Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/RN

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.

RN

[edit]

Final (64/1/0) ended 03:37 October 12, 2005 (UTC)

RN (talk · contribs) – My great friend, Ryan Norton, has been here since March of 05. I welcomed him myself a few months back, and he has nearly 3000 edits. Outside of his wikilife he runs WikiServer, so I think he's familiar with Wiki as a whole. He has a good enough grasp on policy, and he's always friendly to users. He is active on several articles, and even has an FA. He also has 911 edits in the Wikipedia space. I really see no reason to oppose such a fine editor. Redwolf24 (talk) 00:12, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Thank you! This was most unexpected - I accept :). Well, and I'd like to point out that while my first edit was back in march, my edits have only really been active a little over two months :). I'd also like to thank a few people, including Everyking, Redwolf, and anyone else who I forgot for helping me be a better editor and teaching me admin skills :). Ryan Norton T | @ | C 00:39, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Support

  1. No big deal :D Redwolf24 (talk) 00:13, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Extreme Thug Style Support He deserves it --JAranda | yeah 00:36, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Everyking 00:49, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  4. OMGS TEH ÜBER ROFLCOPTER SUPPORT. Another nomination I got beaten to doing! RN would be a wonderful admin. ~~ N (t/c) 00:54, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Hey, I welcomed this guy. Though I'll wait for fuddlemark to pass the bar and then two of my welcomees will be admins :o Redwolf24 (talk) 00:58, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support. Friday (talk) 00:56, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support Seems to be a talented potential admin.--MONGO 00:58, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  7. EXTREME VANILLA COKE SUPPORT! Thought he was one. Ral315 WS 01:07, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Extreme Mexican Support. You were part of the group that started the witty support votes, so let's see what everyone else comes up with. Outside of that, you deserved the mop and the flamethrower a long time ago... Titoxd(?!?) 01:21, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support! Robert 04:15, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support Of course. Molotov (talk) 05:15, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  11. support: Generally collaborative with tolerant approach, but feisty enough to express contentious points - not a bad combination. Ombudsman 07:14, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support. Excellent contributor. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:33, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Cool. --JuntungWu 11:17, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support CambridgeBayWeather 11:19, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support. A reliable vandal-fighter. Owen× ☎ 14:15, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support, every day of the year, every year. Ryan's an awesome editor and an even greater person. (Is this the part were I should say "I thought he was an admin already?") -- Shauri smile! 14:51, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Strong Support, you know, I was actually considering nominating him myself, but Reds beat me to it:) →Journalist >>talk<< 15:25, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    I welcomed him, and I told him not too long after I did so I would one day nominate him an admin, so its more like you were gonna try to steal from me, confess your sins!. ;) Redwolf24 (talk) 22:49, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, OK, I confess. :)→Journalist >>talk<< 20:46, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support A fine editor. Marskell 15:31, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support Private Butcher 19:14, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support excellent Wikipedia presence. -DDerby-(talk) 19:23, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Extreme Support Payback He voted for me, and he definately deserves adminship more than I do. [Insert Random Clint Eastwood quote about payback here] Karmafist 20:39, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support, human shield. --fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 22:00, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Without reservation. (And we should really make it more clear when users have a different signature than their username; I didn't recognize "RN") -- Essjay · Talk 22:53, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support, without silly modifiers. — Dan | Talk 23:20, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Extreme Athiest Support. You've been very nice to me in the past, so here's my support. :-) --WikiFanaticTalk Contribs 18:52, 5 October 2005 (CDT)
  26. Support. Absolutely. A fine editor. --Blackcap | talk 00:21, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support Great editor--Rogerd 02:27, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support. El_C 02:44, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Extreme Why The Heck Aren't You An Admin Already Support! Acetic'Acid 05:51, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  30. ZOMG DONATE TO WIKIPEDIA SUPPORT --Merovingian (t) (c) 10:48, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support --Allen3 talk 11:56, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | WS 13:26, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support, definitely. --JoanneB 15:19, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support, SqueakBox 16:51, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  35. APOYO ESPAÑOL EXTREMO DE LA ESPERANZA FireFox 17:21, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  36. No way ...am I not going to give him my support. --Celestianpower hablamé 20:58, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support. He's friendly, he's polite, he's well-spoken, and he seems to be positively involved with several aspects of the workings of Wikipedia. This place is better for having him around. - Brian Kendig 02:20, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Support. Looks all very good to me. Shanes 02:27, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Extreme (insert witty comment here) support!. When he started working on the Autism article, it was tagged for cleanup and full of non-NPOV nonsense written by random anons. It took him just a couple weeks or so to bring it up to FA standard. As Ryan himself mentioned in another RfA, we have some great candidates lately. sɪzlæk [ +t, +c, +m ] 03:04, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Support without any frills. I've seen him around a lot, and I've never seen him do anything objectionable. Tuf-Kat 03:31, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Furry Alien Support Alf melmac 10:44, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Support. Excellent contributor. *drew 11:28, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Support. Don't see any reason not to support. Carbonite | Talk 12:55, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Support. --Fire Star 15:52, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support. Though I have yet to have any direct dealings with Mr. RN, I see a lot of good reasons to vote AYE and none for opposing. --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 17:49, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support, as I check this person of my list of people to nominate in the future. Hall Monitor 19:11, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Supportize. Had a bit of a head on collision with this gent. He kept his head on, which probably means he was already ready to be an admin at that point in time. Kim Bruning 19:28, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Support. I don't think I have ever visited this page before (happened upon it while wandering around), but I'd just like to say that I have had wonderful interactions with RN. He is amiable, enthusiastic in the face of criticism, and has demonstrated a firm understanding of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Extraordinary Machine 21:31, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  49. David Gerard 09:38, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  50. golden support vote for WP:PR and WP:FAC patrol. =Nichalp «Talk»= 11:03, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Support. encephalon 11:14, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Support. --Bhadani 14:11, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  53. 'Support Lots of valuable contributions. Banes 16:11, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  54. Support another good hand aboard. Denni☯ 23:06, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  55. Support yet another great editor who should get admin. Jtkiefer T | @ | C ----- 04:31, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  56. Support Zzyzx11 (Talk) 22:38, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  57. Support of course you...you...you...hydnjo talk 01:45, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  58. Vastustan jyrkästi tämän käyttäjän nimittämistä ylläpitäjäksi. Siitä ei koituisi muuta kuin harmia kun muut joutuisivat korjaamaan hänen väärinkäytöstensä jälkiä. (I'm counting on no one understanding this anyway...) — JIP | Talk 07:46, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  59. Support Just realised who he is. Dlyons493 Talk 19:45, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  60. Support because "RN" is an abbreviation for registered nurse and ... um ... uh ... Look! A canoe!!!  BD2412 talk 20:59, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  61. Support I truly thought he was one and yeah, I like his initials. ;) Maltmomma (chat) 15:50, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  62. Support; seems like a reasonable and dedicated user. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 19:01, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  63. Support; I thought I voted support here already, but I must not have saved it! Anyway. Ryan has been very helpful and seems to be dedicated to the betterment of Wikipedia. ManekiNeko | Talk 21:04, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  64. Support, good contributions, many contributions, Rhetoricalwater 23:31, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  65. Support. Thought he was one already. Always keeps cool under pressure.--inksT 01:03, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  66. Support. --hydnjo talk

Oppose

  1. --Boothy443 | comhrá 06:42, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Do you have any reasons for Opposing? Because I think it would be nice to atleast give a reason for opposing, unless you already did somewhere, and I never saw it. Private Butcher 03:25, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Boothy has his criteria; I seem to remember him saying something to Acetic Acid about why he votes the way he does somewhere. Anyway, he doesn't have to have a reason, he's entitled to vote however he likes. I know what you mean though, it is nice to have reasons. --Blackcap | talk 04:34, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    I've seen Boothy post his criteria before, and I'm puzzled because RN meets it easily. - Brian Kendig 00:49, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    IIRC, Boothy likes em to be here for 9 months. Redwolf24 (talk) 04:35, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

Comments

Questions for the candidate
A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? (Please read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.)
A. Well, I spend a good deal of time reverting vandalism and linkspam. Also, I'd like to help with the backlog, such as requested moves etc. I've learned a lot from other admins too about how to deal with things, and eventually I'd like to close out AfDs too as I'm rather active there (I know its bad form to close ones you've participated in too). Speedy delete would good too as in the past I've tagged some articles with it. I've also been active in tagging unsourced images. Ryan Norton T | @ | C 00:39, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. That's a tough one. I've did a lot of rewrites to a lot of articles. For example, Microsoft I completely rewrote many parts and filled in the gaps in the history, got rid of the unsubstantiated rumors etc.. I also worked on Ashlee Simpson and the autobiography album which both were failed FACs (the latter being quite close). I and a couple others rewrote Asperger's syndrome and saved it from a FARC also. Sometimes though its the simple things that are more fun - for example just the other day I rewrote Saturated fat due to POV issues. Ryan Norton T | @ | C 00:39, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
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 how will you deal with it in the future?
A. Sure - I like working on contentious articles like George W. Bush etc. so you're bound to get stressed out every now and then :) - I just take a short wikibreak from the articles that are contentious when that happens. I'm not saying I'm perfect though, I'm sure I said something I regret... I also got blocked by User:Kim Bruning during the VfD-->AfD move in a rather unfortunate incident (An edit war where Kim was removing comments from the talk page that resembled "voting" of VfD and I put them back (not a 3RR violation, but most likely a 1RR one :)) - I think we worked out our differences quite well in the incident, and I'm hoping he comes back from his wikibreak soon). Also, just for the record I would not have "blocked back" in that incident :). All in all though, its been a pleasure working with the editors here and especially those at peer review and FAC who have given me invaluable help in becoming a better editor! Ryan Norton T | @ | C 00:39, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The above 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 article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/RN&oldid=1126796352"