) Support. "$user isn't an admin already?" – ABCD 02:18, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 57) And a fine soul it is. Support. sj, I believe (signature added by Bishonen)
 * 58) Support in the strongest possible terms. All the reasons why are already listed. Filiocht | Blarneyman 07:48, May 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * 59) Support for being an "anti-authorist" and a "moderate eventualist". We need more JRMists. --Silversmith 19:11, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 60) Support for all the reasons above. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 02:20, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 61) Support Really, wonderful - I read your page twice: like you I also want to remain always like a new wiki. Wish you all the best, in advance, in your role.--Bhadani 19:23, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 62) Support, of course Sietse 19:37, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 63) Support. No question.--MikeJ9919 20:16, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 64) Support. Surprised that JRM already isn't an admin. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 21:09, May 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * 65) Support - As with Bishonen's nomination, through my own interactions and the opinion of others listed above me, I think JRM would make a good administrator. Ben Babcock 02:09, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 66) Support. Sam Hocevar 12:12, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 67) Support. A quality user all round. BillyH 12:21, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 68) All your base will belong to us - David Gerard 16:50, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 69) Support. Gamaliel 20:08, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 70) Support. --Lst27  ( t a l k )  21:30, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
 * 71) Whole heartely support. Project2501a 00:18, 8 May 2005 (UTC)  (Not releated with JRM's adminship)COMMENT: Voting process should change.' Why, you ask? Wild guess, but I'm willing to bet that the last 10 RfA, came out of #wikipedia. What's wikipedia's user base, anyway? how many admins do we have? what's the ratio of user to admin? how many of them are in the same time zone? how many admins do we need anyway? hm?

Oppose
 * 1) Everyking 14:28, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Care to elaborate? I think I have a pretty good idea what your particular beef is. Assume good faith and no personal attacks, right? This exchange in particular? Please correct me if I'm wrong, and/or add other indications of questionable behaviour on my part&mdash;people need to know what sort of person they're voting for, and I can't be unbiased for obvious reasons. JRM · Talk 18:51, 2005 May 1 (UTC)

Neutral

Comments

Questions for the candidate

A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters: Oh, and I'd promote the cabal at every opportunity, but that goes without saying. Er... wait. This is not good for an admin, right? I will deal with this in the future as I've dealt with it in the past: step back, think about why everybody's doing what they're doing, and what needs to be done to get back on track. Of course I'm going to fail every now and then, which is why we collaborate. You watch me, and I'll watch you. Wikipedia will not fail.
 * 1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? (Please read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.)
 * A. Editing those little nooks and crannies that are (nearly) always protected, when the need arises (see Wikipedia talk:Recentchanges, for example, I had to disappoint someone), blocking especially prolific vandals, regretfully but resolutely blocking 3RR violators, unblocking those people who promise to be nice, protecting pages if nothing else will do, and unprotecting everything that doesn't have a damn good reason for being protected. I'd like to tell you I'd sink lots of time into cleaning out Votes for deletion as well, but you wouldn't believe that any more than I would. I'll try, though.
 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * A. Orange (word) because it was my first taste of research on a topic I'm not an expert in (however modest). Sollog because it was my first taste of truly cooperative editing, even with people who had no interest in cooperating. List of atheists because, even though I didn't make a single edit to the thing myself, I managed to spark the reform that made this one of the most valuable and accurate lists of Wikipedia today&mdash;all credit to the actual contributors, though. Last and certainly least, Template:Toomanyboxes because it's my favorite contribution to end up on Best of BJAODN (the first one was exploding Wales, but I like Toomanyboxes better).
 * 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 will deal with it in the future?
 * A. What's a conflict? I've never been in a revert war or a shouting match, but there have been times when things didn't go as smoothly as I would have liked. Conflict is inevitable; it's what you do when you have it that counts. I'll be honest: I can't claim any serious success in dispute resolution, mostly because I haven't entered disputes. Nobody else has ever caused me stress; I cause myself stress when I start taking myself too seriously and lose track of the goal: building an encyclopedia. The best (worst?) example of me losing it is here. I also have a tendency to not keep my mouth shut when it's the only reasonable option, and waffle instead&mdash;see here for the most recent instance of that.