Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Rama

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Rama[edit]

final (52/0/0) ending 18:30 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Good solid editor, been here since last summer, total of 3868 edits. During debates he tries to keep things on track, and doesn't go for personal attacks. Knows a sufficient number of languages to be REALLY useful cross-wiki too!

Kim Bruning 18:33, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

In the idea that "adminship should be not big deal", and sensitive to this honour, I accept the nomination. Rama 21:10, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Support

  1. Kim Bruning 18:39, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC) The first one's free ;-)
  2. Support. Rama's a great editor and a nice person, always reasonable, sticks to policy, cares about neutrality, fairness, and using good sources, and is always civil. SlimVirgin (talk) 18:47, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)
  3. Support. Considering it occured to me the other day that maybe I should nominate Rama, how could I not support? A great Wikipedian: friendly, constructive, trustworthy, etc. He will make a good admin. — Trilobite (Talk) 19:03, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  4. Support. Good artist :) ugen64 20:20, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  5. Generally appears to be a solid contributor. — Asbestos | Talk 23:12, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  6. Support.-gadfium 01:20, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  7. Support. +sj + 02:19, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  8. Merovingian (t) (c) 05:27, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)
  9. dab () 07:20, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  10. Lupo 07:28, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  11. Support. utcursch | talk 08:09, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)
  12. Support. I particularly like "Coming soon: more group sex" on his userpage. Dbiv 09:18, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    See if he keeps his campaign promises. ;-) -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 04:26, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  13. Support. A quick look at his contributions talls me Rama is a great Wikipedian; a glance at his user page tells me Rama is also probably a great person. :p Phils 10:08, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  14. Cool. JuntungWu 14:18, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  15. Taco Deposit | Talk-o to Taco 15:59, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)
  16. Support. PedanticallySpeaking 16:02, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)
  17. Support, Rama is just what we need. Great editor, hard worker, notably polite and conscientious, hand him the mop and bucket!--Bishonen | talk 19:49, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  18. Support. Very civil, great contributor. --MPerel ( talk | contrib) 01:23, Apr 30, 2005 (UTC)
  19. Support. After looking around his stuff I find his contributions very impressive; I suspect he will be an excellent admin. Antandrus 01:59, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  20. Support Seems to be a very conscientious editor, and clearly more Hindu deities on the mop cadre can only be a good thing. Alai 02:03, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  21. Everyking 04:05, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  22. Support. I was considering this, but Kim beat me to it. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 12:32, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  23. Rje 14:19, Apr 30, 2005 (UTC)
  24. Support. We need more like this. Kingturtle 17:45, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  25. Charles P. (Mirv) 17:51, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  26. Support. I like the pictures. ;) And I am amazed that anyone could be so compassionate in so many languages. Ahem; I am merely extrapolating to the more than four other languages, am I not? ---Rednblu | Talk 18:04, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  27. Andre (talk) 18:23, Apr 30, 2005 (UTC)
  28. Strong support. He has all the qualities we need in an admin and more. sɪzlæk [ +t, +c ] 19:51, Apr 30, 2005 (UTC)
  29. Support. Mike H 23:26, Apr 30, 2005 (UTC)
  30. Very much so. — Dan | Talk 23:49, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  31. Have been watching Rama's ability to work calmly with others. RickK 23:54, Apr 30, 2005 (UTC)
  32. Support. JuntungWu 13:30, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
  33. Support. Great contributor, great candidate. Trustworthy and knows what collaborative editing is about. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 13:41, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
  34. Support. James F. (talk) 15:50, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
  35. Support. Kelly Martin 19:33, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
  36. Support sannse (talk) 21:14, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
  37. Support. Proteus (Talk) 21:52, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
  38. Support, lest he draw embarrassing caricatures of us. Naw, just kidding; he's got what it takes. JRM · Talk 22:10, 2005 May 1 (UTC)
  39. Support. - Mark 01:25, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
  40. Support. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:16, 1 May 2005
  41. In the interests of clarity, yes, most definitely! El_C 03:34, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
  42. Support. A valuable contributor. -Willmcw 21:51, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
  43. Support. Jonathunder 22:25, 2005 May 2 (UTC)
  44. Support AlexR 03:31, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
  45. Support Shanes 03:34, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
  46. Yupyupyupyepsirooney Grutness|hello? Grutness.jpg 07:01, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
  47. Support "better late than never" - so goes a saying, so being so far behind in this sequence - does not worry me. I would love to see an administrator, knowing so many languages.--Bhadani 18:21, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
  48. Support --ShaunMacPherson 22:06, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
  49. Supportmark 11:08, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
  50. Support Páll 22:52, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
  51. Support. A name I'm familiar with and associate with solid edits, intelligent comments and a polite demeanor. Excellent admin material. SWAdair | Talk 01:23, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
  52. Support. Will make an excellent admin. zen master T 05:19, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Oppose

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. Mostly RC patrol. Also, I might occasionally be able to refrain from bothering administrators about deleting pages which I would habe created by mistake or temporarly.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. I am unexplainly happy about Image:Recovery_position.jpg, yatate and FS Dupleix (1861).
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 will deal with it in the future?
A. Although Wikipedia is a project in which I have a great faith, I am not attached to my "virtual identity" to the point where I would actually get stressed; also, I do not think that Wikipedia absolutely has to elvolve on short periods of time, and I am confident that things will always be sorted out eventually.
This being said, I have ran across people whose views were strongly worded; I have learned that very few people are ill-intended, and that interacting normally with them leads to a normal conversation most of the time. I have no theory as to what motivates the few others, but I notice that they get discouraged after a short time. One sad thing is being taken in a cross-fire between two "camps"; in such cases, standing firmly to exactly what one means, being extremely precise and staying systematic in the examination of the arguments helps make the discussion elvolve. Rama 21:10, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)