Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/VirtualSteve


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

VirtualSteve
Closed as successful by Cecropia 16:04, 27 June 2007 (UTC) at (79/1/0); Scheduled end time 15:08, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

- Steve has been an editor since mid-November 2005. Over the last year he has been a prolific, dedicated and hardworking editor, amassing in excess of 10,000 edits, with more than 4,700 in the mainspace and the rest well spread across all other spaces. With more than 1,400 user talk and more than 2,200 article talk edits, Steve has shown an excellent ability to communicate with his fellow editors, an attribute I find highly valued in potential administrators.

Steve is also an effective and experienced vandal fighter. He escalates appropriately through the full range of warning templates, as well as writing personal warnings when necessary. (eg:, , , , , , , ) and reports vandals at AIV.

Steve is loyal, trustworthy and dedicated to the project. He has provided valued assistance and support to myself and other Australian administrators. He takes the time to offer words of encouragement to established  and new editors alike. He is a team player who I believe will become a valued and dedicated member of the admin team.

Steve has also been a prolific and dedicated editor to the mainspace, contributing 326 new articles, 13 DYKs and five Good Articles. Steve is intelligent, mature and reliable and I believe he has the knowledge and skills to make an outstanding administrator. I have no hesitation in asking the community to support Steve's request for adminship. Sarah 13:55, 18 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:


 * I am very happy to accept this nomination.-- VS talk 13:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following optional questions to provide guidance for participants:
 * 1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?
 * A: It is in my nature to be both a team player and to be truly committed to anything in life that I put my hand up for. In a nutshell that means that I will be constantly looking out to help out wherever the Admin tools are required. But to answer the question more pointedly - well I have a tendency to gravitate more to the growth aspect of Wikipedia and am particularly fond of new and well referenced material that inspires both general readers and new editors to the 'pedia and so I would put my hand up to assist specifically at WP:DYK if Blnguyen, Howcheng, Carabinieri, and others in the DYK team would have me.  Similarly I'd also take a supportive role (inclusive of assistance that progresses as necessary from dispute resolution through to admin-based protection) of WP:GAC nominations and assessments.  With regards protection of the project as a whole, well as Sarah has been kind enough to indicate I watch constantly for one-off and recidivistic type vandals.  I would be pleased to help with WP:AIV for those vandals that are not rehabilitated by the first couple or three caution/warnings and in this area I'd be looking at assisting with the removal of any backlogs as necessary. I also have a bent to do something about vandals (and as necessary established editors) who violate WP:NPA.


 * 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A: A quick glance at my user page and the about me section will detail that I am an avid Aussie editor. I am a member of 4 Australian projects - and I am particularly proud of the assistance that I gave to get Riverina & Wagga Wagga to GA.  But that said I can't help but get excited over the way that Wikipedia is a conduit for friendships across the world - so somehow (don't ask me how it just happened) I got involved in WikiProject Chicago some time ago and I have three GA assists there - even though I have never been to the Windy City.  That's the joy of Wikipedia for me - an editor with the time and inclination can assist in the writing of a good article about anything that she or he is willing to do the research on.  I also love the problem solving aspect of this project and so I am very fond of WikiProject Riverina because it forced a number of editors to get their heads together and actually discover where the Riverina was.  I think I helped a fair bit in that discovery - and I am going through a similar project now with regards Template:Sunraysia.  I've already mentioned DYK's - and yes okay call me a wiki-exhibitionist but there is a definite buzz with getting your article up for those few hours on the main page.  (PS I should like to add one other thing - which started off as an interest displayed on English Wiki but then because it got larger was moved to Commons and now resembles a total of over 260 images of which 95% are self taken.)


 * 3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
 * A: Yes I have - but only two that stand out as a conflict beyond the occasional (well actually infrequent for me) disagreement of content or prose that all editors have. In the first instance I had a dispute with Rebecca when she still edited under the name of Ambi.  The dispute (please don't cringe too much Beck) was about redlinks which I couldn't understand as being particularly important.  From the aftermath I learned that new editors (me included) come to Wikipedia with baggage - positive baggage about neatness and prose style and information and bias etc - but baggage nevertheless.  I learned to respect Rebecca and her style of editing and even more importantly I learned that newcomers should be treated slightly more courteously until they understand that wiki has its own rules/guidelines which are not attempting to totally conform the new editor but are attempting to get that person to think of the project as just that; a total worldwide project.  I hope that some of the diffs that Sarah gave above show that I have taken that message to heart as I try firstly to reason with new editors that stray from the established guidelines.  I can tell you of the second conflict only by explaining what I learned first and that is I learned that at times someone who describes themselves the first time you meet them as a tyrant can turn out to be one of the most wonderful editors you will ever have the pleasure to work with especially when you apologise to that person after you explain that you didn't realise that they had changed their user name to Golden Wattle and they explain that they had only made an honest mistake when they edited a page you were interested in.  I know that this detail is obscure but I guess it's my way of saying I have learned to respect  administrators for what they are - dedicated volunteers who sometimes make minor mistakes - and to realise sometimes, despite my trying hard not to - I can be a jerk.

Optional question by AldeBaer
 * 4. Since we all started out as readers of this encyclopedia, I'd like to know what your three (or more) favourite reads on Wikipedia are (may be articles, or even policy pages, whatever you like), ideally with a short explanation as to what especially you like about them.
 * A: Hi AldeBaer - firstly my apologies for not getting to this question a little sooner - my wallet and one of my molars have just returned from a visit to Melbourne for Root Canal Treatment. Please expect your answer in the next 30 minutes or so. Secondly - thank you also for your support vote already given.-- VS  talk 07:04, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

My first "favourite" read. To understand the reason for my first read of Wikipedia I need you to picture this scene ••• Friday night in an apartment I was renting at the intersection of Russell & Bourke Streets Melbourne and yours truly had had more than a few good Margaret River red wines before deciding to dance in bare feet to Ram Jams version of Black Betty on a small coffee table. Woke the next morning and got out of bed in agony - no not my head but my feet, as I could hardly walk for the first few steps. Searching for this phrase (well words to the effect of) intense pain first steps and found Wiki's article on Plantar fasciitis. I learned that Wiki is a serious and encompassing reference encyclopedia and felt immediately comforted with even the slim knowledge - which the article gave at that time.-- VS talk 07:32, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

My second favourite read. I have been a serious collector of the books by W. Somerset Maugham for some years and have a good collection of 60 or so, including a signed copy of one of his rarer items. I enjoyed (still do) reading and editing his article page/s mainly because the controversies surrounding his sexuality, his espionage work, and other parts of his life brings out the opinions of other editors and I learned how contentious opinions in articles bring out the best and worst examples of non-neutral and neutral points of view.-- VS talk 07:56, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

My third favourite read. Truth is I could pick a hundred favourites but given your question allows only 3 then I choose Boinka. I like this article not because I wrote it but because when I penned the first version GarrieIrons (a very good Aussie contributor) came to my talk page and understandably given the name, questioned if it was a hoax. Of course I told him it wasn't and then thinking about it I set out to find anything I could about this community in Victoria which at best has 28 people. In doing that research I managed to find enough detail to get it to DYK stage. I learned that notability and verifiability can be found even for what appears initially to be one of most obscure locations (items) on Wikipedia.-- VS talk 07:56, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Optional Question by Hdt83
 * 5. What is your interpretation of the Ignore all rules policy and how does it help out Wikipedia?

A Many years ago I found myself in a situation where a motor vehicle victim's skin just above the eyebrows had been peeled back (scalped ?) by metal in the vehicle, exposing his skull to just behind his ears. He was conscious and complained of a sore neck and back. Conventional first aid guidelines detail that such a person's head and neck should not be moved until a neck brace and/or back board is brought to the scene. For issues related to blood lose, fear, skin & capillary deterioration and time to wait for ambulance arrival, I ignored those guidelines and very carefully pulled the skin back over his head and then taped it together with some insulation tape. Our task as volunteers at wikipedia is to build a multilingual, web-based, free content encyclopedia that, quite frankly, outlasts us all. The Ignore all rules guideline is similar to my true story above ... as an administrator - if the rules stop me (or anyone) from achieving the task - exactly as much of those rules that need to and can be ignored should be; so that two things do occur: (1) the primary task is assisted, and (2) as little disruption as possible occurs during the ignoring process.-- VS talk 01:41, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

General comments

 * See VirtualSteve's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.


 * Links for VirtualSteve:

''Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/VirtualSteve before commenting.''

Discussion


Support
 * 1) Nominator support. Sarah 15:00, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Sarah nominated. Moreschi Talk 15:10, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Sarah nominated :) Plus my experiences with this user have been more than positive, and he's truly an excellent user. Has my complete trust. Speedy enmop. Oppose section is highly unnecessary, please get rid of it :) Riana ⁂  15:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * "Speedy enmop"? Interesting idea for a policy change... :-) Waltontalk 17:23, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Strong Support - The nomination by Sarah is excellent and VirtualSteve has enough experience and contribution to become an admin..Good Luck..-- Cometstyles 15:15, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Support 1) Answer to questions (except for knew and well referenced new methinks?) 2) Contribs. all over the show. 3) Civility demonstrated in nomination. 4) Hands Up attitude. Think that covers it. Pedro | Chat  15:18, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Support Good editor. ~  Wi ki her mit  15:23, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Support Met VS when he helped get an article I was involved with to GA status - very sensible, civil, and helpful. Good answers to questions.  Mop-trustable without a doubt.  Bencherlite 15:26, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Support Looks fine to me.--MONGO 16:06, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Strong support Sarah's candidates always have a habit of turning out to be excellent administrators. :) Acalamari 16:16, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Support - You gave good answers to the questions and have plenty of contributions and evidence of a good and friendly nature. I am sure you will make an excellent admin. Camaron1 | Chris 16:18, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Support: Solid content contributions, good answers to the questions, experienced and collaborative, active in administrative areas. Support without concerns. MastCell Talk 16:27, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) zOMG! Sarah nominated. — Nearly Headless Nick   {C}  16:54, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) Friendly guy, good nomination, support. —AldeBaer 17:10, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) Support. Adminship is no big deal, and no problems seem to have revealed themselves. Waltontalk 17:23, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) Support I did not have to look too far in your contributions to feel confident that you are capable and trustworthy enough to become an admin. --Ozgod 17:31, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 13) support - I've been waiting for this to come up for some time. VS has got a very firm understanding of policy, I completely trust his ability to make a fine administrator.  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  18:03, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 14) Support- Great User and great answers to the questions.Arnon Chaffin (Talk ) 18:05, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 15) Strong Support With 10,000+ edits, I believe he has the edit experience to have the mop. His answers are good, and he will be a wonderful addition to the Wikipedian admins. Good luck! Politics rule 18:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 16) Support, would make a great admin. -- Phoenix2  (holla) 18:46, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 17) Support absolutely. Steve, I am sure, would make an awesome admin. — An as  talk? 19:10, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 18) Support. A prolific editor who can be trusted with the extra buttons. -- DS1953 talk  20:19, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 19) Support I have worked closely with Steve on many Riverina articles and projects. As I was a new Wikipedian when I first worked with him and I found him to be a constant source of inspiration, ideas and support.  While he is an effective monitor of vandalism, he assumes good faith with new editors and is always ready to provide them with assistance on Wikipedia policy and article style and clearly explains to them why a particular edit may not be appropriate for Wikipedia.  His work at WP:GAC in particular demonstrates both his knowledge of Wikipedia requirements for articles and his personal qualities of helpfulness and civility. I am confident he would make a great admin. -- Mattinbgn/talk 20:38, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 20) Support The above people took the words right out of my mouth.  Stwalkerster  talk 21:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 21) Support - Yes indeed. --Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor  (ταlκ )  21:21, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 22) Support I feel that VirtualSteve will make a good admin. Captain panda  21:50, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 23) Support I feel that VirtualSteve will make an excellent Wikipedia administrator. Andy Saunders 22:04, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 24) Support I've seen nothing but very good things, and Steve has helped me out on a good few occasions. His contributions in the Australia space especially are very much appreciated. --RealSteve (Stephen)talk 22:18, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 25) Support An excellent candidate with a good range of admin-related contribution experience. --Anthony.bradbury</b><sup style="color:black;">"talk" 22:30, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 26) Support - I've had nothing but good experiences working around this user, and I feel that he would make an excellent admin. --Haemo 23:05, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 27) Support Cheers, JetLover (Talk) (Sandbox) 23:10, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 28) Support A good editor and a very nice guy. If he wants to be an admin, I can't see any reason why not. Epbr123 23:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 29) '''Support per Epbr123 and the amazing diffs in nom. &mdash; $PЯING  rαgђ  23:58, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 30) Support - Steve and I have had some more norming and storming experiences than most (as referred to by him above) and I have no qualms in asserting he has moved through those and he has my unqualified endorsement. In fact it would be to my great relief that he be prepared to accept additional responsibilities within the project given I myself have had to significantly scale back on my contributions and that our interests signficantly overlapped. Aan example, at least one dog requires support against persistent assertions he represents otherwise undocumented attempts to massacre people with poisoned flour - not sure how many admins it takes to change a lightbulb but it takes a lot to keep a dog and associated places clean. Importantly to me Steve is a significant contributer of quality edits to the encyclopaedia, I think it is very important that those who have admin tools are fully aligned to the intent of the project by being active contributers of material that fully meets Wikipedia policies, Steve is one such editor.  When trying to build the content one inevitably comes across vandals, the tools are really useful in not allowing that knowledge to disappear in a slough of vandalism. --Golden Wattle  talk 00:09, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Support - Good user, no problems. - <font face="Trebuchet MS">Zeibura (Talk) 01:58, 21 June 2007 (UTC) Abstaining, per Gurch's diff and the fact that I don't know the whole story. - <font face="Trebuchet MS">Zeibura (Talk) 03:26, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Support - an excellent user who seems to be everywhere. I had honestly thought he was an admin. &mdash;Moondyne 02:28, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Support per nom. Peacent 03:41, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Support - calm, cool and collected, has added to my enjoyment of the wikipedia experience WikiTownsvillian 03:43, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Ŭber-Support - Absolutely, for sure, yes, indeed-Great editor. --<font color="SteelBlue" face="verdana">tennis <font color="ForestGreen" face="verdana">man 04:02, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Strong Support Excellent user with great work at DYK, writing and also fixing all those errors in those Australian cricket biographies that I wrote. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:24, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Support I see no problems with this editor using the admin tools. (aeropagitica) 04:53, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Support per excellent contribution history, obvious support from the community. Charlie - talk to me - what I've done  05:54, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) This Candidate gets my vote as I see no reason to oppose.  Black Harry (T|C) (Go Red Sox!) 06:04, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Support -- was eventually going to nominate this fantastic and committed editor myself. - Longhair\talk 06:25, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) Support This user seems reliable so why not vote for him?--†Sir James Paul† 07:07, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) Support - Lostvalley 07:12, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) Hell yes! G  1  ggy  Talk/Contribs 07:39, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 13) Why not? Clean record, good article contribs.... -- <font color="black" face="Brush Script MT">Dark <font color="#120a8f">Falls''    talk 08:37, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 14) Support invaluable contributor. We need more administrators about Australian articles, and Steve is perfect for the task.--cj | talk 13:35, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 15) Support It is time to give him the mop. -- S iva1979 <sup style="background:yellow;">Talk to me 16:46, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 16) Support - Will be an asset to WP:DYK. Baka man  16:50, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 17) I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message! - 19:43, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 18) Michael Snow 19:43, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 19) Approved for this position. — N96 22:21, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 20) Support. See no issues. Jayjg <small style="color:darkgreen;">(talk) 23:18, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 21) Support - Battle tested and came out the better for it. I definitely think that it will be to Wikipedia's betterment if VS is made admin. -- <font face="Kristen ITC"><font color="Blue">Jreferee  (Talk) 23:25, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 22) Support Good editor, he deserves these tools. Oysterguitarist~Talk 00:31, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 23) Strong Support. Great user, fantastic contributions, he'll use the tools well. Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 01:49, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 24) Support. A very convincing nom, and a look at the supporting diffs back it up.  Good luck.-- Kubigula (talk) 03:05, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 25) Good candidate, no reason to think he would misuse the tools. He handles conflict well, even when the person he's in conflict with is being a dick. (He knows what I'm talking about, and everybody else need not worry that I'm personally attacking anyone, unless critiquing your own actions is a personal attack :-)) Picaroon (Talk) 04:53, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 26) Strong, Strong Support If you only elect one admin this year, make it him. Harrison-HB4026 11:13, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 27) Strong Support - Have seen this user many times around the traps, puts in a lot of work doing project tasks that noone wants to think about but have to be done, and is a great editor to boot. I believe this user would be great with the mop. Orderinchaos 13:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 28) support - as a silent observer from WPChi and other projects, steve has shown commitment to undertaking tedious tasks, to proactive and positive communication, and to appropriately citing and using policy. i have strong trust he will use the tools appropriately, communicate well with others, and strengthen the project.  LurkingInChicago 17:08, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 29) Support. I've seen VirtualSteve around a lot and its all been good. Seems to have plenty of relevant experience and I trust the nom. WjBscribe 23:20, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 30) Support - Your contributions as per described in your nomination is outstanding. Soon you will enjoy your new advanced buttons being created as we speak... JungleCat    Shiny! / Oohhh!  23:31, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 31) Support Nothing to suggest will abuse the tools. Davewild 08:47, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 32) Support Looks like he'll make a fine admin. --Canley 12:53, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 33) <font color="#0033FF">Th <font color="#0066FF">e Su <font color="#0099FF">nshi <font color="#0066FF">ne M <font color="#0033FF">an  20:49, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 34) Support because I trust this user.-- Hús  ö  nd  00:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 35) Support My interaction with VSteve has been through work done at WP:WPChi and mostly with WP:CHICOTW. I can say that in my short tenure (3 months) as Director of the Chicago WikiProject he has very often been the eagerest of all the beavers, which is what we really want for a mop holder.  For example, in several articles that we have attempted to promote to WP:GA, Steve has been the most helpful in addressing GAon hold status concerns (E.g., Chicago Theatre and Burnham Park (Chicago)).  At times when I have needed things done I could count on steve to get them done efficiently. Steve has had a very positive attitude in all of my interactions with him.  I can see many otherers have already noticed these qualities in Steve so I needn't ramble on. TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 14:26, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 36) Support Sarah nominated :-). On the other hand, a very good editor who can help with backlogs and is unlikely to go crazy. Martinp23 16:10, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 37) Support  <font color="#DF0001">Buck  ets  ofg  21:15, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 38) Support Considering wherever I have encountered him there is always good sense and practical action - which to me suggests good traits for an admin - and his work capacity on the Tasmania project has helped pull it up by its bootstraps - good candidate worthy of the majority approval that he has SatuSuro 02:06, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 39) support --Astrokey 44 10:23, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 40) Support ElinorD (talk) 13:57, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 41) Support Answers to questions were very good. User will not misuse tools being entrusted. --Hdt83 <font color="blue" face="Arial">Chat 19:19, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 42) Support. Very confident answers to questions, would make a great admin. Sr13 20:06, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 43) Support--<font color="#2A52BE">Agεθ020 (<font color="#E49B0F">ΔT  • <font color="#E52B50">ФC ) 00:31, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 44) Definitely support This is a good user, heaps of quality edits, Good Art's, Did you knows, and a member of heaps of wiki groups. Always polite even when opposed by an editor with shameful and uncivil comments (who clearly is running her own agenda).Bec-Thorn-Berry 04:25, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 45) I considered nominating Steve myself a while ago, but at least two other users, including Sarah, had thought of it first! I'm aware of Steve's work in the mainspace through his involvement with several Australia-related WikiProjects, where he is a very energetic contributor. Steve has also been working to become more involved elsewhere in the project lately to bolster these contributions. I concur with Sarah's assessment above, and think that Steve would make a good admin. --bainer (talk) 06:39, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 46) Support—Contributions look good; nothing of concern turns up. --Paul Erik 11:15, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) Switched to oppose. Despite the tally being at 73/0/1, the candidate still felt the need to pester the one neutral voter and beg for support. Had the candidate made such a post at the start of their nomination, opposes for canvassing would have come flooding in. In the interests of fairness, this candidate should be subjected to just as much unwarranted harshess and borderline personal attacks as any other. Thus opposition is necessary. As is insistence that most of the candidate's contributions are worthless and/or could be done by a monkey – Gurch 13:59, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Gurch, I strongly object to your position above, and I believe that you could certainly have chosen a better set of words. Contacting you and asking for a review of your position doesn't equal to pestering, or badgering, and even less canvassing. No need to be blunt, and definitely no need for such ugly oppose.-- Hús  ö  nd  14:32, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Gurch - I will/would be very happy for anyone to read my post to you here. When/if they do they will note that I did not badger you in any way.  In fact I contacted you so as to give you a gift.  What gift? Well, with respect, your neutral vote came across as a spat with another editor and nothing to do with me.  As I believe all editors are the sum of their edits - I wanted to give you the chance to present yourself in a different way without broadcasting that opportunity too widely. Others will note that I did not disrespect you in any way whatsoever in that request.  Of course you have come across now (unfortunately) in a different way.  To comment on the new Gurch image - well the churlishness is rude but you already know that and have chosen the best way you can to attempt to offend; also the manipulation of the words used on my post to attempt to portray the image of pestering may just be a language difficulty that you have(?); but in truth I most object to the complete untruth in your comment - quite simply I did not beg anything of you (and do not beg anything of any other editor).  I hope you have a good day, good times ahead for the period you stay with Wiki and I offer you at any time in the future my assistance with any article, project etc that you wish - as soon as you come to a realisation of my true value to your needs and the need of Wikipedia. -- VS  talk 22:11, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Neutral
 * Neutral. Candidate's contributions are good, but the comment "Steve is also an effective and experienced vandal fighter." in the nomination is extremely worrying. The candidate also lacks edits to the Wikipedia namespace – Gurch 18:30, 20 June 2007 (UTC) Changed to oppose.
 * Excuse my ignorance, but why is that worrying? -- Phoenix2  (holla) 18:46, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Just channeling my inner SlimVirgin – Gurch 20:41, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Has more WP:NAMESPACE edits than I had when I got the tools, and surely vandal fighting is one of the principal functions of admins. What am I missing?--<b style="color:red;">Anthony.bradbury</b><sup style="color:black;">"talk" 23:32, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I believe that Gurch is being ironic, and his comment is poking fun at the RFA system, rather than a serious misgiving about the candidate. Charlie - talk to me - what I've done  05:51, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh Gurch, when will you learn.... ;) G  1  ggy  Talk/Contribs 07:39, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * You guys should see his neutral comment below, on Greeves' RFa... -- <font color="black" face="Brush Script MT">Dark <font color="#120a8f">Falls''   talk 08:40, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * WHICH ONE I made a comment there, was It me, did I make a bad comment. AAA The suspense its killing me :) --<font color="#B22222"><font color="#B44444">L<font color="#B66666">w<font color="#B88888">a r f  Talk! 12:44, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Neutral, sorry. You are a dedicated, responsible, trustworthy and mature user, but I find insufficient participation in admin-oriented tasks (very sporadic vandalfight only) which leads me to believe that either you have no need for the admin tools, or have not enough experience yet to become an administrator. Usually this would cause me to oppose, but I'll stay neutral per Sarah's nom and my belief that you are an otherwise experienced user and would probably not cause any damage if promoted. -- Hús  ö  nd  14:02, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thought it over and changed to support.-- Hús  ö  nd  00:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The above adminship 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.