Func

final (112/0/0) ending 15:45 10 August 2005 (UTC) Func (talk · contribs) - I'm really happy that Func has relented and allowed me to nominate him for adminship. Func has been with us a year, first as AdmN, then as Func. Lately, he's been the scourge of the vandal crowd, all the while keeping up a goofy sense of humor. He's never too busy to answer a question or a request for help or assistance. He'll be a valuable addition to the admin ranks. Joyous (talk) 15:48, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
Joyous, thank you so much! I very gratefully accept. :) Func( t, c ) 16:19, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Whole-hearted support! Joyous (talk) 15:49, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Delighted to support. Func's more than qualified to use the tools well; I think his own answers already say it all. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 16:31, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. He's not alreafy an admin!?!?! Howabout1 Talk to me! 16:54, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
  4. See line above mine. I mean, what the hell. :P --Golbez 17:14, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
  5. Support. Not a difficult decision at all. --Scimitar parley 17:21, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support This is the first time I've had to use that ol' cliche: you mean he's not one already?!? Bratschetalk 5 pillars 17:23, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
  7. lolZOMFGSRSLY i thought he wuz teh ADMIN alraedhy BLANKFAZE | (что??) 17:24, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support, didn't even have to think about it. --Dmcdevit·t 17:54, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
  9. me too dab (ᛏ) 18:04, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Strong support. I thought he was an AdmN already. Clearly has strong knowledge of Wikipedia procedures. --Deathphoenix 18:15, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Unconditional support.  Denelson83  18:31, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support absolutely. Although, together with Malathion's RfA, this will reduce even further the entertainment available to me on NP/RC patrol! I'm just going to move to a different time-zone I think. -Splash 18:37, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support with pleasure and without reservation. —Theo (Talk) 18:39, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support. NormanEinstein 18:46, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
  15. Support. Martin (Bluemoose) 18:50, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support What, he isn't already a sysop?! This guy reverts vandals faster than a roadrunner on crack! Give him the mop! --malathion talk 19:08, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Obligatory support as a brainwashed member of his micronation. =) Sasquatch (*OW*) 19:11, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
  18. Strong Support. I can't wait to see him on RC patrol once he has admin powers, although he might put me out of a job :). --Canderson7 19:21, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
  19. Support. I quite agree with all of the above.. Fire Star 19:22, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support - for all the foregoing reasons. Rob Church 20:16, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support functional editor. Radiant_>|< 20:23, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
  22. Support. Helpful on the RC patrol and reverts vandalism quickly. — Stevey7788 (talk) 20:28, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support. A fine Wikipedian. — Trilobite (Talk) 22:45, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Strong Support Stewart Adcock 22:51, 3 August 2005 (UTC).[reply]
  25. Support. I love you func. Redwolf24 23:03, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support; I sure thought he was one already when he explained to me how to deal with a dispute. And without a doubt the best answers to the standard questions I've ever read. --Spangineer (háblame) 23:31, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
  27. Support; D. J. Bracey (talk) 23:40, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support. I was starting to wonder when Func would get a nom. -- BD2412 talk 00:35, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  29. Support. Very active doing RC patrol and reverting vandals. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 00:40, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support. Uh, I think I know why the cliché is a cliché after all: I really did think he was one already. And he needs to be. Antandrus (talk) 00:43, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support. "Faster than a roadrunner on crack." That's good enough for me! -- Essjay · Talk 00:50, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  32. Strong support. Huh? He wasn't an admin? *kerblink*. Kim Bruning 01:18, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support! This guy saved my usertalk page from a vulgar vandal last night. MicahMN | Talk 01:50, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  34. SupportEdwinHJ | Talk 01:53, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Support--Jusjih 02:48, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support. Especially with note to the cliche mentioned above. kmccoy (talk) 03:13, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Strong support. I didn't know he wasn't an admin! --Idont Havaname 03:28, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Strong support. I thought he was already an admin. Jtkiefer T | @ | C ----- 03:36, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  39. Strong support. With the greatest of pleasure and a very big smile. I'm just distraught that I'm as far down as #39. I was a bit slow off the mark for you there, Func. SlimVirgin (talk) 04:24, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  40. Support. Good work Func... :) Squash 04:41, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support. Should make a decent admin. - Mark 04:44, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Support, unquestionably. Will make a great admin. Rhobite 04:52, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  43. Anyone who survived Irismeister and Mr. Treason and remains a productive and pleasant human being deserves a much higher reward than this. :-) Wholeheartedly support. Jwrosenzweig 04:57, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Support Kaldari 05:06, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support ofcourse. -JCarriker 06:02, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  46. Support CRAZY vandal fighter. Of course I think being an admin should be no big deal... at least I hope its not one of those who require 8 months and 10000 edits :\ --RN 06:32, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Support. This shouldn't be hard at all. Forgot to sign. Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 09:27, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Support. Another vandalhunter who should be an admin. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:21, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Support - I thought he was already... -- Francs2000 | Talk 11:18, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Support - yeah, me too. FreplySpang (talk) 12:12, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  51. Support.  Grue  13:50, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Support - Thought he was one already. Redux 14:16, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Support - Definitely. Sango123 15:00, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  54. Support --Cyberjunkie | Talk 15:19, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  55. 101% Support *insert sheep vote here* No, but seriously, you answered the questions that way I wish most nominees would. And your sense of humor earns you a bonus point. Ryan 16:36, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  56. Support. Good work against vandals, admin powers would be helpful in this. Jayjg (talk) 18:09, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  57. Support with the obligatory "I thought he was already!" comment :) -- Joolz 18:21, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  58.  BRIAN0918  20:43, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  59. Support - yet another "thought he was already" :-) Dan100 (Talk) 23:53, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  60. Thought he was one. --Merovingian (t) (c) 04:22, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
  61. Of course - David Gerard 06:10, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  62. I'd vote oppose, but he has to break the record :P gkhan 10:50, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
  63. Oh Yeaahh! -- the wub "?/!" 12:18, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  64. Support GeneralPatton 15:41, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  65. Support Warofdreams 16:30, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  66. Support AlistairMcMillan 17:47, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
  67. Support Satori 21:03, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  68. Meelar (talk) 21:03, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
  69. Support. Carbonite | Talk 21:24, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  70. Andre (talk) 21:45, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
  71. Support. More than once have I been on RC patrol, ready to revert vandalism or slap a speedy delete tag on a page where I find that Func has beat me to it. Exactly the kind of admin we need. Mr. Know-It-All 01:07, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  72. Hayeuppp. Grutness...wha? 02:07, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  73. Support. Good editor with a level head. (Figuratively, of course.) android79 04:36, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
  74. Support. Like so many others on this page, had no idea he wasn't an admin already. Yelyos 04:49, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
  75. Support -- Longhair | Talk 04:55, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  76. Support. I've been impressed by him at VfD. The Literate Engineer 05:21, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  77. About time! Func should have become an administrator long before I. — Knowledge Seeker দ 07:19, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
  78. Strong Support. -- BMIComp (talk, HOWS MY DRIVING) 14:02, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  79. Support! Mackensen (talk) 14:14, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  80. Support -- Func has clearly made a positive impact on Wikipedia, and by his editing record, seems to be a good candidate. --Mysidia 18:37, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  81. Absolutely. — mark ✎ 19:05, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  82. Support. -Willmcw 19:39, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
  83. Support ∞Who?¿? 04:22, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  84. Support. jni 13:30, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  85. Obviously. Neutralitytalk 19:23, August 7, 2005 (UTC)
  86. Still unsure as to what it is, or what it is made out of! El_C 21:24, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  87. Support Bring in the func! Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:05, August 7, 2005 (UTC)
  88. Support: Dang, this is what I get for looking at RfA too rarely. I'm, like, #80 or something. Geogre 23:30, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  89. Support...I wonder if this vote actually matters at this point... freestylefrappe 23:43, August 7, 2005 (UTC)
  90. Hell, nothing wrong with showing overwhemling Support to a great user. I RC patrol in the middle of the night so I can have something to do! humblefool®Deletion Reform 00:47, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  91. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 02:15, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  92. Support. How could I not support someone so strongly endorsed by the community? --MPerel ( talk | contrib) 03:13, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  93. EXTERMINATE!!!!! Cat chi? 17:00, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    OK ->
    Like this? Kim Bruning 15:56, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  94. Now that my RfA is over, I can support. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 01:22, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  95. Support 100%, by which I mean support. Let's get this over with so he can start blocking vandals. To be honest... I thought Func already was an admin! - Ta bu shi da yu 03:40, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  96. --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 04:28, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  97. Support and happy to help try to beat the record. DS1953 06:19, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
  98. ((ithoughts/healreadywasone|he)) ;) Pakaran 14:47, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  99. Support: I honestly thought he was an admin already. — Bcat (talk • email) 16:29, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  100. Support (though it worries me that Boothy443 is voting for — I thought that his anti-vote was a prerequisite for adminship). --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 17:12, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  101. Support. Record, what record? Glad to support a great user! Bishonen | talk 17:49, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  102. Support - Tεxτurε 17:55, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  103. Support - Anyone the vandals dislike enough to create a doppelgander must be doing something right. --Allen3 talk 18:14, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
  104. Rude not to. Flowerparty talk 19:56, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  105. Support. --MarkSweep 21:31, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  106. Support in light of imposter, SqueakBox 22:58, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
  107. "'''Support'''. Thought $user already was an admin." – ABCD✉ 23:10, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  108. Support. Gee I almost missed out on being able to vote on this. Paul August ☎ 03:37, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
  109. SupportGrace Note 04:02, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  110. user.support = true :) Alphax τεχ 04:08, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  111. Support. Nice to see many of the edits have edit summaries too! --HappyCamper 04:47, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  112. Support. --Briangotts (talk) 13:10, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

I really like the guy and support his adminship. But I need to be radical. Cat chi? 00:54, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Come on, he has to beat the record. :) Howabout1 Talk to me! 16:15, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
Bah, you are right. This is too radical even for me. Cat chi? 17:00, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Neutral

If you vote Neutral, I'll give you one of these! --SPUI (talk) 05:12, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

He beat the net vote record!!! Two more untill the total support record is broken. Father Howabout1 Talk to me! 04:23, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

He beat the total support record too! — Bcat (talk • email) 14:33, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

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.)
We have maintenance backlogs I would like to assist with, including WP:VIP and WP:VFD. I believe I have a very firm grasp of Wikipedia:Consensus.
I would also like the ability to protect articles that suddenly come under attack. It is often frustrating to see an article suddenly enter a meaningless vandalism-revert war for half an hour or more, and be more or less helpless to stop it, other than by placing notices on WP:VIP, Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts, WP:AN/I, or WP:AN, or running over to IRC. I don't believe any article should be protected for long, but protection is an important temporary tool in defending Wikipedia.
Toward that end, I would also like the ability to block users engaged in repeated and unambiguous Wikipedia:Vandalism. Also related: I have an extreme distaste for spammers, who will often manage to hit upwards of 20 to 30 articles before their commercial-link insertion is identified and halted.
Finally, I like to participate at WP:VFU, which is frustrating when you can't actually examine the history of the deleted articles under discussion.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
I am not a particularly gifted writer/researcher/archivist. It is unlikely that any article I start or contribute to will make it to featured status with any more than ten percent contribution from me. I like to help where I can, when I can.
As I search through my edit history, I am somewhat embarrassed to find very few articles started by myself, including pages such as WASTE text engine, Big River (musical), Wall Ball, Home on Lagrange (The L5 Song), Script Debugger, André Trocmé, Danny Goodman, Auschwitz Album, JavaScript OSA, and more recently Ronald Bass. Few of these are little better than stubs today.
I've done a fair amount of wikification and cleanup; though with my typing and spelling skills, I may be doing more harm than good. ;-)
I am proud of contributions I have made to the very few subjects in which I can claim any expertise, especially those involving scripting languages. However, I would have to say that my finest contributions to the project were possibly those I made to User:Theresa knott/Those who disagree with Angela must not sign their comments. I am actively working towards bringing this article to Semi-Featured status. ;-)
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?
Stress? Hmm...well, let's see now: there was the anti-circumcision POV warriors who accused me of supporting the molestation and rape of circumcised infants; User:Mr Vandal placing pictures of zebras all over the place; my occasional run in with the stalker and quack doctor User:Irismeister; oh, and then there was the charming User:Mr. Treason, (I am still waiting for him to SUE me IN A NEWARK COURT OF LAW). ;-)
More or less, I have managed to avoid any serious conflicts, and to stay out of trouble. How I have handled content disputes in the past is exactly the same way I intend to handle them in the future. Where I am actively involved in a dispute over an article, I ask other Wikipedians not involved in the article to comment upon the matter. This happened in the case of Jeffrey MacDonald, where I was becoming frustrated with an editor whose extreme POV and (initial) failure to communicate on the talk page was disconcerting to me. I requested User:Rhobite to evaluate the matter, (an admin whose commitment to NPOV I highly respect), and he was able to assist in working the article toward a better state...(darn, I've just now reread the article and it is still in a pitiful POV state...I gotta get on that). When I found that my manner had been too abrupt in dealing with the anon, I posted an apology.
Of course, the above isn't particularly relevent to this RfA, since I would never use adminship powers in a content dispute where I was actively involved.
Summation:
I hope this isn't interpreted in the wrong way, but I personally believe that adminship is a big deal. It is an important responsibility, not one to be taken lightly. It is all about trust, understanding consensus, remembering to assume good faith, always striving to maintain NPOV, and keeping the whole canon upon which Wikipedia is founded on in mind, including WP:TRI, WP:IAR, and WP:BEANS. ;-)
If a point were to come where I felt the community had lost trust in my actions, I would unquestionably repeat Seth Ilys's noble experiment.
Func( t, c ) 16:19, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Category