Memory Beta:Requests for adminship/2007 archive


 * ''For information on Wiki Administrators, see the Wikipedia article.

To nominate someone, set up a new section for them and use their talk page to notify them. Self-nominations are allowed. After seven days, an admin will evaluate the supporting and opposing votes, the discussion, and the need for admins and determine whether the situation merits adminship.

List of Current Admins

 * 8of5
 * Chops
 * Emperorkalan
 * Lieutenant Ayala
 * The doctor
 * note: All admins currently have bureacrat status as well.

VortaExpert
Accepted: N/A

Discussion
This user has only been active on the user for less than 24 hours. As an anonymous user, he disruptively vandalized pages, and was insulting of other members. While he has began to make some additions, these have included copied articles from Memory Alpha. At the moment I oppose, but if the user can become an excellent contributor, then I may change my vote. --The Doctor 22:19, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * What the Doc said, and it will take some truely supurb work to make up fr the mess caused by this user so far. -- 8of5 22:41, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I have repeatedly heard people accuse me of vandalizing. What did i vandalize?  Putting up information that you dont find correct is not vandalism.VortaExpert 22:35, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * The information you put up isn't the issue. Between 30 January and 9 February, the IP address (209.52.240.134) that you use was listed as blanking (vandalizing) several articles including, Jean-Luc Picard, James T. Kirk, Nanietta Bacco, Star Trek Nemesis, and 1966.  That is why you (or the IP number) was banned twice. --The Doctor 22:40, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I did not blank any pages. This IP is in a busy office building so perhaps someone else was doing it. I did however post Vorta info many times which was deleted. But, I dont think that is vandalism. I sincerely wanted to expand on "underdeveloped" characters to make this a better Wiki.VortaExpert 22:43, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * That being the case, then I apologise. However, I stand by the point that you haven't been a part of the community for very long, and have yet to make any substantial additions to the wiki.  When you do, I will happily support your request.  --The Doctor 22:46, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I have tried to make substantial additions but my beginning contributions were all erased. You make it hard to develop this wiki when you erase things that are legitimate expansion of the universe.VortaExpert 22:47, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Gee we just keep going around-and-around with this don't we, I believe I'm beginning to feel quite dizzy. --The Doctor 22:49, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Your continued inability to understand why your contributions were removed only acts against you, you clearly do understand the purpose of this wiki. -- 8of5 22:50, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I am dissapointed you wont support me 8of5. I have always been good to you.


 * Actually, Vorta, putting up information that it is against the rules to put up is vandalism. I can't support that kind of behavior. -- Captain M.K.B. 23:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Thus far, Vorta has yet to contribute anything sourced to a licensed work, his only positive contributions within the scope of this wiki have been cut-and-pastes from Memory Alpha and what amounts to minor housekeeping. Furthermore, he's directly stated that his intent for having admin priviledges would be to change the purpose of this wiki. He's repeatedly accused multiple admins of vandalism and not understanding the very purpose of wikis, yet as of this morning he didn't even know how to sign his own posts.

It is vitally important that new contributors be cut a lot of slack because this mode of communication is ripe for misunderstanding and miscommunication (just ask Stripey), but usually once two-way interaction starts the problems are alleviated and the new peoples' posts are increasingly "on board" with longer-time contributors. That has not been happening here, which only serves to fuel suspicions that what we're dealing with is not a "clueless newbie" but a deliberate crank-yanking disruptor.

So enough of this "Vorta for admin" crap. What I'd like to see is a real, original, on-topic, and sourced contribution. And then another one. And another, and another. In fact, anything to indicate that the real question shouldn't be "Should VortaExpert be banned permanently?"--Emperorkalan 02:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) VortaExpert 22:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC) Can't support your own nomination. --The Doctor 22:19, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) --The Doctor 22:19, 27 March 2007 (UTC) (Provisionally)
 * 2) --8of5 22:41, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) --Captain M.K.B. 23:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) --Emperorkalan 02:34, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Captainmike
Accepted: N/A

Although Captainmike has only been here for a short time, I feel he has made some excellent changes to the wiki, and took great steps in improving the quality of our database. --The Doctor 22:20, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Discussion
Thank you for the validation, Doc -- I keep trying to do my best getting this database looking nice and organized, and I appreciate you noticing. -- Captain M.K.B. 16:15, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I held my tongue when the Doc made the nomination, I felt Mike was to new and didn't have a proper understanding of system here. He has since proven himself an excellent contributor and clearly wishes to build this wiki to it's full potential, an ideal candidate for adminship. -- 8of5 22:41, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey, since you oppose me, guess what? I oppose you. Thanks, Vorta. -- Captain M.K.B. 23:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) --The Doctor 22:20, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) --8of5 22:41, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) VortaExpert 22:44, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Tough Little Ship
Accepted: N/A

I've been contributing here for around nine months and am enjoying myself immensely. I thought I may as well give some something back. I'm an administrator over at Memory Alpha already and consider myself to write good articles. -- Tough Little Ship 23:46, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Discussion
Could you give us some examples of what you think are your best articles? --Seventy 01:41, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I recognize your name as that of a solid contributor from other wikias. -- Captain M.K.B. 00:21, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) --Captain M.K.B. 00:20, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) VortaExpert 22:44, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

The doctor
Accepted: Yes

The doctor has more than 3500 edits, but I'm nominating him because of his letter to the existing admins. He did as much about the problem as he could, so why not give him the power to do more? --Chops 01:26, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Agreed with Chops; (and with the Doctor). Initiative is sometimes half the battle, but his contributions seems to add up as well. - Lieutenant Ayala 22:56, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) --Chops 01:26, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) --8of5 01:47, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) --Emperorkalan 01:54, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) --Lieutenant Ayala 22:56, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

8of5
Accepted: Yes

Self nomination, I've been around here a while and whilst I've been abit busy in the real world lately I am a frequent contributor and would love to be able to help in other areas. -- 8of5 01:47, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) --The Doctor 01:50, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) --Emperorkalan 01:54, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Turtletrekker
Accepted: No

I consider Turtletrekker one of this wiki's main contributors and someone who has a good idea of how the site runs and should be run so feel (s)he(?) would make an excellent member of admin. -- 8of5 01:47, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Discussion
I appreciate the nomination and support very much, but time considerations, which have severly cut into my wiki time, force me to decline. Thank you very much all the same. --Turtletrekker 08:27, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) --The Doctor 01:50, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) --Emperorkalan 01:54, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Emperorkalan
Accepted: Yes

Emperor is one of our main contributors, a leave head, and a sensible person who knows how this place works. A perfect candidate. -- 8of5 23:51, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Agreed. One of our best contributors, and can always be relied on to keep us on the straight and narrow. --The Doctor 23:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * In the words of William Riker, "Yes, absolutely, I do indeed concur, wholeheartedly." --TimPendragon 00:27, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Gosh, a guy could get a swelled head around here :) I'll help where I can.--Emperorkalan 02:33, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) --8of5 23:51, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) --The Doctor 23:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) --TimPendragon 00:27, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) --Sci 01:51 5 JAN 2006 UTC