Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Taoster

Taoster
Vote here
 * (6/11/1) ends 23:28, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I would like to nominate myself for adminship under the following circumstances included herewith. This username has seen about 900 edits since its inception in August 2003, and I have edited with both diligence and impartiality since then. To my knowledge, I have not made any libelous remarks against any individual or group of individuals, nor have I wittingly engaged in any activities which violated Wikipedia's codes of conduct. My edits are mainly that of Chinese-related topics, and I have recently endeavored to create and translate articles present in the Chinese Wiki but as of yet not present in the English Wiki. And for both General Chemistry and Organic Chemistry, I have found Wikipedia to be an indispensable learning tool, so I'm looking forward to contributing towards those topics in the future as well. My primary reason for requesting adminship is to be given the ability to revert vandalism where it occurs (rollback); if provided with such, I will use it sparingly and only when necessary. Please feel free to ask me any questions.

Support
 * 1)  – Andre ( talk )  00:34, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * 2) Merovingian &#1124; Talk  00:36, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)
 * 3) User has more edits than I had when when I was made admin. &#922;&#963;&#965;&#960; Cyp  19:09, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * 4) -- orthogonal 21:04, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC) Give the kid a chance. After all, we have a well-known and easy to use mechanism for de-sysopping bad sysops. -- orthogonal 21:04, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * 5) Xiaopo &#8465; 15:29, Sep 19, 2004 (UTC) I have only seen him do good work.
 * 6) Austin Hair 19:30, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) Too new, IMO; especially so for a self-nomination. Come back in a couple of months :) Grunt 🇪🇺 00:35, 2004 Sep 17 (UTC)
 * August 2003 is over a year. Maybe you meant too few edits?  – Andre ( talk )  00:38, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * 1) 896 is too few edits. (And claiming "about" 1,000 edits is misleading and detrimental to your request.)  Should return after getting a better feel for the comminity and the job. -  T&#949;x  &#964;  ur&#949;  21:10, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Perhaps there has been a misunderstanding. I had no prior knowledge of the actual amount of edits attributed to this username, merely the approximate amount. Although I do apologize for not making a more accurate statement, it was not at all my intention to skew the statistics in my favor. --Taoster 14:28, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * 1) Netoholic @ 22:08, 2004 Sep 20 (UTC) - agree with above.
 * 2) Geogre 01:38, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC) I do hate to vote against anyone, but I think greater involvement and a bit more of a "paper trail," as it were, would help out enormously. I find nothing objectionable about the user at all, except that there isn't sufficient interaction yet.
 * 3) ugen64 04:03, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC) - echo Grunt and Texture's concerns
 * 4) RickK 01:15, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC) Anybody who supports EDGE for Adminship is suspect. RickK 01:15, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)
 * 5) **So now you're voting against someone who just so happens to hold a view different from that of your own? You need to get out more. --Taoster 13:05, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * 6) ***It has nothing to do with your having a different view from mine and everythign to do with your judgement. RickK 20:37, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)
 * 7) ****You had better get an attitude check, buddy. If your userpage is any indication of it, flawed judgement seems to be your specialty. --Taoster 21:13, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * 8) *****Is this somehow supposed to make me change my mind and vote for you? Or to make others who are undecided to suddenly see what admin material you are?  RickK 05:20, Sep 24, 2004 (UTC)
 * 9) ******No, but it has humored me quite a bit. --Taoster 18:07, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * 10) Users interactions with RickK and support of problem user are cause for concern. Ambi 06:19, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * 11) Come back after some more edits. {&Alpha;&nu;&#940;&rho;&iota;&omicron;&nu;} 07:43, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * 12) A long-time user, for sure, but has edited rather sparingly. Will he be able to keep up-to-date with the project? --Slowking Man 02:03, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)
 * 13) *Yes, as I have taken on a new initiative to contribute on a more routine basis. --Taoster 14:06, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * 14) **I have moved my vote to Oppose, after seeing Taoster's ad hominem attack upon RickK above. --Slowking Man 07:45, Sep 24, 2004 (UTC)
 * 15) Has done an excellent job of convincing me not to support his request for adminship. &mdash;Stormie 11:46, Sep 24, 2004 (UTC)
 * 16) I concur with Stormie. And it never helps to argue with those voting against you in the middle of the list of votes.... BCorr | &#1041;&#1088;&#1072;&#1081;&#1077;&#1085; 19:34, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Neutral
 * 1) I will support you after more edits, on both the English and the Chinese Wikipedias. --Lst27 20:26, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Comments
 * User has 896 edits as of just now.  – Andre ( talk )  00:38, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:
 * 1. Have you read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list?
 * A. Yes.
 * 2. Are you interested in, and do you think you'll have some time to perform, the chores that only sysops have access to do, to help keep Wikipedia up to date?
 * A. Yes, if need be; I will complete whatever chore is requested of me. That is perhaps one of the benefits of becoming a sysop: attending to things that you would normally not be involved in.
 * 3. If you become a sysop, which sysop chore or chores (WP:VFD, recent changes, watching for vandals and vandalism, responding to editor requests for assistance, any other) do you especially think you would be able to help with.
 * A. I will edit as usual, although I will take greater heed to topics which require mediation. Also, consideration will be given towards requested article edits and the like.
 * 4. In your opinion, what article have you contributed the most succesfully and helpfully to?
 * A. "Simplified Chinese character" was much more condensed and generalized in 2003; since then, many users, including myself, have worked towards the restructuring of its foundation. It is, today, a full-fledged article that is worthy of being featured.
 * 5. In your opinion, what has your best contribution to the running and maintenance of Wikipedia been? (i.e., have you reverted a bad stretch of vandalism, done extensive work categorizing articles, helped mediate a dispute?)
 * A. I have Added interwiki links, catagorized articles, and compromised when arguments had arisen.
 * 6. 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. Yes, a few. Sometimes it is a small annoyance, but life goes on. I try not to provoke the offending party any further so that the situation is quelled in time. As with any large project mutual understanding is necessary.