Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Administrator/DragonFire1024 3

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.

DragonFire1024 (Third nom)

Vote tally:(8/8/1)

DF is a Enthusiastic, active contributor. Has a large knowledge of policy, and has proven this in many cases, and is a incredibly persistent contributer. Covers stories nobody else covers, lots of OR, works very hard Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 12:17, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I accept this nomination :) Jason Safoutin 12:19, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support. --MrMiscellanious (talk) – 18:57, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Jacques Divol 20:03, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Frankie Roberto 20:57, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This user is an excellent contributor and an asset to Wikinews. However, I believe that his understanding of policy is poor, and I have serious doubts about his ability to apply policy in an unbiased way, and therefore I do not trust him to be an administrator. - Borofkin 23:20, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not enough trust. --vonbergm 06:00, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by that? I'm just a little bit confused. Flipbaywood 20:28, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support Great asset to wikinews Cartman02au (Talk)(AU Portal) 06:06, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose After last mess when he was involved in persuing Messedrocker to block me and his die hard support of mrm:s actions, how wrong and confrontative they sometimes be, it should be obvious for everyone that Dragonfire is not suitable for Wikinews administration. USpov and 'Irc cabal' is strong enough among admin here without him. international 08:51, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I find this comment seriously degrading, personally. There's one thing to oppose based on actions, but to oppose because you disagree with an alleged bias which you don't even have the strength to prove is just, in my eyes, a very weak argument. Obviously, this user above is not looking out for the best intentions of the wiki for making that type of argument, and is instead voting for his personal preference of users to become administrators. --MrMiscellanious (talk) – 01:35, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment on comment: *Huomourus mode off* Now, who are you to tell that I am not looking out for the best intentions of the Wikinews. What a crap. And you of all here is not famous for motivating yourself. You and Dragon found each other for sure. Maybe you are to blame for telling Dragon how to act here. Corrupting good Wikinewsie material...Bad! *Good mode on, for rest of weekend*

Comment. I've only known DragonFire1024 to be a good editor via the IRC channel. Obviously, there have been some worries about him enacting policy. Might I suggest that DragonFire1024 request adminship with the caveat that he can't make any blocks for the first three months or so, at which time he has to make a second request to try and receive blocking privileges? Ral315 (talk) 17:27, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
unfourtanatly oppose. Your a great contributer, don't take this the wrong way, but I share similiar concerns as Brofkin. When I've observed you in a dispute with other people, I've noticed you seem to have a tendency to not listen to them, no matter what they say. You seem to not to try and resolve the problem, or figure out what their issue is, but instead just repeat your point. I'm sorry, as it saddends me very much, as you're a fantastic contributor, but I can't support this. However Ral315's idea is acceptable to me, or a condition that you can't block any user you're in conflict with (by conflict, I mean argument, not deleting a page, like the world's ending in aprox. 10 minutes or similiar non-sense, but actually having an argument with someone (ala you and neut)) , even if they're WoW, until such a time as Ral suggests. 20:06, 12 May 2006 (UTC) User:Bawolff
Support. Oppose. Jason has made so many excellent contributions to Wikinews, but his response to Doldrums' vote below is unacceptable for an admin. Flipbaywood 20:28, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose; its hard to oppose a contributor with so much spunk and energy; but the maturity level and objectivity are just not where they need to be, DF's blind(imo) allegiance to MrM(imo) is certainly not something that works to the benefit of the project. Neutralizer 22:28, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, user does not have my trust. - Amgine | ^{talk en.WN} 22:36, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Instead of just stating you don't trust him, I think it would be respectable to state why you don't trust this user to be a sysop on this wiki. --MrMiscellanious (talk) – 01:35, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, MrM, Amgine's comment "user does not have my trust" is straightforward and to the point; any elaboration could be construed as a personal attack and it may be best to not be pushing for more details from anyone if you really want to help DF get his fingers on the big buttons. I suggest we just let the contributors all vote without so much extra comments about each vote. Neutralizer 03:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I don't want to hear from you. --MrMiscellanious (talk) – 19:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Others do want to hear from you. -Edbrown05 05:59, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support I dont now if I vote when I nomed him, but I trust this user, Ral's proposal looks good through 00:09, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Support. How can I not support someone this enthusiastic about WN? He has a love for WN and the guts to 'get the story.' He definitely has passion, which in its extreme form can take the form of the overzealousness and stubbornness that concerns others. As long as he stays on this side (and doesn't cross over to the "dark side"--heh heh), I think he'd make a great admin. Aloha, KeithH (talk) 07:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nyarlathotep 11:17, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain --Brian McNeil / ^talk 18:53, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Can't hurt Joann 02:54, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose DF is an enthusiastic and prolific contributor, but i think he needs more experience with and better understanding of policies and wiki functioning (eg. [1]) before assuming admin responsibilities. Doldrums 08:39, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So I make one mistake? Im not perfect. Jason Safoutin 19:51, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support Albeit with some reservations. PVJ 13:59, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of the Admin's page or the talk page of the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.