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

Bucketsofg

Final (105/2/1) ended 05:08, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Bucketsofg (talk · contribs) – This is a self-nomination (a light-hearted version of which can be seen, and heard, here.) I've been editing since July 2005, but only intermittently until mid-February, when I got the 'bug'. I'm closing in on 5000 edits, though many are reverts of vandalism. I edit quite widely: I've contributed to a few Canadian subjects, created a handful of ballet stubs, and have been quite involved in the last couple months with various articles related to Polynesia (on which see question 2, below). My contribution to the project in community matters has mostly been in vandalism-patrolling, though I have spells where I participate in WP:AFD and here at WP:RFA. I am primarily motivated towards the adminship for vandal-fighting (see below in my answers). Bucketsofg✐ 03:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bucketsofg (talk • contribs) .

Support

  1. Support Strong amount of edits, wide variety of work, no reason to vote for this Rfa.Thetruthbelow(talk) 05:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support as per Thetruthbelow. I think I've chased some of the same vandals. Like his answer to Question 2--an AfD from last march :) Dlohcierekim 06:12, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support he is the very model of a modern wikipedian -- Samir (the scope) धर्म 06:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support Wiki-atitude seems to be well balanced, edit level since feb is very good. I am wating to see the number of references / quotes from the The RfA Candidate's Song that make it into this RfA.--blue520 07:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support. Very experienced user. DarthVader 09:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support, of course. - Mailer Diablo 09:59, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Oppose You have no Portal talk edits!! Oh well, I like your song so Support ;). --Srikeit(talk ¦ ✉) 10:25, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support - Per above. Good work! Afonso Silva 10:58, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support - lack of MediaWiki edits does trouble me, along with lack of contribution to the Bulgarian Wikinews. On balance, however, I regretfully don't see you abusing the powers so I guess I have to support. --Celestianpower háblame 11:34, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support.  Grue  11:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support I like your attitude. --Tone 12:18, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support. The song alone would probably have earned my support to tell the truth. :) Rje 12:37, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support Great vandal fighter (often beats me to a revert) who will make good and wise use of the old mop. Plus that song, of course. Gwernol 12:54, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support per Rje. Phenomenal song... also good edits and whatnot ;) Hoopydink 13:26, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  15. Strong support - a great editor with more than enough experience to becmoe an admin. —Mets501talk 14:14, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support. Yet Another Wikipedian that loves your song (YAWTLYS; pronounced as yawt-lys). __earth (Talk) 14:57, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support. BTW, I like the song. Please also see my comments on the talk page. --Bhadani 15:23, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support--Jusjih 15:49, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support per above.—G.He 15:51, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support --Emc² (CONTACT ME) 15:59, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support -- will make an excellent admin -- No Guru 16:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support --ForestH2
  23. I have to break with the pack of rabid filk fans here.... I'll only support if you promise not to ever sing that song in public. Not even at Wikimania late at night in the bar... Excellent candidate other than that (although you gotta work on those portal talkspace edits man!). ++Lar: t/c 18:34, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support -- DVD+ R/W 18:47, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support, meets my requirements. :-) -gadfium 18:51, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  26. ((Cliché #1)) support. RadioKirk talk to me 19:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support JoshuaZ 19:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support Will be a good admin. --Siva1979Talk to me 19:45, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Another Cliché #1 support! -- getcrunkjuicecontribs 19:53, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support - well rounded user who can offer WP more from having the the buttons -- Tawker 20:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support He has fantastic motivation to revert vandalism and will wield the admin-mop quite nicely. Cowman109Talk 21:25, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support Even if he weren't a stupendous editor, his amazing song alone would win my support. One cannot sing of Wikipedia unless one knows Wikipedia very well. :) Xoloz 21:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support. We need more incremento-eventuo-darwikian-delusionist admins. :o) EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 21:56, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support, excellent editor. Deizio talk 22:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Support, This guy is no stranger to me, I take his requests all the time on WP:AIV with the security of knowing that 'his' vandals have been properly warned. -Obli (Talk)? 22:26, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support per Obli. Royboycrashfan 22:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support. When I made a stupid comment on an RfA a few weeks ago, Bucketsofg was the first on my case. We need admins who hold people accountable like that. WerdnaTc@bCmLt 22:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  38. I'll be joining the chorus here. Redux 23:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support - strong vandal fighter (saw him in action) abakharev 00:35, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Support per several above, but overall excellent editor and will certainly make good use of the tools --Deville (Talk) 02:04, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Weak support. Active for just over three months (barely made it). Oran e (t) (c) (e) 02:43, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Support, as per everyone. Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 02:56, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Support.™ --Rory096 03:10, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Pile-on support. --TantalumTelluride♪ 03:33, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support per above. —Khoikhoi 04:09, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support because without his support and encouragement I wouldn't have grown as a Wikipedian and the Polynesian mythology articles would not have improved 100% over the last few months. Plus, a sense of humour and a musical besides. Tangihia mai rā, e te manu tioriori! Kahuroa 05:39, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Support. Did good work on the Polynesian mythology debacle. Grutness...wha? 05:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Support, great user. --Terence Ong 05:59, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Support Friendly user, wastes time making interesting song - what more could you want? Brisvegas 07:30, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  50. SONG^H^H^H^HSTRONG SUPPORT  ALKIVAR™ 07:47, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Support, and immediately promote to Director of Singing. Good candidate, fine potential admin and will wield the mop harmoniously. --Cactus.man ✍ 09:36, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Support - user meets my criteria. Use the mop well--Looper5920 10:17, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Support merely because of the editor's amazing little poem, "The RfA Candidate's Song."--Alabamaboy 13:49, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  54. Support Have never seen his name in a negative context. Thatcher131 14:06, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  55. I say, no better candidate has ever sought the mop-pery! - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 14:06, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  56. Support. A good candidate for the mop! I had to check twice to be sure I had not already voted on this one. Kukini 16:02, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  57. Support. Hope you scrape it! haz (user talk) 17:06, 15 May 2006
  58. Buckets of support over here. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 17:56, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  59. Support per nom, good interaction with users, and that song that's going to be in my head all afternoon. --Elkman - (talk) 20:02, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  60. Pile on support. But I can't not vote after hearing that song. -- JamesTeterenko 22:59, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  61. Extra Support. I used to make parodies of songs when I was younger. Maybe when I get nominated for Adminship in perhaps late 2007 or 2008, I should make an RfA parody myself. By the way, did you play the song yourself or was a MIDI file playing as you sung? (Update: He told me a MIDI was playing as he sung.) Nevertheless, it brought out a good chuckle! I like to see more funny and light-hearted admins in the future. --Shultz IV 00:27, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  62. Support. Unfortunately, he already ruined his chances of getting unanymous support, but we can still try to get this one into the WP:100. AmiDaniel (talk) 03:02, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  63. Support - I've been brainwashed into support by the song. --Philosophus T 04:43, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  64. I wish I had thought of doing an RfA-related parody song SUPPORT. (I can sing, too, you know. =]) —Nightstallion (?) 05:58, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  65. Support. — Matt Crypto 07:34, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  66. Barrels of support! --Ixfd64 07:36, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  67. Support --Canderous 10:42, 16 May 2006 (UTC) Talk[reply]
  68. Support - Liberatore(T) 12:17, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  69. Support - Longbow4u 12:24, 16 May 2006 (UTC) With tears laughing.[reply]
  70. Seeing the humor in the process is a good sign. --Michael Snow 16:22, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  71. Support obvious reasons. ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 16:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  72. Support - Chocolate mousse. Sorry, totally random! Just like that weird button on the calculator that always gives a random deciaml... sorry... Kilo-Lima|(talk) 17:10, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  73. support this one and great song too really loved it Yuckfoo 18:06, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  74. Support, I thought I had already voted here! Phaedriel ♥ tell me - 20:53, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  75. Super-duper support, I've seen this user around and he's proven himself to be an extremely useful contributor to Wikipedia. --→Buchanan-Hermit™..Talk to Big Brother 22:23, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  76. Support Will make a fine admin TigerShark 00:23, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  77. Another support.--Kungfu Adam (talk) 01:39, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  78. Support Rapid response to my question! FloNight talk 02:31, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  79. Support per all the above. :) Metamagician3000 03:42, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  80. Support. Involvement in AIAV is good, the 1000+ edits to Wikipedia space is also a good sign. Suggestion, avoid using edit summaries to send messages (eg, "Please do not compromise the integrity of pages"), use talk pages instead. Other than that, goferit. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 04:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  81. Support, and suggest making Poet Laureate for Wikipedia. Smurrayinchester 07:11, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  82. Support, will make a good singer^H^H^Hadmin. Kimchi.sg 13:31, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  83. Support --Jay(Reply) 19:33, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  84. Jaranda wat's sup 20:49, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  85. Unlikely to abuse admin tools. Christopher Parham (talk) 21:54, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  86. Support. Kusma (討論) 01:25, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  87. Support per most of the above. -- Jjjsixsix (t)/(c) @ 04:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  88. Aiyoh! Support lah! Simple as that. Dun pray pray ah!-- 陈鼎翔 贡献 Chat with Tdxiang on IRC! 10:51, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  89. Nice song, btw. --Andy123 talk 11:59, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  90. Support DGX 16:37, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  91. Support - not to pile on, but... BD2412 T 19:43, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  92. Support --All in 22:00, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  93. Singing Bucket Support. -Ambuj Saxena (talk) 06:52, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  94. Support - I know how frustrating the WP:AIV lag can be :) (Plus having an admin with your sense of humor can't be a bad thing!) Stollery 11:39, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  95. Support. Fine answers and excellent song. Valentinian (talk) 13:26, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  96. Support. Looks good. — Rebelguys2 talk 18:00, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  97. Jump on Top of Pile Support. Don't nobody move- the fall from up here could kill me. Badgerpatrol 21:00, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  98. Support per all above, despite joke below. joturner 22:07, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  99. Strong Support Good user, going to be a great admin! One more for support and you're in WP:100!! The Halo (talk) 01:07, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  100. support. Love the song. Semperf 00:26, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  101. 101st Support per all above. —CuiviénenT|C, Sunday, 21 May 2006 @ 01:40 UTC
  102. Support Joviality is no crime. Rama's Arrow 03:43, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  103. Support Joe I 04:28, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  104. What the Hell, I haven't Already? Support I'm convinced I did... I mean, I was supposed to be the only non-sock of all of Bucket's socks to support. Drat. Master of Puppets Your will is mine. 04:38, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  105. Support. We need more funny songs. -Will Beback 04:39, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Moral Oppose. I know that I'm not allowed to "vote", but this is my 5000th post and I wanted to do something silly. I was going to leave a ((test)) template on Jimbo's page for this, but someone beat me to it! (Only a few hours ago, here.) Voting against my own RfA was the next stupidest thing I could think of. Bucketsofg✐ 21:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my oppose in light of the complaint listed below. Bucketsofg✐
I'd advise the closing 'crat to discount this oppose, it reeks of bad faith. ;) —Nightstallion (?) 05:58, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
a ((welcome)) on Jimbo's page might have been a nice touch :) Grutness...wha? 08:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Oppose I just can't tolerate silly jokes such as voting against yourself for admin. If you don't want to be an admin withdraw your nomination. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liberal2006 (talk • contribs)
    Note: this user has only around 10 edits, almost all about RfA-s. --Tone 21:02, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose. I am shocked and appalled and petrified and mortified. Adminship is not a joke. Anwar 22:55, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    How is it shocking and appalling and petrifying and mortifying. The guy made a small joke, don't tell me there's a policy saying Wikipedia:No Sense of Humour for Adminstrators. Nobleeagle (Talk) 09:13, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Remember WP:BEANS everyone... --Celestianpower háblame 14:06, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That would be one huge bean to stuff up your nose. ;) --Srikeit(talk ¦ ✉) 15:17, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

  1. Comment - I don't want to make any enemies here, but he's been here only since 2005. There are others users who have been here since 2003 or 2004. I mean, I see all these nomination replies of nearly 99% "support" so, for the sake of Wikipedia and keeping the adminship as a privileged position, (I myself am not an administrator), I am neutral on this. (Wikimachine 18:37, 14 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
    A commonly quoted aphorism here on RfA, and one that should hold true, is "Adminship is no big deal." It should not be a privileged position as we need as many administrators as we can get to maintain our ever-growing encyclopedia. (A "privileged position" is more like being a Bureaucrat or a member of the ArbCom.) —CuiviénenT|C, Monday, 15 May 2006 @ 20:09 UTC
    Will support once more edits have been made in Portal talk namespace.Change to support.-gadfium 05:59, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment Not to be too rude about this, but how important do you think Portal talk space is to a candidate? How does not having portal talk space edits in anyway hamper your ability to judge a candidate or indicate a problematic lack of experience? JoshuaZ 06:02, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    See Wikipedia:Song/The_RfA_Candidate's_Song, as linked to by the candidate above. See the second to last paragraph.-gadfium 06:08, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the clarification (here and on my talk page). It is a sad day when one has trouble telling a genuine RfA concern from a parody concern. JoshuaZ 06:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment. Is this enough? Bucketsofg✐ 12:58, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I know it's a neutral vote, and intended to be a joke, but I suggest we refrain from attempting to do this in the future. You really can't expect a doddering old bureaucrats to run around people's talks finding the real reasons for such votes :-) =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:02, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I know, they can't even tell a singular from a plural... *ducks under rotten tomato* ;) RadioKirk talk to me 19:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments User's edits.Voice-of-AllT|@|ESP 08:02, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply] 

User contributions
--Viewing contribution data for user Bucketsofg (over the 4750 edit(s) shown on this page)-- (FAQ)
Time range: 273 approximate day(s) of edits on this page
Most recent edit on: 7hr (UTC) -- 14, May, 2006
Oldest edit on: 17hr (UTC) -- 14, July, 2005
Overall edit summary use: Major edits: 75% Minor edits: 94.78%
Article edit summary use: Major article edits: 89.12% Minor article edits: 95.28%
Average edits per day (current): 17.38
Recognized significant article edits (non-minor/reverts): 4.82%
Unique pages edited: 2584 | Average edits per page: 1.84 | Edits on top: 13.96%
Breakdown of edits:
All significant edits (non-minor/reverts): 39.26%
Minor edits (non reverts): 20.23%
Marked reverts: 25.49%
Unmarked edits: 15.01%
Edits by Wikipedia namespace:
Article: 42.25% (2007) | Article talk: 4.63% (220)
User: 5.68% (270) | User talk: 24.57% (1167)
Wikipedia: 21.79% (1035) | Wikipedia talk: 0.78% (37)
Image: 0.23% (11)
Template: 0.04% (2)
Category: 0.02% (1)
Portal: 0% (0)
Help: 0% (0)
MediaWiki: 0% (0)
Other talk pages: 0% (0)
Username	Bucketsofg
Total edits	4750
Distinct pages edited	2672
Average edits/page	1.778
First edit	17:46, July 14, 2005

(main)	2007
Talk	220
User	270
User talk	1167
Image	11
Template	2
Category	1
Wikipedia	1035
Wikipedia talk	37

Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
A: There are two areas in which the admin-tools will allow me to better serve the project. First, I hang out at AFDs sometime, and I would be happy to pitch in there: closing discussions once consensus is clear, or cleaning things up at the end. Second (and more often, probably), is with regards to vandalism fighting, which I do quite a bit of (I find it therapeutic). It would be useful to have the ability to block persistent vandals myself (rather than merely reporting them to WP:AIV to await an admin to do so while they potentially can vandalize more). Being able to semi-protect a page when a group of IPs (often a single vandal) "swarm" a page would also be handy. I would also be a regular visitor to WP:AIV, and can help keep the response time down.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I'm quite pleased with my RfA parody, of course, but a better measure of my qualities as a wikipedian are to be found, I think in the way an AfD from last march turned out. A large block of problematic articles on Polynesian mythology was proposed for deletion--in retrosepct, too large a block, as I'm sure even the proposer (Grutness) would admit. But the very size of the proposed deletion shocked me enough to go to the library to sort through what was fact, what as fiction, what was something in between. In the end, a Kahuroa (who had been involved in the original proposal to delete) and I were able to save about half of the entries and have begun a very productive collaboration on a number of articles (e.g. here and here). What especially pleases me about this episode is that various wiki-principles worked together to improve the project: the original proposer of the deletion was acting boldly, I assumed good-faith (as did they when I began to voice my concerns), then two wikipedians (Kahuroa and I), who had began the process on opposite sides of the question, were able to work collaboratively for the good of the whole.
Actually, that's not quite the way it happened, though I can see why you might have thought that. What actually happened was that Kahuroa approached me and said he'd found a huge number of very dodgy Polynesian mythology articles but didn't know how to put in a block AFD nomination for them. I already knew Kahuroa's work on Maori mythology so trusted that if he said they were dodgy, then they were dodgy, and went ahead and bundled them together for a block afd. As it happens, they were better treated singly, since some of them could be saved with a bit of kicking around (for which, kudos to both of you!). So I too was working using AGF, and Kahuroa was also working with BOLD :) Grutness...wha? 05:54, 15 May 2006 (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: No, usually I'm able to keep a pretty cool head. Sometimes I fret a little after having reported a vandal to WP:AIV for having continued to vandalize after their "final warning". But that is pretty minor. Otherwise my general attitude towards edit and reversion wars is that it's best to withdraw and wait for other tempers to cool before re-engaging. My view is that that page will still be there tomorrow, and next week, and next month, and next year. There's lots of time to improve things.

Question from JoshuaZ As always, additional questions are completely optional.

1 Looking over your AfD record, you seem to main voice an opinion identical to the general trend at that time, and are often pile-ons that don't add much to the discussion examples would include[1] [2]. The only unambiguous example of you going against the general consensus was this [3]. (I've only checked the last 2000 edits so there may be others which are older or some which I missed in those 2000). How would you answer concerns that you don't think about the AfDs you are discussing but simply go with the pre-exisisting consensus(excepting a few amazing examples such as what you mentioned in question 2)?
Answer. Thanks for your question, JoshZ, I'm always impressed by how carefully you consider candidates' records. I want to make three points. First, I want to point out that in the first case you cite, there was as yet no consensus to go along with, as I was only the fourth contributor. Also, I am making a new point there, that the article failed a specific standard, WP:BIO, which as of yet hadn't been explicitly stated (though it was surely in everyone's mind). Second, consensus-building is not only about members stating their opinions, it's also about signalling agreement and disagreement with what's been said already. In public meetings this is done by people quickly saying "I agree with what so-and-so said" and sitting down, or people nodding vigorously when a point is made that they agree with (or throwing something when they don't!). In our cyber-AfD-meetings, some of those "delete/support per nom" are really the equivalent of these quick-statements and physical nods. It's not really piling on, since if members weren't allowed to give these cyber-nods it would become harder to build a clear consensus. (If the nominator has said it all, and we're not allowed to say "yup" because we feel we have to add some new point, the admin won't have enough opinions to determine consensus!) Third, it's important to note in this context that most AfDs are in fact pretty clear-cut cases, and to go against the grain for the sake of being seen to be independent would be a very non-productive kind of contrariness. (But a few of my contrarian moments you can see here, here, and here) Bucketsofg✐ 12:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question from FloNight talk As always, additional questions are completely optional.

I noticed that you do not have an activated Wikipedia email address. Why? Are you willing to activate it now? FloNight talk 02:14, 17 May 2006 (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 talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.
Category