Final (92/1/1); Closed as successful by WjB scribe at 12:09, 15 February 2008 (UTC) reply
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:
Optional question from Tim Vickers ( talk)
Question from WBOSITG
Questions from Jay*Jay ( talk)
Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Doczilla before commenting.
For some reason, I always think you're some strange cross between User:Doc glasgow and User:Bishzilla. -- Deskana (talk) 18:34, 8 February 2008 (UTC) reply
Strongest possible oppose. Anybody with poor enough judgment to take
Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Phil Sandifer as a remotely serious accusation and to voice support for it as in this edit
[1] does not have the judgment to be an administrator.
Phil Sandifer (
talk)
23:42, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
reply
Oppose per Phil Sandifer, and suggest this RfA is extended to take account of this. We've had enough drama from admins assuming bad faith already.
Black Kite
23:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
reply
Oppose (moved from support) per Phil & Black Kite.
Snowolf
How can I help?
00:07, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
reply
I request that this RFA be extended for at least 24 hours. I was previously unaware of Doczilla's support of a spurious and malicious accusation of sockpuppetry against me as expressed here: [2]. I apologize for pulling an October Surprise here (I'm frankly floored at it), but I would like sufficient time either for Doczilla to explain what on Earth he was thinking with that comment or for others to weigh in on this issue, and I'm concerned that there is not sufficient time for this information to be substantively considered in this RFA. Phil Sandifer ( talk) 23:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC) reply