Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Keegan

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Requests for adminship

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Theleekycauldron (talk | contribs) at 08:33, 19 September 2023 (hat). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
For Keegan's successful request for adminship under a previous name, see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Teke.
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not cause gas. Please do not delete the candidate.

Keegan[edit]

Final: (∞/∞²/OVER 9000!!!). Closed by Grawp at 00:10, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination[edit]

Keegan (talk · contribs) – I'd like to be an administrator on the English Wikipedia.

I've been on this project nearing five years, and I have 3,909 deletions, 107 page protections, and 270 blocks.

I believe that as an administrator here, I can disrupt the Requests for Adminship process to prove a point. Keegan (talk) 05:11, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

<_< Keegan (talk) 05:19, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for the candidate[edit]

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

1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
A: The fun stuff.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: My RfA being the first with questions at the top, because they didn't used to matter since people took the time to considering candidates.
3. 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?
A: Most of my edit conflicts are with myself.
Additional optional questions from 7
4. Thank you for re-running. Shall we take this to mean you are in support of the yet to be drafted admin recall policy WP:AllAdminMustStandForRe-electionOnAprilFoolsDayOrFaceCommunityBanAndRevokationOfInvitationsToFutureMeetUpEvents (and that's the shortcut)?
A: I'm too charming to ban from MeetUps, but part one works.
Additional question from Bejinhan
5 So nice of you to ask for re-adminship. What do you mean by 'fun stuff'? Could you elaborate further. Note: Your answer would decide my vote
A Things like not blocking you for vindictive reasons. I could do it, you know, and come up with a justifiable reason on AN/I about your participation in this RfA being disruptive. Or something. I haven't thought it out. Keegan (talk) 07:35, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
But weren't you the one who started the RFA? How could my participation be 'disruptive'? BejinhanTalk 10:43, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Additional optional question that is mandatory from Leftis
6 What's your favourite variety of doughnut?
What is your quest?
4, no, 3 - What is your favorite color?
Red. No, Blue! AAAAAAaaahhhhhh....
Additional question from RadManCF
7 How proficient are you at disseminating nonsense?
Additional question from SuperHamster
8 Do you believe hamster-related articles are even more important than BLPs when it comes to accuracy and keeping a neutral point of view?
Important question from George Carlin
666. Can God make a rock so big that He Himself cannot lift it?
Question from Joan Rivers
007. Can we talk?
Oopsie by  fetchcomms☛
OVER 9000!!! User X accidentally eats your cheeseburger, but says it tasted nasty. User Y jumps in and demands some fries. What do you do?
A:
I CAN HAZ CHEEZBURGER NAO?


I WANT MAH CHEEZBURGER!


 fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Colossal Cave question from Will Crowther
Xyzzy YOU ARE STANDING AT THE END OF A ROAD BEFORE A SMALL BRICK BUILDING.
AROUND YOU IS A FOREST. A SMALL STREAM FLOWS OUT OF THE BUILDING AND
DOWN A GULLY.
:
Question from Lara
n: So... how you doin'?
A:

General comments[edit]

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Keegan before commenting.

Discussion[edit]

  • I think at this point we should speedily close the RfA as such a failure that we're rescinding his current administrative bit. You can still do oversight but can't view the deleted articles, only the very deleted ones. Valley2city‽ 22:37, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support[edit]
  1. troppus elbissop tsegnortS, nominated me for adminship. Also, thought he was an admin already. Tim Song (talk) 05:22, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    (edit conflict) Support I thought he was already an admin --(ʞןɐʇ) ʞıɹıɥs 05:24, 1 April 2010 (UTC) Moved to oppose --(ʞןɐʇ) ʞıɹıɥs 13:13, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Indenting vote of infinitely blocked user. JamieS93❤ 16:50, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support - with a cheery grin. Jusdafax 05:37, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support - he's an admin already, so let's make him an admin. BOZ (talk) 05:56, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support jumping him to Bureaucrat. CTJF83 chat 06:18, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Pending support If I support you, will you support me when I run for Bureaucrat/Checkuser/Oversight/Arbitrator/Steward/Ombudsmen? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 06:24, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Only if you run for adminship. You need that first. I seem to recall supporting your OTRS stats job[citation needed], but you haven't delivered on my needs. Tit for tat, that's the wiki way. Keegan (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Oppose - Already thought he was one. Shadowjams (talk) 08:29, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support I'm supporting you because you said you won't block me. If you do, I'll change this to oppose. xD BejinhanTalk 10:30, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  8. troppus kaeW .aedi retteb a eb dluow pihsdrawetS .htiaf doog gnimussA .ti htiw enif m'I ,etov ot skcos sih teg dna em etanimon ot seerga eh fi ,revewoH .tey pihsnimda rof ydaer toN rotidenilmP ∞ )CTU( 0102 lirpA 1 ,83:01
  9. Speedy delete A7, non-notable person - oh, have I got the wrong forum? ;-) -- Boing! said Zebedee 10:53, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Speedy keep. In recognition of the longest successful RfA gap ever (we did it!), every Admin who self-nominates gets an Adminship. / edg ☺ ☭ 11:49, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  11. WP:RIGHTNOW Dlohcierekim 14:22, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support Two positives make a positive, so I'm going with a support. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 16:44, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support Keegan's already got the t-shirt as an admin, I think I read somewhere (probably WP:CRAPPITY-CRAP) that if you get a second successful RfA while you are already an admin, you get the Bunny Slippers... -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 16:55, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  14. See above.  fetchcomms☛ 17:53, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support per D'Oh! -- D'Oh! 23:69, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
  16. Support...on wheels! – User:Willy on Wheels —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.15.127.136 (talk) 17:21, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Put a donk on it  Chzz  ►  17:58, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Chuck Norris Support--White Shadows you're breaking up 20:04, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Who?  fetchcomms☛ 20:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Weak support: Good guy. - Ret.Prof (talk) 23:01, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose[edit]
  1. Keegan is a funny name. Jujutacular T · C 05:38, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose - he's an admin already, so let's make him an admin. BOZ (talk) 05:57, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Strong Oppose- Not yet and already have too many admins as admins need more sysops as admins. Will support request for rollback however. James (T|C) 06:52, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    note: will consider changing my vote to support of he noms me James (T|C) 06:54, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    and i will support you if you nominate TTTSNB. delirious & lost ☯ ~hugs~ 07:14, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Oppose per WP:NOTNOW. Sorry, you're good editor, but I'm afraid 3,900 deletions is nowhere near enough by today's RfA standards. I might support after 12 to 24 more months of exceptional contributions. Jafeluv (talk) 06:56, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    How do you get almost 4K deleted edits and not be indefinitely banned for disruptive editing? Your talk page must be full of CSD notices. delirious & lost ☯ ~hugs~ 07:14, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Magic. Keegan (talk) 07:19, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Not magic, at least not entirely. He oversighted all warnings, that's what this function is for. --Pgallert (talk) 09:21, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, posting warnings to an oversighter is like trying to give a parking ticket to a jedi. Jafeluv (talk) 10:27, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Self-nomination.  f o x  07:23, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  6. O-P-P-O-S-E, you've already gotten the admin bit. Getting seconds on adminship is selfish when there are others who haven't gotten to be admins their first time. Once all 12 million registered users (and a token amount of non-banned IPs) have become admins then you can double dip. Valley2city‽ 07:37, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    With all do respect, Wikipedia is NOT an experiment in Communism, comrade. ;) Dlohcierekim 14:24, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    On Soviet Wikipedia, aЯticles edit YOU! Valley2city‽ 22:34, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Not ready yet, only 0.01% of edits are in the Category space. We have plenty of applicants, so we can afford to be choosy when it comes to promotion people! Lankiveil (speak to me) 08:01, 1 April 2010 (UTC).[reply]
  8. Oppose Sorry but I cannot support any candidate who I have heard about before and whose contributions I thought to be positive. Such people simply don't fit the profile of admins as abusive, elusive and crazy. Sorry Keegan ;-) Regards SoWhy 08:14, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I would like a 'crat to strike this vote as an obvious violation of WP:CANVASS, by the statement that I have been heard of before and that is the reason for the !vote. Keegan (talk) 08:20, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Indefinitely blocked for canvassing mixing color changes and bold within the same edit signature. Shadowjams (talk) 08:30, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Obviously a lie, since I have not nominated you for adminship. It is clear that I am the only one allowed to do that. Please return in 43 months. Keegan (talk) 08:35, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Opposeable thumbs are fun. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:44, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Oppose, user would clearly not make any use of being given admin tools at this time, relative to what he already does. ~ mazca talk 10:38, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Oppose I think you have already been sysopped...or have you? NERDYSCIENCEDUDE (✉ message • changes) 12:38, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Oppose Too many of our administrators are administrators. We should have administrators that are not administrators for a better representation of the editors on Wikipedia. --(ʞןɐʇ) ʞıɹıɥs 13:13, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    That's what MZMcBride and I are for. Lara 22:09, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Oppose this administrator is not quite ready to become an administrator again, please try again in 3 months after gaining more experience in admin related areas of Wikipedia. -- RP459 Talk/Contributions 14:28, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Strongest possible oppose Strongerest possible oppose, obviously. Also, answers to questions indicate clear and obvious violations of WP:3RR, WP:HARASS, WP:AGF, WP:CON, WP:NPA, WP:CIV, WP:OUTING, WP:ATA, WP:NLT, WP:OWN, WP:SOCK, WP:GAME, WP:CANVASS, WP:COOL, WP:DTTR, and WP:POINT. Although WP:LIE is only an essay, which takes less importance over WP:Guidelines or WP:Policy, it is worth noting as a secondary reason. JamieS93❤ 15:52, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, user never answered question 6. This is a very bad sign. JamieS93❤ 23:00, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Oppose - I view longstanding adminship as prima facie evidence of power hunger. Admins are all prima fascists anyway. Steve Smith (talk) 16:26, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Even stronger oppose than JamieS93's oppose -- IjustwantedtoproveIcoulddoit
  17. Oppose Because I can! RayTalk 17:21, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Oppose I can't possibly support an indefinitely unblocked editor -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:23, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Oppose An extreme inclusionist... or is he a Deletionist? Either way, fails WP:PORNBIO. Dekkappai (talk) 18:11, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Meh. I like Keenan a lot. I think he's a good guy. Unfortunately, his handshake is weak, thus I think he lacks the necessary confidence to remain an admin. Sorry Keenan. <3 Lara 22:07, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Comedy gold, Laura. Keegan (talk) 22:13, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Strongest oppose possible!!!! This has already been done and done better... if you can't be more creative, then you don't deserve the F'ing mop!!!---Balloonman NO! I'm Spartacus! 22:34, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keegan is a contradiction and therefore cannot exist[edit]
  1. Hereby endorsed by Dark and his ⌨ on 08:25, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Dark and his... calendar? Lara 00:33, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Keegan (talk) 08:30, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Keegan exists but doesn't exist. That makes sense. Not to meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee, but it makes sense. -- CorporalAgarn 24:60, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Neutral[edit]
  1. Neutral - clearly, I'm conflicted so my opinions should be discounted, as they always should. :) BOZ (talk) 05:58, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Neutral - isn't Keegan already an administrator on the English Wikipedia ? ~ Dwayne Flanders was here! talk 06:20, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    You may say that, I couldn't possibly comment. ~ mazca talk 10:41, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I highly object to your tendentious, bad faith question which violates my moral values and indeed those of this project as a whole, and will take this up asap at WP:WQA... no, make that WP:ANI... no, by golly, to WP:ARB... wait, I know, to Jimbo himself! Harrumph! Jusdafax 15:41, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Suppose - A suppose is halfway through a support and an oppose. It sounds a lot neater than "neutral", which is just the gear on a car that doesn't go anywhere, and also sounds like "neuter" which could be painful and ruin your Saturday nights. -- Atama頭 16:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Neutral As I've already !voted support and oppose, I want to make sure that I get the complete hand - and as I've got Support, Neutral and Oppose in Diamonds, I claim all the bets placed. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:25, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Hey, hang on... who put the button in, instead of a chip? -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:26, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 17:30, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Like most RfAs of last month, this one seems to be a straight flush. -- Atama頭 17:40, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete[edit]
  1. hay wut iz this doing heer lol GlassCobra 19:30, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ben Gurion International Airport[edit]
  1. Fletsi (aklt) 09:56, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. ~ mazca talk 10:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3. ~ mazca talk 10:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  4. ~ mazca talk 10:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Oppose BOZ (talk) 11:37, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Redirect to O'Hare International Airport, because that's what happened to my luggage the last time I flew. -- Atama頭 17:07, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
o Hai[edit]
  1. FASTILYsock(TALK) 21:06, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
kthxbai[edit]
  1.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  4.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  5.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  6.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  7.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  8.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  9.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  10.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  11.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  12.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  13.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  14.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  15.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  16.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  17.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  18.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  19.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  20.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  21.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  22.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  23.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  24.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  25.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  26.  fetchcomms☛ 23:39, 1 April 2010 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Keegan&oldid=1176073341"