Wikibooks:Requests for permissions/Iamunknown

This user has been a valuable and active helper here since October, although he has had a number of minor outlying edits dating back to November 2004. By my count, he has over 850 edits, including many which are boring administrative edits (image tagging, link fixing, etc). Also, this user has been active asking and answering questions on staff lounge, working on policy documents, and generally trying to make Wikibooks a better place. I would like, therefore, to nominate him for adminship here, in the hopes that the additional tools will help this user continue to help us. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 04:22, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[]

• Acceptance of Nomination
  • I decline --Iamunknown 01:25, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[]

• Discussion
  • I am afraid that I will be unable to devote what I consider to be a proper amount of time to Wikibooks especially starting in January. I thank you all for taking the time to vote at and discuss my nomination. I may consider requesting adminship at a later point in time. Cheers, Iamunknown 01:25, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[]

• Votes

• Support - I read that voting doesn't have to wait until the user accepts a nomination but please correct me if I'm wrong. I'm supporting this nomination because Iamunknown is very active, does a lot of tasks which I have no clue about and is working for the good of Wikibooks. Xania ^talk 12:55, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[]
• Oppose - I don't think Iamunknown is ready yet. Categorizing articles for speedy deletion that shouldn't be candidates for speedy deletion is particularly worrisome, but in general I think he needs to become more familiar with the wikibooks structure. He needs more time. --SB_Johnny | ^talk 14:17, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[]

  I'm not entirely sure what you are talking about, I've been following a number of his speedy-deleting nominations on the RC list, and all of them were perfectly plausible to me. The difference between a VfD and a speedy candidate is often a grey area, and one that is very open to some interpretation. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 14:55, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[]

  There've been at least a couple I ran across while going through CSD... I think admins need to have a good idea about where that grey area is, since they've got to know when not to use the delete tool and list on VfD instead.

  The other thing is that the majority of his/her edits have been made within the past 2 weeks... it's just too soon. --SB_Johnny | ^talk

• What I'd like to see is a wide-range of opinions among Admins and I think Iamunknown would help bring this to Wikibooks. Disagreement is often good as it provokes debate. As for the grey area - I agree. I usually ere on the side of caution and call for a vfd when it's probably not necessary. What should be remembered is that Iamunknown is working for the good of the project just like everyone else. That's my two euro-cents. Xania ^talk 21:15, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[]

This user has previously been nominated for Adminship, a nomination which the user declined. At the time, Iamunknown felt that he was not familiar enough with wikibooks, and did not have as good a feel for the infamous "gray area" that dominates decision-making here. This user has had over 2300 edits here, spread across all the namespaces. He has been very active on staff lounge, in matters of policy, and on VfD. It is my opinion that the user has progressed a large deal since his last nomination, and has proven himself time and time again to be a solid, helpful, and trustworthy wikibookian who would make excellent uses of admin tools. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 00:42, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[]

I humbly accept Whiteknight's nomination. Please feel free to ask any questions. —Iamunknown 01:19, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[]

• Support - agree with all comments above. Webaware ^talk 04:11, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[]
• Support - no comments necessary. Xania ^talk 21:25, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[]
• Support - Gets things done. xixtas ^talk 00:13, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[]
• Support - I thought he already was one (and a good one at that). -- Jim Thomas 01:26, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[]
• Support - Agree he deserves it. Mattb112885 (talk) 02:23, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[]
• Question - What's this about, and what do you mean by "from my previous edit at [2], thus I own the copyright and add it here" ???? --SB_Johnny | ^talk 12:29, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[]

  Actually, what's with the userpage too? Are you aware of what Essjay did (and why he's had all his user rights stripped on all wikimedia projects)?--SB_Johnny | ^talk 12:53, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[]

  Whatever Essjay did is irrelevant, it's a good quote and one that people should be mindful of before they edit pages. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 15:00, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[]

  I interpreted that as Iamunknown's clever way of shining a light on hypocrisy. -- Jim Thomas 15:08, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[]

  heh, agreed, just making sure. --SB_Johnny | ^talk 16:08, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[]

  I don't think that even if it's there as a show of support that should have any bearing on whether iamunknown should be made an admin. There are thoughtful and conscientious people who disagree about what should have been done in this case. It was bound to happen eventually that the disparity between someone's real-life and their online persona would ignite this kind of firestorm. I've heard it said that on the Internet, no-one knows you're a dog. This may be the start of the end for that. --xixtas ^talk 00:08, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[]

  • Actually, what's with the userpage [...] stripped on all wikimedia projects. Yes, I am aware of that. No, I was not thinking of hypocrisy when I added that image. Essjay used false credentials to leverage himself in content disputes, and that was inappropriate. The statement in that image, however, should be universal. I sometimes feel that I make too hasty of edits, so I added that image to help myself be more aware of my actions.
  • What's User:Iamunknown/Spam/Modules about [...] and add it here. I created that earlier this week when I began thinking about a spammy pages. I came to my senses earlier today, however, decided I should just keep contributing to Herby's excellent and more developed list, realized that it was silly of me to start a whole other one, and requested that my module be deleted via the speedy deletion process. --Iamunknown 01:57, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[]
• Support - Worthy. --Rob Horning 02:08, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[]
• Support - Positive and seemingly trustworthy contributor. --Remi 02:31, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[]
• Support - Courteous and Professional. -- Urbane User (Talk) (Contributions) 11:55, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[]
• Support - A few new tools will serve him well in his many cleanup efforts. --SB_Johnny | ^talk 20:37, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[]
• Support -- Keep up the good work! // FrankB 16:29, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[]
• Support - Helps out a lot around here --Dragontamer 23:26, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[]
• Support - Positive contributor --SamEEE 13:13, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[]

Full support over several weeks. Now a sysop. -withinfocus 13:24, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[]