Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Simple11

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

Simple11

Ends on 18th March 2008

I have nominated this user because recently he has been doing a lot of work by creating numerous new articles and his work on the geographical features of taiwan has been second to none Polopolo379 (talk) 09:48, 11 March 2008 (UTC)The nominator is a banned user --Bärliner 13:55, 11 March 2008 (UTC)Candidate's acceptance:[reply]

Support

• Support As the nominator (talk)
• Support I've seen his work on taiwan and it seems to be genuine and in the "simple style" loganberry 1 09.55 March 11 (talk)

• Support After using various wikipedia sites over the years, and seeing many great writers, one writer that really stands out is Simple 11. If anyone deserves the right of administration it is simple 11. He has brought many useful information perfectly written to people with less advanced english. Thank you for reading, regards, Simplifier.(talk)

• SupportI totally agree with Simplifier. He is great and would be perfect at helping and moderating. Similie.
• Support I agree good editing Mitchye 11th march

Votes strucken out, all  of them were made by sockpuppets.-- Lights  talk   13:23, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

• User is completely new; the fact that we see various support votes of users that are less than a day old only shows that the candidate is not familiar with how this Wikipedia works; I will not even go into things like edit counts in this wikipedia. I think the only thing that is reasonable to do here is to oppose the nomination --Eptalon (talk) 12:55, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Per Eptalon.-- Lights  talk  12:57, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• I have a feeling that this user is using sockpuppets to influence the vote in his/her favor. This is unacceptable. The only thing I can do is Oppose. Razorflame 13:23, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• Be sure to read the Criteria that a future administrator must meet. There are interesting passages(esp. in the who can vote section) regarding using multiple accounts for voting; and creating accounts just for voting. Both will cast a bad light on the future admin - Would you trust someone if you knew they were cheating? --Eptalon (talk) 12:59, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  This vote was closed;users abusing multiple accounts are unlikely to become admins; plus all of them are banned now. --Eptalon (talk) 22:55, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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