Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Guanaco

~ 1950 edits, user since March 1. Seems not unreasonable, interested in process (lots of listing at Speedy deletions, Wikipedia:Images for deletion, dealing with user page redirects of vandals pretending to be Jimbo, vandalism reversion, replacing stub notices with the proper mediawiki message, various fixes, other useful tasks. - Fennec 01:53, May 6, 2004 (UTC)

I originally accepted at 03:15, 6 May 2004, but I've just now decided to move this nomination thing here myself. It was originally commented out on my talk page by Fennec when he asked me whether I would accept a nomination. Guanaco 23:57, 8 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry not to have noticed this earlier... I've been a trifle more busy than I anticipated of late :D - Fennec 14:35, May 9, 2004 (UTC)

Support:

1. Fennec 01:53, May 6, 2004 (UTC) -- wouldn't hurt if he used the edit summary box just a little more, though :)
2. Dysprosia 00:08, 9 May 2004 (UTC) good work at Speedy deletions, so would be able to take care of things himself...[reply]
3. Here for too months, and I've seen good work. Meelar 21:31, 9 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
4. Good contributor and I am not sure 3000 edits is a fair or often applied metric for adminship. GrazingshipIV 21:36, May 9, 2004 (UTC)
5. Masses of vandalism control, I thoroughly approve and support Guanaco's nomination. --Stormie 10:54, May 10, 2004 (UTC)
6. Angela. 14:52, May 10, 2004 (UTC)
7. Support - but recommend Guanaco follows the recommendation to provide edit summaries. - Tεxτurε 18:47, 11 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
8. Support. Wikipedia is not Kingturtle's exclusive country club. --"DICK" CHENEY 19:38, 11 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
9. Seems to understand the criteria for speedy deletion, at least. anthony (see warning)
10. Maximus Rex 04:01, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
11. What I've seen from him is good. Helpful in watching recent changes. Isomorphic 04:03, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
12. Michael Snow 20:03, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
13. Meelar 15:03, 13 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
14. UtherSRG 15:06, 13 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
15. MykReeve 21:11, 13 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
16. Jim Regan 15:23, 15 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
17. Absolutely. Good work with VfD.--Beelzebubs 17:04, 15 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

1. Not here long enough. Not enough edits. Kingturtle 20:26, 9 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
2. Too new. --Wik 20:32, May 9, 2004 (UTC)
3. 172 02:56, 13 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral:

1. Danny 02:59, 13 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: