Wikipedia talk:Requests for bureaucratship/Wizardman 2

Username:	Wizardman User groups:	oversight, sysop First edit:	Mar 09, 2006 03:44:13 Unique pages edited:	111,820 Average edits per page:	1.62 Live edits:	174,839 Deleted edits:	5,834 Total edits (including deleted):	180,673

Namespace Totals

Article	70162	40.13% Talk	64969	37.16% User	2122	1.21% User talk	5055	2.89% Wikipedia	23423	13.40% Wikipedia talk	1872	1.07% File	308	0.18% File talk	269	0.15% MediaWiki	1	0.00% MediaWiki talk	1	0.00% Template	1786	1.02% Template talk	2965	1.70% Category	869	0.50% Category talk	762	0.44% Portal	126	0.07% Portal talk	10	0.01% Book	25	0.01% Book talk	102	0.06% Namespace Totals Pie Chart Month counts 2006/03	179 	2006/04	271 	2006/05	62 	2006/06	493 	2006/07	74 	2006/08	123 	2006/09	39 	2006/10	88 	2006/11	559 	2006/12	1507 	2007/01	2963 	2007/02	1625 	2007/03	1757 	2007/04	1515 	2007/05	1131 	2007/06	4831 	2007/07	1876 	2007/08	5377 	2007/09	961 	2007/10	2188 	2007/11	628 	2007/12	747 	2008/01	1900 	2008/02	312 	2008/03	3428 	2008/04	2569 	2008/05	3756 	2008/06	3668 	2008/07	1088 	2008/08	1677 	2008/09	797 	2008/10	891 	2008/11	2199 	2008/12	1779 	2009/01	3267 	2009/02	1152 	2009/03	3043 	2009/04	3042 	2009/05	2816 	2009/06	2557 	2009/07	3395 	2009/08	2288 	2009/09	1308 	2009/10	966 	2009/11	1356 	2009/12	2295 	2010/01	1959 	2010/02	3275 	2010/03	2550 	2010/04	2674 	2010/05	1360 	2010/06	2877 	2010/07	8099 	2010/08	3670 	2010/09	4424 	2010/10	3542 	2010/11	3190 	2010/12	2241 	2011/01	1437 	2011/02	2669 	2011/03	1537 	2011/04	1170 	2011/05	1822 	2011/06	2919 	2011/07	2630 	2011/08	3762 	2011/09	6145 	2011/10	4032 	2011/11	3298 	2011/12	760 	2012/01	877 	2012/02	5795 	2012/03	704 	2012/04	618 	2012/05	1228 	2012/06	1796 	2012/07	1444 	2012/08	2351 	2012/09	1338 	2012/10	562 	2012/11	750 	2012/12	660 	2013/01	1254 	2013/02	1796 	2013/03	1069

Question # 42
(since we all know that 42 is the ultimate question)
 * Have you "Sir Wizardman" not stepped on a single toe to which they would come forth and offer an Oppose to this venerable RfB? In all your years upon this most exalted project, pray tell ... how does one manage to go forth and produce such profound wisdom; and yet avoid offending the puling masses?  (is this a bit over the top? ... I'm never quite sure.) — Ched :  ?  01:09, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * There are still five days left, but it is odd that a former Arb has no opposes yet. I'm still holding out hope for a WP:200.  Automatic  Strikeout   ( T  •  C  •  AAPT ) 01:13, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Side discussion moved from "oppose" section

 * LOL. This is a complete revenge oppose. Well, I guess there's always gotta be one, and congrats, you're it!  — Statυs  ( talk,  contribs ) 02:35, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * ...no, it isn't...if never is all he has to offer at an Rfa, then that means in my mind, regardless of who is running for admin, that he has no business being a crat.--MONGO 02:41, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * You can say no all you want, but that's exactly what it is. Apparently, 99.23% of the project disagree with you. Yikes.  — Statυs  ( talk,  contribs ) 02:42, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I can read BTW, but thank you for your concern.  — Statυs  ( talk,  contribs ) 02:44, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * His oppose at my Rfa was the revenge...he didn't even offer an a decent explanation...least here I did.--MONGO 02:45, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * On what? Would you like to provide some diffs in where you and Wizard got in a disagreement which made him oppose your RFA? Your reason for opposing his RFB was him opposing your RFA.  — Statυs  ( talk,  contribs ) 02:47, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, and I think that it's pretty self explanatory, from what I'm seeing.  — Statυs  ( talk,  contribs ) 02:48, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * An explanation that he did not provide reasoning at your requests for adminship if what you would have preferred I believe, but he was probably opposing on the basis of the arguments of other well-established contributors. Either way, the opposing statement sounds like a revenge statement to me as well, so if it is not, I would suggest rewriting the context. However, you should base arguments based on their overall contributions anyway, not just one vote at requests for adminship.  TB randley  02:51, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * "he didn't even offer an a decent explanation...least here I did" Um, nope. There is nothing decent about your explanation. Given the pile-on that you had at your RfA, you should be glad he didn't say much.  Automatic  Strikeout   ( T  •  C  •  AAPT ) 02:53, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * If he wants to oppose he has the right to do that. Disengage please everyone. I shouldn't have said "never" (people can change, after all), I just didn't provide further reasoning as the opposes that preceded mine noted the same concerns I had. Wizardman  02:56, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * What part about the explanation is difficult for you to understand? Do you really think that someone running for crat should vote! "never" at anyone's Rfa? I expect most opposes to have some level of decency in their opposition..I tried to show that here. If I wanted revenge, I might have been a SOB at the FAC nomination he had...you don't seem to get it do you? While my oppose isn't going to keep this person from becoming a crat, consider me the Jeanette Rankin in the room if you wish.--MONGO 02:57, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * This is clearly a revenge !vote. Anyone who can read can see that. But, if Wizardman is not upset about it, we might as well let it drop.  Automatic  Strikeout   ( T  •  C  •  AAPT ) 02:59, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * You obviously cannot read...nor do you understand the level of trust that I expect out of a crat. I cannot trust anyone to be a crat if a never vote on anyone's Rfa is all he can offer.--MONGO 03:05, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I can read perfectly well. However, I don't understand why you thought it was necessary to get revenge against one of Wikipedia's most respected contributors by ruining a perfect RfB. If you can't trust Wizardman, I'm not sure who you can trust.  Automatic  Strikeout   ( T  •  C  •  AAPT ) 03:10, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Obviously he can read if he's replying to you. It appears that Wizard was right with his "never" statement. You're making it quite clear why "never" was the right choice of words. You're not helping your case any further, you're proving his statement to be right.  — Statυs  ( talk,  contribs ) 03:12, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * What statement? Here I offered an oppose statement on a nomination for a position of much greater responsibility and trust than admin. Even above he claims "people can change, after all"...no apparently he can't...for even here and now, this is supposed to be some reassurance for his ugly "never" comment. Maybe I should have simply left Oppose as I did at his last run for crat...which is worse...Never or Oppose?--MONGO 03:56, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * You're giving evidence of why "Never" was appropriate. Oh, wow, thanks for pointing out that you also opposed his last RFB. Your reason last time, which was 5 years ago, was because he took a break from Wikipedia? This just keeps getting more and more interesting...  — Statυs  ( talk,  contribs ) 04:00, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * In addition, "for even here and now". What did you want from him? A big apology for "Never"ing your RFA months ago?  — Statυs  ( talk,  contribs ) 04:02, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * His last Rfb failed...was I wrong then? I might be wrong now in your opinion, but I cannot support for crat anyone whose only offer at any Rfa is "never"....it is as simple as that.--MONGO 04:16, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Guys. Time to stop this right here. Mongo has a talk page; it's better if you continue with it there. Regards. — ΛΧΣ  21  03:15, 24 March 2013 (UTC)