Nomination: I hereby nominate myself as a local English Wiktionary Administrator. I've been a solid contributor and have learned a lot about Wiktionary practice, written and unwritten. Teh Rote 23:01, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Vote ends: 23:59 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Vote started: 00:00 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Acceptance: Since this is a self-nomination, I think I'll accept.
OpposeΠαρατηρητής 15:05, 30 December 2008 (UTC) (self-nominated)
Can you clarify your comment? Are you opposing just because this is a self-nomination? If yes, I believe the policies page permits self-nomination. "Anyone with a fair track record of contributions can apply for administrator status." Wiktionary:Policies_and_guidelines --AZard 14:42, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
Oppose pending vetting by a CheckUser. (I've got a feeling. My apologies if I'm wrong.) —RuakhTALK 15:54, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Oppose. Teh Rote is a great contributor who has learned a lot about Wiktionary practice, written and unwritten. Can't comment on what constitutes a "solid" contributor, but he's certainly more active than myself. Neither do I doubt his intentions. Certainly any and all contributors who have a positive impact are welcomed as part of the community. However, that isn't sufficient justification for adminship, and I don't yet see any reason why he should be trusted to this role. I'm not saying that any qualities are lacking, just that the evidence is insufficient when it should be overwhelming. The nomination is premature. DAVilla 10:56, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Premature, per DAVilla. --Neskayakanetsv 22:13, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Abstain\Mike 23:38, 1 January 2009 (UTC) Normally I would simply pass a vote like this without bothering to edit, but... even I have seen that things have happened around this user, but I have no idea about how it came to happen, so I cannot make any fair judgment in either direction. Hence the explicit "abstain".