Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2009-03/User:Equinox for admin

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search

User:Equinox for admin[edit]

  • Vote ends: 23:59 7 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Vote started: 00:00 24 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Acceptance: I accepted over here: [1] Thanks.
    • Languages: en, fr-1
    • Timezone: UTC+0 (United Kingdom)
    Equinox 19:41, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Support[edit]

  1. Symbol support vote.svg Support as nominator.—msh210 16:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
  2. Symbol support vote.svg Support Conrad.Irwin 17:13, 23 March 2009 (UTC) Equinox does so much patrolling that it's idiotic for him not to have a sysop flag. Conrad.Irwin 17:13, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
  3. Symbol support vote.svg Support Ƿidsiþ 18:02, 23 March 2009 (UTC) Yep, sounds good.
  4. Symbol support vote.svg Support For the love of God, please. I'm quite tired of doing things for him which he is obviously qualified to do himself. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 19:15, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
  5. Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, indeed. DCDuring TALK 19:45, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
  6. Symbol support vote.svg Support Razorflame 22:50, 23 March 2009 (UTC) I do not believe that he is Wonderfool. Razorflame 22:50, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
  7. Symbol support vote.svg Support Nadando 23:25, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
  8. Symbol support vote.svg Support. I'm utterly disappointed over the opposing arguments. Whatever wrong he'll ever do as an admin will be revertable. --Eivind (t) 08:11, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
  9. Symbol support vote.svg Support. See no reason whatsoever to change my stance from the previous vote. --Duncan 15:45, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
  10. Symbol support vote.svg Support Neskaya kanetsv 19:28, 24 March 2009 (UTC) I suppose I support this afterall, though I'm a little nervous overall of it. --Neskaya kanetsv 19:28, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
  11. Symbol support vote.svg Support Jackofclubs 08:53, 25 March 2009 (UTC) - has but improved since the last run. --Jackofclubs 08:53, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
  12. Symbol support vote.svg Support Vahagn Petrosyan 21:48, 25 March 2009 (UTC) Though a diabolical plan I sense... --Vahagn Petrosyan 21:48, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
  13. Symbol support vote.svg Support. Nothing but contributions since last run. Probably too many contributions judging from RFV nominations. DAVilla 08:00, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
  14. Symbol support vote.svg Support. Dominic·t 12:24, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
  15. Symbol support vote.svg SupportRuakhTALK 13:16, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
  16. Symbol support vote.svg Support Even if he is WonderFool, WF as Keene helped me a good deal until he lost his marbles. Let him on until it happens again, if he is WonderFool :p — [ ric ] opiaterein — 17:05, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Oppose[edit]

  1. Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose WikiPedant 20:05, 23 March 2009 (UTC). SemperB has long suspected that Equinox is a sock for the notorious Wonderfool, who carefully built a history of substantive contributions before gaining adminship and going on a very destructive vandalism rampage using the admin tools. (See User_talk:SemperBlotto/2008#Wonderfool.) In an anonymous wiki world, there's no way to know for sure, but I trust SemperB's instincts and do not believe granting this adminship is worth the risk. If Equinox is just Equinox, and not Wonderfool, he has my apologies--but not my vote. WikiPedant
    Sigh. I feel I'd have to nuke that Florida server room at this point to cause enough damage to annul the value of my thousands of new entries. Thanks for the explanation, though. Equinox 23:03, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
  2. Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Neskaya kanetsv 22:58, 23 March 2009 (UTC) The other vote is just too fresh in my mind still, and I'd rather not risk this. I have nothing against Equinox, but my vote is cast as oppose this time. --Neskaya kanetsv 22:58, 23 March 2009 (UTC) Changing to support after some thought on the issue. --Neskaya kanetsv 19:27, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Abstain[edit]

Discussion[edit]

It should be noted that, since Equinox has had his identity confirmed by WM, if he is, in fact, Wonderfool, we can finally find out exactly who that is. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 23:14, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

I sort of assumed "Wonderfool" was whichever Encyclopaedia Dramatica user hadn't been banned yet and felt like a bit of trolling. "We are Anonymous, we are many" etc. Anyway, yes, if I go postal you get to see my passport photo. (Unfortunately not the slightly older one where I had blue hair.) But I am a good person. Tell you what: if any very regular Wiktionarian whose user name I would recognise cares to drop me an e-mail, I am happy to share my identity regardless (on the gentlemanly understanding that you won't splash it around everywhere). Then you can Google me and decide for yourself whether I seem like a Wonderfool. Equinox 23:24, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Why the secrecy? If I were accused of being Wonderfool, I would put my real name on my user page, together with a list of the places I have lived in since 2004. Do that, Equinox, and I'll vote for you - even if you are Wonderfool. --Makaokalani 17:11, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Ateleas, at the risk of sounding paranoid — how do you know? —RuakhTALK 13:07, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
See Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2008-12/User:Equinox_for_admin#Discussion. Equinox 01:19, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I see no evidence there. (I absolutely refuse to take your word for this, because it's only relevant if you're not trustworthy.) —RuakhTALK 14:25, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Ah yes. Well, it was w:User:Cary_Bass who responded to me, so you could ask him whether Wiktionary's Equinox is identified or not, assuming that a mere yes/no answer isn't considered a data protection breach. Equinox 14:34, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Equinox is definitely identified already. See the identification noticeboard where Cary confirms these: [2]. Dominic·t 12:24, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! —RuakhTALK 13:17, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
I am aware of the cautionary tale of w:James J. Angleton and I have not reviewed the WM process, but is it not still possible that Equinox is yet another cutout for Wonderfool? DCDuring TALK 16:25, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Anything is possible. Whether it is likely enough to represent a significant threat is up to individuals to decide. Conrad.Irwin 16:28, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
De omnibus dubitandum. An old, but good principle of yore. The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 18:00, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Decision[edit]

Passes, 16-1. --Neskaya kanetsv 01:32, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

  • As that is the will of the community - made it so. SemperBlotto 18:55, 8 April 2009 (UTC)