Project:Requests for adminship/Deon555

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a permissions request that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.

Deon555

I understand that I am quite new - on this WikiPedia, but I have been on en wikipedia for aaages now, and have heaps of edits, in the main space, Wiki, Template etc. I do Recent Changes Patrol, New Changes Patrol, I monitor high-profile pages, espech Wikipages (including the Main Page). I am familiar with many Wiki features, like:

• Editing your Monobook.js page
• Reverting Vandalism
• Rollback
• Banning and Blocking Policys - incuding things like dodgy Usernames etc
• Warning Vandals

on en:wiki i have Popups, Godmode-light (Rollback), RC Filter,etc and other 'advanced tools'.

In closing, I believe Adminship/sysop status should not be given out on the basis of edit count. There are political and technical arguments against this. The technical side is that adding all users above a certain edit count to an implicit group would require at least one extra query on page view; this could turn into an unreasonable performance demand. There's a workable solution to this, however. On the political side of things; English Wikipeia, and I'm sure this one also, is a wiki where "editcountitis" is discouraged and in some cases, condemned. An edit count is not a valuable indicator of a user's trustworthiness where Adminship/sysop status is concerned, nor is it a good indicator of the value and quality of their contributions.

Thank You Sincerely,

--Deon555 03:46, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Oppose. Sorry, but Simple works rather differently to EN, and you'll need some time to get used to things, even if you have the technical knowledge. 09:06, 27 May 2006 (UTC) -- (Comment by Archer7, as to changelog of page -- Eptalon 10:43, 27 May 2006 (UTC))

Oppose. I agree that the edit count should not be the sole thing looked at for the decision on who to grant admin status (or other privileges) to. Things like warning vandals and reverting pages can also be done without being admin. The change of the old layout of simple to the new one was done completely by someone who does not have administrative status (Only for the final commit might they have needed an admin). As of this writing, you have an editcount of 2 (edits probably spent on putting up this request). As to my knowledge, adminship requires working with the project for about three monnths. This is simply to get to know how things work here. I therefore propose you to worki with us, as a normal user. After about 3 months, you come back, if you want, and show us what you have done. This is the basic idea of a meritocracy. -- Eptalon 10:07, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'll do some editing, and come back. Is there a real base line for the number of edits? --Deon555 22:38, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Oppose, per above. Neither edit count nor time spent should be the absolute test of admin rights (I think a few excellent users should be granted it earlier), but both are useful in most cases. Three months is a good amount of time, and the edit limit is about 1000 edits. Happy editing! --Cromwellt|talk|contris 03:54, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Oppose, per above. -- Blockinblox 15:33, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Oppose: even has no user page. How am I supposed to know you and your work? 89.50.64.212 15:52, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.