Knowledge (XXG):Requests for adminship/Berig 2

985:

articles you have referred to, I thought it sufficient to refer to easily accessible primary sources that the reader could consult. Lately, I have changed my routines and in more recent articles you are not likely to find many statements that don't have inline sourcing, even if the subject is completely uncontroversial. In the case of the old village, I wrote the article in the hope that someone more knowledgeable could contribute with what happened after 1897. As to your question as to whether it is important that the reader can find English references, I agree that an English-language source is always better than a Scandinavian source. However, in many cases there are no English-language sources that can be consulted, and a good case in point is the runestone articles where the standard reference works are only in Scandinavian. I think that all articles should be well-referenced and cover the topic well, but I have written so many articles (more than 400) that it is truly a daunting task to bring them all to GA status.--

3360:

over with the new account. I can think of many legitimate reasons why someone would leave thinking they will not return, but then coming back and starting over. If the old account was not indefinitely blocked and the new account is therefore not evading a ban, then there is nothing wrong with someone coming back and editing in good faith. It is not worth it to me nor is it any of my business as to why the editor left and did not see a need to immediately return. He said he left for personal reasons and didn’t edit for a time. Thus, the new account was not evading a ban or acting a sock and to protect whatever his personal concerns were, I do not feel it is right to inquire any further. So, in summary, I just don’t see enough care in “votes” at AfDs to trust the candidate closing deletion discussions with appropriate thoughtfulness (which is important to me) and so I have to oppose, but again, I see a number of positives that make it a weak oppose. So, all the best in any event. Sincerely, --

2284:- You are a good candidate, I see no problems after reviewing your current and old account. The AFD rationales and question answers are not fantastic but do not concern me, and neither does activity with quality being preferred over quantity. I have reviewed the opposition and none of it concerns me. The answer to question three is fine in my opinion, taking a break while stressed and returning later is good advice and not running away. Experience in admin areas does not concern me either, I think you have enough general experience for the tools and it is rather difficult for non-admins to build up the edits at pages such as 3351:

discussions that are not unanimous. I do not see from my experience with the candidate in the above cited examples much of an explanation beyond one or two words of how he actually interprets and understands policies and guidelines with regards to these examples. In fact all of the preceding examples are the kinds of arguments typically cited as ones to avoid and from administrators I look for more carefully thought out arguments that tell me the logic behind their thinking. Yet, I am still only saying a weak oppose, because

3123:. When I visited this RfA, my first thought was that this would be an easy support. I looked at all the DYKs and article building and was impressed, but then I asked myself if Berig had any experience in anything but article building. In his last 500 edits, 18 were to the Projectspace with five being to RfA's. I understand that this user wants the tools mainly to work with moves, but Berig needs at least a little experience outside of the projectspace, and I'm not seeing it. Sorry, 1636:

contributed quality edits to an incredible amount of articles - actually, his generosity with time and expertise has made Knowledge (XXG) into one of the best places on the Internet to find well-organized and well-sourced information on runes stones and other subjects relating to Norse history. If the organizational or vandalism-fighting aspects of his work here (such as moving over redirects and page protection) would make the admin tools useful to him, he certainly deserves them.

3338:, etc. (I do not find that “per x” style “arguments” actually add anything new to discussions and I cannot take seriously use of the nonsense “word” “cruft”; nor do I find use of the subjective and disputed concept of notability as a persuasive argument; when considering the good faith work of others, we should be considerate enough to come up with thoughtful and original comments that bring something to the discussion rather than vote-sounding 2233:....and whose edits resumed a year later and have continued for the past two years. Let's be frank, Balloonman: the more things change, the more they stay the same. The blocking, protection, and deletion policies have hardly changed along with the five pillars since administrators were created. While I can understand where you're coming from in hesitancy due to time, certainly this candidate is trustworthy. 1345: 3527:

this user is reasonably active at AfD, and I believe we should hold our administrators to higher standards than other editors. Combined with the weak unblock answer, and the userpage vandalism answer, I don't feel confident about this user as an administrator, even while his planned admin actions are not in these areas.

114:, but for personal reasons I scrambled my password in December 2005, and stayed away from WP for eight months. After having received e-mails from other editors that I was needed at Knowledge (XXG), I returned with this user account. If this rfa should be successful my old Wiglaf account should naturally be de-admined.-- 1946:

questions are more likely to be genuine rather than "copied and reworded". (3.) There was no abuse that I know about from his former account. (4.) Berig mentioned in his answer to question four about who can confirm that he is Wiglaf. Finally, I'm not worried about inactivity either...remember the adage: "

3759:

The lack of recent activity is a bit concerning as well as lack of experience in admin related areas. Being an admin 3 years ago is great as well but it is just that, 3 years ago. It's a long time and the lack of current activity with the great experience beforehand will mainly lead me to not being

1945:

No concerns whatsoever: I don't believe that Berig is "inexperienced" at all. Unless Wiglaf/Berig mysteriously forgot relevant policies, then I don't see any reason to worry. (1.) He's been active with this account for over two years. (2.) he doesn't appear to be an RfA regular, so his answers to the

824:

Yes, I did but I did not receive any confirmation that they had done so, and I never bothered to check. I was considering my options for becoming an admin again and apparently the Wiglaf account had to be desysoped before the Berig account could get the tools. Then I got a new job and I have had less

3144:

I agree... when I read this page, I thought for sure that I was going to be supporting this candidate. Unfortunately, I can't. Not only did I see any meaningful activity outside of the project space, but Berig hasn't been active in the project for 3 months. I want to see admin candidates that have

289:

yes, I can confirm Berig is a non-abusive sock of Wiglaf's. I understand the reason for the username change was disgust over being harassed by a troll. Fwiiw, I don't quite see why Berig would take it upon himself to suffer through another rfa when he could just ask for a new password for his Wiglaf

1560:

Taken with the previous accounts tally of over 20,000 edits the candidate has almost 39,000 edit total (and perhaps more than 40,000 including deleted contribs). However, more than the mere count is the focus of the edits - to improving the encyclopedia. A review of the previous admin actions gives

3805:

Unnecessarily punitive answer to Q16, and out-of-touch answer on Q12 (a vandal vandalizing one's userpage does not place oneself into a conflict of interests: just block them) but since he technically could've just re-requested the tools I suppose opposing would be a bit silly. Would urge Berig to

3526:

When I was reading over the nomination, I figured this would be a pretty good candidate. When I got to the CSD question, I figured, okay, deletion is not this users "thing". There is nothing about deletion or AfD in Q1, so a weak answer there is not a problem. But the diffs brought up on AfD shows

616:

Technically such a photo can only be used if it is impossible to find or make a free picture of the person (I doubt that such a situation often arises). A photo of a person as appearing on the cover of a magazine may be allowed as fair use when it appears in a part of an article that discusses the

3627:

above, but that wasn't sufficient enough to convince me to oppose. What tipped the balance was the answer to Q13, which, while correct in a sense, essentially boiled down to "I won't delete because I'm an inclusionist", rather than any argument rooted in policy (in this case the CSD A7 policy).

3423:

I reviewed the candidate's edit record and success highlights, which were pretty impressive, but the relatively low recent edit counts, lack of project-space involvement, and the answer about leaving for weeks or months at a time when the user is stressed, leaves me to believe that the editor has

3359:

are reasonable arguments that I agreed with. Moreover, I am impressed by the article creation (including good articles) work he has done as shown on his user page as well as that the candidate has never been blocked. Finally, I assume good faith regarding abandoning the old account and starting

649:

Well, that is something that never happened to me when I fought vandals as Wiglaf. No, since there is inevitably a conflict of interest, I would not block the IP in that situation. However, if the IP continued by vandalising another page, I would block it. If the IP ceases the vandalism after its

638:

An IP vandalises a page. You revert the vandalism and give the IP a final warning on its talk page. After that the IP vandalises your userpage. Summarising, the IP was sufficiently warned and vandalised (your userpage) after a final warning. Would you block the IP yourself or rather report it to

2321:: The recent inactiveness is kind of holding me back, but such and experienced editor who has made so many valuable contributions should definitely get the tools. Even a little work as an admin will help Knowledge (XXG), and I think everyone has agreed he is not someone who will abuse the tools. 3350:

non-arguments). It is important that administrators close discussions in a manner and with rationales that are still respectful of good faith contributors and that explain their judgment. We can only get a real sense of the why behind someone’s argument if he/she articulates it, especially in

1189:

I think it would be useful to have the details of the old account made easily available. I have had a look and found nothing awful and it gives a fair picture of what the candidate will be like with the tools again. There is nothing to indicate why this old account was abandoned so suddenly and

984:

That is something I used to decide depending on the topic. If I wrote a short stub that I wanted myself or others to expand later, and if I thought that the content was not controversial, not likely to be contested and was easily verifiable, I usually did not add many references. In some of the

2213:

whose last edits were over 3 years ago... a LOT has changed since then... and standards have changed since then. Just as I wouldn't hold the edits of a reformed vandal from 3 years ago against them, I can't use that as a free pass. Edits from 3+ years ago, are 3+ years old... and thus not a

1635:

a highly qualified, trustworthy, dedicated, level-headed, mature and approachable candidate, who has accumulated a lot experience over the years, a thorough knowledge of Knowledge (XXG) policy as well as a large repository of patience. He has demonstrated great organizational skills and has

3145:

been active for at least five of the past six months---and I consider 150 edits to be a good base line for an active editor. Based upon that criteria, Berig, hasn't been active for the past 3 months. In fact, we are almost at the end of October, and at this moment Berig only has

262:

I didn't reveal my previous account at that time because I knew that people would start questioning me about why I left and why I had returned. As things were then, I didn't feel ready for it. There are several long-time administrators who can confirm that I was Wiglaf, such as

1797:- Great article contributor; was an admin in good-standing before he left; after returning, he has worked diligently on the project for two years before deciding to take up the tools again. I think he shows the reasonable and thoughtful approach one desires in an admin. 881:

As an administrator, you will come across some extremely vulgar language and often come under attack for your actions. You will most likely have to deal with some fairly troublesome users. The users you block will sometimes ask to be unblocked. Please review the very

1612:

a good candiate, was already an admin without a controversial background, understands that the comunity changes (evidenced by starting at square one to learn about the changed norms of Knowledge (XXG)) instead of recovering or transfering his adminship. Also per my

2841:

I have to support you because obviously you are a editor who has done much work for this website. So behold your self: the best editor around has spoken and he is content with you: this means you will be an administrator and you owe that completely to me.

3467:

As much as I'd like to support, the lack of activity for a while makes me a little afraid. To ensure you will stay active, I think it's necessary to wait for at least a couple months of fair activity (at least 200 or so edits a month, ideally more).

2577:

Highly educated content builder. Gold-dust. Who cares if you haven't ticked the wiki-process boxes, you're inteligent enough to work it out if you ever want to use the tools in those ares. Which can't always be said of process admins doing content.

2178:. This user didn't abuse the tools first time around and doesn't seem to have gone off the rails since then. Berig does a lot of stuff on Knowledge (XXG) and can be trusted to use the tools uncontroversially and for the benefit of the encyclopedia. 709:

The topic of the article had been in the news, and that is sufficiently notable IMO. I think some research is warranted before an article is nominated for deletion, but I'm an inclusionist who rather includes (e.g. writes articles) than

1459:

The user has over 18000 edits with over 12000 mainspace edits further the user can get back the bits from the crats if he/she wants but still seeks tools through RFA and Last RFA over 2 years ago.Also track is good. See no misuse of

2389:

I'm a little confused about the inexperience objections when Berig was an admin under another name even though it was long ago. No one has pointed to any objections under his prior adminship so I'm presuming he's still qualified.

2305:

I don't remember any significant troubles involving Wiglaf or Berig so I see no reason not to reinstate his adminship, although I'm wondering why he simply isn't returning to his previous account. Would save us a lot of work. -

3816:

if there is a sliver of hope they would become constructive contributors - no need to make them wait a week, as reblocks are cheap if they return to vandalism. Vandals are a dime a dozen, constructive contributors are golden.

81:) - I'd like to nominate Berig, an experienced and knowledgeable editor; actively editing for more than two years he has quite a good knowledge of policy and has, during that time, improved reams of Scandinavian articles with 3694:

No issue with the comments, but I have to laugh at "weak neutral". "neutral verging on oppose/support" I can understand, but what does weak neutral mean? "I am sitting on the fence as to whether or not I should !vote"? :P

3289:

an admin, and other users you have previously supported have never been admins yet have had sufficient "admin experience" to gain your support. Sorry I'm being annoying, I understood what you meant...but I couldn't resist

2160:

IMO there are no good reasons against the nomination, and Berig is definitely an active and deserving candidate. Also, the election of his previous account puts him in good light, despite the account being "inactivated."

896:

I'd kindly respond that he can indeed make constructive edits but ask him to wait out his block as a week passes fast. I'd also point out to him that the 11.18 edit was not his "latest post", since that one took place

181:

which was a stub before I expanded it. I like the fact that it is a well-referenced article that covers both historical, archaeological and literary evidence for the actual practices. For the same reasons I also like

3149:

this includes 7 edits related to the RfA. While I might be able to over look some issues for a trusted editor, I can't support somebody who isn't currently active in the project whose edits don't demonstrate policy

588:

My personal standards for granting would be a user I trust with several months of experience and at least a few thousand edits. I would remove the rollback if the user employs it for other things but obvious vandal

2615:

I think he should become an admin he used to be an admin so he knows the tools if he just got a new password for his old account he would be an admin if he passed once I find no reason why he shouldn't pass again.

3222:. I would like to support as well, but I just think that you should be more active, both in the project space and overall. In addition, you say you wish to work on protection, but you have less than 4 edits to 1930:

wiglaf and in that case this is pretty well open and shut. I would prefer it if we had some way of demonstrating clearly that Berig==Wiglaf, but barring some evidence to the contrary, it isn't a show stopper.

2267:. I have often worked with and collaborated with Berig here on Knowledge (XXG), and I've always found Berig to be evenhanded and levelheaded. I see no reason why he should not have administrator tools again. 3729:

I see a great future ahead for you, and this RfA will most likely pass, but I'm just worried about the last of involvement in admin areas. Let me see how the rest of the RfA works out, I may later support.

213:

Yes, it has happened that editors have caused me stress. I believe that the best way of dealing with editing disagreements is to take a break and return to the subject matter after a few weeks or months.--

1252: 1757:

I cannot see any mistakes or stuff like that when looking at your editing history so far. You seem to be a constructive editor to this wikipedia and I am sure you would make a fine admin!

1190:

completely, and it may be that the candidate still does not wish to revisit the matter, and I leave it up to the candidate if they are happy to place the history of that account here.

3405:. The candidate lacks experience in admin-related areas. The answer to question three also concerns me; it seems the user wouldn't try resolve the disagreement, but runaway from it. 137:

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Knowledge (XXG) as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

93:

being GAs. He has accumulated nearly 20,000 edits (for those who like a simple count) which are mostly in mainspace with an impressive 42 DYKs. People, it's now your decision... --

3442:

The high amount of poor arguments at AFD, cited by "A Nobody," have shown me that I cannot trust you with the tools at this time. Please put more thought into your AFD votes, as "

1525:

Malinaccier in the oppose section brings up a good point, but Berig seems to know what he's doing. A few GAs and 42 DYKs indicate a dedication to the project. Best of luck, –

933:. What is your feeling about how to dealwith articles that, although probably correct and citable from standard references, are not cited, such as the articles you wrote at 150:

Helping out with work like moving over redirects and page protection, if necessary. I would also appreciate being able to remove misnamed pictures that I have uploaded.--

3544:

The answer you gave to Q3 leads me to believe that if and possibly when you get stressed with a disagreement you will leave it not IMO a good thing for an admin to do.

207:

Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?

3849: 3371: 1065: 3777:- The lack of recent activity is somewhat concerning, as is the fact that the requester has not done any recent admin related work. Though he seems to have been an 256:

Why did you not reveal your previous account during your first RfA under this account? Also, do you have any way to prove that you are indeed who you say you were?

963:; or for articles with only non-English citations but where there is a decent chance English references exist, do you think it important to try to find them? e.g. 2037:

I'm surprised that your criteria for granting rollback are more cautious than some people have for rfa votes, but over caution is scarcely grounds for oppose..

3566: 785:

15. You said: "If this rfa should be successful my old Wiglaf account should naturally be de-admined." However, the Wiglaf account no longer has admin rights.

807: 1088: 3867: 1323: 1076: 370:) and I received some moving e-mails asking me that I should return. Almost three years have passed now, and a lot of water has gone under the bridge.-- 1898: 1129: 1083: 1999:

Hello, I'm Judas Iscariot and I just received 30 pieces of silver -- I'd like buy a microwave oven, please...oh, wrong queue. But while I'm here:

2974: 2104: 2049: 762:

Frankly, I wouldn't be the one who deleted it. This is because it looks like a border case and I don't know enough about the subject to judge.--

1385:

per nom. Berig is by far one of the most active and resourceful contributors on Norse topics I know, and he is a pure pleasure to work with. –

3793: 3496: 2670: 2646: 2063:. No reason not to trust with the tools, ample experience suggesting user is deserving of trust. Support is an easy call for me, here. ⇔ 1312: 1287: 3509:

A nice summary in the comment from A Nobody above along with a rather strange situation given in reply to #4 which leaves more questions.

2969:

A great Wikipedian and trustworthy candidate by any name! It is my pleasure to endorse Berig since I wasn't around to do so for Wiglaf.--

3091:. Successfully held the tools previously, and has been a productive editor since then. No flags (for me) raised by the arguments below. 2633:

just as qualified as ever. I've seen him around on some articles, and he has well-thought out answers to all of the questions. Erik the

3183:

I would love to support you, really I would. However, a combination of little edits to admin-related areas and inactivity pushes me to

33: 17: 2970: 1531: 1116: 1159: 1153: 1033:

I am watching more than a thousand pages in subjects that I am fairly knowledgeable about which gives me plenty of edits to check.--

3146: 2149: 1488: 1465: 2954:. Per above (sic). Sometimes all that can be said abut a topic has been said, but we somehow need !votes to achieve consensus. 2734: 2127: 3051: 2436:

No real issues; some mainspace concerns, but as has been said, the candidate has already been an admin. I trust his judgment.

3607: 2863: 1428: 356:

reversible as you started editing 8 months later, by your own admission, and now are requesting the sysop bit. What changed?

2350:

I am going out on a limb here, and I hope it does not smack me in my face down the road, but I think Berig can be trusted.

1123: 3574: 3382:

at least was a proper use of"per nom" -- first saying per nom, and then explaining adequately why. and being right, also.

1825: 1730: 1671: 1561:

no reason for concern, and as the tools are granted on the basis of trust rather than use I see no reason not to support.

1024: 3101: 2376: 1492: 1216: 1061: 348:

Pending the answer to the excellent question above about non disclosure, you clearly stated that your previous leaving

186:

which I will try to raise to FA status. If I succeed in doing so, it'll be the first one of a series of FAs on runes.--

2366:

While duly noting the opposing rationales, I don't find any reason to be concerned for possibility of abuse of tools.

2099: 2044: 1907: 1614: 1513: 1461: 1176: 1109: 78: 2847: 3628:

Please don't interpret this as an attack on the candidate's mainspace contributions, which appear to be excellent.

1901:, and I'm more than happy to do so again. Excellent editor, with many many fine works both behind and ahead of him. 706:

What leads you to believe that it was "sufficiently notable" (other than the fact that the article is still there)?

3583:

No offense intended, but that's awfully narrow, especially considering that the user doesn't wish to work clearing

3532: 3413: 3064: 2873: 2843: 2120: 2075: 1396: 1228: 3008: 2583: 1246: 1234: 561:

Well, it depends on the rationale for the hangon tag and if the article meets the criteria for speedy deletion.--

3789: 3570: 3492: 2726:- despite the opposes, seems like a no-brainer since he was already an admin and left without any controversy. 2665: 2641: 2395: 1745: 1725: 1566: 1308: 1283: 1222: 1195: 1020: 1005: 465: 427: 2958: 1841: 2796: 2553:

the candidate has already been an admin without any issues. Opposes are not convincing to not support you --

1863:. I'm not real keen on your activity for the last three months, but I still think net positive applies here. 3645:#Combination of questionable experience with admin-related areas and unanswered questions. Per Malinaccier, 2695: 2480: 2465: 2408: 2311: 1850: 1240: 1408:- Reasonable stipulations in the answer to Q1. I see no reason not to allow this user access to the tools. 2913: 2524: 2094: 2039: 1808: 1762: 1529: 3455: 2955: 1326:

be linked in the "RfAs for this user" box? (I was going to add it but couldn't figure out the syntax.) —

3528: 3406: 3130: 3059: 2686:. Exceptional work, tons of great edits, absolutely an asset to the mighty 'pedia. Full speed ahead! - 2561: 2424: 2064: 1885: 743:

speedy deletion nominee? Is it eligible for speedy? What if it were a prod and enough time had elapsed?

3848:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either

3339: 1948:

better an admin who uses the tools sparingly but effectively than one who uses them often and abusively

1845: 1758: 1477:— Great article work, already been an admin in the past so no worries about using the tools. Why not? — 1172: 110:

Thanks! I feel flattered that I am nominated for adminship. I used to be an administrator by the name

3514: 3173: 3159: 3004: 2579: 2443: 2223: 2146: 2008: 1680:

Opposes noted, but I think there should be no chance of misuse. Honest, if brief, answers to my Q's.

1654: 1600: 1484: 750: 3451: 3834: 3827: 3810: 3798: 3782: 3769: 3751: 3717: 3704: 3700: 3689: 3671: 3632: 3613: 3588: 3578: 3554: 3536: 3518: 3501: 3485: 3476: 3459: 3434: 3415: 3393: 3364: 3301: 3280: 3259: 3241: 3212: 3195: 3178: 3136: 3108: 3083: 3078: 3066: 3043: 3027: 3024: 3012: 2995: 2978: 2961: 2946: 2925: 2904: 2900: 2885: 2881: 2869: 2835: 2821: 2779: 2755: 2751: 2738: 2718: 2701: 2676: 2658: 2652: 2634: 2625: 2621: 2607: 2587: 2569: 2545: 2527: 2503: 2484: 2467: 2449: 2428: 2411: 2399: 2391: 2381: 2358: 2342: 2313: 2297: 2276: 2272: 2259: 2239: 2228: 2208: 2193: 2170: 2166: 2152: 2134: 2111: 2083: 2055: 2029: 2012: 1994: 1977: 1954: 1940: 1913: 1889: 1872: 1855: 1835: 1811: 1789: 1766: 1749: 1741: 1732: 1716: 1696: 1675: 1657: 1645: 1627: 1625: 1604: 1587: 1570: 1562: 1552: 1547: 1533: 1517: 1496: 1469: 1451: 1447: 1434: 1409: 1400: 1368: 1333: 1330: 1317: 1301: 1292: 1276: 1263: 1199: 1191: 1042: 1028: 994: 979: 906: 887: 848: 834: 819: 801: 771: 756: 719: 698: 659: 626: 598: 570: 535: 508: 469: 461: 452: 431: 423: 414: 379: 328: 312: 299: 295: 284: 248: 236: 227:

PS. To clarify: I refer above to rare occasions when editing disagreements have caused me stress.--

222: 195: 159: 123: 104: 99: 3443: 3343: 3291: 610:

Under what circumstances may a non-free photograph of a living person be used on Knowledge (XXG)?

3745: 3597: 3474: 3424:

potential, but definitely needs to gain more experience solving issues, not just taking breaks.

3275: 2991: 2811: 2688: 2596: 2458: 2405: 2340: 2307: 2256: 2025: 1714: 1583: 1418: 1205: 324: 310: 111: 3055: 2251:

What better way for him to get (more) admin experience than by giving him back his (old) tools?

3552: 3296: 2921: 2857: 2714: 2514: 2293: 1936: 1868: 1830: 1800: 1667: 1526: 183: 82: 3223: 2285: 3765: 3250: 3126: 3097: 2936: 2772: 2554: 2420: 2372: 1881: 1781: 1210: 3584: 3447: 3347: 2657:

My fool-self just realized that this user was Wiglaf. Make that a strong support. Erik the

1923: 810:. So you didn't request to be desysopped? Could you please shed some light on this matter? 640: 3710: 3682: 3510: 3425: 3166: 3152: 2437: 2216: 2143: 2004: 1989: 1689: 1641: 1596: 1509: 1479: 1361: 1103: 1038: 990: 902: 830: 797: 767: 745: 733: 715: 694: 655: 622: 594: 566: 531: 504: 445: 410: 375: 280: 268: 232: 218: 191: 155: 119: 72: 2214:

reflection on CURRENT policies, guidelines, or understanding of how things work today.---

3267:

I'm not seeing the kind of admin-experience that would make me comfortable supporting.--

954:

Are you quite sure there is nothing new or changed to say from modern scholarhship? for

3819: 3709:

LOLO Ironholds, you take the cake :P. Nearly all of my neutrals lean towards support.

3696: 3629: 3255: 3075: 3021: 2896: 2877: 2747: 2728: 2617: 2536: 2498: 2268: 2186: 2162: 1951: 1617: 1542: 1443: 1390: 1327: 864: 844: 815: 669: 291: 272: 178: 94: 90: 952: 3861: 3733: 3664: 3650: 3624: 3469: 3389: 3361: 3268: 3205: 3201: 3188: 2987: 2830: 2804: 2322: 2252: 2021: 1974: 1705: 1579: 975: 923: 643:? Respectively, would you consider blocking the IP yourself a conflict of interests? 483: 457:

My bad, that one was unblocked on the same day by another party - I was referring to

320: 305: 264: 86: 3546: 3234: 2917: 2710: 2457:. I have seen past admins being opposed for various reasons, but inexperience... — 2352: 2289: 1932: 1864: 1820: 1663: 945:; or where the only sources are from early 20th century encyclopedias, such as the 520:

Is there any policies or guidelines that you disagree with? If so please tell why.

1962:. Fine contributions. He has enough evidence of collaboration with other editors. 3164:

07:54, 26 October 2008 (UTC) COMMENT: forgot to put my actual !vote on here...---

555:

Is there any circumstance in which you would delete a page despite a Hangon tag?

3761: 3092: 3037: 2765: 2476: 2367: 2234: 2203: 1775: 1258: 545: 54: 1902: 1683: 1637: 1505: 1355: 1297: 1099: 1057: 1034: 986: 898: 826: 793: 763: 711: 690: 651: 618: 590: 562: 527: 500: 439: 406: 389: 371: 340: 276: 228: 214: 187: 151: 115: 68: 58: 3842:

The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion.

3681:

Seems like an excellent candidate, but needs more experience in admin areas.

1774:

Great article work, good answers to my questions. Overall a good candidate. —

650:

edit to my user page there is little reason to block it in the first place.--

2493: 2179: 1578:. Nice guy, good editor - one of the first people I met at Knowledge (XXG). 1386: 840: 811: 779: 961: 422:

That block was reversed by the candidate, presumably after being reminded.

3384: 1963: 970: 918: 582:

What would your personal standards be on granting and removing rollback?

397:

Are you intending to block IP addresses forever if you regain the tools?

890:

and describe how you would respond to the IP's request to be unblocked.

806:

The rights were removed by request several months ago, according to the

319:

I can also confirm that Berig is Wiglaf, longer answer on my talk page.

3227: 1272: 689:

No, I don't thinks so. It appears to have been sufficiently notable.--

3852:

or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.

3450:

are discounted by any responsible closing administrator immediately.

2829:, may adminship not drive you away from article writing too much! -- 2003:

for someone who can clearly be trusted with the duties of adminship.

1704:- Complete faith and trust in this superb editor and former admin. — 3370:

Discussion relating to the length of A Nobody's rationale moved to

2709:. It's nice to have admins with good article writing experience. 2419:. The candidate has been an admin before and is quite experienced. 1175:. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review 964: 934: 957:, what happened to that village after 1897? , under your new a/c, 3623:

per Q13. I was initially worried by the non-arguments shown by

2916:; nice user page, plenty of experience, if a bit uneven in use. 1662:

Because the opposes really aren't anything to worry about, IMO.

943: 937: 883: 61: 3074:. Former admin who hasn't done anything crazy with the tools. 2986:. Anyone who earns Pete Hurd's support is good enough for me. 958: 946: 171:

What are your best contributions to Knowledge (XXG), and why?

290:

account, or ask to have the two editing histories merged. --

967: 949: 792:

Oh, I didn't know that the admin rights had been removed.--

940: 2288:, I had nearly none there myself before I got the tools. 29:

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a

1819:

The more article builders as administrators the better.

144:

What administrative work do you intend to take part in?

3379: 3356: 3352: 3336: 3333: 3330: 3327: 3324: 3321: 3318: 3315: 3312: 1147: 1141: 1135: 1016: 955: 786: 740: 680: 458: 398: 367: 363: 349: 3781:

admin a few years ago; it was, well, a few years ago.

2198:

Hmm, many opposes point to lack of admin experience.

3297: 3292: 3020:

I see no opposition that convinces me otherwise. —

2792: 2404:

No worries here. I trust him to do the right thing.

2535:. Contributions are great, opposes not convincing. 493:Why did you leave Knowledge (XXG) the first time? 3335:(sounds like a reason for a merge and redirect), 2763:. Will be a net positive, at any activity level. 2876:has been blocked for disruption and vandalism). 2200:The candidate has held a flagged account before 1273:Haukurth confirms that Berig was indeed Wiglaf 683:a valid speedy deletion target? Why/why not? 1324:Knowledge (XXG):Requests for adminship/Wiglaf 617:magazine and the person's appearance in it.-- 8: 436:Was it? I don't see that in the block log. 2119:Good mainspace contributions, has clue. 1300:. I think we can call it confirmed now. 1171:Please keep discussion constructive and 825:time for WP than I would like to have.-- 739:14. What would you do if you ran across 3058:. No RfA spam on my talk page please.-- 1081: 1074: 788:How do you explain this contradiction? 3679:Weak Neutral (leaning towards support) 1831: 1826: 1821: 18:Knowledge (XXG):Requests for adminship 3003:Good user, will make a good admin. -- 7: 3204:'s rationale to my oppose as well. 2791:long? He'll do fine with the mop. — 2511:, meets most of my requirements. -- 1986: 1073: 177:One of the articles I like most is 1897:. I supported without reservation 24: 3868:Successful requests for adminship 3285:Ironic, considering this user is 2872:) 19:15, 30 October 2008 (UTC) ( 1343: 942:? -- & Under your new a/c , 2967:Strong, though late, Support". 2850:) 13:24, 30 October 2008 (UTC) 1089:Requests for adminship/Berig 2 1064:. For the edit count, see the 863: 1: 3760:able to support or oppose. -- 2971:R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 1077:Requests for adminship/Wiglaf 3835:15:17, 29 October 2008 (UTC) 3799:19:35, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 3770:13:53, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 3752:22:07, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 3718:21:05, 28 October 2008 (UTC) 3705:07:28, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 3690:12:17, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 3672:16:26, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 3657:04:32, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 3633:03:29, 1 November 2008 (UTC) 3614:01:55, 1 November 2008 (UTC) 3579:23:03, 31 October 2008 (UTC) 3555:16:49, 31 October 2008 (UTC) 3537:10:52, 31 October 2008 (UTC) 3519:23:49, 29 October 2008 (UTC) 3502:21:20, 29 October 2008 (UTC) 3477:02:20, 29 October 2008 (UTC) 3460:19:57, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 3435:06:09, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 3416:02:30, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 3394:03:25, 1 November 2008 (UTC) 3365:01:22, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 3302:21:45, 28 October 2008 (UTC) 3281:23:57, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 3276: 3260:21:15, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 3242:17:57, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 3213:21:08, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 3196:16:28, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 3179:15:10, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 3147:58 edits for the whole month 3137:17:37, 25 October 2008 (UTC) 3109:13:38, 1 November 2008 (UTC) 3084:12:56, 1 November 2008 (UTC) 3067:12:40, 1 November 2008 (UTC) 3044:08:33, 1 November 2008 (UTC) 3028:05:15, 1 November 2008 (UTC) 3013:01:08, 1 November 2008 (UTC) 2996:23:18, 31 October 2008 (UTC) 2979:16:13, 31 October 2008 (UTC) 2962:22:36, 30 October 2008 (UTC) 2947:22:10, 30 October 2008 (UTC) 2926:20:37, 30 October 2008 (UTC) 2905:19:10, 30 October 2008 (UTC) 2886:19:24, 30 October 2008 (UTC) 2866:14:03, 30 October 2008 (UTC) 2836:11:20, 30 October 2008 (UTC) 2822:00:29, 30 October 2008 (UTC) 2780:20:54, 29 October 2008 (UTC) 2756:18:21, 29 October 2008 (UTC) 2739:18:02, 29 October 2008 (UTC) 2719:15:13, 29 October 2008 (UTC) 2702:08:29, 29 October 2008 (UTC) 2677:02:33, 29 October 2008 (UTC) 2653:02:31, 29 October 2008 (UTC) 2626:00:07, 29 October 2008 (UTC) 2608:20:18, 28 October 2008 (UTC) 2588:18:52, 28 October 2008 (UTC) 2570:17:56, 28 October 2008 (UTC) 2546:16:33, 28 October 2008 (UTC) 2528:16:11, 28 October 2008 (UTC) 2504:16:02, 28 October 2008 (UTC) 2485:12:06, 28 October 2008 (UTC) 2468:11:01, 28 October 2008 (UTC) 2450:10:21, 28 October 2008 (UTC) 2429:03:58, 28 October 2008 (UTC) 2412:23:54, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 2400:19:45, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 2382:17:30, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 2359:15:15, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 2343:13:00, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 2314:12:10, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 2298:09:08, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 2277:07:39, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 2260:06:24, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 2240:04:56, 29 October 2008 (UTC) 2229:05:51, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 2209:05:14, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 2194:02:45, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 2171:02:42, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 2153:02:22, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 2135:00:26, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 2112:00:25, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 2084:23:38, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 2056:23:25, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 2030:23:10, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 2013:21:01, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 1995:20:40, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 1978:20:24, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 1955:18:24, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 1941:17:45, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 1914:17:43, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 1890:17:07, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 1873:15:59, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 1856:15:35, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 1836:15:30, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 1812:14:00, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 1790:13:53, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 1767:12:25, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 1750:13:44, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 1733:13:44, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 1717:13:35, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 1697:12:55, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 1676:09:36, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 1658:06:30, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 1646:05:18, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 1628:00:08, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 1605:23:55, 25 October 2008 (UTC) 1588:21:51, 25 October 2008 (UTC) 1571:20:59, 25 October 2008 (UTC) 1553:19:45, 25 October 2008 (UTC) 1534:18:11, 25 October 2008 (UTC) 1518:17:09, 25 October 2008 (UTC) 1497:16:55, 25 October 2008 (UTC) 1470:16:52, 25 October 2008 (UTC) 1452:16:32, 25 October 2008 (UTC) 1435:16:27, 25 October 2008 (UTC) 1401:15:26, 25 October 2008 (UTC) 1369:22:02, 28 October 2008 (UTC) 1334:02:01, 28 October 2008 (UTC) 1318:02:31, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 1293:01:43, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 1264:04:22, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 1200:20:35, 25 October 2008 (UTC) 1084:Requests for adminship/Berig 1043:10:20, 1 November 2008 (UTC) 1029:01:45, 1 November 2008 (UTC) 995:08:41, 31 October 2008 (UTC) 980:23:03, 30 October 2008 (UTC) 907:23:13, 28 October 2008 (UTC) 849:23:36, 29 October 2008 (UTC) 835:17:37, 29 October 2008 (UTC) 820:17:33, 29 October 2008 (UTC) 802:22:56, 28 October 2008 (UTC) 772:15:52, 28 October 2008 (UTC) 757:12:59, 28 October 2008 (UTC) 720:06:24, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 699:06:14, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 660:11:29, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 627:11:29, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 599:11:29, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 571:11:29, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 536:05:40, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 509:05:40, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 470:21:05, 25 October 2008 (UTC) 453:20:54, 25 October 2008 (UTC) 432:20:38, 25 October 2008 (UTC) 415:05:40, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 380:05:40, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 329:18:02, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 313:02:08, 29 October 2008 (UTC) 300:12:10, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 285:05:40, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 237:06:33, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 223:14:57, 25 October 2008 (UTC) 196:14:57, 25 October 2008 (UTC) 160:14:57, 25 October 2008 (UTC) 124:14:57, 25 October 2008 (UTC) 105:12:27, 25 October 2008 (UTC) 3374:, not relevant to this RfA. 2864:a sweet and tender hooligan 2854: 2492:, will make a fine admin. — 1177:Special:Contributions/Berig 1060:'s edit summary usage with 133:Questions for the candidate 53:Final (81/17/4); Closed by 3884: 3806:consider offering users a 1504:, great article writer. -- 1015:Why have you not done any 3562:: this user has not done 839:Thanks for your answers. 3845:Please do not modify it. 3311:per weak “arguments” at 2787:...He's been around for 544:Optional questions from 482:Optional Questions from 3484:from previous neutral. 3380:this one of those above 3035:- Trustworthy editor -- 1985:- Likely net positive. 1899:the last time Berig ran 808:user rights log on Meta 778:Optional question from 526:No, I don't think so.-- 499:For personal reasons.-- 304:Wiglaf was desysopped. 247:Optional question from 38:Please do not modify it 2853:Blocked SPA editor. ➨ 1595:- trustworthy editor. 1462:Pharaoh of the Wizards 1003:Optional question from 915:Optional question from 861:Optional question from 388:Further question from 2874:Upperclass Wikipedian 2844:Upperclass Wikipedian 2595:. Fine, just fine. 886:scenario outlined at 732:Optional Question by 362:I noticed posts like 34:request for adminship 3448:weightless arguments 1727:II MusLiM HyBRiD II 1724:Looks Goood To Me. 1072:RfAs for this user: 1006:DragonflySixtyseven 888:User:Xenocidic/RFAQ 3551: 2778: 2761:Absolutely support 2746:trust with tools. 2020:- can be trusted. 1740:Seems good to me. 1298:As does Briangotts 1179:before commenting. 350:was not reversible 39: 3609: 3604: 3545: 3375: 3258: 3238: 3106: 3104:So let it be done 3099: 3081: 2867: 2819: 2777: 2764: 2675: 2651: 2380: 2296: 2258: 2132: 2079: 2072: 1976: 1916: 1695: 1430: 1425: 1399: 1367: 1097:Links for Berig: 451: 298: 184:Greece Runestones 83:Greece Runestones 37: 3875: 3847: 3833: 3830: 3824: 3815: 3809: 3785: 3750: 3742: 3739: 3736: 3715: 3687: 3669: 3655: 3608: 3602: 3598: 3592: 3549: 3529:Martijn Hoekstra 3488: 3430: 3429:- Jameson L. Tai 3411: 3409:DiverseMentality 3369: 3299: 3294: 3278: 3273: 3254: 3239: 3236: 3232: 3210: 3193: 3169: 3155: 3135: 3102: 3098: 3079: 3062: 3052:Why the hell not 3040: 2942: 2939: 2862: 2852: 2833: 2820: 2814: 2807: 2802: 2793: 2775: 2770: 2768: 2698: 2691: 2673: 2668: 2664: 2661: 2649: 2644: 2640: 2637: 2604: 2599: 2543: 2526: 2522: 2463: 2446: 2440: 2370: 2355: 2338: 2335: 2332: 2329: 2325: 2292: 2255: 2237: 2219: 2206: 2184: 2131: 2128: 2125: 2107: 2102: 2097: 2077: 2068: 2052: 2047: 2042: 1993: 1973: 1972: 1968: 1911: 1853: 1848: 1833: 1828: 1823: 1810: 1806: 1803: 1755:Strongly support 1728: 1712: 1694: 1692: 1681: 1623: 1620: 1550: 1545: 1429: 1423: 1419: 1413: 1389: 1366: 1364: 1353: 1351: 1347: 1346: 1304: 1279: 1261: 1256: 1163: 1122: 1051:General comments 874: 872: 869: 753: 748: 450: 448: 437: 352:. Apparently it 294: 102: 97: 3883: 3882: 3878: 3877: 3876: 3874: 3873: 3872: 3858: 3857: 3856: 3850:this nomination 3843: 3828: 3820: 3818: 3813: 3807: 3796: 3783: 3740: 3737: 3734: 3731: 3711: 3683: 3674: 3665: 3651: 3642: 3612: 3603: 3600: 3590: 3547: 3499: 3486: 3428: 3407: 3269: 3237:clamation point 3235: 3228: 3206: 3189: 3167: 3153: 3124: 3117: 3105: 3060: 3056:its no big deal 3038: 2940: 2937: 2831: 2817: 2812: 2805: 2797: 2773: 2766: 2737: 2696: 2689: 2671: 2666: 2659: 2647: 2642: 2635: 2600: 2597: 2580:Scott MacDonald 2537: 2515: 2512: 2475:. No problems. 2459: 2444: 2438: 2353: 2336: 2333: 2330: 2327: 2323: 2290:Camaron | Chris 2235: 2217: 2204: 2190: 2180: 2142:per all above. 2129: 2121: 2105: 2100: 2095: 2091:per Acalamari. 2071: 2050: 2045: 2040: 2022:X MarX the Spot 1970: 1964: 1910: 1851: 1846: 1842:seems OK to me. 1804: 1801: 1798: 1726: 1706: 1690: 1682: 1621: 1618: 1548: 1543: 1433: 1424: 1421: 1411: 1379: 1362: 1354: 1344: 1342: 1315: 1302: 1290: 1277: 1259: 1208: 1186: 1115: 1098: 1094: 1053: 870: 865: 751: 746: 734:User:Royalbroil 446: 438: 135: 100: 95: 50: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 3881: 3879: 3871: 3870: 3860: 3859: 3855: 3854: 3838: 3837: 3803: 3802: 3801: 3794: 3784:NuclearWarfare 3754: 3724: 3723: 3722: 3721: 3720: 3659: 3641: 3638: 3637: 3636: 3618: 3617: 3616: 3599: 3595: 3567:newpage patrol 3557: 3539: 3521: 3504: 3497: 3487:NuclearWarfare 3479: 3462: 3437: 3418: 3400: 3399: 3398: 3397: 3396: 3306: 3305: 3304: 3262: 3244: 3217: 3216: 3215: 3181: 3139: 3116: 3113: 3112: 3111: 3103: 3086: 3069: 3046: 3030: 3015: 2998: 2981: 2964: 2949: 2928: 2907: 2890: 2889: 2888: 2824: 2809: 2785:Strong Support 2782: 2758: 2741: 2733: 2721: 2704: 2681: 2680: 2679: 2631:Strong Support 2628: 2610: 2590: 2572: 2565: 2558: 2548: 2530: 2506: 2487: 2470: 2452: 2431: 2414: 2406:Angus McLellan 2402: 2392:Morbidthoughts 2384: 2361: 2345: 2316: 2300: 2279: 2262: 2246: 2245: 2244: 2243: 2242: 2196: 2188: 2173: 2155: 2137: 2114: 2109: 2086: 2069: 2058: 2032: 2015: 1997: 1980: 1957: 1943: 1917: 1906: 1892: 1875: 1858: 1838: 1814: 1792: 1769: 1752: 1742:ErikTheBikeMan 1735: 1719: 1699: 1678: 1660: 1648: 1630: 1607: 1590: 1573: 1563:LessHeard vanU 1555: 1536: 1520: 1499: 1472: 1454: 1437: 1420: 1416: 1403: 1378: 1375: 1374: 1373: 1372: 1371: 1337: 1336: 1320: 1313: 1303:NuclearWarfare 1295: 1288: 1278:NuclearWarfare 1269: 1268: 1267: 1266: 1192:LessHeard vanU 1185: 1182: 1168: 1167: 1166: 1164: 1093: 1092: 1091: 1086: 1080: 1079: 1071: 1070: 1069: 1062:mathbot's tool 1052: 1049: 1048: 1047: 1046: 1045: 1000: 999: 998: 997: 912: 911: 910: 909: 858: 857: 856: 855: 854: 853: 852: 851: 783: 782: 775: 774: 729: 728: 727: 726: 725: 724: 723: 722: 668:Question from 665: 664: 663: 662: 632: 631: 630: 629: 604: 603: 602: 601: 576: 575: 574: 573: 550: 548: 541: 540: 539: 538: 514: 513: 512: 511: 479: 478: 477: 476: 475: 474: 473: 472: 462:LessHeard vanU 424:LessHeard vanU 417: 405:No, I'm not.-- 392: 385: 384: 383: 382: 366:(an answer to 343: 339:Question from 336: 335: 334: 333: 332: 331: 317: 316: 315: 251: 249:NuclearWarfare 244: 243: 242: 241: 240: 239: 201: 200: 199: 198: 179:Viking funeral 165: 164: 163: 162: 134: 131: 129: 127: 126: 91:Viking funeral 49: 44: 43: 42: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3880: 3869: 3866: 3865: 3863: 3853: 3851: 3846: 3840: 3839: 3836: 3831: 3825: 3823: 3812: 3804: 3800: 3797: 3792: 3791: 3790: 3786: 3780: 3776: 3773: 3772: 3771: 3767: 3763: 3758: 3755: 3753: 3749: 3747: 3743: 3728: 3725: 3719: 3716: 3714: 3708: 3707: 3706: 3702: 3698: 3693: 3692: 3691: 3688: 3686: 3680: 3677: 3676: 3675: 3673: 3670: 3668: 3663: 3658: 3656: 3654: 3648: 3639: 3634: 3631: 3626: 3625:User:A Nobody 3622: 3619: 3615: 3610: 3605: 3594: 3593: 3586: 3582: 3581: 3580: 3576: 3572: 3568: 3565: 3561: 3560:Strong oppose 3558: 3556: 3553: 3550: 3543: 3540: 3538: 3534: 3530: 3525: 3522: 3520: 3516: 3512: 3508: 3505: 3503: 3500: 3495: 3494: 3493: 3489: 3483: 3480: 3478: 3475: 3473: 3472: 3466: 3463: 3461: 3457: 3453: 3449: 3445: 3441: 3438: 3436: 3433: 3432: 3431: 3422: 3419: 3417: 3414: 3412: 3410: 3404: 3401: 3395: 3391: 3387: 3386: 3381: 3377: 3376: 3373: 3368: 3367: 3366: 3363: 3358: 3354: 3349: 3345: 3341: 3337: 3334: 3331: 3328: 3325: 3322: 3319: 3316: 3313: 3310: 3307: 3303: 3300: 3295: 3288: 3284: 3283: 3282: 3279: 3274: 3272: 3266: 3263: 3261: 3257: 3253:'s comments. 3252: 3248: 3247:Strong Oppose 3245: 3243: 3240: 3233: 3231: 3225: 3221: 3218: 3214: 3211: 3209: 3203: 3199: 3198: 3197: 3194: 3192: 3186: 3182: 3180: 3177: 3176: 3175: 3171: 3170: 3163: 3162: 3161: 3157: 3156: 3150:knowledge.--- 3148: 3143: 3140: 3138: 3134: 3132: 3128: 3122: 3119: 3118: 3114: 3110: 3107: 3100: 3096: 3095: 3090: 3087: 3085: 3082: 3077: 3073: 3070: 3068: 3065: 3063: 3057: 3053: 3050: 3047: 3045: 3042: 3041: 3034: 3031: 3029: 3026: 3023: 3019: 3016: 3014: 3010: 3006: 3002: 2999: 2997: 2993: 2989: 2985: 2982: 2980: 2976: 2972: 2968: 2965: 2963: 2960: 2957: 2953: 2950: 2948: 2945: 2944: 2943: 2932: 2929: 2927: 2923: 2919: 2915: 2911: 2908: 2906: 2902: 2898: 2894: 2891: 2887: 2883: 2879: 2875: 2871: 2865: 2860: 2859: 2851: 2849: 2845: 2839: 2838: 2837: 2834: 2828: 2825: 2823: 2818: 2816: 2815: 2808: 2806:for President 2803: 2801: 2790: 2786: 2783: 2781: 2776: 2769: 2762: 2759: 2757: 2753: 2749: 2745: 2742: 2740: 2736: 2731: 2730: 2725: 2722: 2720: 2716: 2712: 2708: 2705: 2703: 2700: 2699: 2693: 2692: 2685: 2682: 2678: 2674: 2669: 2662: 2656: 2655: 2654: 2650: 2645: 2638: 2632: 2629: 2627: 2623: 2619: 2614: 2611: 2609: 2605: 2603: 2594: 2591: 2589: 2585: 2581: 2576: 2573: 2571: 2567: 2566: 2563: 2560: 2559: 2556: 2552: 2549: 2547: 2544: 2542: 2541: 2534: 2531: 2529: 2525: 2523: 2521: 2519: 2510: 2507: 2505: 2502: 2501: 2497: 2496: 2491: 2488: 2486: 2482: 2478: 2474: 2471: 2469: 2466: 2464: 2462: 2456: 2453: 2451: 2448: 2447: 2441: 2435: 2432: 2430: 2426: 2422: 2418: 2415: 2413: 2410: 2407: 2403: 2401: 2397: 2393: 2388: 2385: 2383: 2378: 2374: 2369: 2365: 2362: 2360: 2357: 2356: 2349: 2346: 2344: 2341: 2339: 2320: 2317: 2315: 2312: 2309: 2304: 2301: 2299: 2295: 2291: 2287: 2283: 2280: 2278: 2274: 2270: 2266: 2263: 2261: 2257: 2254: 2250: 2247: 2241: 2238: 2232: 2231: 2230: 2227: 2226: 2225: 2221: 2220: 2212: 2211: 2210: 2207: 2201: 2197: 2195: 2192: 2191: 2185: 2183: 2177: 2174: 2172: 2168: 2164: 2159: 2156: 2154: 2151: 2148: 2145: 2141: 2138: 2136: 2133: 2126: 2124: 2118: 2115: 2113: 2110: 2108: 2103: 2098: 2093: 2090: 2087: 2085: 2081: 2080: 2074: 2073: 2062: 2059: 2057: 2054: 2053: 2048: 2043: 2036: 2033: 2031: 2027: 2023: 2019: 2016: 2014: 2010: 2006: 2002: 1998: 1996: 1992: 1991: 1984: 1981: 1979: 1975: 1969: 1967: 1961: 1958: 1956: 1953: 1949: 1944: 1942: 1938: 1934: 1929: 1925: 1921: 1918: 1915: 1909: 1904: 1900: 1896: 1893: 1891: 1887: 1883: 1879: 1876: 1874: 1870: 1866: 1862: 1859: 1857: 1854: 1849: 1844: 1843: 1839: 1837: 1834: 1829: 1824: 1818: 1815: 1813: 1809: 1807: 1796: 1793: 1791: 1788: 1785: 1784: 1780: 1777: 1773: 1770: 1768: 1764: 1760: 1756: 1753: 1751: 1747: 1743: 1739: 1736: 1734: 1731: 1729: 1723: 1720: 1718: 1715: 1713: 1711: 1710: 1703: 1700: 1698: 1693: 1687: 1686: 1679: 1677: 1673: 1669: 1665: 1661: 1659: 1656: 1652: 1649: 1647: 1643: 1639: 1634: 1631: 1629: 1626: 1624: 1616: 1611: 1608: 1606: 1602: 1598: 1594: 1591: 1589: 1585: 1581: 1577: 1574: 1572: 1568: 1564: 1559: 1556: 1554: 1551: 1546: 1541:, as nom. -- 1540: 1537: 1535: 1532: 1530: 1528: 1524: 1521: 1519: 1515: 1514:contributions 1511: 1507: 1503: 1500: 1498: 1494: 1490: 1486: 1482: 1481: 1476: 1473: 1471: 1467: 1463: 1458: 1455: 1453: 1449: 1445: 1441: 1438: 1436: 1431: 1426: 1415: 1414: 1407: 1404: 1402: 1398: 1394: 1393: 1388: 1384: 1381: 1380: 1376: 1370: 1365: 1359: 1358: 1350: 1341: 1340: 1339: 1338: 1335: 1332: 1329: 1325: 1321: 1319: 1316: 1311: 1310: 1309: 1305: 1299: 1296: 1294: 1291: 1286: 1285: 1284: 1280: 1274: 1271: 1270: 1265: 1262: 1254: 1251: 1248: 1245: 1242: 1239: 1236: 1233: 1230: 1227: 1224: 1221: 1218: 1215: 1212: 1207: 1203: 1202: 1201: 1197: 1193: 1188: 1187: 1183: 1181: 1180: 1178: 1174: 1165: 1161: 1158: 1155: 1152: 1149: 1146: 1143: 1140: 1137: 1134: 1131: 1128: 1125: 1121: 1118: 1114: 1111: 1108: 1105: 1101: 1096: 1095: 1090: 1087: 1085: 1082: 1078: 1075: 1067: 1063: 1059: 1055: 1054: 1050: 1044: 1040: 1036: 1032: 1031: 1030: 1026: 1022: 1018: 1014: 1011: 1010: 1009: 1007: 1004: 996: 992: 988: 983: 982: 981: 977: 973: 972: 968: 965: 962: 959: 956: 953: 950: 947: 944: 941: 938: 935: 932: 929: 928: 927: 925: 921: 920: 916: 908: 904: 900: 895: 892: 891: 889: 885: 880: 877: 876: 875: 873: 868: 862: 850: 846: 842: 838: 837: 836: 832: 828: 823: 822: 821: 817: 813: 809: 805: 804: 803: 799: 795: 791: 790: 789: 787: 781: 777: 776: 773: 769: 765: 761: 760: 759: 758: 755: 754: 749: 742: 737: 736: 735: 721: 717: 713: 708: 707: 705: 702: 701: 700: 696: 692: 688: 685: 684: 682: 678: 675: 674: 673: 672: 671: 661: 657: 653: 648: 645: 644: 642: 637: 634: 633: 628: 624: 620: 615: 612: 611: 609: 606: 605: 600: 596: 592: 587: 584: 583: 581: 578: 577: 572: 568: 564: 560: 557: 556: 554: 551: 549: 547: 543: 542: 537: 533: 529: 525: 522: 521: 519: 516: 515: 510: 506: 502: 498: 495: 494: 492: 489: 488: 487: 486: 485: 471: 467: 463: 460: 456: 455: 454: 449: 443: 442: 435: 434: 433: 429: 425: 421: 418: 416: 412: 408: 404: 401: 400: 399: 396: 393: 391: 387: 386: 381: 377: 373: 369: 365: 361: 358: 357: 355: 351: 347: 344: 342: 338: 337: 330: 326: 322: 318: 314: 311: 309: 308: 303: 302: 301: 297: 293: 288: 287: 286: 282: 278: 274: 270: 266: 261: 258: 257: 255: 252: 250: 246: 245: 238: 234: 230: 226: 225: 224: 220: 216: 212: 209: 208: 206: 203: 202: 197: 193: 189: 185: 180: 176: 173: 172: 170: 167: 166: 161: 157: 153: 149: 146: 145: 143: 140: 139: 138: 132: 130: 125: 121: 117: 113: 109: 108: 107: 106: 103: 98: 92: 88: 87:Midvinterblot 84: 80: 77: 74: 70: 66: 65: 63: 60: 56: 48: 45: 41: 35: 32: 27: 26: 19: 3844: 3841: 3821: 3788: 3787: 3778: 3774: 3756: 3732: 3726: 3712: 3684: 3678: 3666: 3661: 3660:Switched to 3652: 3646: 3644: 3643: 3620: 3589: 3563: 3559: 3541: 3523: 3506: 3491: 3490: 3481: 3470: 3464: 3446:" and other 3439: 3427: 3426: 3420: 3408: 3402: 3383: 3308: 3286: 3270: 3264: 3246: 3229: 3219: 3207: 3200:Oh, and add 3190: 3184: 3174: 3172: 3165: 3160: 3158: 3151: 3141: 3125: 3120: 3093: 3088: 3071: 3048: 3036: 3032: 3017: 3000: 2983: 2966: 2951: 2935: 2934: 2930: 2914:my standards 2909: 2895:and thanks. 2892: 2856: 2840: 2826: 2810: 2799: 2794: 2788: 2784: 2760: 2743: 2727: 2723: 2706: 2694: 2687: 2683: 2630: 2612: 2601: 2592: 2574: 2562: 2555: 2550: 2539: 2538: 2532: 2517: 2516: 2508: 2499: 2494: 2489: 2472: 2460: 2454: 2442: 2433: 2416: 2386: 2363: 2351: 2347: 2319:Weak Support 2318: 2302: 2281: 2264: 2248: 2224: 2222: 2215: 2199: 2187: 2181: 2175: 2157: 2139: 2122: 2116: 2092: 2088: 2076: 2066: 2060: 2038: 2034: 2017: 2000: 1987: 1982: 1965: 1959: 1947: 1927: 1920:Weak Support 1919: 1894: 1877: 1861:Weak Support 1860: 1840: 1816: 1794: 1786: 1782: 1778: 1771: 1754: 1737: 1721: 1708: 1707: 1701: 1684: 1650: 1632: 1615:RfA criteria 1609: 1592: 1575: 1557: 1538: 1527:Juliancolton 1522: 1501: 1478: 1474: 1456: 1439: 1410: 1405: 1391: 1382: 1356: 1348: 1307: 1306: 1282: 1281: 1249: 1243: 1237: 1231: 1225: 1219: 1213: 1204:Here we go: 1170: 1169: 1156: 1150: 1144: 1138: 1132: 1126: 1119: 1112: 1106: 1012: 1002: 1001: 969: 930: 917: 914: 913: 893: 878: 866: 860: 859: 784: 744: 738: 731: 730: 703: 686: 676: 667: 666: 646: 635: 613: 607: 585: 579: 558: 552: 523: 517: 496: 490: 481: 480: 440: 419: 402: 394: 359: 353: 345: 306: 259: 253: 210: 204: 174: 168: 147: 141: 136: 128: 75: 67: 52: 51: 46: 30: 28: 3621:Weak Oppose 3542:Weak Oppose 3340:WP:ITSCRUFT 3309:Weak oppose 3251:Malinaccier 3142:Weak Oppose 3127:Malinaccier 3121:Weak oppose 2813:Vote for Ed 2421:Majoreditor 2269::bloodofox: 1882:AdjustShift 1229:protections 589:fighting.-- 3811:2nd chance 3587:backlogs. 3511:SunCreator 3168:Balloonman 3154:Balloonman 3061:intraining 2218:Balloonman 2144:Briangotts 2005:Ecoleetage 1926:that this 1783:discussion 1655:Hemmingsen 1597:PhilKnight 1480:Cyclonenim 1322:Shouldn't 1241:page moves 1184:Discussion 710:removes.-- 269:Briangotts 59:1 November 57:at 13:47, 31:successful 3697:Ironholds 3649:for now. 3630:Lankiveil 3452:SashaNein 3444:per above 3378:I think 3372:talk page 3344:WP:PERNOM 3076:Sjakkalle 3022:Athaenara 2897:Gwen Gale 2878:Gwen Gale 2748:Pete.Hurd 2729:Jauerback 2618:Etineskid 2540:Wizardman 2163:Firebat08 2150:(Contrib) 2123:faithless 1952:Acalamari 1852:cierekim 1444:America69 1442:Why not. 1328:Athaenara 1235:deletions 1142:block log 1066:talk page 704:Follow-Up 670:Lankiveil 459:this one. 3862:Category 3667:RockManQ 3653:RockManQ 3591:Wisdom89 3569:at all. 3471:Voyaging 3362:A Nobody 3208:RockManQ 3202:A Nobody 3191:RockManQ 3080:(Check!) 3018:Support. 2988:Eusebeus 2912:- meets 2832:lucasbfr 2564:Cherian 2377:contribs 2253:Amerique 2101:Mountain 2051:Chequers 1805:Writer | 1672:contribs 1489:contribs 1412:Wisdom89 1217:contribs 1110:contribs 897:11.28.-- 484:RockManQ 420:Comment: 368:this one 364:this one 307:Voyaging 79:contribs 3795:My work 3775:Neutral 3757:Neutral 3727:Neutral 3647:Neutral 3640:Neutral 3548:BigDunc 3498:My work 3293:Serviam 3287:already 3224:WP:RFPP 3089:Support 3072:Support 3049:Support 3033:Support 3005:Patrick 3001:Support 2984:Support 2952:Support 2931:Support 2918:Bearian 2910:Support 2893:Support 2858:ЯEDVERS 2827:Support 2744:Support 2724:Support 2711:Deli nk 2707:Support 2697:Toaster 2684:Support 2613:Support 2593:Support 2575:Support 2551:Support 2533:Support 2518:Amused 2509:Support 2490:Support 2473:Support 2455:Support 2434:Support 2417:Support 2387:Support 2364:Support 2354:MBisanz 2348:Support 2303:Support 2286:WP:RFPP 2282:Support 2265:Support 2249:Support 2176:Support 2158:Support 2140:Support 2117:Support 2089:Support 2061:Support 2035:Support 2018:Support 2001:Support 1983:Support 1960:Support 1933:Protonk 1895:Support 1880:- Yep! 1878:Support 1865:Useight 1817:Support 1795:Support 1772:Support 1738:Support 1722:Support 1709:Realist 1702:Support 1664:Tombomp 1651:Support 1633:Support 1610:Support 1593:Support 1576:Support 1558:Support 1539:Support 1523:Support 1502:Support 1475:Support 1457:Support 1440:Support 1406:Support 1383:Support 1377:Support 1314:My work 1289:My work 1117:deleted 3762:Banime 3662:Oppose 3585:WP:CSD 3524:Oppose 3507:Oppose 3482:Oppose 3465:Oppose 3440:Oppose 3421:Oppose 3403:Oppose 3348:WP:JNN 3346:, and 3298:(talk) 3265:Oppose 3249:- per 3220:Weakly 3185:Oppose 3115:Oppose 3094:Xymmax 3039:Flewis 2767:henrik 2690:Flying 2602:DrNick 2520:Repose 2477:Stifle 2409:(Talk) 2368:SWik78 2294:(talk) 2236:Keegan 2205:Keegan 2147:(Talk) 2096:Little 1924:assume 1802:Cactus 1776:αἰτίας 1580:Haukur 1460:tools. 1260:Keegan 1247:rights 1223:blocks 1206:Wiglaf 1017:patrol 641:WP:AIV 546:Aitias 321:Haukur 265:Haukur 112:Wiglaf 89:, and 55:Rlevse 2735:dude. 2445:Cobra 2439:Glass 2046:Spiel 1990:neuro 1922:I'll 1903:GeeJo 1691:Chat 1685:Pedro 1544:Menti 1506:Aqwis 1493:email 1363:Chat 1357:Pedro 1352:FWIW 1173:civil 1124:count 1100:Berig 1058:Berig 1035:Berig 987:Berig 899:Berig 871:cidic 827:Berig 794:Berig 764:Berig 752:broil 747:Royal 712:Berig 691:Berig 652:Berig 619:Berig 591:Berig 563:Berig 528:Berig 501:Berig 447:Chat 441:Pedro 407:Berig 390:Pedro 372:Berig 341:Pedro 277:Berig 229:Berig 215:Berig 188:Berig 152:Berig 116:Berig 96:Menti 69:Berig 64:(UTC) 47:Berig 16:< 3829:talk 3822:xeno 3766:talk 3746:talk 3701:talk 3575:talk 3533:talk 3515:talk 3456:talk 3390:talk 3357:this 3355:and 3353:this 3290::P-- 3271:Koji 3256:macy 3131:talk 3009:talk 2992:talk 2975:talk 2938:Rami 2922:talk 2901:talk 2882:talk 2870:talk 2848:talk 2774:talk 2752:talk 2715:talk 2622:talk 2584:talk 2557:Tinu 2481:talk 2461:Lost 2425:talk 2396:talk 2373:talk 2273:talk 2182:Reyk 2167:talk 2041:Ϣere 2026:talk 2009:talk 1937:talk 1886:talk 1869:talk 1847:Dloh 1832:Mate 1763:talk 1759:J.B. 1746:talk 1668:talk 1642:talk 1622:Loxy 1619:Foxy 1601:talk 1584:talk 1567:talk 1549:sock 1510:talk 1485:talk 1466:talk 1448:talk 1387:Holt 1349:Done 1211:talk 1196:talk 1154:rfar 1136:logs 1104:talk 1056:See 1039:talk 1025:talk 991:talk 976:talk 924:talk 903:talk 884:NSFW 867:xeno 845:talk 841:Korg 831:talk 816:talk 812:Korg 798:talk 780:Korg 768:talk 741:this 716:talk 695:talk 681:this 679:Was 656:talk 623:talk 595:talk 567:talk 532:talk 505:talk 466:talk 428:talk 411:talk 376:talk 325:talk 296:(𒁳) 281:talk 271:and 233:talk 219:talk 192:talk 156:talk 120:talk 101:sock 73:talk 62:2008 3738:tth 3735:iMa 3713:Sam 3685:Sam 3564:any 3385:DGG 2795:Ed 2789:how 2660:Red 2636:Red 2308:Mgm 2202:. 2189:YO! 1966:Axl 1950:". 1908:(c) 1638:Pia 1257:. 1253:RfA 1160:spi 1130:AfD 971:DGG 919:DGG 879:16. 677:13. 636:12. 608:11. 580:10. 354:was 292:dab 275:.-- 273:Dab 3864:: 3814:}} 3808:{{ 3779:OK 3768:) 3741:ew 3703:) 3606:/ 3577:) 3571:DS 3535:) 3517:) 3458:) 3392:) 3342:, 3332:, 3329:, 3326:, 3323:, 3320:, 3317:, 3314:, 3226:. 3187:. 3054:, 3025:✉ 3011:) 2994:) 2977:) 2956:VG 2933:. 2924:) 2903:) 2884:) 2754:) 2717:) 2672:~~ 2667:~~ 2663:2 2648:~~ 2643:~~ 2639:2 2624:) 2606:! 2598:Hi 2586:) 2578:-- 2568:- 2513:₪ 2500:gr 2495:An 2483:) 2427:) 2398:) 2375:• 2275:) 2169:) 2130:() 2082:@ 2078:dt 2028:) 2011:) 1988:— 1939:) 1928:is 1912:• 1888:) 1871:) 1827:ni 1799:— 1765:) 1748:) 1688:: 1674:) 1653:. 1644:) 1603:) 1586:) 1569:) 1516:) 1512:– 1495:) 1491:· 1487:· 1468:) 1450:) 1427:/ 1360:: 1331:✉ 1275:. 1198:) 1148:lu 1041:) 1027:) 1021:DS 1019:? 1013:18 1008:: 993:) 978:) 966:, 960:, 951:, 948:, 939:, 936:, 931:17 926:) 905:) 894:A: 847:) 833:) 818:) 800:) 770:) 718:) 697:) 687:A: 658:) 647:A: 625:) 614:A: 597:) 586:A: 569:) 559:A: 553:9. 534:) 524:A: 518:8. 507:) 497:A: 491:7. 468:) 444:: 430:) 413:) 403:A: 395:6. 378:) 360:A: 346:5. 327:) 283:) 267:, 260:A: 254:4. 235:) 221:) 211:A: 205:3. 194:) 175:A: 169:2. 158:) 148:A: 142:1. 122:) 85:, 36:. 3832:) 3826:( 3817:– 3764:( 3748:) 3744:( 3699:( 3635:. 3611:) 3601:T 3596:( 3573:( 3531:( 3513:( 3454:( 3388:( 3277:† 3230:X 3133:) 3129:( 3007:( 2990:( 2973:( 2959:☎ 2941:R 2920:( 2899:( 2880:( 2868:( 2861:❞ 2855:❝ 2846:( 2800:7 2798:1 2771:• 2750:( 2732:/ 2713:( 2620:( 2582:( 2479:( 2423:( 2394:( 2379:) 2371:( 2337:l 2334:a 2331:m 2328:a 2326:h 2324:C 2310:| 2271:( 2165:( 2106:5 2070:S 2067:Æ 2065:∫ 2024:( 2007:( 1971:¤ 1935:( 1905:⁄ 1884:( 1867:( 1822:A 1787:• 1779:• 1761:( 1744:( 1670:/ 1666:( 1640:( 1599:( 1582:( 1565:( 1508:( 1483:( 1464:( 1446:( 1432:) 1422:T 1417:( 1397:C 1395:• 1392:T 1255:) 1250:· 1244:· 1238:· 1232:· 1226:· 1220:· 1214:· 1209:( 1194:( 1162:) 1157:· 1151:· 1145:· 1139:· 1133:· 1127:· 1120:· 1113:· 1107:· 1102:( 1068:. 1037:( 1023:( 989:( 974:( 922:( 901:( 843:( 829:( 814:( 796:( 766:( 714:( 693:( 654:( 621:( 593:( 565:( 530:( 503:( 464:( 426:( 409:( 374:( 323:( 279:( 231:( 217:( 190:( 154:( 118:( 76:· 71:( 40:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Knowledge (XXG)

:Requests for adminship/Berig 2 - Knowledge (XXG)

Index