Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Phaedriel 2

message: From my investigative trawling I can see that Phaedriel has created and maintains two portals of extremely high quality, visual appeal and content, as well as a wikiproject which is now flourishing with more than 40 contributors. Aside from that, there is a very detailed map she created, :Image:IPNA.png. I have compiled a longer list of articles which she has contributed to here, where a good example of the upholding of NPOV, which is essential for WP is set for other users. 
Secondly, an administrator is meant to be an ambassador for Wikipedia, and the civility, politeness, enthusiasm and encouragement that Phaedriel brings to the project is amply evidenced (, , ). You can also see her "Today's star" campaign, and the number of userpages she has renovated. Needless to say, she does not use agitatory editing practices.
Phaedriel's ability to work and discuss issues in a group can be observed at  as well as a dispute at Talk:Texas Ranger Division; which is ample evidence that she will be able to weather the inevitable storms that an administrator will face in a gracious and dignified manner.
Phaedriel frequently reverts vandalism and always remembers to warn the user in question (), as well as not biting the newbies.Her record and contributions at AfD, (,
, ) demonstrate an ability to reason and debate with logic and in good spirit with other Wikipedians and the community can be confident that she will close debates with discretionary wisdom where necessary.
I am honoured, humbled and embarrassed to be selected to nominate Phaedriel for administrator status.Blnguyen | rant-line 08:56, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Blnguyen's supporting remarks

message: It is my pleasure to co-nominate Phaedriel for adminship. Once in a while you see a candidate so awesomely right for the position that it is difficult to explain exactly why to those that do not know the candidate. If you know Phaedriel, you already know she's right for the job and I'm not talking to you because it is almost certain that you will already be scrolling down to support. But if you do not know Phaedriel you are in for a treat. Read on.
 
Blnguyen in his co nomination has presented the quantitative case, with numbers, analysis, and so forth, but I think it's important, perhaps more important, to also present the qualitiative case. Adminship evaluation is a lot more than raw numbers. It's also about the Wikipedia spirit. Merely analysing Phaedriel on past and anticipated future edits and actions is profoundly wrong as it misses the point. 
For, while she will be a fine admin in terms of the mechanicals, it's what she brings to the project itself with her spirit and approach that will rock. Look at her approach to dealing with other users. She's always there with a kind word and a sympathetic ear and a comment to cheer you up. Even the stalkers that have plagued her have been met with the utmost reasonably possible good faith and civility. Her recent "Today's star shines on" campaign to recognise good editors is a perfect demonstration of Phaedriel's embrace of the Wikipedia spirit.
For some time now, Phaedriel has had a long procession of people wanting to nominate her for adminship. If everyone that wanted to were actually a co nominator she'd have dozens. I was one of the voices arguing that she should NOT accept adminship until she was ready, and willing to take the mop. That time has now come. I am extremely honored that Phaedriel, out of the many people that have offered, selected me as a co nominee. It's time to make this fine Wikipedian an admin. For the good of the encyclopedia, and for the good of all of us. 
Phaedriel will be changed a little bit by adminship. It changes all of us. But I think Adminship itself may well be changed by Phaedriel. I think we admins are a fair, firm, and civil bunch. But I think Phaedriel will push us to be even better, to be fairer, to be more civil, and yes, more loving, in our approaches to our users, and to our tasks, and that she will keep us honest when we stray, and will cheer us should the work grow heavy and we despair.
 
It is  way past time to make Phaedriel an admin and I hope you will join me in supporting her candidacy. ++Lar: t/c 10:16, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Lar's supporting remarks

message: I never thought that she was not one already!.. I had earlier inter-acted with her, and found her really a very nice person. Only such administrators shall take wikipedia to a stage of higher credibility and complete integrity. --Bhadani 14:02, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: My My!

message: This'll be another Wikipedia 100. And for those who don't know, it's Phaedriel's birthday today! (29th July, which will, in a matter of hours, be true for everyone) So from everybody at the Birthday committee, and everyone who voted for you, Phaedriel:
	Happy Birthday!	from the Birthday Committee, and all the RfA supporters
	
Wishing Phaedriel a very happy birthday on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee and all her wonderful RfA supporters!
Don't forget to save us all a piece of cake!	
Wishing Phaedriel a very happy birthday on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee and all her wonderful RfA supporters!
Don't forget to save us all a piece of cake!
	               	
(I know there's about 10 hours left till this is true for GMT, but we can bring it forward a bit... :D ) --Draicone (talk) 14:16, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, let me add my super-early congratulations. The tremendous support your RfA has garnered is a tribute to your fine work here and couldn't be more deserved. Its about time you were en-mopped. Well done, Gwernol 14:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 100???  after 13 hours it is already 117.  I think it will set a new record - maybe 300+  --rogerd 17:00, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 137142 supports now.  I really would love to see WP:300 achieved here; she totally deserves it from what I've seen.  As for the birthday wish, since I'm part of the Birthday Committee...I'm going to hold off until it actually says the 29th :) Thistheman 19:15, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:300 could be possible, we hit 100 in 11 hours I believe. Is there a notice on Phaedriel's user page that the RfA is going on? --Draicone (talk) 21:59, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brilliant 

message: <my biggest rant ever>This time I choose to be that obligatory stupid hair in the soup. Too much Wikilove overall here for me. All the idiots that take the bumpy road to try to improve Wikipedia from the technical side are ignored here by all these nice "Wikilove" freaks. I hope we finally start getting some more technical knowledgeable admins. After all, there are fully protected pages that affect the site as whole - I hope all these admins here know how to edit them. Yes, I am frustrated. And yes, I am that first one idiot neutral vote. Phaedriel: it's nothing personal against you. You sure must have excellent communication skills. I just hope you don't start taking technical decisions from idots, once you are at the top of that Wikilove Iceberg Cabal. Being nice is not everything. Could someone of the freaks here put the fully protected citation templates , ,  on her/his watchlist and learn how to edit them? Ignoring/killing doesn't work there (They survived "The Wiki Process"). Thanks for reading. <rant off> No. I'm not feeling warm and fuzzy. Not at all. You might have guessed it. --Ligulem 09:15, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "...if this passes"? You are far too humble my dear :) --Doc Tropics Message in a bottle 17:12, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Right you are. I knew I would be tarred and featherd by Phaedriel's pretorians :). Feel free to ignore my "vote" and take my wiki persona to whatever tribunal you see fit. And when we're done with the whole ceremony, you can tell us what to do with the citation templates and all the other things that are piling out there. Are we here to celebrate an adminship election or do we write an encyclopaedia? If Phaedriel really want's to waste her talent in the admin trenches, of course she shall do so (she will do so anyway, did you ever think she would not pass?). And per the "freak": don't take that too literal. It is was more meant as a collective attribution of that collective excitement about Phaedriel's talents. And that strange conception here what adminship is: it's obviously meant as an ambassador title and a trophy. Just the job title "sysop" is a bit strange then. And I wonder why it needs an ambassador to edit  or MediaWiki:Common.css. In normal clubs, they call the service personal, which has the key to open the service cabinet. Here, we hold a celebration while some true "admins" try to tinker with template:cite journal :). I know, I'm evil. I plead guilty. The strongest punishment is to be released of the burdon to keep things rolling at  :). Luckily, I already have that. --Ligulem 00:13, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As Ligulem mentioned above, being an admin doesn't mean you spend all of your time in the "admin trenches", as you put it.  I have been an admin since March, and I still spend most of my wiki-time as an editor.  However, when the circumstances deem it nessecary, I block vandals, I speedy delete articles and images (when called for), and do other admin functions.  However, I do not spend all of my wiki-time in the "admin trenches", and I think that many other admins also still contribute to the article space in addition to performing admin duties.  I can't speak for Phaedriel, but I doubt having the admin tools will diminish her contributions to the article space.  --rogerd 01:56, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Well yes, I don't have enough portal edits. I would never make it. ;) — Nathan (talk) / 17:19, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

text: You are right (even though you say you are kidding). I was proving a point. I have changed my vote to support. My rant is against the sysophood as a whole and what we do with it on this wiki. We are wasting here other talents due to this strange treating of adminship. This annoys the experts. I'm annoyed myself because I'm a template expert and can't edit  & Co. All I need is the right to edit fully protected pages (it's not a technical problem, see Wikipedia:User access levels. A new user group with the "protect" permission would do it). This would have helped other failed wiki-tech sysop candidacies in the past too (User:AzaToth, User:Robchurch). Failing adminship requests is not exactly what the average wikipedian is keen on (Although Rob seems to be pretty immune on this). Both users seem to have left the project for the moment. Wikipedia fails to keep the experts. Another example: . Hey, we have pages about quantum physics on this wiki! We should stop to be a sockpuppet kindergarten and stupid debating club here. Too much waste of resouces (it is interesting how most systemic errors on this wiki can be linked to resource waste...). Now, I'm watching the show :-). --Ligulem 07:43, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Copied from nomination - technical savy vs Wikilove

message: Hmm... at the rate this is going, this will make it into WP:200 in no time! Fredil Yupigo 01:42, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For the record, at the midpoint (3 ½ days) the count on this RfA was (206/3/4). For comparison, the current record RfA (CSCWEM 3) had a count of (192/9/3) at the midpoint, and finished at (246/12/5). NoSeptember 19:19, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, the whole "image issues" sub-issue may make the numbersa little lower than we thought :( — Deckiller 19:23, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, you have to earn voting records fair and square, and if an issue comes up that prevents it, then so be it. Note that BD2412, CSCWEM and Phaedriel all got these tremendous vote totals the same way: being well regarded users who waited for months before accepting their nomination, even though it was clear they would pass much earlier. The next person who wants to set a record should make a note of the route to success ;). NoSeptember 19:38, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That wasn't really CSCWEM's path, was it? —Bunchofgrapes  (talk) 19:42, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He clearly didn't have to wait over two months after his first (failed) RfA to try again and succeed, so in that sense, it does apply to him - we weren't so stringent about how long you must wait back then. But on his first RfA, he didn't wait, so you are right if that's what you mean. My point was, all three allowed the pressure build on the demand that they become admins. NoSeptember 19:47, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:200]]? 

message: If I am not mistaken, this is a record number of positive votes (271) in a RfA. I believe that this number has not been reached before as well on this page. Am I correct about this? --Siva1979Talk to me 19:35, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That is correct. :o) See WP:200. EWS23 (Leave me a message!) 19:36, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

text: You are not mistaken. 271 supports breaks CSCWEM's record as can be seen here. - Aksi_great (talk - review me) 19:38, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And the margin record too. NoSeptember 19:40, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Record?