Zscout370

final (98/2/0) ending 03:57 11 August 2005 (UTC) Zscout370 (talk · contribs) Kate's Tool - Zscout has shown himself to be VERY familiar with Wikipolicy and has been a familiar face at WP:CFD, WP:VfD, WP:IFD, and he has also helped out newbies several times. He has done loads of work on RC Patrol and has been attacked by trolls, without losing his cool. This user DEFINATELY deserves the tools. He has declined to be nominated before but has now gave in. --Redwolf24 03:57, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept. I had many users ask me to take this job, but I hesitated. Now, I see that other admins ask me, especially, Ta bu shi da yu, I will go ahead and accept this nomination. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 03:59, 4 August 2005 (UTC) Hey I'm an admin too! Redwolf24 04:19, 4 August 2005 (UTC) [reply]
What the? Gah! I wanted to do this! Argh! I might just point out that this editor is one of our best: if anyone wants to know just how good, have a look at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Gay Nigger Association of America. You can't actually get much more controversial than this article, and he has done some amazing work in getting it up to scratch! For this alone I would highly recommend him, but he is good with vandalism, diplomatic and a great editor anyway - see Hero of Belarus. Personally, I hope they break the support vote record. - Ta bu shi da yu 04:22, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
...and he turned it down when I suggested nominating him. Twice. :P Grutness...wha? 05:47, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
well I beat you both on the time that mattered. Redwolf24 05:56, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Won't repeat things already said. Also, Zscout has shown exemplary character. He never lost temper even with the hardest to deal with editors. He kindly always helped when he was asked for help on any matters. He shows broad interest in several underrepresanted topic (e.g. East Europe), created the Russia portal (especially amazing for a stranger), which also inspired a Ukraine portal that soon followed. For these and many other reasons, I am happy to co-sign. --Irpen 07:30, August 4, 2005 (UTC)

Support

  1. Support! (Yay obnoxious attention seeking habits!) Redwolf24 03:58, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support Very active in janitorial tasks, including RC patrol. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 03:59, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support. I've seen good work with this one, and I definately support. Give him the mop! -- Essjay · Talk 04:00, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  4. Support; mopworthy indeed. Good candidate. Antandrus (talk) 04:01, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support. I've worked with Zach on a couple of articles. He shows a lot of commonsense, is enthusiastic, works hard, and explains what he's doing on talk pages. He's a good editor and he'll make a responsible admin. SlimVirgin (talk) 04:13, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  6. Strongest support possible, by which I mean support. - Ta bu shi da yu 04:22, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support. siafu 04:33, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  8. SUPPORT! About time he accepted nom. Grutness...wha? 05:47, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Everyking 06:29, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  10. As a co-nominator, I of course support. --Irpen 07:30, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  11. я соглашаюсь - Very good editor, cool headed. I also admire him for being; Trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and reverent, and trust most who have walked this path. ∞Who?¿? 07:58, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Certainly. Radiant_>|< 09:04, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  13. Support. A very good user who has done plenty of very good work. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:22, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Ofcourse =Nichalp «Talk»= 09:35, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  15. Absolutely. After all of five and a half hours I'm number 15, how did that happen? :) --Dmcdevit·t 09:45, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  16. Support Everyking supports this nomination? Wow. -- Viajero | Talk 10:22, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    I actually find this a bit offensive. Everyking 10:49, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support, definitely. --Spangineer (háblame) 11:13, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  18. Definitely, yes -- Francs2000 | Talk 11:16, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Total Support. --Canderson7 12:29, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  20. Support.  Grue  13:48, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Yes, please. Joyous (talk) 13:50, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  22. Unconditional Support - There are no questions about Zscout370's qualities as a contributor and a person. He is always proactive, polite and insightful, not to mention a great graphic designer. If there was ever an user who deserved Adminship, it is Zscout! Redux 13:58, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Strong Support. Does excellent work. Thunderbrand 14:12, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  24. Strong support. Nothing more needs to be said. --Deathphoenix 14:51, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support 120% - An ideal contributor who would make an great admin. Sango><span style="color:#006400"123 14:53, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  26. Support. As much as I hate the idea of joining a bandwagon, this editor deserves a bandwagon. --Scimitar parley 15:04, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support--Cyberjunkie | Talk 15:27, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support. 'Nuff said above. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 16:27, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Strong support Glad to see he's finally accepted a nomination; I would have nominated myself a few months ago had I not seen that he had declined a nominaton in the past. Y0u (Y0ur talk page) (Y0ur contributions) 18:04, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  30. Support. Sensible editor, good grasp of policy. Jayjg (talk) 18:07, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support. I've seen him around the Wikipedia and he strikes me as a good editor. 'Though my vote seems unnecessary at this point, you have it anyway. --User:Jenmoa 18:17, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support! --Jiang 18:32, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  33.  BRIAN0918  20:40, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support Astrotrain 20:45, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  35. Support. No doubts. --Lysy (talk) 21:13, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Strong support. I actually thought that Zscout370 would make an excellent admin, I had once even thought about nominating him for admin. Now that Redwolf24 has put him on the RfA, I will give my support. Excellent user, does a lot of work on Wikipedia. — Stevey7788 (talk) 22:30, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support Never seen you before, but I've seen GNAA, and well... :) Only article I've ever seen go directly from VfD to Featured Article nomination. Good work. And, I guess it's a good thing when admins fight over who got to nominate you. :P Ryan 22:47, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  38. Emphatic Support. Great overall contributor, and a nice guy. android79 22:47, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  39. Support, SqueakBox 22:49, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  40. Support, especially as per SlimVirgin and Ta bu's comments. Func( t, c ) 23:06, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support, we need more like this one. —Michael Z. 2005-08-4 23:38 Z
  42. Support, long overdue. Flowerparty talk 23:44, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Support, wholeheartedly. Dan100 (Talk) 23:51, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  44. Support Sure. SchmuckyTheCat 00:05, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support Harrumph! MicahMN | Talk 00:41, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
  46. Strong Support I had assumed he was an admin already.... -- BMIComp (talk, HOWS MY DRIVING) 00:53, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Definitely totally unconditional strong absolute support (did I miss any adverbs, adjectives or adjuncts in there?). Very level-headed user. One more for the cabal! Tomer TALK 01:10, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
  48. Strong support, would make a great fellow Cabalist (if there's such a word). Craigy (talk) 01:23, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
  49. Strongest possible support If everyone was like Zscout, Wikipedia would probably be the absolute best site on the web. Welcome to the cabal-club! Bratschetalk 5 pillars 02:08, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
  50. Wow, first time I get to exercise my democratic Wiki right and vote, for someone whose work I am, admittedly, not very familiar with, but I'm familiar with him on other non-Wiki projects. He has the attitude of a good Wiki admin on there, so I think he'd make one hell of an admin where his attitude is actually good for something. Zscout370, you got my support--Canuckguy 04:25, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Merovingian (t) (c) 04:26, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
  52. David Gerard 06:08, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Support. the wub "?/!" 12:06, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  54. Support - better late than never: I am sure, I am not the last to support. --Bhadani 14:27, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  55. Support. Constructive, courteous, does good work all over the place. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 15:06, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  56. Support. I don't know him to well, but I see his name everywhere and every time he is doing something usefull. &#0149;Zhatt&#0149; 18:02, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
  57. Support. I don't think there's anything left to say that hasn't already been said. Carbonite | Talk 21:23, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  58. Support. I thought he was an admin already. --cesarb 02:39, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  59. Support. Are you sure you weren't already an admin, and were too busy doing good things to notice? NatusRoma 04:05, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
  60. Support. -Mysidia 04:36, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  61. Support. Exceptionally courteous and patient, takes time to help everybody and respond even to the obvious comments...hmm...this comment supposed to be obvious. –Gnomz007(?) 04:56, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  62. 'Support!!!!, Yet another WTH ? He is not an adm. already ?!This shouldn't be an issue, make him an adm now! D. J. Bracey (talk) 05:50, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  63. Support. Without a doubt. — Knowledge Seeker দ 07:12, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
  64. Cool. JuntungWu 09:14, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  65. Splash 16:21, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  66. Very strong support. One of the best Wikipedians I've come across. Courteous, conscientious, responsible. Will make a great admin. Ann Heneghan (talk) 18:47, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  67. Support. Fine editor. -Willmcw 19:56, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
  68. Support --malathion talk 02:01, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  69. Gee, I thought I had registered my vote on this application already... Oh well, support.  Denelson83  09:44, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  70. Making it an even (3)70 :-PKarmafist 19:39, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  71. Support Great editor, strong admin material. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:03, August 7, 2005 (UTC)
  72. Support. HKT talk 23:46, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  73. EXTERMINATE! Cat chi? 01:00, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  74. Ding. humblefool®Deletion Reform 01:08, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  75. Support. "I thought $user already was an admin." – ABCD✉ 01:32, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  76. Support. I run across his edits all the time, great editor, will make a fine admin. --MPerel ( talk | contrib) 03:25, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  77. Never heard of him, therefore, I support! El_C 03:35, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  78. Support. Sashazlv 23:14, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  79. Support - Introvert talk 01:32, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  80. Support as this person never tramped me although we intervene each other regularly. Deryck C. 05:48, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  81. I Support. This guy's definitely fit for the job, and I want to see him break the record for the most votes supporting someone going for adminship. Zero1328 06:25, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  82. Support not that it makes much of a difference at this point. Jtkiefer T | @ | C ----- 06:39, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
  83. Support. DS1953 13:45, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
  84. Support. I'm a bit late to the party, but better late than never. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 17:07, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  85. Support. From his obvious talent and level-headedness, I had assumed he already was an admin. --Habap 17:58, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  86. Support How come nobody tells me when there's a party? - Tεxτurε 18:02, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  87. Support Pardon my being so late. :P --Gaurav Arora Talk 20:30, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
  88. Support Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 21:31, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  89. Support support support support . . . Of course Zachary should be an admin. I always presumed he was. If we had the option of speedy admin creation to match our speedy deletion options, Zach would be top of the list. Oh, have I said that I support his nomination? lol FearÉIREANN\(caint) 22:13, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  90. Support—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 00:05, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
  91. Support. Guettarda 02:00, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  92. Strong support! - Lucky 6.9 07:07, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Hey, you got a vote from Lucky! A rare privilege indeed :-) Ta bu shi da yu 07:13, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  93. Support It appears Zscout needs a little nudge to put him over the top, so here it is. NoSeptember 08:38, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  94. Support. --NormanEinstein 19:10, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
  95. Support. ral315 01:09, August 11, 2005 (UTC)
  96. Support. Must....follow...crowd. (does seem like he'll make a good admin though). →ubεr nεmo→ lóquï 02:04, August 11, 2005 (UTC)
  97. Support -- A worthy editor who has established trust. For sure. Longhair | Talk 03:57, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  98. Support - it's about time he accepted. Rob Church Talk | Desk 04:22, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Well, I would support, but since everyone else is going to, I suppose SOMEONE should oppose. Plus, it seems like the evil thing to do. Looks set in stone now, so congrats. --Lord Voldemort (Dark Mark) 14:56, 4 August 2005 (UTC) Crossed out as its not really a serious vote. should not have an effect on the tally. Redwolf24 04:41, 6 August 2005 (UTC) Withdrawn --Lord Voldemort (Dark Mark) 15:24, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments That's obviously devil's advocate~ :-D -- Jerry Crimson Mann 16:49, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's Jason Jr. :o Ryan 22:47, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
While I don't really care if you cross out my vote (since it doesn't really matter what one vote does), I don't think you should cross out votes. People can vote however they see fit. You shouldn't cross one out because you think it's "not really a serious vote." Perhaps that's how someone really wants to vote. It is their perogative. If someone want to not vote seriously, why stop them? It's not vandalism, it's not disrupting WP to make a point, it's just how they vote. Maybe a person has a real problem with someone, but just would rather not bring it up. Not that I do, I just think we shouldn't get into the habit of just crossing out votes at will. I respectfully withdraw my own oppose vote. --Lord Voldemort (Dark Mark) 15:24, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. It is up to the bureaucrat who closes the RfA to accept votes or disregard them. Votes should not be crossed out by other users. --Canderson7 17:16, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
The crossing out the vote made by Lord Voldemort was not my idea, and if I had a choice in the matter, it would have let it stand. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 18:55, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I just felt it useless opposing just cause it was against the majority (see below...) Sorry Voldemort. Redwolf24 04:40, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I open saying that what I'm about to say does not reflect any current policy or guideline, it is my opinion. Voldemort, I must strongly disagree with your opinion in regards to not voting seriously not being a problem. RfAs are important in the "wikiverse", it is through them that Admins get "elected". They also usually mean something to the candidate. So, if you're (meaning: anyone) going to oppose a candidate, do it for a proper reason. It doesn't even needs to be an objective one, it could be completely subjective (e.g., I don't like what this guy writes), but a valid reason nonetheless (even if you are not required to divulge your reasons for opposing a candidate). Opposing someone's nomination "just for the heck of it" is not in keeping with the community spirit, and, IMHO, it does disrupt Wikipedia (Admins are an important part of the project). Sure, in this particular RfA it will make no difference, given the substantial support the candidate has received, but there are cases in which every vote can make a difference in reaching the necessary consensus to adminify a user. It is true, however, that there's nothing in the present rules that expressly prohibit voting "for fun". Doesn't mean that it should be done though. Regards, Redux 05:07, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  1. --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 04:24, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose, user has exposed templates with section headers to breakage by not substituting them. At present lacks the technical knowledge required to be an effective admin. Will support provided he goes and substitutes them all... Alphax τεχ 01:16, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

Comments

Questions for the candidate
A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? (Please read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.)
A. Deal with WP:IFD, other images issues and stomp vandalism here and there.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. Most likely Hero of Belarus my first WP:FA. It is a gem, since I took a topic few would even touch and made it into something great.
3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
A. Been involved in the styles debate, the GNAA article, was a party to an RFAr. Of course, things like that happen after you been here a while. I have been asked to provide edit summaries, which I admit I did not do that much in the past. However, I am getting better at that. Overall, I enjoyed my experience here, and it can only get better with time, just like great wine.
Category