Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2012-04/User:Metaknowledge for admin

• Nomination: I hereby nominate Metaknowledge (talk • contribs) as a local English Wiktionary Administrator. See User_talk:Metaknowledge#Admin_vote.3F. Equinox ◑ 23:04, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
• Vote starts: as soon as the nomination is accepted
• Vote ends: 24:00, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
• Acceptance: I gratefully accept.
  • Languages: en, la-3, it-1, enm-1, tpi-1, es-0.5, various Polynesian-0.5 but read this disclaimer before trusting my numbering system.
  • Timezone: UTC-8 (usually).

  --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 23:17, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

1. Support Equinox ◑ 23:04, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
2. Support. I've had a look through the user contributions, there seem to be enough and enough evidence of progression over those 4 and a half months to merit my support. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:41, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
3. Support Ƿidsiþ 11:48, 17 April 2012 (UTC) looks good.
4. Support --BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 01:08, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

   Support Itkilledthecat (talk) 22:00, 26 April 2012 (UTC). I hope this user gets a chance to block me someday. --Itkilledthecat (talk) 22:00, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

   I will gladly leave the job to Jamesjiao.--Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 00:59, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Oppose -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 23:42, 15 April 2012 (UTC) Clearly a solid editor with a good attitude, and someone destined for adminship, but they only got here in January, and I think it's just a bit too soon right now. Looking at the talk page, it looks like they're still working on some of our basic formatting. Half an admin's job is to oh so politely and patiently (or not) criticize people for outlandishly subtle and nitpicky mistakes in formatting. Also, and perhaps more importantly, I just don't have enough to go on as far as assessing their personality, though I'd like to note that what I have seen is very encouraging. However, I've seen editors who start out polite and good-natured, get promoted to admin early on (with my support vote in tow), and then turn out to be rather nasty, using their big buttons when discussion would be more appropriate. I really don't want to do that again, as bully admins are nightmarish to deal with. Everything I see points to someone whom I would support in a vote a few months down the road, but I can't do it now. Sorry. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 23:42, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

I understand if you think it's too early, but as for the personality thing, I don't think it's an issue. Whether I get sysopped or not, if any admin thinks I'm being a bully, they can just give me a block until I cool down (not that I expect ever to be an angry mastodon). --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 00:45, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

1. Abstain —Ruakh_TALK 20:26, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
2. Abstain Not enough experience to judge. -- Liliana • 20:46, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
3. Abstain -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 00:23, 25 April 2012 (UTC) As I think about it, the simple fact is that Metaknowledge has really given no cause for reproach, at least none that I've seen. I still feel uncomfortable voting support, due to a lack of experience, but oppose is too strong. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 00:23, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

• Vote passes, 4-0-3. --Yair rand (talk) 10:41, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Done. —Stephen ^(Talk) 02:50, 2 May 2012 (UTC)