Wikisource:Administrators/Archives/Captain Nemo

Captain Nemo edit

2015-07 admin edit

Captain Nemo (talk • contribs) • activity • Global

I would like to nominate Captain Nemo for adminship. They have been with us for 5 years, and undertook their first edit on Author:Arthur Conan Doyle, so straight in to the deep end. Nearly 40k edits, doing plenty of maintenance work in that time, and as I noticed a few days ago, unable to clean up after some excellent maintenance. If you look at Captain Nemo's contributions you will see an extensive cross-namespace set of contributions. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:09, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I am happy to accept nomination. Captain Nemo (talk) 23:02, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Zyephyrus (talk) 16:49, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:17, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support - @Captain Nemo: please enable the "email this user" function in your Preferences>>User profile>>Email options. Cheers. Green Giant (talk) 18:27, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Agree with Billinghurst's assessment; a solid contributor and excellent when it comes maintenance practices. -- George Orwell III (talk) 20:27, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I see nothing in this editor's history that would disqualify them from wielding the mop. BD2412 T 21:07, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support— Mpaa (talk) 07:26, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support— Ineuw talk 17:22, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed:

successful

Hesperian 01:43, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

2016-08 confirmation edit

The following discussion is closed:

To be relisted; see below. Hesperian 03:52, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

admin since August 2015 (see previous discussions), currently inactive (contributions · logs · count · crossactivity). Captain Nemo will be removed automatically unless a simple majority of established users support continued access.

Keep --Zyephyrus (talk) 19:12, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- No significant activity this year. Outlier59 (talk) 00:39, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — Ineuw talk 01:26, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep no reason not to, though I would like to see more activity — billinghurst sDrewth 06:18, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for long inactivity and many missing edit summaries.--Jusjih (talk) 02:22, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose solely on the ground of inactivity per WS:AP. No problems from my perspective with regaining the tools upon return. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 04:53, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — Ineuw talk 05:31, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose solely for inactivity. --EncycloPetey (talk) 14:12, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Removal requested.[1] Hesperian 04:03, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted self. There has been an error here.

According to our Wikisource:Restricted access policy#restricted access policy,

"An 'inactive administrator' is one who has not edited during the past six months and has nmore than 50 edits during the last year."

Captain Nemo may not have edited since November 2015, but they made around five thousand edits in the months preceding, and therefore they are not inactive under our policy.

Whoever started this discussion at the start of the month has erred in listing Captain Nemo as inactive. The vote has been held under a misapprehension. As an active administrator, Captain Nemo cannot be removed unless a vote of confidence is called. No such vote of confidence was called, though the criteria for one was met... but again, under a misapprehension. What a mess.

I am going to close this without an outcome, and relist it.

Hesperian 04:22, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose A sensible reaction, and in response may I register my opposition to their continuance. You cannot win them all. AuFCL (talk) 04:29, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can you vote in the "Captain Nemo" section below please? Hesperian 04:47, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@AuFCL: I do not see how an administrator becoming inactive and therefore being removed from administrator status is a "win" for anyone. BD2412 T 13:18, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2016-09 relisting edit

admin since August 2015 (see previous discussions), currently active (contributions · logs · count · crossactivity). Captain Nemo will be reconfirmed automatically unless at least three established users oppose, which will trigger a vote of confidence with decision by simple majority.

Relisted from last month. Captain Nemo is active under our restricted access policy, not inactive. Hesperian 04:42, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

┌──────┘
As expressed (momentarily) above. Sadly: another failed experiment. AuFCL (talk) 05:19, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support for now and hopefully they return. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 13:25, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per August comments — billinghurst sDrewth 14:02, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep --Zyephyrus (talk) 16:05, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I have also pinged Captain Nemo about this discussion on his Wikipedia talk page. Cheers! BD2412 T 18:03, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — Ineuw talk 02:25, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for long inactivity and many missing edit summaries.--Jusjih (talk) 23:05, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2017-10 confirmation (not confirmed) edit

admin since August 2015 (see previous discussions), currently inactive (contributions · logs · count · crossactivity). Captain Nemo will be removed automatically unless a simple majority of established users support continued access.

The following discussion is closed:

Not Confirmed. Mpaa (talk) 20:53, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support — Ineuw talk 06:02, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Zyephyrus (talk) 06:04, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose solely on the ground of inactivity per WS:AP. No problems from my perspective with regaining the tools upon return. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:06, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Because inactive since 2015. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:44, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for long inactivity.--Jusjih (talk) 00:54, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - I have no concerns at this point that maintaining this adminship would lead to any kind of problems, but I would like to hear from Captain Nemo about whether he actually wants to remain an admin on this project. BD2412 T 01:17, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
N gone. <shrug> — billinghurst sDrewth 14:28, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain Would remain neutral, but not having been involved much myself for some time now, can't in all conscience oppose for inactivity. —C. F. 18:50, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Removal requested.[2] Hesperian 23:09, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Removed.[3] Hesperian 00:16, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]