Meta:Requests for adminship/Aphaia 2

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a closed Meta-Wiki request. Please do not modify it.

Closed as passed by Huib talk 18:40, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Aphaia[edit]

Aphaia (talk • contribs • count • logs • page moves • block log • CA • email)

Requirements:

Be an administrator, bureaucrat, or checkuser on a local Wikipedia or related project: admin on JaWQ, bureaucrat on JaWN, EnWQ and checkuser on EnWQ.
Have a user page on Meta, with links to the user pages on other participated projects. This can state that SUL is activated or be provided via a Wiki matrix if that is not possible: my user page has a wiki matrix. All accounts are SULed.
Have a valid contact address (either a confirmed email address in preferences, or a valid email address on the user page): Wikimail activated.
Be a currently an active contributor on Meta. This is a subjective, not an objective, measure and there is no official post count: Not so terribly but I hope to be now and try more in future :)

First, sorry for my recent rollback, which excesses the limit of my temp adminship. Apologies.

On the other hand it made me realize it's the time for me to request again for regular adminship. It's hard for me just to stand aside without tool! I've recently undone some edits which would have been handled much more easily; although I wouldn't be so active as in the past, there are still what I can help I expect.

As for my involvement to meta, I served an admin here from 2004 until recent when I was in a long wikibreak and failed to respond. My tool usage at that time was basically for housekeeping related to Translation but I think I used tools in time. I hope the community accepts their prodigal daughter and entrust the tools again. Cheers :) --Aphaia 14:45, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support Long term experienced contributions. No hesitations --Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:54, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment You seem to be currently indefinitely blocked on jawiki. Would you mind sharing the background of that? Jafeluv 15:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for your question, Jafeluv.

I think I've already given my explanation in full details in another venue, so I'd prefer it if you give a look to Stewards/elections 2007/statements/Aphaia. There you find the account from the opposite party too, and may wear out your own perspective. My account is from my own interest, and should be a single-minded to some extent.

But it's a quite lengthy and somehow complicated, so just for your convenience, I dare summarize it as follows:
I have a friend and Wikipedian and have usually called her name in real life. She prefers to be addressed with her username on wiki, and I normally took care of that, but forgot once. I apologized her for my mistake, she was okay with that and we are friends, so it's over in my opinion but some people made a drama from it.

Thanks. --Aphaia 23:46, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks for the explanation. Jafeluv 12:55, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support I've worked with Aphaia on the CU list and have no problem extending trust. -- Avi 15:11, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, D'oh. guillom 17:25, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Dferg 17:58, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support es:Drini 19:13, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support -Barras ^talk 19:52, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support --WizardOfOz ^talk 20:30, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support definitely yes --Mardetanha ^talk 20:42, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cbrown1023 talk 23:40, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Az1568 (talk) 23:42, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Why not? -FASTILY ^(TALK) 05:23, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Can't really think of a reason not to support. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:26, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support; –BruTe ^talk 06:12, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Grunny (talk) 06:13, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support sure --Church of emacs talk · contrib 07:10, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Please don't say sorry for using rollback, it doesn't make a difference between undo and rollback both have the same effect. Its was a good action, nothing wrong with it. Huib talk 07:20, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sure. Pmlineditor ∞ 04:03, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - @lestaty ^discuţie 04:37, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:13, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support --.snoopy. ✉ 12:44, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sounds good to me. Razor flame 12:09, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, --birdy geimfyglið _(:> )=| 15:17, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As long as Aphaia thinks the matters in jawp are already over, just as sha has stated above, I oppose to any of her attempts to acquire "power". At least I will never forgive or forget what she has done to jawp project, community, and its users. Moreover, she still has access to admin tools in meta as a temporary sysop, so why needs permanent admin status then? Just keep using those tools as a "temporary" admin. Yassie 09:33, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, trusted user. Good luck. Alex Pereira ^falaê 13:00, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]