Memory Alpha

Memory Alpha:Nominations for administratorship/Archive

< Memory Alpha:Nominations for administratorship

41,686pages on
this wiki
Add New Page
Add New Page Discuss0

Ottens (2/1/0) (June 2004, unresolved after >14 days)Edit

I'm not sure if he wants to be an administrator, but if does (or can be persuaded), I feel he would make a great addition to the team. -- Redge 12:21, 28 Jun 2004 (CEST)

Well, I wouldn't mind... (means, accept, yes... ;) Ottens 17:41, 28 Jun 2004 (CEST)


  1. Redge (implicit from nomination -- Michael Warren)
  2. Dan Carlson


  1. Oppose. Addition of too much non-canon info and speculation to articles without references, suggesting lack of familiarity with MA policies. Judging from Talk:Excelsior class, reluctant to accept his POV as speculation. Plus, I don't really see the need for additional admins at this time.-- Michael Warren 15:48, 28 Jun 2004 (CEST)


  • Comment: Note that I wouldn't feel offended or something when you think I wouldn't make a good admin, or for the simple reason that MA doesn't need any more admins [for now]... :) -- Ottens
  • Michael: I understand your point, concerning the addition of non-canon information. And yes, I made some mistakes concerning the Excelsior-class page, but do note that that's the only occassion where I included non-canon information, and when other members commented me on it, I removed virtually all non-canon information. Ottens 17:43, 28 Jun 2004 (CEST)
  • I think the Excelsior should be seen as an exception, as several people have been known to make mistakes there. Besides, IMO Ottens' extensive knowledge on various subjects would make him very suited to assertain the canonaty of articles as an admin. -- Redge 13:37, 30 Jun 2004 (CEST)
  • Michael: You think I added those pages on purpose, just to annoy you? :S Ottens 11:30, 12 Aug 2004 (CEST)
    • I don't think that this is what Michael thinks. His reasoning, and I agree with this, seems to be that an administrator should be aware of our policies and act accordingly. The creation of more than 30 articles not allowed by our canon policy shows, IMO, that this is not the case here. This is nothing personal. -- Cid Highwind 12:28, 12 Aug 2004 (CEST)
        • Apoligies. I misunderstood. Ottens 12:34, 12 Aug 2004 (CEST)
  • It seems that this one has been rejected (unresolved after 14 days). I will archive this suggestion later, unless some of you still want to discuss. -- Cid Highwind 12:28, 12 Aug 2004 (CEST)

Captain Michael K. Bartel (3/0/1) (July 2004, successful after 7+ days)Edit

Aside from being one of the most active non-admin Archivists, Mike's been very helpful in hammering out our still-vague canon policy. He's also been good at judging the canonicity of submitted material and whittling away the superfluous information. -- Dan Carlson 20:52, 30 Jun 2004 (CEST)

Accepted.--Captain Mike K. Bartel 16:22, 1 Jul 2004 (CEST)


  1. Dan Carlson
  2. Redge 01:26, 24 Jul 2004 (CEST): After taking some time to examine Mike's entries and background, I say he has extensive knowledge of StarTrek (which is my chief criterium), but also has hamered on the canon policy when all seemed forgotten (which I like) and is one of the first to come up with good references (which I like even better). So I say Mike disserves to be an admin, and would make MA proud!
  3. I agree with Cid's concerns re: policy and Mike's compliance therewith, but support the nomination. I would ask Redge to remember that knowledge should not be the criterion for judging nominations, but the nominee's ability to deal with the responsibilities of the post. Admins do not decide what is and is not suitable, the community as a whole does that. Admins are 'janitors', not 'supervisors' -- Michael Warren | Talk 19:42, Aug 11, 2004 (CEST)



  • I don't oppose this nomination, but noticed in the past that Mike sometimes is a little 'uneven' when it comes to the compliance with our policies and guidelines - including some strange comments on his user page that were later deleted. If Mike comes to accept the (necessarily) rather slow process of building a wiki, he would make a good addition... -- Cid Highwind 12:02, 6 Jul 2004 (CEST)
  • Michael: I feel that extensive knowledge is also an important criterium, since it allows for recognizing canon from non-canon, factual errors, etc.. -- Redge | Talk 17:35, 12 Aug 2004 (CEST)
    • Except that, that is a job for any user. Not just admins. As I say, admin nominations should be judged on their suitability to do the job, not what they know. (Oh, and FYI, it's criterion (pl. criteria)) -- Michael Warren | Talk 18:27, Aug 12, 2004 (CEST)
      • Ok, good point. And pardon my English, I've only been using it a year or 6. -- Redge | Talk 19:40, 12 Aug 2004 (CEST)

Okay, this has been left open much longer than it should've. Sorry about the delay! -- Dan Carlson | Talk 17:11, Sep 10, 2004 (CEST)

SmokeDetector47 (3/0/0) (May 2005)Edit

I do not know if they are interested, but their close adherence to the policies of this site (so far as I have been able to tell), and their penchant for writing detailed articles that attain featured status cannot be ignored. A commendable contributor and an asset that deserves recognition, should they accept. I expected that they would have been offered this position in the past, but it does not seem to be so. -- Dmsdbo 15:51, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Accept. -- SmokeDetector47 // talk 22:01, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)


  1. Dmsdbo (from nomination)
  2. Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 14:22, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
  3. Cid Highwind

No objections after seven days. Discussion closed, awaiting bureaucrat action. -- Cid Highwind 15:36, 12 May 2005 (UTC)



Gvsualan (7/0/0) (May 2005)Edit

In my opinion, has a good understanding of the policies&guidelines. Is not afraid of helping with the "boring" maintenance tasks (renaming images, for example). Last but not least, wants to be an admin... ;) -- Cid Highwind 12:51, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)


  1. Cid Highwind (implicit from nomination)
  2. Strong support -- Michael Warren | Talk 14:21, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  3. Support -- rebelstrike 14:25, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  4. Support, a consummate professional and intelligent contributer. Someone I truly feel comfortable having the reigns of MA. — THOR 14:48, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  5. Support -- His comments and extensive knowledge of how things are meant to be done on MA are both signs that he should be an administrator already, IMHO. zsingaya 18:45, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  6. Support --Defiant | Talk 02:50, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  7. Support. While we do disagree on some formatting issues, Gvsualan has shown a professional attitude and willingness to take care of problems such as page deletions and PNAs almost immediately, which would make him a perfect admin. He also has a solid history of quality contributions. -- SmokeDetector47 // talk 22:01, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

No objections after seven days. Discussion closed, awaiting bureaucrat action. -- Cid Highwind 14:04, 5 May 2005 (UTC)



  1. Neutral -- I am not against this nomination, but I question whether or not their are others who would be more beneficial as administrators on this site. He still performs an excellent job. -- Dmsdbo 15:51, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Defiant (6/0/0) (May 2005)Edit

I hope it doesn't seem too arrogant of me, but I want to be an administrator and feel that I would make a good addition to the team. --Defiant | Talk 10:14, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)



  1. Defiant (implicit from nomination)
  2. Species8472 - I've looked at some of Defiant's work and seen that he knows a lot about Star Trek. His work is correctly formatted, I think he would make a good administrator.
  3. Support -- Defiant really knows his stuff and his episode summaries are excellent. I hope he remembers the people who supported him on his way to the top! -- Rebelstrike2005 21:16, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  4. Support - not updating the count, though. I don't think you can vote for yourself... :) -- Cid Highwind 12:51, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  5. Support, fantastic contributer of both content and images; impressively willing to accept criticism and incorporate as opposed to disregarding the input of others. — THOR 14:51, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  6. Support - I was surprised to learn that he was not already an admin -- Dmsdbo 15:31, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  7. Support. Excellent contributions, plays well with the rest of the community, and most important of all, actually wants to do the job so much he nominated himself. -- SmokeDetector47 // talk 22:01, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

No objections after seven days. Discussion closed, awaiting bureaucrat action. -- Cid Highwind 20:36, 1 May 2005 (UTC)



Kobi (7/0/0)Edit

Already is an admin on MA/de. Operates a bot on MA/en, being an admin here would avoid some of the problems encountered. Cid Highwind 14:53, 9 Jul 2005 (UTC)

  • Strong support Jaf 14:57, 9 Jul 2005 (UTC)Jaf
  • indeed it would be helpful, thanks for the support -- Kobi - (Talk) 15:34, 9 Jul 2005 (UTC)


  1. Cid Highwind (from nomination)
  2. Jaf
  3. Support (I thought Kobi was already an admin here!) -- SmokeDetector47 // talk 19:03, 9 Jul 2005 (UTC)
  4. AmdrBoltz 04:45, 15 Jul 2005 (UTC)
  5. Support --Shran 07:34, 15 Jul 2005 (UTC)
  6. Support --Patricia 09:20, 15 Jul 2005 (UTC)
  7. Support (sorry, I'm late - can't see everything) -- Florian - talk 20:00, 15 Jul 2005 (UTC)



AJHalliwell (6/0/1)Edit

I am nominating AJHalliwell because he seems to have a good graps of MA protocol, also is a value member of the MA community in my opinion. Furthure more he is consitantly on (atleast that I have viewed) durring the 12:00am to 4am timeslot when an admin is despertatly needed to ward away vandals, and take drastic action. (Suggestion by User:Kahless)

accept, graciously. - AJHalliwell 17:29, 4 Aug 2005 (UTC)


  1. Kahless (implicit from nomination)
  2. Cid Highwind 12:17, 28 Jul 2005 (UTC)
  3. Jaf 13:49, 28 Jul 2005 (UTC)Jaf
  4. Shran 17:38, 28 Jul 2005 (UTC)
  5. Tough Little Ship 18:11, 28 Jul 2005 (UTC)
  6. Scimitar 22:06, 28 Jul 2005 (UTC)



  1. I'm not necessarily against it, but I'm not necessarily for it for the reasons stated in the nomination. I still think there are several aspects of our policies that are not yet understood by the user, as well, the timeslot is not always void at those hours. --Alan del Beccio 12:25, 28 Jul 2005 (UTC)
    • A suggestion - in case of problems with "understanding policies", could you perhaps try to work them out with AJ on his talk page or something? -- Cid Highwind
    • I've made several suggestions. I'm also now having to make a note to him about not blanking pages, which seems to fortify my point, as was just done on Irina Karlovassi. --Alan del Beccio 15:58, 28 Jul 2005 (UTC)
      • BUT that could have just been an accident. I don't believe he does that often (if at all, with the exception of this one time). And, if that is the only thing he does or did wrong, then that still pales in comparison with everything he's contributed to MA, especially with protecting against vandalism, as pointed out above by Cid Highwind. AJ has strong support from this blue skin, that's for sure. :) --Shran 17:47, 28 Jul 2005 (UTC)
        • I appologize for that, it was my last edit before I went to sleep and I most certainly did not mean to blank the page. If you look into the time historys, just before the edit I uploaded File:Irina Karlovassi.jpg, which I meant to put onto the page and add a note about her being from the 20th century (like I'd just done for Miklos Karlovassi.) It blanked for some reason, but I'd left and didn't notice. - AJHalliwell 17:29, 4 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Shran (6/0/0)Edit

He has a very good understanding of the Policies, he rarely makes mistakes, he has made hundreds of edits to the pages (1211 main article, non-minor edits, an average of 12 major edits a day from June 18 to September 23), plus he has a couple featured articles. He seems to be one of the top contributors who has not been nominated for administratorship.--Tim Thomason 11:27, 24 Sep 2005 (UTC)


  1. Tim Thomason (implicit from nomination)
  2. Support- seems like a fine idea. -Platypus Man | Talk 15:31, 24 Sep 2005 (UTC)
  3. Support - I was surprised that he allowed me to edit and conclude the summary of "In a Mirror, Darkly, Part II" and to collaborate on "These Are the Voyages...". I support this officer's promotion in rank, as long as I get to see him walk the plank first! --Defiant | Talk 15:43, 24 Sep 2005 (UTC)
  4. Support. I probably see the "reverted edit of x, changed back to last version by y" message from him more often than anyone, and I remember at least one or two occasions where someone was vandalizing and he had to wait for an admin to show up. Plus, he takes things quite seriously, unlike yours truly. --Schrei 15:47, 24 Sep 2005 (UTC)
  5. Support. He smells ok. Jaf 15:49, 24 Sep 2005 (UTC)Jaf
  6. Support. I'm still a newbie, but I have certainly been impressed. --Fenian 07:15, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Holy crap, I don't believe this, lol! Truth be told, I'm not entirely sure if I'm ready for administratorship (mainly b/c I don't know yet what all it entails, aside from being able to revert easier and block/delete), but I wanna thank Tim for nominating me and everyone else for their support. I really appreciate it, everybody. :) --Truly, From Andoria with Love 02:39, 25 Sep 2005 (UTC)

PS to Defiant: Just remember, it's retract plank, not remove plank. ;-) --From Andoria with Love 02:42, 25 Sep 2005 (UTC)
Aww, they've forgotten me. Oh, well. :P (Truth be told, I forgot about this myself until a few moments ago, lol!) --From Andoria with Love 03:34, 8 Oct 2005 (UTC)



  • Comment: I already voted (actually nominated) so this comment isn't "neutral" and has nothing to do with Shran directly. It seems that Shran has been nominated for almost a month now, and has a unanimous 5-0 vote. I gather from the policy pages and archive that a nomination has to be "on the table" for at least seven days unanimously and at least fourteen days for consensus. I understand the "at least" part but the vote was unanimous and it's been about 4 voting periods now. I believe the next step is an administrator should archive this and contact a bureaucrat, and the bureaucrat should sysop Shran into admin status. Of course, if an administrator has a problem with it, I guess they should give their opinion and vote against or whatever, and then the nomination can wait another couple weeks.--Tim Thomason 01:07, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: I'm not saying this to win support or help my case or anything, but I feel I need to point out that with both Alan and A.J. gone for an indeterminate length of time, we are currently lacking two administrators. Not to discredit those admins still available, but I'm sure another one would be helpful during this time. Like I said, I'm not saying it for me, I just felt I should point this out. --From Andoria with Love 07:10, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)
    • Sorry, I completely missed that earlier. Done now. :) -- Cid Highwind 11:14, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: With power comes great responsibility. And with diplomacy, I only want to reassert that reverting edits with an opinion of 'the descriptions of the episodes are not necessary' isn't in the spirit of a Wiki. Remembering that this isn't just Shran's wiki or Funkdubious' wiki but a community of like-minded Star Trek fans. Of course, vandalism should always be reverted, and we all will help report any articles we've found to be vandalized. --Funkdubious 18:26, 5 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Mike Nobody (0/5/0)Edit



  • Despite claims to the contrary, Mike still seems to have some problems with our policies, most notably the canon policy and the copyrights - which are, in my opinion, the two most important policies this site has. Examples: Talk:Hippie, Talk:MACO, other copyright violations, all with related discussions elsewhere, including user talk pages and Ten Forward. -- Cid Highwind 12:45, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Browsing through Mike's talk page shows that within the few months of his contributions he has earned nothing but comments where to find MA policies. Since administrators are supposed to be prime examples of archivists I feel Mike is unsuited to become sysop -- Kobi - (Talk) 12:52, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Agreed with the above. Also, considering there has been at least 4 major copyright violations in the past ~10 days, and just as many, if not more, reminders about not doing it, on just as many separate occasions, it is quite clear he refuses to follow our policies. Did I mention he fondness towards resorting to name-calling as a means to resolving conflicts? --Alan del Beccio 13:03, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • I, too, agree with all of the above. Mike has commited numerous copyright violations (the latest discovered can be found here), cursing out users, has been generally disruptive (as Alan said above), and is currently having problems accepting our canon policy. Alan and I have tried to reason with him, but he seems intent on ignoring our policies. --From Andoria with Love 13:10, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Mike needs to learn how to take criticism gracefully -- or if that wouldn't work, how to take it at all. When I was a new user, it took me a long time to come to terms with those who aggravated me here, now I work with them daily -- and dozens of other, more aggravating people. I focus on the parts of the work I like, and can manage, without violating the policies and guidelines, and if I can't keep an exchange with another user civil, I usually stay out of it, or seek a third party -- rather than cutting to the chase and cussing out the other contributor, the third party, anyone who might have a comment, etc. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk


If I may make a note of something, I have little real interest in becoming an Administrator. I wanted to bring the issue up to get a gauge of the environment. If by chance, I would've actually been voted in (fat chance of that) at least it would've added my point of my view into the status quo and maybe have made a difference.

The name-calling, the trolling, as someone has said, has been exaggerated. The thin-skinned passive-aggressiveness that passes for civility here is disgusting. If anyone has been offended, remember, you took the first swing. Although I try not to reply in kind, the debates can get frustrating. Any issues of policy I'm willing to listen to and discuss as long as it doesn't get out of hand and turn into a rant or flame-war.Mike Nobody

The fact you would nominate without real intent is indicative that you can't handle the job. Other than that, I don't know much about you, other than what I read on this page, and I see unresolved disputes -- which, from Wikipedia experience, I can confidently say is a bad thing to have among admin. In any case, there are plenty of admin right now. Assuming Vedek Dukat continues to grow and be a team player and vandal handler, I think he'd be my choice for admin in a couple months. --Broik 06:22, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)
To Mike: Somehow, I knew you weren't serious about becoming an admin. And if by "taking the first swing" you mean defending M/A policies, then you're right; we generally like to do things right and by-the-book around here, and when someone conflicts with our goals, we do tend to get a little defensive, especially when that someone continually creates conflicts on the same subject. As for this "thin-skinned passive-aggressiveness" you speak of, I'm sure it would seem to you as being aggressive since we're not telling you or doing what you want to hear or want us to do. You, on the other hand, have not even been passive aggressive -- not once has any of us wrote to you "What the Hell is your problem?" or "Give me a !@#$ break!" Several of us have attempted to reason with you, but you just won't back down. And when we try to discuss policy with you, you seem to just want to ignore it or argue with it and stick with your own misguided views of our policies and do your own thing, which we just can't have that here.
And to Broik: I, too, think Vedek Dukat could become an admin candidate if he continues to serve the community as he is doing. I don't think we've had any problem with him either, have we? Also, Tim Thomason might also make a good admin; I might nominate him myself soon. --From Andoria with Love 06:46, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • See what I mean? But, at least I agree, Tim Thomason would make a good Admin. As for my own capabilities, yes, I can handle the "job". The debates get tiresome, though. Mike Nobody
    • You can't even handle the most basic aspects of the common contributors job of contributing original work. In fact, those of us who keep tabs on such matters cannot trust you or your contributions; how can we trust you with synops privileges? Having that kind of reputation preceeding you, and constantly building upon it, rather than attempting to "conform" to the most basic rules, is hardly becoming for any contributor, much less an admin. --Alan del Beccio 07:16, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Not to get off topic, but when I read the comments about myself, I had to say something. :P I'm flattered someone would say that, so thanks, but for the record there were problems with me, namely that I started off as a quasi-vandal (remember the "(Name) is an element" articles and pointless redirects?) and little things like my template change (see user page) that are part of the learning process. But anyway, I'd definitely rather see Tim be an admin than Mike, though I don't think we need any admin right now. --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 07:37, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Vedek Dukat (11/3/2)Edit

I wouldn't normally do this, but I think I've combated enough vandals (BTW only reason Bentbrain and I had such a long convo was because I was afraide he'd keep vandalizing...) I've gotten sick of waiting for an admin to get on. A recent wave of particularly insidious vandalism involving moving episode pages -- and now apparently editing the resultant redirect (for example, "Covenant") could have been averted had I been an admin. Basically, that's all I'm asking for; I've never considered myself the admin type, but if it means I can get rid of vandals and prevent this (crap) from happening, I'm all for it. --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 08:01, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)


  • Support. I'll admit I'm a newbie, but the good Vedek's work was one of the first contributors I noticed. He strikes me a civil and prolific, and cares about this project earnestly without going nuts about it. Sounds like a good guy to have on the button. I second. AureliusKirk 20:42, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. Similar to AureliusKirk's comments (interesting name incidentally), except I'm not much of a newbie any more. I'm not sure about the early contributions issue, but he seems to understand the rules and regulations part, so the inexperience can be overcome. :-) I third. Weyoun 03:06, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. It looks to me like the Vedek's got a case of the watched pot that never boils, meaning the obvious support from Shran and near-support from others who aren't voting to support this indicate he'll be an admin eventually. In response to Tim Thomason, though, I don't think self-nominating is a sign of anything but impatience. Personally, I support this because I don't think tenure should be a factor in adminship and, aside from the "not yet" arguments, I see no reason he shouldn't be an amin. I guess his previous foulplay can be analagous to B'Elanna Torres becoming Chief Engineer when Carey had been there longer; if you've got what it takes, you deserve it. Sloan 05:52, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. I have not been on Memory Alpha for awhile and am not entirely familiar with the vandal issues and such, but the roster everyone has mentioned looked really helpful and the changes to the main page are certainly welcome! Everyone who has commented, with the exception perhaps of Platypus Man, sounded positive but said the same thing about the length of time. Well this is longer than a week, as Tim says, and I think he deserves a shot based on the available evidence. Makon 09:41, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. Changed my mind because I think Vedek Dukat is someone I trust and would like to see go somewhere. I'm probably wasting my time by voting, since it's a policy of unanimity, but I might as well show my support. --Broik 10:29, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. I've been here quite a while now (a year, on the 17th December). I've seen people become admins, such as Shran, and I've then witnessed how much good they've done for the site. Watching his edits and how he managed the recent vandal, amongst other things, I believe he's got the knowledge and the character thats needed to help out more around here. I don't think his earlier transgressions should be held against him forever, should they? Zsingaya Talk 22:05, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. Let the man have a chance already! He got off to a bad start but has kicked arse ever since and shown he's a valuable member of the community. He listed the vandal fighting as reasons he wanted to be an admin because he was stressed out over the BS, but from what I've read on here he genuinely wants to and can help with administrative issues including (but not limited to) vandalism. Ben Sisqo 00:35, 14 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • OK, I'm getting into this a bit late, but my vote is support. I think the Vedek would be a good admin, as he has extensive knowledge and has definitely shown that he is a good member of the community since he shaped up, and I think that making Vedek an admin would only be an asset to the site. --Starchild 02:10, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Mild Support: I know it's been about a week since I first voted to oppose, and most of the voting is pretty much over already, but it should at least be on record that I've been leaning toward the good Vedek's side lately. My initial objections were based on experience and history (as Shran has agreed to object to below). His early vandalism isn't that bad, I guess, if you assume that he was just trying to get rid of red links and didn't fully understand the policies. His recent history has been pretty much spotless, he has become a very well-known member of the community (8 users wanting him for adminship is pretty high compared to the archives, plus the recent edit war based on one of his user pages), and he has taken the most-likely failed nomination for administratorship in stride. His experience is still the only thing I find wrong, but like his self-nomination, shouldn't be enough to prove he isn't qualified for adminship. He has been here two months now and I'm sure, avoiding any catastrophe, will still be here two months from now. I admit, I may have been a bit biased in my first vote (I tend to sway on the pro-Gvsualan side), so I hope this will rectify things a little.--Tim Thomason 17:01, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Mild Support. Oh, what the hell. I've talked with him now and then and he seems to have his head on straight. I think I would still prefer to wait one or two more months before seeing him become an admin, but I guess now's as good as time as ever. Like Tim said, his vandalism wasn't really vandalism, and he had cleaned up his act and then some since then, so yeah. All's good. --From Andoria with Love 19:05, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. I know the Vedek on a personal level and believe him to be a fine person. I have faith in his integrity to use the admin power responsibility. Although I'm not sure what the bad blood is between him and Alan del Beccio (essentially, Alan's argument comes down to the Vedek being new once you remove the personal reasons), but I do know Dukat has my support to become an admin. --PRueda29 21:39, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. After forcing myself to read the way-too-lengthy debate - which in normal cases for an admin is a bad sign, since they're supposed to be community leaders and a problem with the community is a problem with the leader - and I simply find myself seeing the glass half full. I'm sure some people want to err on the side of caution and deny his adminship, but it's like they say on Wikipedia - be bold!
In the end, it was Gvsualan's vote that changed my mind, however, as I found many arguments lacking in substance - judging his knowledge of Star Trek, which none of us can presume to know, or how many edits he has made is irrelevant. It reminds me of a quote I once saw on Wikipedia: "If I can inspire 10 users to each make 1,000 edits, it's better t han making 10,000 edits myself." The fact that Dukat is a "welcoming committee" is a positive trait, as it shows he cares about the community, which is quite a welcome contrast to Gv's rather blunt (no offence)way of dealing with people. I also think Dukat has shown himself to be an asset, so I give him my support, even if I'm just pissing in the wind since I doubt Gvsualan will ever change his mind, whether it's a month or a year from now. Anyway, I've said my piece. Roar 00:09, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Ditto... Well, aside from the part about Alan convincing him and all that, since I'd voted already. Well said . --Broik 00:20, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Support Although I don't know him that well, he seems alright. What the Hell.--Mike Nobody =/\= 03:42, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)


  • Oppose. No offense, but if blocking vandals is the only reason you have to want to be an admin, then I don't think you should be. Sure, you could block quicker, but then it would be like wasting the other responsibilities of an admin. Also, as you yourself said, you lack the experience. The Duty Roster is a nice idea, but it isn't enough in my eyes to vote for you to be an admin. If someone can convince me, I'll strike my vote, but I'm sticking with this for now. -Platypus Man | Talk 20:53, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • ↑ (That's an upwards arrow if you can't see it.) I would have said the same, but after reading the Vedek's comments below, I thought otherwise. Weyoun 03:06, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose: Like Shran says below, I think it is a bit early for Vedek Dukat to be thinking of administratorship. I nominated Shran after almost 4 months of good non-vandalistic edits (started early June, nominated late September), whereas Vedek Dukat started in mid October and is now being nominated (by himself, which is something that makes me not so sure) not even two months later. Also, he himself admits that his early edits are a little bit "pushing the envelope." The Duty Roster has been well accepted by the community, and I admit yesterdays episode-moving guy needed to be combatted (I did all I could when I showed up an hour later, so it wasn't just Cid, Shran, and Alan), but I think he should stay a couple more months before he gets administratorship.--Tim Thomason 05:39, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • In response to Sloan, obviously we shouldn't judge on "tenure" per se, but, hypothetically, you shouldn't show up for a week, make awesome contributions, and then nominate yourself for adminship. It specifically says on Memory Alpha:Administrators#Becoming an administrator, that "it is expected that a nominee for administratorship be a registered member of the community for at least several months." This is to prove that you are committed to the project and will stick around. As for "self-nominating," while it is an alright thing to do if the community "forgets" that this page exists (it happens), I, personally, think that you should be nominated by another user, as it shows, even more than "Support" votes that you are accepted as a valid member of the community. Any one-week guy or near-vandal could nominate themself ("ahem" Mike Nobody). However, that was not my opposition to the nomination (the "tenure" thing was), and isn't (and shouldn't) be used to oppose someone. It's just a personal gripe that I threw in there (in parenthesis, which is my way of saying something to "the side," if anyone has noticed).--Tim Thomason 06:24, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
      • (Sorry, had to butt in.) It should be noted that Defiant became an admin on self-nomination, with a vote of 6/0/0, so that doesn't change anything about a candidate's merits. --Broik 10:29, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
      • Vedek Dukat's nothing like Mike Nobody - I know that's not what you were saying, but just so it's clear. It seems that he nominated himself in exasperation and probably wouldn't have done so normally, but realized it was too late to take it back. Sloan is probably right in any case: Vedek Dukat is a question not of if but when he will become an admin. Not that I necessarily think it should be now, but someone (Weyoun, Shran, myself) would have and probably will do it sooner or later. --Broik 06:34, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
        • If it's a question of when rather than if, why not now? I realize it's important to be here a while and gain people's trust, but Shran, Tim and now you have essentially said the same thing: he's qualified but it's premature - sentiments I agree with to an extent (see original comment) but don't think should be automatic grounds for disqualifying him. The fact is Memory Alpha would benefit from him being an admin, in terms of leadership, maintenance and vandal fighting, and that's enough to convince me that he's qualified. Sloan 07:15, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Mild Oppose. I have thought about it, and the more I think about it, I cannot bring myself to say "We should make him an administrator right now!" While I, too, grew frustrated when dealing with vandalism I couldn't do anything about, I knew that, sooner or later, everything would be made right again by an admin. Granted, nobody likes to see articles defaced, especially for several hours, but the fact remains that it will be corrected. And what of the times when vandalism occurs and the good Vedek isn't around (let alone any administrator)? Do we nominate whoever was around to take care of the vandalism while waiting for an admin? I don't believe someone should be voted as an admin just because they were around when a vandal struck and were not able to do anything. As for Vedek himself, I cannot get by the fact that his first contributions themselves were on the verge of vandalism -- that coupled with his inexperience seriously makes me wonder if he is ready to tackle administrative duties. It's not a matter of trust -- it's a matter of experience and history. Because those qualities are somewhat questionable at the moment I cannot bring myself to support his becoming an administrator right now. (Not to mention, he should have had an unquestionable membership for at least several months -- several being more than 2 or 3, but not many, according to the dictionary.) That said, Vedek has been doing a magnificent job in the past month or so and has become, as everyone else observed, a team player... if he keeps it up and if he has patience, I believe another nomination in a few more months will be in order. :) --From Andoria with Love 18:16, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Oppose. I'm sorry, but Dukat is still too new-- with the simple fact being that he has less than 900 contributions! Compare that to our last new Admin initiated, Shran, who I might add, had not only made a name for himself with an impressive number of contributions both in quality and quantity (who comparatively has almost 6900 contributions!)-- I don't believe Dukat has even begun to the scratch the so-called surface that our current admins did to earn the title.
To clarify, the majority of our current administrators have an understanding of, accessibility to, and the reputation in the areas of knowledge, resources and ability in policies and diplomacy, and above all the full realm of Star Trek lore that I think Dukat lacks. Aside from making himself a self-appointed "welcoming committee" and making and implementing the "Duty Roster" (which I am not sure is exactly "innovative"), I have not seen where he has the contribution "range", resourcefulness, and overall knowledge on the subject-- much of which is quite evident in his user contributions-- is that of what one might expect of an administrator. From what I can tell, his work consists mostly of cosmetic work, a few episode summaries, lots of redirects and a lot of talk page contributions-- at least in relation to previous up and coming nominees contributions. Above all, unlike previous nominees, I see a noticeable lack of "stand out" or rather, exquisitely researched and well written articles on any one specialty or contrarily, any wide variety of subjects.
Aside from that, as he has clearly admitted to vandalizing in the beginning (evidence appearing in the first handful of comments on his talk page that didn't make his archive), I have also noticed, in addition to that, he rather seems (or has the tendency to seem) to enjoy "walking the line" of questionable behavior/contributions in the past two or three months that he has been here, including using our talk pages for idle chit-chat or "slinging mud" against those that oppose his views (notably against me, many times for no reason whatsoever), for encouraging vandals (ironically), and for showing a lack of seriousness to otherwise straight-forward format of this site -- referring to some of his so-called humorous or "inappropriate" content added to articles.
Understandably with the absence of myself and User:AJHalliwell, there has been a few more holes in the Admin coverage for a few more hours than usual in a day, but that is (or in my case was) only temporary and really, with that now recovered (now that I have returned more permanently, and the anticipated return of AJ) that does not seem to feed the need of requiring us to christen in a new Admin, as his reasoning for self-nomination indicates. If an Admin is supposed to be some sort of "model" of our community-- be it personality, encyclopedic mind or resource access, and not because we need another "vandal buster"-- then noting his lack of experience, apparent subject knowledge and questionable behavior (that I noted above), I think he needs more time than a few weeks of legitimate contributions here to earn becoming an Admin, and as well, I ultimately think he needs to build himself a bigger repertoire in his contributions (both in quantity and quality) before he gets my vote. --Alan del Beccio 21:00, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - His vandalism to start with is one reason. Also, as he has stated himself, he is still not very aware of "the rules and responsibilities of an admin".
His edits just now are fine (if not very many), but I only fear what kind of insulting response the other users here might get if his nomination is unsuccessful (luckily, this doesn't seem likely). --Defiant Administrator | Talk 21:24, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Umm, didn't he say that he doesn't hold it against anyone if they vote against him? You might wanna check your facts before you make a comment. --PRueda29 21:36, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)
He did say that (on the bottom of this page, actually), but he also has a habit of making personal attacks or derogatory "nicknames" as he did just recently on Talk:Story arcs (which he kinda apologized for). I didn't see that before I changed my vote earlier, or I wouldn't have supported, but it kinda scares me, because I really thought he was beyond that type of behavior.--Tim Thomason 21:49, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Deratory nicknames? He apologized on that page for saying: "In all fairness, Alan, let's be honest: you need glasses. You don't see the point in many things, be it a barnster, a duty roster, or a story arc. --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 23:40, 17 Dec 2005 (UTC)" That's a little harsh, but no harsher than what Alan del Beccio said on this page. --PRueda29 22:13, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)


Nominating myself was done out of frustration at once again being unable to do anything but while someone went around vandalizing, but here are some things to consider:


  • Team player - I've gotten along with everyone ever since I "shaped up" and started being a legit contributor
  • Innovative - I came up with the Duty Roster on my own, and I set the current discussion on Main Page/temp (now obsolete) into action
  • Reliability - The e-mail I have assigned to my MA account is for the office, and as I seem to spend more time there than not lately, I can usually be here within five minutes to block vandals if someone uses the "E-mail user" link


  • Inexperience - I haven't been here that long and probably am not as familiar with the rules and responsibilities of an admin as you'd like me to be
  • History - Admittedly, I did start out as a quasi-vandal because I had just discovered MA and didn't take it seriously

Like I said, the only reason I want this is so I can do something other than say "shame on you" when a vandal comes along. Dunno how the community will react. --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 17:14, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)

  • Neutral. I didn't get off to a very good start at M/A, either, nor was I here very long before I was nominated for administatorship (about four or five months, I think). Because Vedek's contributions since his "quasi-vandalism" has been exemplary, I am almost motivated to vote in complete favor of his becoming an admin. However, I think I would like to wait a little while longer before seeing him become an admin (one or two months maybe?). Also, if the only reason he was nominated was the hope of providing further defense from vandalism, I'm afraid, as Platypus said, that just won't cut it... although Vedek did provide good reasons why he should be an admin. So, I'm kinda torn between supporting and opposing, so I will have to remain neutral, at least for the time being. --From Andoria with Love 21:12, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Question regarding Platypus Man's opposition. Is there a finite number of Admin positions available? If infinite, or the number is high enough that all positions aren't likely to be filled in the forseeable future, how is an Administrator focusing on a specialty any kind of waste of resources? Like I said, I'm a newbie. Merely curious. AureliusKirk 21:21, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Re: Platypus/Shran. I would of course be glad to pitch in with other things, such as maintenance, cleanup and decision making. However, I didn't want to bee all fake about it and pretend that was my motivation. But I wouldn't blame anyone for voting against this because I know I'm not the most qualified candidate. Although for the record, the term quasi-vandal was to discriminate things intentionally done to push the envelope from writing "OMGWTFLOL" on a page. :P In any case, vandal fighting is what I want most because it gets very frustrating, and that latest wave was not cleaned up until several (I think six) hours later through the combined efforts of Cid, Shran and Alan. I get tired of going "Well gee, I hope someone shows up soon..." Re Aurelius: There is no quota on the number of admin, although as the expression goes you don't want too many chiefs. I think the concern is not about the proportion but rather the cons I listed. --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 02:33, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Abstain. Interesting arguments on all sides. It appears that, in the end, the only thing in question is whether or not Vedek Dukat has been around long enough. While I don't know how much of an issue that normally is here, on Wikipedia they are very particular and regularly say, "Well, I don't think so-and-so has been here long enough" or "You only have 1500 edits, maybe when you get to 2000" or something like that. As for me, essentially everything Shran said, sans being nominated himself, goes for me as well - including the almost voting in favor. --Broik 06:28, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment True, having an extra admin on hand when a vandal strikes would be nice, but what about the times when there are 5 admins on and we don't need an extra? Like our Andorian pal said above, it will always be fixed eventually, but it will happen. Now, I'm pretty sure that we can't do this, but I think it would be a nice idea to have an emergency-admin, a person who would only have admin "powers" in an emergency, kinda like the ECH. Another idea would be a semi-admin, who could only block vandals and revert pages, but nothing else. I'm not saying that you, Vedek, wouldn't help with the other admin duties if you were told to do so, but I don't see you striving to do them. I've been on longer than you, and I'm still not sure if I would be ready (or willing) to be an admin. I still find myself not doing certain things that I could do to help, simply because I'm lazy. An admin can't do that. You should feel compelled to do the boring things that go along with being an admin, not just blocking vandals. I'm not saying that you're not a "team player" -- you are. I'm not worried about your quasi-vandal beginnings -- you've obviously changed. You're a good MA member, but not quite an Admin. Not yet. If you needed more justification on my viewpoint, there ya go. -Platypus Man | Talk 20:52, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • Wow, I got more support votes on this than I thought! Broik hit the nail on the head with his observation about nominating myself and then thinking differently, because even though I think I could handle being an admin, I suspected as much about the lack of... credibility, for lack of a better word, since I have experience with other Wikis and being an admin but I don't think "tenure" is the right word either. Anyway, once again, I don't blame people who voted against it, and thank you to those who voted for it. :) --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 21:08, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Abstain: I'm tired of flip-flopping on this issue, so I decided not to vote at all. My gut instinct told me to oppose, mostly because his earliest incidents messing up my element pages, to his derogatory "Vulcan" statements to another user (the V-word shouldn't be used negatively). But, I tried to legitimize my argument by talking about the valid point of "experience and history." Vedek Dukat has made a lot of friends and is quite the figure in this community, however his behavior has recently shown some "degeneration" that makes me afraid that if he became an administrator, he might think he has free license to make all sorts of idle chit-chat and "friendly" name-calling. Anyways, it's turning out to be a battle between the "old-timers" of late 2004 to early 2005, and the new comers of mid to late 2005. As I come from the "middle aged" area of early to mid 2005, I guess I'll just back off and watch them duke it out.--Tim Thomason 22:01, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment. I think you might be mistaken about the battle, as Zsingaya indicated that he has been around a long time and Shran is a current administrator. But I'm a newcomer, so I don't know. Anyway I, like most people, was hoping to wash my hands of this debate, but I wanted to step in to clear the "V-word" up. Being the nosy lurker I am, I remembered seeing Dukat say somewhere that it was just a nickname, and I found the proof here. Dukat said, "I meant 'Mr. Vulcan' to be a nickname, not an insult ... opposites who coexist peacefully more or less ... he did ask me not to do it, which is why I've stopped." Sloan 01:01, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Abstain (Neutral): I'm with Tim on this one. I had no idea about the remarks he made recently (at least, if I did, they didn't click in my head), but at the same time, I've come to know him (his personality, anyway) a bit through IM's, and he's been taking the whole thing in stride. I dunno, maybe my acquaintance with him is clouding my judgment, I'm not sure, but to be on the safe side, I'm dropping out of the voting all together. --From Andoria with Love 05:09, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment (another one): Whether you are for or against this nomination, it should be alarming how much discussion this needs. To be an admin, it should be a clear "yes." With a few oppositions, a couple of objections turned support turned abstentions, and so many "mild" votes, it is clearly obvious that this need wait. That's why it has to be a unanimous vote: it should be clear. If a vote needs discussion and people being convinced, then I don't see it as being 100% good idea. Well, sorry good Vedek, but it appears that the will of the Prophets is not with you. -Platypus Man | Talk 05:30, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Tim Thomason (5/0/0)Edit

Now that the ruckus caused by our last two nominees has died down, let's try this again, shall we? :) Now, some of you may look at this as returning a favor, but I am really nominating Tim because he has a good understanding of our policies (which Mike Nobody seriously lacked) and a ton of experience and contributions behind him (which Vedek Dukat lacked). He also has no questionable history (which both Mike and Vedek lacked). He also knows the content, and also knows the responsibilities entailed with being an admin, having founded the wikipedias for the DC Animated Universe and the Hercules and Xena TV shows. He has also been made an admin on the X-Files wiki. This and the above reasons make him a perfect candidate for administratorship here at Memory Alpha. --From Andoria with Love 21:28, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I had no idea this was coming, but I graciously accept.--Tim Thomason 21:36, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)


  • Shran (implicit from nomination)
  • Sure, go for it. -Platypus Man | Talk 05:23, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • Fine with me :) Renegade54 13:45, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • Sounds good to me, too. --Galaxy001 04:44, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • Looking at Tim's recent contributions, both regarding content and "administration", he seems to have a good grasp of our explicit and implicit rules, guidelines and other conventions. -- Cid Highwind 13:03, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)



  • There's no serious reason to oppose this, but we should discuss the question if we need more admins first. --Memory 22:05, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Memory might be right, although I haven't paid close enough attention to Tim's presence to know if he's on when vandal-busting is most needed. BTW Shran, I think you mean we both had the questionable history, don't you? :) Either way, Tim also has the other qualifier an admin needs that Mike lacked: getting along with people. --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 22:12, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • I was here when that page-moving vandal was around, the one that Vedek nominated himself over. I did my best at putting the bad page titles on the Immediate delete page and moving pages back once they were deleted. [1]. But there is more to being an administrator than banning people (which I don't hope to do unless absolutely necessary).--Tim Thomason 22:35, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
      • Oh, don't get me wrong, that's not the only thing admins do. But at this point in time I think it's the only area we're deficient in, and for the moment, things seem to have died down. As I said (more than once), I would take back my nomination if I could. :) --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 22:46, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Um, this discussion isn't about whether we need more admins, nor should there be such a discussion. This is about whether or not Tim is suitable to be an administrator. Not voting or basing your vote (even a neutral vote) on the perception that we have too many administrators is not a valid argument, at least it should not be. And what about in the future? Can nobody else become an administrator now because "we have too many"? That doesn't really seem fair to me. --From Andoria with Love 07:02, 30 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • In one week, we've only gotten two votes? I guess I should bring this to people's attention by adding unneeded comments -- like this! Let's get voting, people! :-P --From Andoria with Love 13:29, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • All right, I've cast my vote. Ooops, this is uneeded.  :)--Galaxy001 04:45, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)

No objections after seven+ days. Discussion closed. -- Cid Highwind 13:06, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Vedek Dukat (null)Edit

I know the Vedek told me not to do this, but I think he deserves a chance since it's been a while now. He continues to act in ways befitting an admin, creating the Article of the Week page and singlehandedly redesigning the AotW process. He's worked at streamlining the Babel categories to maximize the page's usefulness, helped with the changes to the main page (which were initiated at his request), and assisted many new users, both on MA and through IM/email. We all know his duty roster of course, and I think he's made a complete 180 since originally joining MA. I'm not nominating him as a "reward" or "favor" - he's shown he can be trusted, and I honestly think MA will be better for it if we make him an administrator. Weyoun 04:34, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Sheesh guys, can't you give me a chance to respond to the nomination before voting goes into full swing? It's normally a formality to go "You like me! You really like me!" and accept graciously, but this horse never let the gate because I decline the offer, having asked you not to do this. Thanks Weyoun, now I look like the guy who just got fired and declares he's quitting!
Last time, I made MA history by garnering the most votes and most heated debate (as well as the most hanging chads - ahem, Shran and Tim) of any nomination. Now I'm going to do it again by becoming the first person to reject his nomination. I prefer to remain the Dennis Kucinich of MA - right on most issues but not necessarily taken seriously. ;) The example Cid was referring to is a good one: We are "legally" not allowed to use images from the Star Trek Fact Files according to the admins, but I had the nerve (read "balls") to question whether Paramount actually cares. As an admin, I couldn't say things like that, one reason I prefer to remain one of the little people.
But for the record, Cid, you didn't vote on the last nomination so you're not opposing this "again". :P --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 10:11, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)


  1. Weyoun 04:34, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  2. I know he didn't support me, but I really do think both of us would be great admin. Jaz 05:04, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  3. Talk about a good sport. Way to go, Jaz. Anyway, I eventually backed the Vedek last time and he's only gotten better since then, so my vote is the same. --Broik 05:15, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  4. Similarly, I supported the controversial nomination last time (which was I believe simply a mistake on his part) and these arguments only further convince me that he is deserving. Makon 05:49, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  5. Go for it. --Galaxy001 05:53, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)


  1. Hmm, that was quick - in fact, a little too quick, especially if the Vedek even told you not to try this at the moment. His last admin nomination, which was the most controversial we ever had, was archived less than a month ago. In that discussion, several problems were addressed, and Vedek Dukat was asked to work on them and try this again later. I think that less than a month is not enough for this, especially considering that in that time, I noticed him second-guessing standing policy or comments by other admins that were made in regard to such policy more than once. Sorry, but I have to oppose that again. -- Cid Highwind 08:50, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Jaz (2/2/2) (Withdrawn by Jaz)Edit

This is a self nomination. I have been an archivist here for about ten months, but it is really in the past month that I have stepped up my contributions to Memory Alpha. My work has shown I am committed to upholding our policy, especially canon policy. About a week ago I spent about an hour reverting the work of a vandal, to restore our articles. I have also done a lot of the nitty-gritty work, such as adding pictures to our novel pages, fixing common spelling mistakes (by searching for mispelled versions of commonly used words at MA), and welcoming new users and IPs. I hope you will consider my self-nomination - for I only ask so that I may further my ability to help. --Jaz 00:53, 15 Jan 2006 (UTC)


  • Support. Obviously. Jaz 00:53, 15 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Great contributions. I've been on here for a lot of the day and he has contributed to a large variety of articles. Jaz is ready to take on sysop rights. :) --Galaxy001 06:03, 16 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. My vote probably does not count for much because I don't know what sysop is, but he seems like a strong contributor. I hope I am not starting to sound like a yes-man. Makon 05:49, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)


  • Mild oppose. I don't want to sound like a sore loser, because it honestly has nothing to do with my feelings or Jaz personally, but I think he should wait a while. According to the Wikicities stats, he joined on April 23 of last year, but even 9er (a very new user) had more contributions than him as late as two months ago. I really like the enthusiasm I've seen from him (450 of his 850 edits were in January of this year!), but I'd like to wait a while before we make him an admin. I realize that edit counts are not the sole determining factor, but I'd like potential admins to demonstrate consistency, as the recent burst of persistence seems to have started a few weeks prior to his nomination (he's usurped my "welcoming committee" role :P). I'll change my mind if someone else can convince me otherwise. (On the side, I think he's a bit too anti-apocrypha -- or pro-canon if you're a Republican -- for my taste, but that's personal feelings and not voting rationale.) --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 02:40, 15 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • Mild oppose. I sort of hate for my first vote on an admin to be an oppose, but looking at the stats page Vedek Dukat put out shows that Jaz has less than 200 article edits, and almost as many edits on non-article pages like User pages, talk, etc. To me that speaks to a user who is more interested in the being an admin/managing the site than actually contributing content. There's also the policy point for admin nominations that says they should have contributed to "several hundred" articles. Admins have to demonstrate thorough knowledge of MA policies not just by commenting on them, it seems, but by creating content and editing content according to those policies. Jaz isn't quite there, esp. compared to the work of current Admins. Until there are more articles under his belt I consider this nomination a little premature. Logan 5 17:55, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
In my defense Logan, the Stats page is over 2 months old (see Ten Foreward), and if you check my contributions you will notice I have around 1500 edits now. Jaz 00:45, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I stand corrected on that count and will consider revising my vote to Neutral. However, I still have some concern that so many of your contributions are to non-article pages, and that actual article edits are mostly minor edits or additions of templates and other organizational type edits rather than serious content contribution. I think there needs to be a demonstration of content-creation, not just content-labeling, in order to convince me there is a full understanding of how policies work on content, not just how they work on site structure and rules. If you've got at least a few major content efforts that I can look at and just missed on your contributions page please note them and I'll check them out. Logan 5 18:24, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


Except you have recently demonstrated that you are not ready to be an admin with your rude comment on Q's talk page, calling it "vandalism" and "slander" (which should have been libel anyway :P) when all he did was strike an oppose vote on the nominations for featured articles once your concern - an image copyright issue - had been addressed. True, he should have left a message on your talk page, but your response was inappropriate and inflammatory. You also lashed out at a new user (I forgot which one) who had edited your user page - copyediting spelling/grammar errors, changes I would welcome if it was my page, especially considering you left the changes the user made - blabbering on about policy. I think it's best if this entire issue just goes away so we can move on to better, more important things. --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 00:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


That user was Carboni. Why don't you check out his user page and see what he has to say about that "outburst". Jaz 01:01, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


Which shows that Carbonari has a lot more patience than you, nothing less, nothing more. Your comment on the talk page was way overdone considering you left his changes intact afterwards... You didn't even thank him. :P --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 01:07, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


  • To comment in my defense, my recent wave of edits (as you said, about 500 in 2 or 3 weeks) is the reason I want to be admin, not vice versa. I'm only here to help. You'll notice I have never vandalized a page, or acted contrary to our policy to my knowledge. Yes, two months ago I was ranked 73rd on wikistats, but I've made almost 900 edits, and I am an active member of our community. I nominated myself because I think I can make MA a better place. --Jaz
  • I'm just commenting at the moment, because I haven't had time to check Jaz's contributions yet. I'm basing this on the other comments made here, mainly on the comment by Jaz above. He says: "my recent wave of edits is the reason I want to be an admin". I think, and you can read a lengthy comment about that on the talk page of this article, that neither should "many article edits" be the sole reason for becoming an admin, nor vice versa. Someone who likes to edit and contribute much content doesn't necessarily need to be an admin. And someone who would be a good admin doesn't need to have a minimum of X article edits per week. Admin status is not a reward for activity. I will try to look into this and vote when I find the time, but until then, my suggestion would be to check whether you really want to be an admin, or just an active contributor... -- Cid Highwind 13:40, 15 Jan 2006 (UTC)
    • I just want to help, and I think I can help a lot more as an admin. Jaz 16:20, 15 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: That's why I think we need a discussion on the process before nominating more admins. Sure, Jaz helps us, but does he need admin rights for this? There are not that much privileges that an admin has, so if he want to help the project he can do that as user too. More and more I get the impression that this process is treated like some kind of promotion of active users so that they have some kind of "medal" for their contribs. But this is covered by the featured articles, not by the voting for adminship. Wiki-admins should be people that proved that they are able to moderate discussions or help other users (newbies) with problems in an ideal way. Based on this, they get some possibilities like blocking vandals or pages to solve problems, but these cases are not that common that we need 20 Admins for that. This is no reason to oppose his nomination, so I won't do it, but it would be useful to clarify our needs concerning admins before going on with this. --Memory 22:42, 15 Jan 2006 (UTC)
    • To quote the policy: "the more administrators the better". I think I have proven I can be trusted with this job, my record is spotless, and I already perform some admin-like tasks such as welcoming new users and reverting vandals. I think we do need more admin, because there are times when there isn't one available. I make most of my edits between 11:30 PM and 12:30 AM EST, a time I find there are often very few people logged in, and there was an occasion where I found myself reverting a vandal, and it was about 15 minutes before an admin was able to disable him (I can't take credit for this alsone, Zsynga did a lot of them too). As I've said before, I want to do this because I think my assistance can make MA a better place, and I have proven myself to be both competent and trustworthy. Jaz 22:49, 15 Jan 2006 (UTC)
      • The policy must not be correct, this is still discussed. And as you say by yourself, you don't need to be admin to revert vandalism. --Memory 20:54, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Neutral. I read this earlier and meant to vote, but I don't think I can one way or the other. Jaz is a great contributor, but the questions of his consistency/motives and a couple cases in the recent changes list (such as putting a PNA on a blank page instead of listing it for immediate deletion) make me think twice about it. Like Memory said not enough to oppose, but I don't think I can support either. I'm a lurker who's on at the same time as Jaz, and it seems that Shran and the Vedek are on to revert the vandalism if that's the concern. ---Broik 06:08, 16 Jan 2006 (UTC)
    • True, but it is not fair to discuss limiting administrators for various reasons. Just because Shran and Vedek are the main vandalism reverters dosen't mean that there can't be more or backup reverters. If Jaz is a major contributor (which he is), then it is fair enough to give him the opertunity of stepping up to sysop rights. If we want to limit the number of admins, put it on Ten Forward. Right now is the time to say yay or nay to Jaz (I say yay, see above). --Galaxy001 01:01, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)
      • Nothing Broik said indicated he was voting based on politics. He only mentioned at the end that there are other people around (most of the time) to revert vandalism. --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 01:49, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)
      • Sorry if what I commented sounded like that. :) --Galaxy001 05:12, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • Neutral. I have no reason to oppose this, but there are a few minor reasons why I don't wish to support it. While it is true, he has been a good contributor, I'm not entirely sure he's ready for sysop rights. It's a bit hard to explain actually -- he has made plenty of contributions, although I would like to see him make a lot more before becoming an admin; and there have been editing mistakes made on his part (i.e. incorrectly placing templates), but those are mistakes anyone can make (we're only Human after all), but after nearly a year, I think he would know better. (Then again, I'm still in the learning process. Merges, anybody? :P) But something about him just doesn't scream "admin" to me; at the same time, I can't find the reason why he doesn't. Therefore, I must remain neutral on this... because I just don't frickin' know what to think! :P --From Andoria with Love 02:09, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Galaxy001 (1/2/0) (January 2006, unresolved after 14 days)Edit

While we are all in this administrator discussion, I believe that I will join.  :) I first found Memory-Alpha early last year. I thought it was great, and recently started making contributions. Also, recently, I became a user because I thought that I could contribute more that way. Now, I would like to give a go at admin rights because I believe that I can help even more that way. I have also created my own web site with MediaWiki, which shows that I am qualified for this position. Also, this evening, I have been trying to fix a bunch of PNA articles. I may not have done as much as, say Shran, but I believe that the above qualifies me for admin. I want to help in any way I can, so going for admin is another way I can help.

Actually, some people, like Jaz and Shran, enspired me to run for this position. --Galaxy001 06:03, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)


Of course.  :) --Galaxy001 06:03, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)


  • Sorry, but I have to oppose that for the moment. I have no reason not to believe you when you say that you did contribute since early last year - but the fact is, your first edit with this user account was not even a month ago, and since then you made only about 50 edits. This is simply not enough to judge whether you would make a good admin or not. I think it would be best if you just continued to contribute, and we'll talk about this again another time? -- Cid Highwind 08:37, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • I, too, must oppose. By your own admission, you only recently began to contribute and even more recently created a user name. From the community's viewpoint, you only began editing a month ago and have only made a handful of edits since, which is just not enough to determine whether or not you are suited for sysop rights. Keep contributing, though, and within a few months, you may get a better outcome here. Sorry, boyo. --From Andoria with Love 02:19, 18 January 2006 (UTC)


Comment. Oh well, I tried. I'll keep making contributions and mabey run for admin again in a few months. --Galaxy001 03:04, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Renegade54 (1/2/0) Edit

Renegade has made hundreds of edits and contributes in one of MA's weak spots by re-formatting articles continuously. Renegade has expressed an interest in becomming an admin and according to my observations, Renegade is could definately go for sysop rights. So, I'm definately supporting him! --Galaxy001 20:03, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Support Edit

--Galaxy001 20:03, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Oppose Edit

Oppose. First off, and no offense to Renegade, he hasn't even been here for four months yet. He has had a few fairly recent notices on his talk page about style and such, and he hasn't made many significant changes, as best I can tell. Sure, he's made the re-formatting edits, like Galaxy said, but some of those are the mindless types of edits that are best suited to a bot. Sure, he has made "hundreds of edits," (2330, by my count), but many of those edits were on a single page in the same stretch (IE, he could have made them all at the same time) and almost all (2177, by my count) are minor edits. That means that he only considers 153 of his edits to be major, let alone how many actually are major. Becoming an Admin is not our reward for being a good contributor; it means that the person has shown initiative, reliability, knowledge, hard work, time, and a lot more edits than that, or at least more major edits. Sorry Renegade54, not yet, but you are on the right track. -Platypus Man | Talk 21:13, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Oppose. Also, no offense intended, but I do not believe Renegade is ready for administrative abilities yet. I'll admit, he's a great guy and he's excellent in making formatting fixes and minor edits. However, his minor edits to major edits 'ratio' is quite one-sided to minor edits. As time goes on and more major edits are performed by Renegade, I'm sure he would have a greater chance at becoming an admin. Sorry Renegade, but continue your good work! - Adm. Enzo Aquarius 21:18, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Comments Edit

Jaz (6/0/0)Edit

Today is big day for me here at Memory Alpha. Today marks exactly one year since my first edit. I feel I've come a long way in that year, and that I have made a positive impact on Memory Alpha. This is from Memory Alpha:Administrators:

Memory Alpha's general policy is to grant administrator status to anyone who has actively participated in the development of the encyclopedia for a while and is a recognized member of the community. For a wiki, the more administrators that participate in the system, the better.

I believe I have certainly proven that I am an active member, but more importantly I, I believe I have demonstrated that I can be trusted; I have (obviously) never vandalized, I try to give positive feedback when I can, I make an effort to welcome new users, and I have tried to add new aspect to improve MA, such as the Novel Duty Roster, and Ghosts, which it now appears may become the first comic book on MA to be featured. I really enjoy my time here, and I feel I can make an even more positive contribution with sysop rights. Thank you. Jaz talk 19:19, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Also, just as a side not for those who say we don't need more admin, today after a vandal uploaded some really disgusting pictures ontop of the ones on the mainpage, we went about 15 minutes before a anyone realized it and reverted. The other pics are still in the history as no admin has yet deleted them. This is by no means meant to be an insult to our admin -- it would be impossible for them to be on 24 hrs a day, which is why we need more :) Jaz talk 22:34, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
And today the communism vandal hit about 70 pages before anyone blocked him. Jaz talk 16:58, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
wtf is with these people, anyway? Do they have no life?? Sheesh. -- Renegade54 17:09, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
I think this is a great step to take, especially since Jaz is so up to date on how we are expanding MA's "media" articles on comics, novels, etc, as well as helping the continued improvement of canon subject matter -- Captain M.K.B. 19:37, 30 April 2006 (UTC)


  • Support -- Renegade54 17:09, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Support -- Jörg 17:12, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Support -- Captain M.K.B. 19:37, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 04:05, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. However, I do suggest to Jaz that he be a bit more civil when reverting edits. I seem to recall not too long ago when he removed some non-canon info and stated in the summary box that nobody cared about the information. Such behavior, I feel, is unbecoming of an admin. Other than that, however, he has done some good work, especially in welcoming new users and reverting vandalism. I think he still needs to learn the difference between testing and vandalism, though. ;) --From Andoria with Love 04:38, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: Calling someone a nutjob isn't very adminlike, either... --From Andoria with Love 04:38, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
I was actually refering to my nutjob remarks :) Jaz talk 04:38, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Oh, okay. Then I move to strike that last comment. My apologies. :D --From Andoria with Love 04:40, 1 May 2006 (UTC)


  • Oppose -- I cannot in good conscience support Jaz, due to his views on the war. --Ricimer 04:27, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
I have no idea what your taking about. Jaz talk 04:33, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Neither do I, nor is it a valid reason to oppose... --From Andoria with Love 04:36, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Not to rain on anyone's parade, but there's nothing in the policy that states which objections might be "invalid" under specific circumstances. Striking that comment is not an option. However, I suggest to keep this nomination open (not reject after 14 days) until either Ricimer rescinds his comment himself or we find a consensus to alter our policy in that regard (something which seems to be long overdue, didn't we have lengthy discussions about that topic already?). Just to make that absolutely clear, I don't have any problems with Jaz becoming an admin (although I really don't like self-nominations), but it wouldn't make a good impression if he became an admin just by violating policy... -- Cid Highwind 14:26, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
For the record, I wasn't the one who struck out his comment, although I do think it was justified. I'm not even sure which war he's talking about, or what my stance on it is. Jaz talk 14:35, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
This seems rather insane. And to demonstrate the insanity of an all rejections valid apporach, to further mix it up I am going to oppose because I'm fairly certain there are foods that I like that Jaz does not like. Jaf 14:37, 2 May 2006 (UTC)Jaf
WP:POINT. Too bad we don't have an own page for this - sometimes I really think we need it. -- Cid Highwind 14:55, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm allowed to vote. And I meant what I said, the fact that my action also proves my point is secondary. Jaf 15:14, 2 May 2006 (UTC)Jaf
Your earlier comment makes it clear that proving a point wasn't a secondary concern of yours in this case. Anyway, I'm done with this subdiscussion. Maybe it might be best if you thought about rescinding that objection and instead joined the constructive discussion that we are already having on the talk page. Thanks. -- Cid Highwind 15:33, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
I maintain that my primary concern is food preference. My objection remains, future admin must have the same taste in food, sorry. Jaf 16:57, 2 May 2006 (UTC)Jaf
Just for the record, the person who started this all has only made 8 edits to the mainspace, and several months ago he was using our site to harass Mike Sussman. Jaz talk 22:39, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
We are a perfect troll target, we spend most of our time arguing politics. Jaf 23:05, 2 May 2006 (UTC)Jaf
  • Oppose. See also my comment in the section below. I think that someone considering discussions and necessary consensus-finding "unbearable internal politics" and "not fun enough" might, in his own interests, want to think about staying a "normal" editor instead of becoming an admin (which needs to deal with these things). Perhaps Jaz has something to say about this when he returns, as I'm definitely willing to reconsider this objection if he changes his mind... -- Cid Highwind 12:48, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
I am now back. I had some temporary frustration, so I felt it was best to remove myself from the scene for a few days, but I feel much better now, and I'm very glad to be back. Jaz talk 02:03, 8 May 2006 (UTC)


I tallied Jaf's objection as an "oppose" for now even though I'm fairly certain it was only meant to prove a point... -- SmokeDetector47( TALK ) 23:17, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Comment: I move to strike Ricimer's vote, as the reason stated has nothing to do with Memory Alpha, Jaz, or the administratorship. Ricimer has caused trouble on MA before (on Mike Sussman's talk page; he has made next to 0 contributions; and his statement that he doesn't agree with Jaz's view on the war has no standing as he doesn't know Jaz's point on the war - at least, it's never been discussed on MA, which is what matters. Again, I move to strike the vote and let common sense reign again. --From Andoria with Love 04:44, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I second that motion. I'm all for rules, and for not making exceptions, but when the rules get in the way of getting the job done, then there's a problem. Like I said before, I doubt that whoever put the policy in writing thought it through to this point. A lot of the policies, at least initially, assume a well-behaved, rational, orderly community of archivists, and don't take every conceivable exception into consideration. I think we need to be intelligent about interpreting the rules, and if there's a grey area, submit the issue for a consensus. -- Renegade54 13:12, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Again, that's why we're having a discussion to actually change the policy on the talk page right now. That doesn't mean we should just ignore the existing one - even now, there is some controversy about this, and simply ignoring that is the worst of all options. -- Cid Highwind 13:19, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
We're not ignoring policy, we're just interpreting it to mean that votes do not count unless they are supported by a reason that makes sense; votes cast for the sake of disrupting activities or based on personal reasons do not count, and I wish you'd stop encouraging our troll friend. --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 00:34, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
No, they do - which, as I said here and elsewhere, is a problem with the current policy that should be dealt with, not ignored. As for my wishes, I wish you wouldn't simply keep reverting my edits while completely ignoring the ongoing discussion that tries to deal with exactly that (which, btw, also shows that the situation is not as clear as you are making it out to be). To avoid an edit war, I'm not going to change that back again, although I'm not convinced. However, before this is going somewhere let me address two things: First, I'm not going to make someone an admin that is "on hiatus". This is not an objection, but I see no reason to give special rights to someone who is inactive. Whatever the outcome is, this should be put on hold until Jaz returns. Second, and that I do call an objection - discussions, consensus-finding, adhering to existing policies (and trying to work on them if they turn out to be problematic) all are a part of the typical "wiki procedure". Even more than that, they are part of the "admin work", and someone who thinks that this sort of "internal politics" is "unbearable" should perhaps (and especially in his own interest) not become an admin as which he would have to deal with this, but instead concentrate on the "fun" part of editing. -- Cid Highwind 07:48, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree about the hiatus, and certainly that the policy needs to be discussed. However, in certain circumstances I feel that there are cases where a hole in a policy must be filled in order to keep the ship from sinking, which is why I reverted the edits. As usual, it was nothing personal, just to make that clear.

One thing I'm concerned about is User:Jaz/Suggestions to vandals... That shows some immaturity to be sure. --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 08:03, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I, personally, thought that was kinda clever. Read it over carefully, and you should note that his suggestions are (for the most part) non-vandalizing things to be done (ie, add constructive comment to pages, click on amazon lks, don't edit -- browse!). That may just be me though. Back to copyedits and whatnot. Whee. -- Sulfur 12:12, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

  • I think Jaz has withdrawn his nomination of himself. See User:Jaz. Will the discussion about rules change continue? --Bp 22:33, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Sure. Why should it stop now just to be brought up the next time again? -- Cid Highwind 12:48, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
I am now back, see above. Jaz talk 02:04, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Well, then - Good to see you back. :)
Let me just rescind my objection and finally get this done... -- Cid Highwind 21:34, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Jörg (5/0/0)Edit

The reasons why Jörg should be an admin are self-explanatory if you look at his contributions. Since September of last year, he has made numerous contributions to MA, especially in the image department. He has proven himself reliable, has shown a vast knowledge of the Trek universe, and has shown a dedicated commitment to this project. I believe he has also helped out with vandalism from time to time and, especially recently, has created over 100 new articles (no stubs). That's admin material if I've ever seen it. --From Andoria with Love 04:34, 31 May 2006 (UTC)


  • Shran (implicit from nomination)
  • Jaz
  • Renegade54
  • Bp - Jörg is a great contributor. Definately "Most Valuable Archivist" for the last week. Since May 24 hes made over 500 edits, created over 100 new articles (as shran mentioned - no stubs) and uploaded over 50 images. He is available on IRC often and he's always been helpful whenever I've needed information about something Trek.
  • F8street - For all the reasons listed above. Productive, Helpful, and allways online.



Thanks for the nomination and I accept, now that I'm finished with uni and do have the time (as you might have noticed during the past week...) :-)--Jörg 09:44, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Tough Little Ship (3/0/0)Edit

I've been here for a more than a year now, so I thought I'd give this a shot. I think I write average articles etc and know how things are done around here. -- Tough Little Ship 09:59, 30 June 2006 (UTC)


  • Support -- When it rains... it pours 12:34, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. I'm not a fan of self nominations, but Ship's done good, consistent work as evidenced by his contributions and I think he'd be of great help as an admin. --From Andoria with Love 05:23, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. as per Shran, seem to be a good editor who knows what he is doing. Mafeu 20:11, 5 July 2006 (UTC)



Renegade54 (3/1/0)Edit

Renegade54 is a consistently good editor who seems familiar with policies and guidelines and appears in the RC regularly. I'm confident that he would be trustworthy as an administrator. --Bp 16:56, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


  • Bp (implied from nomination)
  • Support. I whole heartedly support this nomination. Renegade has been one of those people who has helped me, and continues to help me, learn more about how to do things and make pages properly on MA. He consistently makes large number of edits, fixing formatting, links, etc. --OuroborosCobra talk 17:47, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Well... just so long as he doesn't have any more of these little slip-ups. ;) --From Andoria with Love 17:58, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


  • Oppose. Pros: Renegade has been here 8 months, consistantly uses the "summary bar" and has made the fifth most contributions to this site. Cons: a very high percentage of his edits have simply been "mindless" minor cosmetic or formatting edits, such as: adding links, italics, categories, templates, +actors, etc. to pages. Now, I am not saying that those types of edits are not necessary here, but certainly, I haven't seen anything done here that has really stood out beyond that what random IP users are found occassionally doing on site. I have not seen, in the past month, the creation of a single new Star Trek related article nor any (that I can see) significant contributions made to any existing Star Trek article. So other than having good editing skills-- edits that, in reality, even a non-fan of the series could do, I haven't seen any real impressive, thorough, or well-researched contributions to M/A, in terms of Star Trek related contributions nor the near-limitless Star Trek knowledge some here possess and contribute to M/A. --Alan del Beccio 18:16, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Comment: Hmm... those are valid points. I guess I should look at what type of edits he's been done, rather than how long he's been here and how many. Oh, well, I'll stick with my support vote for now, since only one valid oppose vote is needed for the nomination to fail. :P --From Andoria with Love 18:29, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Comment: The large number of minor edits is the significant contribution. These edits together have greatly improved the quality of MA. Also, I don't believe that admin has to be a spectacular writer or even Trek expert, he just has to be trustable with the power to delete and block. Looking at the conversations that Renegade has participated in via Talk pages, it's safe to say that he isn't a jerk and he probably wouldn't misuse the extra power. He meets all the criteria at becoming an administrator. --Bp 20:30, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Allow me to clarify my comment above. I have already voted in support of Renegade's nomination, and I find no need to change it unless I'm given a damn good reason. Alan does have a point: Renegade's edits are mostly minor cosmetic changes, and therefore his usefulness as an admin may be minimal. However, his total number of contributions are what I believe should really count. He has been consistent and helpful in his formatting, and I believe there can be no harm in allowing him to become an admin. Therefore, my vote remains – although, with Alan's opposition (and any other future opposition), it may not matter. But I do see where Alan's coming from. I would like to hear Renegade's thoughts on this... --From Andoria with Love 19:06, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


  • Comment: I've thought about this subject a bit, and here is my two cent's worth on the issue.
First off, I'd be glad to help out in an admin capacity if everyone agrees that I'd be of value. I'm currently a systems administrator for a health care provider, and I have the type of job where I spend large blocks of time waiting for something to go wrong, whereupon I fix the problem and go back to waiting. In between, I have a fair amount of free time and flexibility in how to spend that time. This allows me to work on MA during the day (EST), and I'd be able to perform admin tasks during that time as well. I've been a systems admin for 20+ years, and admin duties here on MA are similar in nature: cleanup of files, moving of files, setting protections, monitoring users and disk space, etc. I've also been a web administrator, so that knowledge of HTML, CSS, and the like might be useful as well.
Having said that, though, I wouldn't lose sleep if I didn't become an admin; if you'd like me to help, great, if not... ok, no problem.
One thing that does bother me, though, is the implication that one should have God-like Trek knowledge in order to be an effective admin here. I strongly disagree with that viewpoint; that aside, if that is one of the criteria for becoming an administrator on MA, then the policy on that should be amended to reflect that in some way. As it stands now, "it is expected that a nominee for administratorship be a registered member of the community for at least several months" (check), " have made several hundred edits to articles" (check), " exhibit a good understanding of Memory Alpha's Policies and guidelines" (check), and "to be an active participant in the implementation of those policies for various articles" (check). The policy says nothing about level of Trek knowledge; I'll readily admit that many (most? all??) of the other members of this wiki have more extensive Trek info available off the tops of their heads than do I. I don't really think that's an absolute requirement of an admin here, though. Knowing where to find information and how to retrieve it is most important in any kind of research project.
Another irksome issue is the statement that nothing I've done here "has really stood out beyond that what random IP users are found occassionally doing on site". For one thing, I've found myself (and most others) reverting about as many of the contributions of anonymous users as are kept, with many of the other requiring (often substantial) editing. That notwithstanding, even though, as stated, most of my edits have been relatively minor in nature (spelling, link fixes, adding links, removing redundant links, formatting, reorganizing, categorizing, etc.), I have done more than that. My more substantial contributions, though, have typically been in the form of researching lists such as Borg technology, chemical compounds, alerts, reports, conflicts, and others, or in creating articles such as Jem'Hadar ranks. In addition, I've spent considerable time and effort in standardizing all the episode navigation templates and editing each episode to replace hard-coded tables in a number of different formats with templates. And, I must say, I do bristle at the suggestion that the bulk of the editing I've done (as well as many others, such as Bp, Sulfur, and others spending time doing "cleanup" work) is "mindless". Proper editing takes a keen eye, good proofreading skills, good spelling abilities, an excellent vocabulary, good grammar, and lots of time... ask an editor at any publishing house.
I guess that's about it. It's all rather moot, though, because as Shran pointed out, all it takes is one oppose vote to kill the nomination, and that's been cast. -- Renegade54 22:16, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Renegade54 (7/0) Edit

Renegade54 registered 26 October 2005, almost one year ago. In that time, he has made at least 9019 article edits. While I have only seen his edits since the end of May, his work and diligence on Memory Alpha have always impressed me. When I started making articles, he helped me improve them and to learn the style used here. He has shown again and again that he understands our manual of style and our policies and guidelines. He is constantly making "maintainence" edits, fixing links, spelling, categories, etc. throughout the database. While somemay see this as minor work, it isn't. It is entirely necessery to the operation and professional quality of Memory Alpha. Renegade54 does a tremendous amount of work in this department almost every single day. In closing, I would like to add that I am certain that I am leaving things out that Renegade54 has done, that is how much he does around here. --OuroborosCobra talk 19:40, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


  1. OuroborosCobra (from nomination)
  2. I agree, Renegade does a lot of work, and especially "admin-like" work, already. I think he can be trusted with admin powers, and in the end that is what should count when we're discussing an admin nomination, not the number of articles he has written from scratch. -- Cid Highwind 19:48, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
  3. Yes, again. --Bp 00:15, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  4. Yes, for the love of Surak, support! --From Andoria with Love 16:46, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  5. Yes, my support as well. --Jörg 16:50, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  6. Support -- Michael Warren | Talk 17:20, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  7. Support - many contributors wax and wane, myself included, but Renegade seems to be always around and making solid decisions. Logan 5 17:42, 13 September 2006 (UTC)



JemHadar (N/A)Edit

JemHadar registered about a week ago, after many years of using M-A, with the single goal of creating Czech language version of Memory Alpha.

While working on this goal, I found out that I miss the administration rights, e.g. for customizing CSS, not to mention that a Wiki has to have at least one administrator, and since it was me who decided to start the Czech version and work on it, I believe I would be the right person for the job.

I am dedicated to help to create the best Czech Star Trek reference guide on the internet. If you make me an administrator, I shall not let you down. - JemHadar

There's no admin on MA-cs ?!! But who asked the creation of this version ? Generally, Wikia granted admin rights to this creator. If Wikia forgot to nominate an admin, there's a problem and you should ask them. MA-en admin can't do anything about that because admin rights are specific to the language version. - From Cardassia with pain 12:10, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Evidently he created that version as he is the only contributor to that version of the site.--Alan del Beccio 12:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Yes, guys, that was me who created this version. I am sorry if this is the wrong place. I'll contact Wikia then. --JemHadar 12:46, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Cid had Bureaucrat status at one time (in fact, the Administrators page still says he is one). Does he still have that flag? If so, I believe he can change JemHadar into an admin as well. -- Renegade54 14:42, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I think the Bureaucrat status might only be on MA/en. --OuroborosCobra talk 14:49, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
I think he does only on the "en" site, not all. As I pointed out in the external link above, to my knowledge the first item to appear on the "recent changes" page of new wiki's is usually with Sanse or Angela or someone from Wikia granting bureaucrat status to someone on that particular site-- the link I posted above shows none what so ever. Personally, I am curious how that particular site was started, as judging from JemHadar's comments, he sounds as if he just did it all by himself. --Alan del Beccio 14:59, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
My mistake... on further investigation, I see that the Bureaucrat status is version-specific, just as Admin status is. I'm curious about the Czech version also, since, as you mentioned, the first item in the recent changes list for the Russian version is Angela, granting Admin and Bureaucrat status to the user Eartheaven there. -- Renegade54 15:20, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Basically what I did is that I followed the MA guide for creating localisated versions of the site. I asked wikia to create MA-cs, today I got an e-mail they did, and so I started working on it... --JemHadar 15:33, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, so based on my experience and observations, what you (JemHadar) are really waiting on is for Wikia to give you the permissions, not us. I might suggest going to the "live chat and support" in the toolbox on the left and going to the "#wikia" room and discuss it with them there. --Alan del Beccio 15:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
I just did :) Thank you everyone! --JemHadar

Archived --Alan del Beccio 16:28, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Sulfur (7/0) (February 2007) Edit

Sulfur is a pork loin that is succulent, tender, and incredibly tasty (sorry about that, I was dared to do that on IRC). Seriously now though. Sulfur has been an editor for 9 months now. He has nearly 10000 edits, more than some of the active administrators that have been here even longer. Like Renegade, he does a great many of the minor edits that allow this site to function, such as his link fixes for the disambiguation pages that have been filling RC recently. These are edits that require a lot of time and attention, and cannot be done by bots. He is giving of his own time to do these edits. When Sulfur puts himself on a task, he gets it done. Sulfur has also been one of the primary editors of our comics sections. Recently, he has created most of the Gold Key comics, and is in the process of expanding them.

Sulfur is also very courteous when it comes to his communications with other editors. I don't think I have ever seen him get into a fight with other archivists, and he is quick to go to talk pages when there is a policy question or suggestion that he has. Some of our admins have gotten to used to just reverting edits, rather than trying to discuss them. Sulfur does not have that problem. Sulfur is also one of the only editors I can think of who always puts a good description in the edit summary, very helpful both for looking through the edit history, and for other archivists looking through "recent changes".

For these reasons and more, I think that Sulfur would make a valuable addition to our administrator team. --OuroborosCobra talk 17:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC)


  1. OuroborosCobra (by nomination)
  2. I too am also quite impressed by Sulfur's work here on Memory Alpha, and I definitely support his nomination for administratorship. - Enzo Aquarius 21:56, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
  3. Sulfur does a lot of important detail work, and the Gold Key contributions are as well-done as they are needed. He will make an excellent admin. Support --GNDN 01:51, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
  4. Hell's yeah, support! ;) --From Andoria with Love 03:03, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
  5. Support, definitely deserving of it. -- Jaz talk 21:03, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
  6. Half-Mild, Half-Strong Support: As long as I get to block him once he goes rogue. (Seriously, I see no problems with someone who tortures themself like the best of us).--Tim Thomason 03:44, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
  7. Support: He will make a good admin. --WTRiker 01:04, 2 February 2007 (UTC)



Well, I may as well accept the nomination. At pretty much the end of the first seven days. Thanks for the kind words all. :) -- Sulfur 18:42, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

StoryMaster (1/11) (April 2007)Edit

I would like to nominate myself to be an admin. I have alot of valuable ideas to help improve and make this wiki great.StoryMaster 22:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


  1. StoryMaster


  1. Cid Highwind
  2. Mr. del bechio.
  3. Sulfur - as per the becoming an admin page: "it is expected that a nominee for administratorship be a registered member of the community for at least several months, and to have made several hundred edits to articles." "It's best for the nominees to exhibit a good understanding of Memory Alpha's Policies and Guidelines"
  4. Shran - reason: see the policies quoted by Sulfur above and by Alan below.
  5. OuroborosCobra - For the reasons stated above. I would add, though, that losing this vote is no reason not to bring your ideas to Memory Alpha. You don't have to be an admin to do that.
  6. GNDN -rationale: alot!?
  7. Kobi - Of course the contributions should not speculate about breasts of a Vorta.
  8. Jörg
  9. Enzo Aquarius - Only a day's worth of edits, when typically an admin should be here for months (if not a year or more), along with hundreds of edits.
  10. Maestro4k - Only one minor edit, only been a member for a few days. There's simply no record to judge you by.
  11. The Doctor


If you are going to oppose, I think you owe me the dignity of a reason.StoryMaster 23:02, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Zero useful edits on this site, for starters. There really is no need to go on...--Alan del Beccio 23:04, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I have to say this is a very cold welcome to the Wiki. I would have thought things would have been alot friendlier. I really want to help expand and grow this Wiki. I hope you can see that over time.. StoryMaster 08:23, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

To be honest, don't consider this vote to be a 'cold entry'. We are simply following the outlines for administratorship nomination, in which one who wishes to be an admin should have more experience with MA, including time and contributions. Nonetheless, you are still able to work and contribute to Memory Alpha without being an admin ;) - V. Adm. Enzo Aquarius 01:21, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

yes, I know but all my additions have been deleted. I have a hard time understanding what "cannon" is, and how to get my information accepted into the Memory Alpha cannon. Any guidance would be appreciated.StoryMaster 22:27, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Simple. Follow the link to canon. Read the policy that is linked on your talk page. Not that tough really. Unless you get your story a) published by Pocket Books (which would make it Apocrypha) or b) shown on screen in a proper, licensed Star Trek television series or movie, then it will never be canon. That's how it works here. It's pretty simple really. And by pretty simple, I mean, very insanely simply.
Now, please note, none of this is new to you, as this is at least the third time that you've been told. -- Sulfur 22:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok, so this wiki ONLY allows information that has been seen on screen. Am i correct? I have browed around alot and the wiki is very comprehensive on things from screen. I think it is hard to find places that do not have a record of what is on screen. StoryMaster 22:48, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Then we've done a good job. Trust me though, there is still a lot more to be done. --OuroborosCobra talk 22:52, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Enzo Aquarius (12/0/0) (April 2007)Edit

Enzo Aquarius has been an active member of this community since November 2004 and has over 5000 edits. He has written or contributed to some of our better articles here, ranging from episode summaries ("The Naked Now", for example), general articles that he has fleshed out (such as Antarian Trans-stellar Rally), and has done work towards articles that have been featured (such as Delta Flyer). He has also been one of the drivers behind the "It's a Wrap!" auction stuff. More of his contributions are listed on his user page, with some of his favorites on my talk page.

Enzo has demonstrated an understanding of our policies and practices here as well. He is often involved in talk page discussions to help decide what content should be here, or how it should be presented. He often helps in properly formatting new additions, and tries to help newer members "learn the ropes".

He has a generally positive attitude here, better than some of our currently active administrators. For these, and more, I feel he would be a good addition to our administrator team. --OuroborosCobra talk 23:13, 13 April 2007 (UTC)


  1. OuroborosCobra talk 23:13, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  2. Alan del Beccio 23:21, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  3. Shran 23:22, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
    Oh come on! - V. Adm. Enzo Aquarius 23:38, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
    Deal with it. --From Andoria with Love 23:40, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  4. Renegade54 23:34, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  5. Obviously not a sockpuppet. --Captain MKB Timm Thomason 23:48, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  6. Captain MKB 00:12, 14 April 2007 (UTC), maybe also an article for the Aquarius constellation...
  7. Jörg 06:24, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  8. Maestro4k 13:22, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
  9. Gabriel O. Brum 06:01, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
  10. Kobi 07:09, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
  11. Mafeu 12:42, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  12. Willie 13:37, 19 April 2007 (UTC)


  1. StoryMaster Some of his edits include non-cannon material so I cant support the nomination.StoryMaster 00:49, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I disagree. Please provide specific examples. -- Renegade54 02:49, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I have to question whether this is bitterness over your own failed self-nomination and the fact that we are not allowing you to add self created material. --OuroborosCobra talk 03:01, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
As no reasonable explanation has been given for the opposition (which is required) and since the opposer's history is questionable, at best, and this is likely another attempt at disruption on his part, his vote has been struck out and ignored until such time that a reasonable explanation and examples are given. --From Andoria with Love 03:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I know you all dislike what I did before, but I truely didnt understand cannon. Now I do so I know that it means on screen material. One example of a non-cannon posting is a Section 31 book he put on here (I can get the title if you really need it). Its a non cannon piece of material and from how the rules were given to me, it should not be allowedStoryMaster 06:29, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

It is within our policies here to write articles on the licensed products from a real world perspective. While individual characters and such from those products (like the novels) do not get articles of their own, the novels themselves do. Therefore Enzo has done nothing against policy. --OuroborosCobra talk 06:33, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
And thus, the vote remains ignored. --From Andoria with Love 06:43, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Another non-cannon example is the PC World page. This clearly is not on-screen trek and has no place in this wikiStoryMaster 04:13, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Dude, there is a god damn picture PROVING it was seen in the episode. --OuroborosCobra talk 04:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC)


  • It's a Fayk I tell yous, a fayk! That isn't the real Cobra making the nomination, it's KHAAAAAAN in a mask...
heh, I accept, and thank you for the nomination ;) - V. Adm. Enzo Aquarius 23:21, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, Alan thinks I'm a sockpuppet so... - V. Adm. Enzo Aquarius 23:28, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Alan thinks everyone is a sockpuppet... even himself. :P --From Andoria with Love 23:36, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • I like to think of myself as a panty hose puppet, thank you. --Alan del Beccio 23:59, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Wahoo! 10 votes! It's time to 'party-down'. Who ordered the cake? - V. Adm. Enzo Aquarius 01:47, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

OuroborosCobra (6/4/0) (January 2008)Edit

I've been around MA for about 2 years now, the last year as a user-account. What i have noted is that OuroborosCobra have worked a lot with a wide number of pages. He have also participated in a great number of discussions on talk-pages, providing helpful information when needed, and bright ideas. He does large work around here, and I think it is just fair of us to grant him the honor of becoming an administrator.


  • -- Rom Ulan 21:07, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Support, I have known you Cobra for quite some time, and speaking of time, you've been here for quite some time. I think you are deserving of administratorship. Just don't go disappear like I have. :P - Adm. Enzo Aquarius...I'm listening 03:44, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I have "crossed swords" with Cobra more than once...and while I think he can be nitpicky and narrowly focused on some issues, I think overall he has shown good character and a mostly level head. SUPPORTCapt Christopher Donovan 07:05, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Support - I've always appreciated Cobra's contributions and input on talk page discussions, and I feel confident that he'd make a good administrator. – Cleanse 11:35, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Oh... what the heck. Support. ;) --From Andoria with Love 13:17, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Support. I even thought he IS an more for your list, cobra. – Tom 14:15, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
    • yeah, I even thought so once (or twice). After this, he can't keep his list :-P -- Rom Ulan 14:19, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Support Cobra meets the general guidelines for consideration: he has been a registered member of the community for quite some time, he has made several hundred thousand edits to articles. Clearly, Cobra has a good understanding of Memory Alpha's Policies and Guidelines and he has been implementing those policies for various articles. The quality his contributions is impeccable and the quantatity is susbstantial. --GNDN 13:25, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


  • --Ultraice 02:52, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
    • Would you mind saying why? --OuroborosCobra talk 03:35, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
      • I have to agree with Cobra here, is there a reason you are opposing this nomination? Generally when one opposes, it is best to give a reason. - Adm. Enzo Aquarius...I'm listening 03:45, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I just think you should wait a bit longer,plus you need to have more then a few edits made.--Ultraice 03:49, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
    I have been here for more than a year and a half and have more than 9000 edits. I dare say this is not a "short time" or just "a few edits". --OuroborosCobra talk 03:52, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
    Ultraice, please do your research before making such claims. Cobra has been a member here for quite some time and has thousands of edits. - Adm. Enzo Aquarius...I'm listening 03:54, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I just think you need to wait,try in 6 months.--Ultraice 03:56, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
    Definite no for me, not with that number of edits, wait a few months--Newbook 04:03, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
    I find this very strange -- as this was the same argument I made when opposing Ultraice's admin self-nomination on Memory Beta -- he nominated himself on about his third or fourth site edit, and might be bitter, perhaps. I daresay that 9000 is greater than 4, although I've been out of math class for quite a few years -- OC has certainly been around long enough to deserve serious consideration.. since Ultraice has been spamming the forum and talk pages on multiple wikis with with anti-admin rhetoric, i think perhaps he should be restricted from voting here... (the same goes for his "friend" Newbook) -- Captain MKB
    I must concur with Mike on this issue. Cobra has thousands of edits under his belt, and this seems to be an invalid reason for opposing. - Adm. Enzo Aquarius...I'm listening 04:09, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
  • First of all i nomatied myself as a joke, not a serious one. I just feel if corba is going to be huffy about it, he should wait--Ultraice 04:12, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
    I'm not being "huffy". I've barely responded thus far, except to ask for rationale and point out that you are wrong in some of your claims, such as saying that I only have "a few" edits. Most of these responses have been from others. --OuroborosCobra talk 04:14, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
    He hasn't been huffy at all -- except to point out that you are dead wrong in saying he doesn't have "more then a few edits" -- which I will further correct you in that you were probably trying to say "more than a few edits" -- and the OC is probably going to do a great job administrating users, correcting their English grammar with the correct uses of "then" and "than", and correcting their spellings of words such as "nominated", "cobra" et cetera... please don't reply, Ultra... cheers! -- Captain MKB 04:18, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I have to agree with you ultraice, he should wait a few months before applying again--Supericed 04:30, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
    • OK, I have spoken with Angela @ Wikia, and she says that Ultraice and Supericed are sockpuppets, and that Newbook is most likely as well. I therefore request that their votes be struck, as they were made in violation of policy, and the original user who made them has not demonstrated basically ever an ability to follow or understand MA policies. --OuroborosCobra talk 04:38, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose for the following reason: It is true that Cobra has been active here for quite some time now, responding on talk pages, reverting edits etc. What is also true is that I am one of the admins that Cobra has "crossed" in the past (not recently, mind you), but that is not the reason why I, for the moment, oppose his adminship. In my opinion, being an admin means more than reverting changes, welcoming (or warning) new users and commenting on talk pages. All of these activities have to do with maintaining the quality of MA but what I want to see from a regular user as Cobra and from an admin, is creating new articles, expanding MA beyond what it is now. I think that is something that Cobra could improve on. What I would like you to do is simply take some topics that interest you (there's still much ground to cover) and help expand this wiki. In your comment you also state, that there is some more stuff you would like to work on, similar to the excellent "Return to Raimon" article. Please show the community in the following weeks, that this in an area you want to work on as well and you won't get another oppose from me. --Jörg 14:32, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I'm against needing to give a reason for opposition, but thanks to that User:Jaz fiasco, here we are. Cobra is power-hungry, and I am generally against giving power to people who crave it. He doesn't have any restraint. He's too invlolved with the politics, not enough with the work. He baits vandals. Being an administrator has been his goal since he first arrived. He doesn't seem to get that people work on this site for fun, and he is quick with talk of punishment. He has favored pre-emptive page-protection and blocking in the past, something I don't think has a place on a wiki. He's quick with accusations. He seems to barely skim the talk pages before replying. So many rounds of discussion end up just trying reverse Cobras misunderstanding for not reading the previous comments fully. The pages end up full of cruft and difficult to use. I don't see Cobra becoming an admin/workhorse like Jorg, Shran, Sulphur, or R54. I see him as a Jaz; I expect he would just go away after he was an admin for a few weeks, becoming an admin being his only goal on the site. He would only stop in now and then to use his powers in some stupid way. --Bp 15:54, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
    • Considering I seriously gave up any ambitions of being an admin quite some time ago (in fact I was surprised to get this nomination at all), I have to disagree with you. I certainly would not just leave, it hasn't been my goal for a long time to get admin. In fact, Personally have to wonder if this is not more issues from back when you were more active than my actual current behavior. In fact, I wonder if this is not about things like the "47 references" incident, which I admit as not one of my finest hours. As I said in my accepting the nomination, somee of that came from problems in my personal life (truth be told, the day that happened I had just sat down at my computer after being told I was being kicked out of where I was living, and for a BS reason). I remind you that discussion is 8 months old. I would ask you to look at current behavior, and not old ones from when you were more active. If you do not have a frame of reference to do that (because of your inactivity), maybe you shouldn't be making opposition or supports of current editors? --OuroborosCobra talk 15:59, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose at this time. I largely agree with Jörg's comment. --31dot 00:09, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Mild oppose. I'm going to have to agree with many of the comments above, particularly those stating that Cobra should probably do more to expand the wiki before becoming an admin. As such, I'll change my vote to oppose, for now. Not that it matters, of course, given the current results.
  • Having said that, my previous vote of support for Cobra seems to have caused a bit of controversy off-site (no, that isn't why I changed my vote), so allow me to expound it. Cobra has been around a while, seems to have a clear understanding of the policies, has dome some decent administrative work, and I personally don't believe his becoming an admin would be the horrible thing many is making it out to be. No, I don't agree with everything he says or does, and yes, there are a few things he needs to work on (his replies on talk pages, for example, have sometimes struck me as a little nasty, though he has gotten better with that). But I don't think he would make a horrible admin (he's been mistaken for one often enough). Nonetheless, I was pretty sure certain people would take issue with him and oppose the nomination. And, I was right. Basically, I didn't feel like jumping on the "shoot down Cobra" bandwagon, especially since I've never been very good at explaining what I'm thinking (if that makes sense). But if Cobra became an admin, I really don't think any harm would come out of it. Hence, my initial vote for support. So bugger off! :P --From Andoria with Love 22:59, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


  • I thank you Rom Ulan for this nomination. I'm not sure I will pass this round, I know I have ruffled some feathers in the past. I have been working more on my "behavior" at those instances, and to be honest many of them came at times of particular difficulty in my personal life that I sadly let affect my actions here. I apologize for those past mistakes, and have been working on them. I feel that my interactions with the users I have "crossed" with have for the most part been more positive since then, or at least neutral. I have projects that I have been working on lately on MA, such as removing uncited content from articles to better maintain the accuracy and integrity of the information here. I need to do more work on developing comic articles to the level that I did with Return to Raimon. I also tend to try to maintain the policies we have set out, and participate in the discussions on those policies. In the end, I expect to not necessarily pass on this round (although I will be pleasantly surprised if I do), but would welcome comments and suggestions here on how I can become a better contributor and pass on a later nomination. --OuroborosCobra talk 03:35, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Re to Jörg: This is exactly the type of constructive criticism I was hoping to get, should my nomination fail. In addition, this is exactly the area where I expected to get an opposition in. Let's face it, had I passed I would have been one of the only administrators without an FA article to my credit, for example. I've created some stubs in my time, or short articles that didn't have much info to go in them (like guidance and navigation relay, or star system articles), but I have not done much in the way of larger articles, like Return to Raimon, or even medium ones like an early creation of mine, rain. In terms of what I already do, maintaining articles, reverts, helping on talk pages, helping maintain accuracy and clean up on new additions, I can keep doing this admin or not (especially since I was granted the roll-back capability as a non-admin). As Jörg said, I need to expand in the "volume" additions, if you will. I need to have more that expands the quality of the database, not just maintain what is here. So, in what may be a rarity for MA, I thank you for your opposing vote :) --OuroborosCobra talk 14:54, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I agree. An admin without a featured article, would be a terrible, terrible, horrible person.--Tim Thomason 19:05, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
QUESTION Why is it necessary to have a FA to be an Admin? Not everyone has the time to make lengthy articles, and lets face it, most of the topics likely to produce LARGE articles are done already, as far as I can see. Writing a FA, IMO, is not necessary to be good at keeping the posts "clean", properly cited, and well maintained.Capt Christopher Donovan 01:48, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Comment to QUESTION This criterion is a non sequitor, since articles are written collaboratively [2] and specific claims of authorship are discouraged. --GNDN 04:38, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I think Tim was making a joke. You see, he is such a person. --Bp 04:48, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I was being self-deprecatingly sarcastic. Both me and OuroborosCobra have numerous edits on existing Featured Articles both before and after they were featured, but neither of us (I believe) can claim with helping with the bulk of said article (which we shouldn't anyways, per Mr. Nothing).--Tim Thomason 01:28, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

More CommentsEdit

I sensed a certain irony in his comment, and nearly wrote as much in my comment. That notwithstanding, I am concerned that the topic of this discussion believes that authorship is a requirement. Apparently, he is not alone. I only got involved because while this nomination was made in good faith, a whole can of worms has been opened as a result and I am somewhat disheartened by the direction these comments have taken. --GNDN 05:02, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I separated off the last comment from the others because it is not showing up on to the conversation...I am now totally confused. Is being "responsible" for a FA a requirement for Admin or not?Capt Christopher Donovan 05:06, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
No, not at all, but I believe the comment is directed at how some user's priorities do not include making in-depth or as comprehensive contributions as other users. As in, the site would otherwise remain stagnant unless you get those who grab the bull by the horns and dredge forward in making an effort of contributing new and interesting content, making the site more than it is, rather than continuously polishing what's already here with reverts, et al. --Alan del Beccio 05:15, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for clearing that up, Alan...and I agree that if ALL the Admins (let alone posters) were that way the board might tend towards stagnation, but I don't see that happening right now, nor do I personally see a lack of FAs as a disqualifyer on OC's part. If MA is an "encylopedia", then 90% of what goes on WILL be "polishing" of existing's the nature of the beast.Capt Christopher Donovan 05:22, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
As I said before, this is one area I am weak in. I recognize that. I was surprised to receive a nomination at all just because of this (and despite certain users accusations of me being "power hungry", I did not expect to receive a nomination, and did not self nominate, what does that tell you?). On receiving it, I did not expect to get it this time around, but welcomed constructive criticism (as opposed to personal gripes most of which are related to events from 6 or more months ago). I have received such criticism from some users, and I thank you for it. I am not withdrawing the nomination (if I even could, not sure how that works) because I am willing to have the 14 days used for people to suggest how I could be a better contributor. I do think some users do not give enough credit to some of the more major contributions I have made (or images I have contributed), but I recognize that I need more of them. Perhaps saying "I need an FA article" was the wrong way to go. Even if I was not able to get an FA article, if I wrote more on the scale of Return to Raimon, or more contributions like multitronic, or rain, or the revamp I did to Star Trek: Armada, I have a feeling I would be getting more support. Even if I did more with some of the smaller things, like the articles I have done on the mirror universe vehicles seen in the opening of "In a Mirror, Darkly", as well as larger contributions. Am I right in this belief? --OuroborosCobra talk 05:29, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

As the nominator, I too are surprised that your edits is not taken so seriously. In an encyclopedia where everybody can edit, there has to be some cleanup to make the article look good.
And furthermore; What would MA be without the images of almost everything shown on-screen?
now is that said.
-- Rom Ulan 01:40, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Rom Ulan, I really don't think a month (or 15 days on the board) at M/A is really enough time to give someone the feel of who others here are and what they do, that is, aside from that familiarity of seeing the same name(s) day after day.
Replying to Cobra, I'm not sure I'm going to vote on this, but here is a thoughtful response to a majority of this matter. It just feels, and this is just my own observation, like most of your time is spent as a desk jockey, doing what can only be done without making any concerted effort in doing it. Refresh 'recent changes', shame or welcome an IP talk page, undo an edit, lather, rinse and repeat. Granted you have created new articles in the past, as you mentioned above, and that is not being completely overlooked, but I don't see it as a priority, by any means. While I recall you saying that you don't have (m)any of the DVDs, and knowing full well that that obviously shouldn't be looked at as a handicap and held against you, I just don't see you making (m)any big *wow* contributions being made to make M/A "better," just lots and lots and lots of effort in keeping it "good." At this point, it just disturbs me that a good two-thirds of your contributions (<5,500) are not actually made to articles (yes, perhaps made on behalf of the articles) and of those made to articles, one cannot deny that a vast majority of them are reverts, but I'm guess I personally don't feel that that is enough. With that all said, I'm not asking for a FA from you or to be your best friend before you get my vote, just that when it comes down to it, I haven't been blown away, like, say, I was when Jorg joined the club and did what few others could do, or have done since, in improving the quality and content of the site, or for that matter, Bp and his behind-the-scenes efforts in streamlining M/A and keeping it up-to-date, wiki-wise. --Alan del Beccio 02:08, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your very well written and polite comments. I agree with a lot of what you have said here. I'm not in the league of most of the admins here, and I know it. Granted, I think most aren't in the league of Jorg (honestly, who is? the man has indexed images of basically every object ever seen, etc.), but I'm not in the realm of contributors like Shran or Tim or Enzo either. I greatly appreciate your commentary and suggestions on how I can improve. --OuroborosCobra talk 02:26, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

ThomasHL (7/0/0) (February 2008)Edit

ThomasHL is technically speaking among the newer of our "major" contributors, with just shy of a year of presence here. Despite that, he is one of our greatest gems here, providing outstanding information on performers, stunt performers, extras, etc. He has worked to improve countless pages, as can be seen on his user page. He has brought large volumes of information that he is able to acquire through means that would be largely unavailable to us without him. Truly, he has made a terrific impact on Memory Alpha. In addition, he has shown a fine understanding on our policies, not the least bit limited to his understanding of formatting of articles, copyright issues (I say this because on things like photos on the performer side, this can be important), etc. He has further demonstrated this and his caring of maintaining the integrity and quality of Memory Alpha with his participation in various policy related discussions such as deletion PfDs. Lastly, his personal behavior has been outstanding. I cannot think of a time he has made an attack, or gotten into a "fight" with another user. Certainly administrator material if you ask me. --OuroborosCobra talk 04:13, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


  1. --OuroborosCobra talk 04:13, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  2. -- What can I say about Tom? He's awesome. Definitely admin material. He's been here since February of last year (and we're just nominating him now?!) and has well over 6,000 contributions to his credit. And you gotta love his detective skills :) (For example, he found out Spencer Daniels was playing George Kirk in the new movie!) As Cobra stated, he's shown understanding of our policies, has helped expand the site (big time), and has never been involved in any kind of altercation (wish I could make that claim). Definitely has my support. --From Andoria with Love 04:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  3. -- Thomas done great work here. As an admin he would be able to do more work, not that his current work is not enough. :-) -- Rom Ulan 16:50, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  4. -- His work and efforts here are impressive, and I don't see any reason why he would not be a good administrator.--31dot 02:11, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  5. -- Yep, I agree with all the above. -- Renegade54 10:57, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  6. -- Look at his userpage: Can't get any bluer! ;-) He does great work, maintaining and enhancing the site (he's in contact with most of those stunt performers, extras, stand-ins etc). Absolute admin-material. --Jörg 11:06, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  7. -- Strong support. Excellent work! --- Jaz 19:04, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  8. -- Thomas is an excellent researcher and he does NOT forget to include the un-named performers who work just as hard in front of the camera. When he communicates with us, he is very thorough but is quite the gentleman and never has bothered us. It is always a pleasure talking with him. It would only benefit Memory-Alpha and all your readers to have him as an Administrator. Please, have Thomas and all of his knowledge, his genuine kindness towards Star Trek and all the people who are a past of this wonderful history, become a more major part of Memory-Alpha. Thank you. ---stuntrek 18:19, 6 February 2008 (UTC)



Guys and lady, I am really speechless about the comments and of course the nomination. I didn't know that my work is so much appreciated. But I am happy to contribute, get into contact with the people who worked on Star Trek, and find more and more. Thanks to Cobra for the nomination and thanks to Shran, Jörg, Renegade54, Rom Ulan, 31dot, Jaz, and Leslie Hoffman for these comments. :) – Tom 19:16, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Rhinecanthus rectangulus (Withdrawn) (April 2008)Edit

This user has been very helpful here. I think he should be rewared. --Jellygem 14:22, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Just a reminder, prior to some mediawiki limitations, User:Rhinecanthus rectangulus used to be User:Humu­humu­nuku­nuku­āpuaʻa. --- Jaz 17:22, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Please also note that the user that submitted this nomination is a known sock puppet of a known vandal with several other sock puppets. -- Sulfur 17:53, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
I have no idea who Jellygem is, and I'm not pursuing administratorship. I just like poking around and making articles at my leisure! -Rhinecanthus rectangulus 18:30, 11 April 2008 (UTC)


  • Accept--Jellygem 14:22, 11 April 2008 (UTC)



  • Nomination void. Since this nomination was brought up by a banned sockpuppet account user, the nomination is not valid. If someone would be so kind as to delete the page? :) --From a College Campus with Love

User:Cleanse (5/0) Edit

There are no strict standards for becoming an administrator; however, in general it is expected that a nominee for administratorship be a registered member of the community for at least several months, and to have made several hundred edits to articles. It's best for the nominees to exhibit a good understanding of Memory Alpha's Policies and Guidelines and to be an active participant in the implementation of those policies for various articles. In this case, both quality and quantity are important factors to be considered. -- Memory Alpha:Administrators


  • Here for over 9 months
  • 2000+ contributions, including about 1300 article edits, very few of which are minor, and 700 contructive discussion edits
    • Shows dedication, and makes valuable contributions
  • Demonstrates good judgment
    • No history of bad behavior
    • Does not engage in senseless arguments. (I can say first hand, since we are currently on opposite sides of a discussion, and Cleanse is civil and profession)
  • Understands policies
  • I believe he can be trusted with sysop powers

--- Jaz 06:03, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


  1. --- Jaz 06:03, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
  2. I believe he would be a great admin. I haven't seen anything that would make me feel otherwise. :) ---- Willie LLAP 17:25, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
  3. I believe that he would make a good admin. I never see him being anything other than civil, polite, and friendly. His contributions make MA better, and I think he could do the same as an admin.--31dot 20:43, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
  4. Support. -- Renegade54 17:13, 25 April 2008 (UTC)


Comments & DiscussionEdit

I'd just like to thank Jaz for his nomination and 31dot and Willie for their support so far. :-) I'm happy to discuss any issue relating to my contributions or conduct here. – Cleanse 00:49, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

It's been over a week...any other votes/comments?– Cleanse 10:45, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I think there is some hesitation, particularly by established members and/or administrators to get involved in this vote because of the close proximity to other issues with the nominator, Jaz. I know I personally find it difficult to separate this nomination from his current "agenda" on changing Memory Alpha after many months of his personal absence. That said, I don't know that is enough to outright oppose the nomination. I have a feeling others are feeling the same way, since normally nominations get the established editors out in droves. --OuroborosCobra talk 16:45, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
I agree. In fact, the reason why I haven't voted, is because I really haven't been overly fact, I thought he just started here. --Alan 19:05, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I probably should have asked earlier why no one is commenting on this but I thought it would be a tad presumptuous. I can assure you that I am not a front for whatever agenda you believe Jaz has, nor am I part of some plot to overthrow the bourgeoisie of MA! :-) Certainly, I never expected this nomination, nor will I stop contributing if this fails.

If you guys haven't already, I would ask that you examine my contribution record if you'd like to see what I've done. I've been participating in almost all the important discussions (deletions, merges, TF, templates, categories etc.) here for most of my time here, and I'd like to think that my input helped improve at least a few articles. If you look at my contributions you'll see that I've taken upon many small projects, such as improving "X's species" articles, cleaning up TOS background notes (- nitpicks, categorizing notes), addressing concerns of PNA unformatted tags etc. Furthermore, I may not have written an FA, but I've helped clean up a few (take Klingon Civil War for example). In short, I understand if you don't wish to vote for me as an administrator, but I fail to see how you could think that I "just started here".– Cleanse 00:34, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I personally haven't participated in the last admin nominations - not because I don't care, but because, being the one who "makes" admins, I feel it might be better to stay relatively neutral to avoid stupid "cabal" arguments to come up again. I have participated when I felt strongly about a nomination, though.
Having said that, I must admit that this nomination raised an eyebrow. As Cobra correctly pointed out, there is a contributor who, after months of absence, comes back and tries to stir up the whole project at once, ranging from unnecessarily PC article titles, over changing the project's scope, to a huge essay about "Why Memory Alpha is failing!" - and the minute another contributor agrees with him, he gets nominated for adminship. How can that not look at least a little strange for an observer of that whole story? :)
In the end, though, it doesn't matter who did the nominating. What does matter is the work the nominee did in the past. In Cleanse's case, I personally don't see anything that makes me want to oppose this nomination (see above). So, since this whole discussion has been brought up very late in the game, I'd like to give everyone a little more time to discuss, or oppose (with reason), or support. If nothing changes, I'm going to close this nomination as successful tomorrow evening my time. -- Cid Highwind 11:33, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Unless there is some evidence of Cleanse and the nominator in collusion with each other about this nomination(which there isn't, I'm almost sure), who nominated him is irrelevant. His work speaks for itself and shows no evidence of any kind of agenda. --31dot 12:19, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

31dot (3/0) Edit

I wish to nominate User:31dot for administratorship. He has been a solid and consistent contributor for some time now (since 2 July 2007, and over 3500 edits), contributing to a wide variety of topics on MA, including quite a few new pages. In my experience, he has been courteous and helpful in many talk page discussions, and knows our policies well. Overall, I think he is a valuable contributor and can be trusted with admin powers.– Cleanse 08:06, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Support Edit

  1. SupportCleanse 08:06, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
  2. SupportTrekFan Talk 15:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
  3. SupportPatricia 18:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Oppose Edit

Comments and Discussion Edit

I'd like to thank Cleanse for nominating me and for his kind words. I would be more than willing to address any concerns people might have, or to answer any questions. I do have some admin experience on the Law and Order wiki, just so users are aware(though I understand that's a totally different animal)--31dot 00:11, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Is anyone going to vote? It's been nearly a month. ;-) – Cleanse 00:38, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
For what it's worth - there's apparently no opposition to this nomination, but at the same time not really a community decision to go forward with it, either. A single user does not make a community... ;) I'll consider the recent comment by Cleanse a wake-up call to everyone who might still want to vote either way, and keep this open for a little longer. Still no clear community activity in, say, a week from now means that this nomination failed due to inactivity. It could then, of course, be reattempted after a while. -- Cid Highwind 12:54, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
If I may: I think such kind of "promotions" or whatever you wanna call this should be merit-based and not about popularity and how many people like you and think you should get it. If 31dot deserves it based on his work and contributions (which look great), then he should get it, regardless of who votes. A community can still reward merit without voting on it and remain a community. Anyway, just my opinion. Peace. – Distantlycharmed 18:29, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Ah but that's the point. Who decides whether or not his contributions are worthy of Adminship? That's what the vote is for. An admin of a wiki (which, only recently can be removed) must be someone who interacts well with the community. Hence popularity. Sure some might not like him but they will vote appropriately, however you must explain your reason for voting. You can support this nomination and base your claims on your personal experience. He's a helpful user. He's a nice user. He contributes great material...or you can deny the nomination on similar stuff...He's not very helpful. He's rude and so on...This is why we vote. Gives the nominee a chance to respond to criticism and comments. I haven't voted because I don't interact with 31dot enough to make a valid judgment for or against him. — Morder 18:40, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Morder (10/0) (June 2009) Edit

I would like to nominate Morder for admin. Morder has been at Memory alpha for more than a a year and a half. In that time, he's made more than 5,000 edits. In the past month, he's been our second-most frequent contributor (after Alan, of course). But it isn't editcount that makes me believe Morder would be a fantastic admin. Morder has made a significant positive impact with his edits. While many of his edits are substantive content additions, Morder also makes hundreds of crucial (and painstakingly boring) behind-the-scene edits, (for example he recently fixed navigation boxes on lot of pages, and added the missing disclaimer to book excerpts). Morder has also demonstrated good judgment. He contributes positively behind the scenes, offering his 2 cents on talk pages, and other issues. That being said, Morder tends to stay out of some of the more mean-spirited back-and-forth that sometimes goes on here. He seems to keep his cool, avoiding edit wars, personal attacks, and the likes. I think the combination of commitment and good judgment shown by Morder over the past 19 month demonstrates he is fit to serve as an administrator. --- Jaz 07:33, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

AcceptedMorder 08:58, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Support Edit

  • Support (implicit from nomination). --- Jaz 07:33, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Support. Jaz summarized it well- Morder makes excellent contributions and understands MA's policies. He is a friendly contributor and I believe would be an excellent admin.--31dot 18:02, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Support, big time. I was actually going to nominate him myself in the near future. Blast you, Jaz! :-P --From Andoria with Love 18:17, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Support I think (hope) I've been around long enough and contributed enough to vote. I've noticed Morder's name all over the place making improvements to the site, very dedicated indeed. -- DhaliaUnsung 18:26, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Support. I agree completely and support Shran's comment. – Tom 19:09, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Support. Made significant contributions following the new film, along with other articles. Seems like every other edit is made by this user.- JustPhil 19:42, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Support - He will make an excellent admin.– Cleanse 23:53, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Support. I thought Morder was an admin for many months due to his frequent edits and professional and helpful attitude.— Vince47 00:10, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Support. Oooh, an admin-drone, I like that! -- Renegade54 02:01, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Support. Great job, Morder!! ---- Willie LLAP 14:11, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Oppose Edit

Comment Edit

Archduk3 (4/0) (March 2010) Edit

I would like to nominate Archduk3 for administratorship. He is a consistent contributor (over 6000 edits in less than a year) and his contributions have added to MA, such as his work with Laserdisc releases of Trek, as well as his numerous smaller(but no less important) edits. Most importantly, he consistently displays a good temperment and attitude towards other users. I believe him to have a good knowledge of MA's policies and guidelines. I think this combination of a consistent contributor and good attitude merit his being given admin powers.--31dot 21:17, March 12, 2010 (UTC)

Support Edit

  • You beat me too it by about 10 minutes! I was about to nominate our Duke. Support, especially in light of his recent LaserDisc work, work which may have been made easier by having admin abilities, since the sheer volume of pages he has created has had some typo creep that he would be able to fix himself with admin. --OuroborosCobra talk 21:40, March 12, 2010 (UTC)
  • I support Archduk3's nomination for administratorship as he posses a great knowledge of non-canon Stark Trek publications as well as a great handle on all things within this universe. In the parlance of the Borg, his administratorship would add greatly to our Collective.--Obey the Fist!! 21:42, March 12, 2010 (UTC)
  • SupportCleanse ( talk | contribs ) 03:33, March 13, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose Edit

Comment Edit

I should probably accept the nomination officially before any more time gos by. So to that end, thanks go out to 31dot for the nomination, and to everyone else for the support. - Archduk3 04:52, March 20, 2010 (UTC)

sulfur (bureaucrat; 6/0) (September 2010)Edit

A bit outside the mold here, but per the discussion here, it was decided that this place could pull a double duty. With that said, here's my nomination for a second, active bureaucrat. The reason for this is numerous, as are sulfur's qualifications. Having someone here with bureaucrat powers is must IMO, and sulfur is definitely here, generally with edits every week for the last year. If Cid decides to take a vacation, the thinking is he won't be going with sulfur, and while a situation that needs a bureaucrat may be few and far between, I would loath not having one if the event arises. - Archduk3 20:49, August 29, 2010 (UTC)


  • Support. I've given this a lot of thought since seeing that we were thinking about new bureaucrats, and sulfur is one of only a couple of administrators that make the list that I think I can support. His decisions are almost always sound, he's devoted to maintaining high standards on this site, he has had innumerable personal projects to increase those standards, such as maintaining Memorable Quotes on the episode pages (actually, that's one of his older projects, but one that I always think of when thinking of sulfur). He keeps his cool in discussions and generally makes a great neutral voice, and takes care to actually look at what is being asked, even by new editors. I butt heads with a lot of administrators here, but almost never with sulfur, except maybe when he's putting me in my place (usually deservedly so). I can't think of almost anyone else I'd want to trust with the added responsibility of bureaucraticship. --OuroborosCobra talk 21:04, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. Agreed with everything you said Cobra. Though as long as Cid isn't going away permanently there's really no need for a bureaucrat as the only time it's really needed is to demote or promote an administrator. But, if anyone should take that mantle it should be sulfur. — Morder (talk) 00:59, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. I see no reason why he shouldn't be one. One of our best community members.--31dot 01:12, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
  • Support - What they said.– Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 03:51, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
  • Support - Not only all of the above, but his grasp of the grammar of the English language, as far as I can ascertain as a non-Anglo Saxon, is impressive.Sennim 05:48, August 30, 2010 (UTC)



I suppose that, since it's been a week, I should gracefully accept the nomination. Noting, of course, that I have no intentions of replacing Cid, merely providing an outlet when he happens to be away. The other thing I must address -- I have no idea who Cid is (beyond some weird and twisted anime character in some random Star Trek fan fiction), so chances of us going on vacation together at any given time are pretty damned slim. At best. :) -- sulfur 15:29, September 7, 2010 (UTC)

Sheesh! So much for the honeymoon suite I booked... :) -- Cid Highwind 17:03, September 7, 2010 (UTC)

Admiralalexmann (withdrawn; 0/2) (September 2010) Edit

I know that it says you cannot nominate yourself, but I have checked the previous nominations and Defiant nominated themself and was approved.

I believe that I would make a good addition to the team, I know that I have posted information on the Galaxy class page that was not accepted but that was my very first post and I had not then checked the policies and guidlines.

Thank you for considering this.

Admiralalexmann 14:04, September 12, 2010 (UTC)

  • Oppose at this time. Defiant nominated himself in the very early days of this site(2005) before current policies were established. The nomination criteria states that "in general it is expected that a nominee for administratorship be a registered member of the community for at least several months, and to have made several hundred edits to articles", which you haven't done yet. If you want to eventually become an admin, I would suggest that you take some time to establish a history here first, which will demonstrate your worthiness.--31dot 14:10, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment. The policy changed after the previous nominations due to a desire by the community to avoid self-nominations. -- sulfur 15:14, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
  • Definite oppose (and I guess we can archive this a little quicker than normal, but not delete). What it simply boils down to is not the fact that "people here don't like you" - it's the fact that people don't know you. And unless that changes, there's no real basis for you to become an administrator here. Besides, it's not as if another one is urgently needed at this time. -- Cid Highwind 16:23, September 12, 2010 (UTC)

For the record: this suggestion was removed from the nomination page twice, and is thus considered withdrawn. -- Cid Highwind 18:59, September 12, 2010 (UTC)

Mdsussman (0/3) (September 2010) Edit

Not sure If he wants to be one (or is, but i dont think so), My nomination is: Mdsussman --Admiralalexmann 17:32, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

"Not being sure" about all those things should have set off an alarm or two. While it is very valuable to have someone like Mike around (as an "insider"), that alone doesn't mean that he needs to (or should) become an admin - administratorship is not a reward for anything, but first and foremost a job someone volunteers to do, and then is able to do. Mike last edited about a year ago, and then only a couple of times throughout 2009, so I guess he has other things to do than administrate a wiki. I'm going to oppose this nomination, at least until Mike comes out and tells us whether he even wants that job.
To Admiralalexmann: this is your second nomination within about 24hrs, and probably the second one that will fail for very basic reasons. Maybe you should focus more on editing and less on this nomination page. -- Cid Highwind 19:04, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
  • I second Cid's notion and oppose the adminship of someone whose last contribution to MA was about a year ago. Admiral Alex, being an admin is not the end all, be all of MA contribution wise. – Distantlycharmed 20:25, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
  • I third the notion. I'll also suggest that this be archived fairly soon, as even if Mr. Sussman was interested in being an admin(unlikely) he does not meet the criteria.--31dot 01:07, September 14, 2010 (UTC)

Archived.--31dot 21:02, September 14, 2010 (UTC)

bp (4/2/1) (December 2010, unresolved after >14 days)Edit

Looking over the CSS files are proof enough that bp should have admin powers. While not the most active of users, almost all his edits are on the site maintenance side, and he clearly has a grasp of MA policy, so I don't see a reason to have an admin do all his edits for him. ;) In all seriousness though, bp has been here helping to keep the site looking good and running long before I was, and I think giving him admin powers would be in the best interests for MA. - Archduk3 00:05, November 16, 2010 (UTC)

Support Edit

  • I don't know any of you, really... but that's probably my fault, but my point is in reading the css pages and other things, I see he does a lot of the coding. I'm surprised he doesn't already have the edit powers to do so, and as someone who messes with coding on other wikis, can already attest that having the abilities to just do the edits yourself is far easier. I say let him have the powers, at the very least to implement the new coding himself. --Terran Officer 17:05, November 24, 2010 (UTC)
  • Support: for reasons mentioned by Bp, Duke and above. – Distantlycharmed 18:51, November 24, 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. According to the "Becoming an administrator" text: Memory Alpha's general policy is to grant administrator status to anyone who has actively participated in the development of the encyclopedia for a while and is a recognized member of the community. There are no strict standards for becoming an administrator; however, in general it is expected that a nominee for administratorship be a registered member of the community for at least several months, and to have made several hundred edits to articles. It's best for the nominees to exhibit a good understanding of Memory Alpha's Policies and Guidelines and to be an active participant in the implementation of those policies for various articles. In this case, both quality and quantity are important factors to be considered. I can see that bp had some breaks during his contributions but I can also see that he was active and edited many pages and templates over four years. IMO, a contributor who helped to built this wiki and participated in the development of it and is a recognized member of this community without foul distinctive features should be an admin. bp comes up to these requirements. – Tom 18:26, November 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose Edit

  • I'm going to oppose this nomination. A lot for Cid's comments, especially about over directness. I realize that as of late this is basically the pot calling the kettle black, but then I wouldn't expect to pass a nomination myself at this time. I have a much more concrete reason, mainly that he wouldn't be able to serve in the role well because of his low activity. If one looks at bp's contributions over the last few years, he goes months at a time without a single edit, and then only a handful of days in a given month with activity. One of the primary roles of administrators is to combat vandalism, and he would not be able to do so on almost any day. We don't seem to be at a shortage of admins able to delete pages, edit style sheets, or move images. At least we aren't in such an extreme shortage that someone with such low activity would give us better service then we have now. The only other major admin tool is the revert button. As far as I know, both bp and I already have the revert button, we were given it independently of admin functionality. Bp is, like it or not, not a regularly active editor. An administrator should be. MA has even had policy discussions about removing administrators based solely on the grounds of inactivity. --OuroborosCobra talk 16:11, November 22, 2010 (UTC)
  • I am also going to oppose, because of both the low activity(which even the nominator admits to) and the points Cid raised.--31dot 01:59, November 23, 2010 (UTC)
I'll reply to Cid here as well, since it would be rather foolish to post this block twice.
There is no activity requirement to be an admin, beyond being "a registered member of the community for at least several months, and to have made several hundred edits to articles." Bp is clearly a "recognized member of the community" and while not the most active of members, is still far more active currently then Alan, who's more or less been AWOL for the last 6 months. I'm not suggesting we de-admin Alan, since when he is here he generally more than makes up for his absence, and unless I'm mistaken he still has the most edits. I feel bp more than makes up for his absence as well.
Admins do more than just combat vandals as well, although that is the most frequent activity that requires sysop powers, but it is not the primary role as I see it. Site maintenance would be our primary role, of which combating vandals is just one part. Bp already does a lot of site maintenance as is, and I think he would do even more as an admin.
This is also not to suggest that he, or we, should flat out forgo the policies and guidelines by not having discussions before hand. I don't think there is an admin who hasn't just made a change at one point or another without bringing it up first, but I haven't seen anything that I would call an edit war between admins while I've been here when that change is contested, so to suggest that including bp would somehow lead to that is confusing at best, and disingenuous at worst. That said, there is currently plenty of room for debate and discussion between admins over said policy and guidelines, which unless I'm mistaken is the whole point "the more administrators that participate in the system, the better", so I don't think that a little bit of rabble rousing on the talk pages, if that were to happen, is going to bring down the whole house of cards as it were.
I also don't consider bluntness to be a major drawback for the most part, or I never would have suggest sulfur for bureaucrat ;) , but I can see how that could be a problem. Of course, are there any admins who haven't been accused or being at least rude at one point? That's not to sidestep or down play the issue, just to point out that there are many ways to read what was typed without ever hitting upon the way it "said".
While I don't expect to change anyone's mind here, I did feel I should at least defend my reasoning for the nomination, since I admit that I could have put at least half of this in there beforehand. I also know that becoming an admin isn't some sort of prize we hand out for time spent and edits made, but I do feel that we could be doing ourselves a disservice by not at least suggesting members more often who meet the requirements, since I was surprised to see that bp hadn't been nominated before. - Archduk3 07:04, November 23, 2010 (UTC)

Comment Edit

Thanks, Archduk3. --bp 22:02, November 21, 2010 (UTC)

This is probably going to be difficult - I'm not trying to deliberately step on anyones toes, but with bp now having accepted the nomination, he of course deserves some other reply than just silence. So - should bp become an admin here? On the one hand, he has been an active contributor for years now, and has helped MA in more than one way during that time - examples are custom scripts and CSS fixes, work on several of the more arcane templates, etc.. On the other hand, being an admin is not only about doing the behind-the-scenes maintenance work, but also about accepting the explicit and implicit rules of a wiki while doing so (if nothing else, at least as a necessary evil). In that regard, I think that bp's directness (for lack of a better term) might lead to some problems down the line. Not enough to actively oppose this nomination, but enough to at least bring it up proactively and ask that this please not happen, should there be further support votes.
Also, and this is not directed at bp specifically , I have to question the reasons for this nomination: should anyone become an admin for the sole reason of giving him access to the site's "layout"? I think not. I see an increased interest in the CSS files over the last few weeks - of course, related to the skin change, but still: the more people are editing the files, and the more often they do it, the higher is the need for doing it while following the typical workflow for controversial wiki edits: discuss first, change later. If this is followed, we don't need to hand out admin access for just the reason of editing the files - and if it is not followed, this might lead to admin edit wars over the CSS files sooner or later. Not exactly what we'd want to have. -- Cid Highwind 13:32, November 22, 2010 (UTC)

As Archduk3 said, there isn't really an activity requirement, but I completely disagree that I haven't been active. I've been appearing in the RC enough lately, but even when not editing I'm around often, and I'm in the IRC room nearly every day. I've been editing here since 2006. I've always been just trying to make the place better with constructive edits. I'm not a big reverter, and I don't care very much about having power over others. I generally don't go after vandalism because I know its easier for admins to do it all at once after they block, and I'm not trying to prove anything about how good an admin I would be with a quick revert trigger. On the other hand, I am useful here. I have proven that. I have knowledge and skills about how the wiki works that I've used often to improve it. I've also written many articles and been involved in creating major functional items such as the episode reference templates, or main page panels system, and the forum (which was just a talk page before I started), etc. I've been thoughtful and reasonable when I participate in discussions and I generally don't butt-in unless I've got something substantive to add. I've written thoughtful, reasoned policy positions such as the ones on Nitpicks and Link context. I was involved in a major way in keeping the site in its own domain after it was secretly bought by Wikia. I've worked with a custom bot to do many things that would be difficult without it, or with only the pywikibot. About Cid's argument that doing maintenance on the functional parts of the site is not a good reason for someone to be an admin, I would say that it is as good as any. It needs to be done, and I've been here long enough, and been doing it indirectly long enough, that I should be trusted to have that ability. I'm constantly frustrated by being blocked out of pages that I created because they are must be protected due to their importance. That should say something itself. I do believe that I have proven myself useful here. Archduke's reason for nominating me is completely valid. I should be able to edit the various templates and pages that I created, or designed, or help to design without begging first. I've never been involved in any edit war, definitely some heated discussions, but that shouldn't matter here. I am qualified in every way that is required by policy. The objections are terribly weak, but without any support votes it doesn't matter. It does hurt a bit, considering I've talked to many editors and admins often on IRC and I thought there was a different level of respect for me and what I've done here. Anyway, thanks again, Archduk3. --Bp (mirror) 16:50, November 24, 2010 (UTC)

Archived. - Archduk3 02:02, December 14, 2010 (UTC)

Blair2009 (3/0/0) (February 2011) Edit

I would like to nominate Blair2009 for administratorship. I believe Blair has a good grasp of MA's policies and guidelines, and is a consistent contributor with over 5000 edits in a year and a half. A good number of these edits have been creating new pages. Also, every talk page post by him I've read is polite and constructive, and I think a polite, consistent contributor who adds to the encyclopedia should be granted admin powers. - Archduk3 20:00, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

I'm honored. I graciously accept the nomination. -Angry Future Romulan 21:39, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

Support Edit

  • I'll support this nomination. He has demonstrated an awareness of policies and been a consistent, solid contributor. That combined with his temperament leads me to believe he is worthy of admin powers, and would use them appropriately.--31dot 21:24, February 23, 2011 (UTC)
  • Support - Like 31dot said, Blair2009 has consistently improved MA through his contributions and understands our policies well.–Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 23:56, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose Edit

Comments Edit

Sennim (declined by nominee) (November 2011) Edit

I was surprised that Sennim is not already an admin on here. Seems to be one of the best contributors to MA (at least, IMHO). --Defiant 19:19, November 16, 2011 (UTC)


  • Support. Sennim's statement convinced me. There is nothing wrong with not being totally familiar with all aspects of this site; I am not as familiar with the real-world articles or production background, for example, while Sennim says he is not as familiar with the in-universe part. He clearly knows his stuff about the content he posts here, and that's what counts. Looking at some of his history I see no issues with policies that would prevent him from being an admin.--31dot 02:18, November 17, 2011 (UTC)
  • Support. Ditto above. - Archduk3 02:46, November 17, 2011 (UTC)
  • Support - Sennim is one of our best contributors, and I am sure he would be a fine administrator. In addition to what's said above, I have confidence in Sennim's ability to "learn the ropes" – I know I didn't know everything to start with. ;-) –Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 03:46, November 17, 2011 (UTC)



I'm not ready to weigh in on this nomination yet, but I wonder if we should attempt to address the inactive admins we have before adding another one.--31dot 21:46, November 16, 2011 (UTC)

I am in agreement with 31dot. --| TrekFan Open a channel 22:28, November 16, 2011 (UTC)
Well, that's fair enough. But I don't think we need to change absolutely everything and for it to be too drastic. Anyways, Sennim's proposed admin status is also (at least, afaik) dependent on his acceptance (or lack thereof) of the role. --Defiant 23:53, November 16, 2011 (UTC)
[edit conflict] - "For a wiki, the more administrators that participate in the system, the better." Since nothing has come of the various attempts to do something about the "inactive" admins before, I don't see any reason to hold up nominations until something is done, since it's likely that nothing will be right now. That said, I've been mulling over another proposal that would address the inactive admins issue, but I wasn't going to bring it up without further input and refinement, most likely early next year, though it wouldn't surprise me if there was already another suggestion on table as soon as new year's day.
As for Sennim, while I know him to meet nearly all of the qualifications, not to mention that I think he would make fine admin, I've never really seen him "exhibit a good understanding of Memory Alpha's Policies and Guidelines". I would like for further input on that matter before deciding either way. - Archduk3 00:03, November 17, 2011 (UTC)
And shouldn't the site-wide issue over what to do with long-inactive admins be dealt with separately from this particular, specific nomination? --Defiant 00:07, November 17, 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Archduk's last paragraph- I'm inclined to support Sennim but would like the same info that Archduk wants.

Defiant, that's what I'm kind of suggesting- only that we deal with that first before adding new admins. If push comes to shove and this goes forward, fine- but that's just my thought. The nomination is clearly valid and deserved- and again, I'm inclined to support him.--31dot 00:11, November 17, 2011 (UTC)

Admittedly, I'm not entirely sure about how to prove that Sennim has exhibited "a good understanding of Memory Alpha's Policies and Guidelines" (that bit); I was basing the nomination more on his exemplary conduct as an archivist, as well as the quantity and quality of his contributions. The "understanding" bit would most likely have to come from him, as I'm not a telepath (it'd be the same for whoever I was nominating, largely because I don't know anyone here outside of MA). Anyways, the nomination policy page does state, "There are no strict standards for becoming an administrator," and "It's best for the nominees to exhibit a good understanding [etc.]," therefore such an "understanding" is not compulsory. I personally also feel that too much emphasis is usually cast on that aspect of the admin nominations, but that's just individual opinion. --Defiant 01:23, November 17, 2011 (UTC)

Probably the best way to show that would be to hear from Sennim personally, though I would also ask if anyone is aware of Sennim demonstrating an awareness of policies through his actions. I think it reasonable to expect potential admins to be aware of policies since part of their job is encouraging others to follow them. --31dot 01:44, November 17, 2011 (UTC)

And quite often implementing them, too. I didn't mean to suggest that I believe a knowledge of the policies and guidelines is entirely unimportant, just slightly less important than is usually expected of admin candidates. --Defiant 01:52, November 17, 2011 (UTC)
Greetings to all. I'm extremely honored to be considered for the position of admin, and very thankful. However as of now I do have to admit that I'm not very well versed in the exhibiting a "good understanding of Memory Alpha's Policies and Guidelines" as Duke rightfully put it. Why is this? As I've admitted it on several occasions, I'm not that well versed on the "in-universe" aspects of the franchise as of now, which is what MA is primarily all about. My strong points is as "archivist" concerning the bginfo sections as most of you have witnessed, and as such I'll endeavor to do my utmost best, now and in the near future. Please, do not consider this a shirking of responsibilities, but rather me realizing where my strong points really lie...Again I'm really grateful of the vote of confidence--Sennim 02:11, November 17, 2011 (UTC)

I'll put my above concerns aside for now, but I look forward to Archduk's (or anyone's) future discussion about the issue I raised.--31dot 02:20, November 17, 2011 (UTC)

I'm not going to vote either way, but I'd just like to ask everyone involved to not consider admin rights as some sort of "merit badge". Admin, first and foremost, is a set of tools given to people who are willing and able to work with them - which, in the end, boils down to nothing else but having a good grasp of our policies and guidelines. Someone who doesn't want to help with page deletions or user blocks&bans (which, of course, isn't a bad thing in itself - there's enough other work to do) shouldn't be made an admin just because he is good in editing articles, or because "it is about time". A simple "thank you" on that user's talk page might be a better solution to that. :) To be honest, in my opinion the most problematic admins (not restricted to this wiki, but generally speaking) have been those that considered the local policies to be so unimportant that they didn't even know some of them. In that light, I'm sure Sennim will make sure whether he even wants to become an admin (and then read up on the policies), or not (and then gets praise and kisses another way ;)) - that would only be fair, especially in the light of not having proper rules to get rid of admins who actually don't want to be admins at the moment. -- Cid Highwind 07:51, November 17, 2011 (UTC)
I personally disagree with some of that, as the nomination policy clearly shows that it's important the admin candidate be also a stable and reliable archivist. Quality and quantity of edits can help show whether the candidate fits these criteria, so yes, there are some important elements other than just having "an understanding" of the policies and guidelines (note – the policy page doesn't even specify that it has to be "a good understanding," though I believe that's kind of implied). --Defiant 10:35, November 17, 2011 (UTC)
For what it's worth: "[A]dmins are expected to be familiar with the policies and guidelines of Memory Alpha." I think it can't be much more specific than that. :) -- Cid Highwind 10:45, November 17, 2011 (UTC)
Cid, the same policy states: "Memory Alpha's general policy is to grant administrator status to anyone who has actively participated in the development of the encyclopedia for a while and is a recognized member of the community. For a wiki, the more administrators that participate in the system, the better." I think that shows that giving out administrator privileges to well-established, reliable editors can only be a good thing. I'm certain no one supporting this nomination is doing it because they want to give Sennim a "merit badge" - we're doing it because we think he's a reliable, dedicted contributor who can be trusted with admin powers.
As for having a discussion about a policy for demoting admins, I'm all for it – now seems a good time since there's no heated debates about alleged administrative malpractice at the moment. :-) –Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 11:15, November 17, 2011 (UTC)
In the end, I would just like to see a statement from Sennim, clarifying whether he even wants to become an admin after it has been clarified that, yes, admins should know what they are doing. The last statement by Sennim could be interpreted as him actually declining that offer (regarding the "realizing that my strong points is as archivist" bit). -- Cid Highwind 11:27, November 17, 2011 (UTC)
I agree with that, and with the first paragraph of Cleanse's last post here. It'd be good if Sennim could say some more on this nomination. --Defiant 11:35, November 17, 2011 (UTC)
Apologies for the late reply, I'm on the mend from some jaw surgery...Cid has grasped my intention correctly, I am deeply sorry if that was not clear. In all honesty I feel not ready yet for taking up the responsibility for the admin function at this point in time, which I feel is something not to be taken lightly. As Cid hinted at, being a good writer/editor is something different from being a good admin. The past two years I've been so immersed in doing my thing that I'm myopic in regard to other aspects of MA, including "good understanding of Memory Alpha's Policies and Guidelines". It is only relatively recently that I've started to follow, and on occasion participate in, discussions and reviews outside of my comfort zone as much as for weighing in as for testing the waters to get a "feel" what the greater picture is all about (and sometimes missing the point, but I'm learning). I might become a good admin in time, but just not now. Again, I'm not trying to shirk responsibility, but I honestly feel the way I do at the moment. I again apologize if my initial comment was misunderstood and I'm humbled by being considered...Sennim 12:15, November 18, 2011 (UTC)

Archiving as Sennim declined the nomination.--31dot 20:27, November 22, 2011 (UTC)

Capricorn (unresvolved) (April 2016) Edit

I keep forgetting that Capricorn isn't an admin. I know, as Cid put it in the last admin nomination, that sysop powers aren't a "merit badge" we hand out, but I think that Capricorn can, and should have already been, entrusted with these powers awhile ago. At the very least, I think Capricorn is just as tired of waiting for an admin to do something around here as I am with having to ignore those jobs since I would have no time to do anything else. I think entrusting Capricorn with sysop powers is the best solution to these, and many other problems, not to mention a smart move all around. - Archduk3 03:59, April 2, 2016 (UTC)


  • Support. I do not see any reason they should not be one, and personally believe they would do well. 31dot (talk) 08:11, April 3, 2016 (UTC)


I'd like to oppose this nomination, as I find Capricorn to have been persistently negative and abusive, qualities which I don't think should be encouraged. --Defiant (talk) 08:29, April 2, 2016 (UTC)

Please provide evidence of your claims. 31dot (talk) 09:16, April 2, 2016 (UTC)

Sorry if I wasn't clear enough. The examples are many, imo. Capricorn seems to have a gross misunderstanding about the naming of articles, seemingly under the impression that scripts aren't allowed to be used for naming articles at all, and has repeatedly dogged me when I've created pages whose names are allowed for by the policies and guidelines, opposing the very existence of such pages just because their naming is based on script sources. One notable example is when he submitted submersible infrastructure for deletion, not only despite its naming being allowed for by the policies and guidelines, but also despite myself and others repeatedly trying to explain that to him. This misunderstanding continued with him suggesting that Reptilian blade should be moved because no source specifically says "Xindi-Reptilian blade", just "Reptilian blade". That's a highly irrational suggestion, considering that a major percentage of the articles on MA consist of ones that follow the format "(full species name) (item)" when, in reality, the species name has either been abbreviated when directly associated with the item or not used at all. This kind of fundamental misunderstanding of our article-naming conventions is not a good sign in a potential admin, as it implies he would continue these disruptive edits but with the added resources of adminship. Also, as for the negativity of his comments, whereas I've seen him persistently crack down on new articles, not once have I noticed him say anything encouraging about new pages; his edits appear to be at least mostly about what should not happen, rather than focusing on the positive contributions of the community. --Defiant (talk) 10:04, April 2, 2016 (UTC)

Oh I accept that script names are allowed alright, I just don't think because they're allowed you can use any old string of text and be immune from consequences. The submersible infrastructure deletion turned (or at least should have, some people seem to skim posts and think an assault on their integrity is underway) on the question if that was in fact a proper name for the facility, not on whether script sources were allowed. And regarding the xindi-reptilian blade, well, I think I've said it as good as I can on the talk page, if your argument for having a page instead of adding the thing to unnamed technology is completely based on it having a specific name, then the least you can do is actually call it that. But since annoyed Defiant flat out refuses to consider nuances at this point I am apparently the disruptive one.
But this seeming grudge aside, the last few lines in that post offer a good starting point for my own playing devil's advocate with the idea idea of me becoming an admin.
Bluntly, there is probably some truth to the perception that I'm cracking down on other's contributions. Here's the situation: my life outside the site is very unpredictable, with time for hobbies being something that comes and goes. And while I've been around for a looong time now, I've often been absent from the sites for days or a few weeks or on rare occasions even longer periods. In more recent years, I might appear more active, but really what I'm doing a lot of days is taking a peak at my watchlist and the recent changes page, and then acting on things I see. I absolutely prefer adding stuff myself, but periods where I don't have the time are more common then ever as I'm building my life. Years ago I would have been awol during those periods, now I try to keep an eye on things. (another aspect of Defiant's criticism lies in that I have set myself the task of giving every new page a look. Defiant is actually not the first editor to suddenly make a lot of articles and subsequently feel targeted by me, Lakenheath had the same reaction. But I am not apologizing for this: I'm no Sulfur, but regardless a whole damn lot of good improvements have come from this systematic attempt to catch issues with articles early on, and if I've occasionally put one up for merge or deletion that's only a fraction of the good I've done with that, adding categories, correcting the tense, improving wording, etc are the more typical actions)
So, there I am having naively laid my soul bare in the interest of having a fair discussion (and somehow in the oppose section no less, but consider me neutral). The truth is, I'm just not dependable when it comes to being around every day, given the facts of my real life that just can't be helped. I'm still scrambling to imagine out what me being an admin would actually look like, so I'm not sure how much of a downside this would be. I absolutely don't mind being made an admin if it's believed that that would help the site. And I sure as hell would take those powers seriously, and not abuse them to push my will upon people I disagree with like Defiant fears. But honestly as flattering as the nomination is my ego isn't stirred. I was perfectly happy not having a merit badge, and would not mind in the least for things to stay as they are. Nor would I mind for things to change, and I'm kinda sympathetic to the idea that the site could do with another administrator. In the end, even though I'm the topic of the discussion, all I can really say is do what you think is best. -- Capricorn (talk) 18:31, April 2, 2016 (UTC)
What Capricorn describes regarding being able to be on site is exactly the reason I think we should not only have another admin, but that it should be Capricorn. I don't think I'm going out on a ledge here when I say pretty much every admin here has RL stuff "get in the way" of being here, and based on the number of admins still editing, it seems to me that for more than half of them have little to no time to even look at MA these days. I also don't think admins should be omnipresent for too long, since it gives one a sense of distance that really, really helps when the shit is hitting the fan here in one regard or another. Hell, if I had more time to deal with MA stuff there would be a whole other version of this site online right now and I'd be doing my damnedest to make sure MA and wikia never interacted again. That said, what Capricorn is already doing is mostly what an admin does; the merit badge just gives you a few tools that makes those jobs easier to do, and I don't think that the examples Defiant mentioned are anything beyond questioning the context in which those terms were used, if not necessarily in the most tactful way. I don't know of anyone who has been around as long as Capricorn has and not been a bit tactless from time to time though, and, regarding adding another admin, I would ask: "if not Capricorn, then whom?" - Archduk3 22:20, April 2, 2016 (UTC)

Capricorn, firstly, I'm not annoyed; was just asked what examples I could give and tried to present them as best I could. I absolutely not only tolerate nuances but welcome them. For example, I have no issue with you personally, and strongly believe you're likely a great guy in RL; I just have a bit of a problem with the notion of you becoming an admin, since I don't think you show enough know-how on MA. That's hardly the be-all-and-end-all of the universe, however, as others have pointed out. I actually also agree with you not apologizing for targeting new articles; that would be completely fine with me, as long as it didn't keep demonstrating a fundamental lack of understanding of our article-naming conventions. Because that's how it currently is, my fear is that, if you were given admin options, you might make a lot of accidents, only for other users to then notify you essentially, "Er... that wasn't quite right...." My fear is definitely not that you would "abuse [admin powers] to push [your] will upon people [you] disagree with." --Defiant (talk) 23:23, April 2, 2016 (UTC)


I will abstain.--Memphis77 (talk) 08:40, April 2, 2016 (UTC)

I'm leaning towards supporting but I'd like to hear from Capricorn first. 31dot (talk) 09:15, April 2, 2016 (UTC)

Also on Fandom

Random Wiki