Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2011-10/User:Maro for admin

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

User:Maro for admin[edit]

  • Nomination: I hereby nominate Maro (talkcontribs) as a local English Wiktionary Administrator. Rockpilot 08:05, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
  • Vote starts: 18:21, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
  • Vote ends: 23:59, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
  • Acceptance: I accept the nomination. Maro 18:21, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
    • Languages: en, pl, ru-1, de-1, nl-1
    • Timezone: CET


  1. Symbol support vote.svg Support Equinox 16:27, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
  2. Symbol support vote.svg Support Come on, boost the Slavic contents. :) --Anatoli 00:55, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
  3. Symbol support vote.svg Support Fairly established Polish editor. JamesjiaoTC 01:10, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
  4. Symbol support vote.svg Support —Stephen (Talk) 11:12, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
  5. Symbol support vote.svg SupportInternoob 23:49, 15 October 2011 (UTC) I was nominated by WF too, no big deal :-P
  6. Symbol support vote.svg Support[Ric Laurent] — 12:59, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
  7. Symbol support vote.svg Support I thought he's already one. -- Gauss 22:05, 18 October 2011 (UTC)


  1. Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose SemperBlotto 10:45, 7 October 2011 (UTC) I won't support anyone nominated by Wonderfool (nothing personal)
    Would you if someone else duplicated the nomination? I'm not familiar with Maro, so it wouldn't be me. DAVilla 07:14, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
    He nominated me too... :( —CodeCat 10:23, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
    I think Wonderfool nominated the majority of the successful candidates. --Rockpilot 21:28, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
    And even himself. Maro 21:38, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
    Ah yeah, that was full of lols. --Rockpilot 21:59, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
    Once per vote (general remark, unrelated to the topic of this particular vote): Could you all please stop contesting/discussing every opposing vote? Votes are votes. There is plenty of space for discussion elsewhere, e.g. here. -- Gauss 22:05, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
    I agree. --Rockpilot 22:08, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
    I disagree. We definitely don't want to nag/bug/harass/intimidate "Oppose" voters just because they disagree with us, but if an "Oppose" vote expresses a concern that can be addressed, and addressing it will increase consensus and decrease contention, then that's absolutely wonderful. It makes voting a little bit less evil. —RuakhTALK 23:29, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
    But the appropriate place for discussion is the talk page. In addition, it does discourage opposing votes, at least the way it is usually done. -- Gauss 22:45, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
    phhh, appropriate place. Who cares where ppl express their opinion? So what if it discourages opposing votes? --Rockpilot 23:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
    No, Gauss. The talk page of the voting page is the appropriate page for discussing the voting page itself, i.e. the proposal and its implications.
    The proper place to discuss a comment/opposition/agreement/abstention is just below it. Anywhere else would be counterintuitive and troublesome for both parties. If the discussion stemming from the comment/opposition/agreement/abstention becomes too large and important, it can be moved elsewhere as to not be distracting.
    And, finally, just forbidding replies or rebuttals is out of question. --Daniel 11:48, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
    This is just not true, Daniel. (Except for the "finally" remark. The replies/rebuttals must be placed at an appropriate place for discussion, though.) -- Gauss 11:42, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
    How untrue is what I said? How any other place would be better than just below the last message? If I replied at the talk page of this vote, would you see it easily? If I replied at your talk page, would other people be able to easily find it? Where you learned what is an "appropriate place"? Did someone else teach you or you found it out by original research? If other people keep talking with each other in places other than the only one you deem "appropriate", what are you going to do? --Daniel 13:50, 23 October 2011 (UTC)


  1. Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain Mglovesfun (talk) 16:22, 7 October 2011 (UTC) only because I've seen the user nominate stuff for speedy deletion that no administrator has seen fit to delete. That worries me a bit. But that on it's own is not enough for me to oppose this, which is why I'm not doing so. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:22, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
  2. Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain doesn't particularly strike me as sysop material, but on the other hand I have no real reason to oppose either -- Liliana 03:55, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
  3. Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain for the moment, leaning toward support. DAVilla 07:27, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
  4. Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain Dan Polansky 08:27, 18 October 2011 (UTC)


  • Sure. 7-1 passes by anyone's standard.--Rockpilot 23:44, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
    Thank you! Maro 21:21, 21 October 2011 (UTC)