Wikibooks:Requests for permissions/Robert Horning

+Administrator

I'm nominating Rob because I still feel as if we could use more admins, and Rob is a tireless editor who seems to have the best interests of this project at heart. I was kinda hoping he'd nominate himself, since I don't like to put any pressure on users to become admins. It's a lot of extra work, and you tend to get more abuse from other users. Before we start voting, what say you, Rob? - Aya T C 03:09, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[]

To be honest here, there is plenty of work to be done that doesn't need admin access, so I do want people to know that admin access is not required in order to help out with Wikibooks. I also wanted to let the politcal issues calm down quite a bit before I "threw my hat into the ring", particularly in regards to Wikiversity and the Muggle's Guide to Harry Potter before I tried for the nomination. I'm also working on another project that will impact Wikibooks in a significant manner, and I hope that my being an admin won't affect anyone's feelings on this project (I'll do a formal announcement soon on both the Textbook-l and Staff Lounge... I'm just trying to get the details down first). Nonetheless, I do accept this nomination, and there is a need to have some more active admins on Wikibooks, as it looks like this project is finally starting to take off on its own. I hope I can help out in any way. --Rob Horning 11:32, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[]
  • Support - Despite the cryptic acceptance statement.;) Geo.T 12:12, 15 August 2005 (UTC) Robert has e-mailed me an explanation of his proposed project, it has no bearing on my support for his nomination for adminship. Geo.T 03:54, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[]
  • Support - Again, my reasons here are similar for those for supporting Garrett. The users who can be bothered to find the cruft and mark it for speedy may as well delete it themselves to save other admins the hassle of processing the speedy list. Don't worry too much about the political implications, since, although you will have access to administrative tools, you are still a user, and your opinions should be valued only as much as they were before. Just make sure you are aware of WB:PAG. - Aya T E C 15:37, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[]
  • Question - Rob: what are your feelings about Wikiversity and HP specifically? And can you give us clues as to what this big impacting project is? MShonle 21:23, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[]
My feelings about the HP VfD are that it was a premature discussion, and there have been changes made in Wikibooks:Deletion policy that had they been in place with the Harry Potter discussion, it would never have happened in the first place. I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and see where their project is going to go. I am pissed at myself for not noticing that the VfD was started by what could be called a sock puppet... or a social vandal that is close to as bad if not worse than the AP vandal we have dealt with. I'll be more vigilant next time for a similar injustice. As far as Wikiversity is concerned, my opinion is very clear on the VfD discussion. I think it should go, but I also think that it should be started on its own server and given a chance to become a Wikimedia sister project. That may take a month or two, and Foundation policy is going to require an interest poll to see that this take place. I'm going to make a splash on this one, and force Wikiversity to go through the formal process of becoming a major Wikimedia project. If it takes my leadership to do that, so be it. In general, I think Wikibooks needs to be cool and slow on any major changes, and this patients is going to be required with Wikiversity in particular.

As far as the new project is concerned that I'm working on, it will involve money changing hands between people and Wikibooks authors, which I know if it is done wrong will piss off a whole bunch of people here. I'll try to give you some details if you are interested through private e-mail, and if you have read my posts elsewhere on Wikimedia projects (including Wikibooks) you may be able to figure out what I'm going to do... I'm just not ready for a formal announcement yet. Sorry about being so cryptic, but I don't want to piss anybody off, but I might anyway. I am also trying to find an appropriate forum to discuss the whole thing, but it will involve Wikibooks authors directly. --Rob Horning 00:20, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[]

Please do email me (via WB) about this other project. Perhaps I can lend you advice to avoid any pissing off of anyone. :-) MShonle 03:37, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[]
  • Wholeheartedly Support - not an admin already?! Scandalous. Definitely one of those "no big deal" promotions. And I'm sure you'll find those extra clicky things will come in handy anyway. :) GarrettTalk 03:02, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[]

Done - Aya T E C 16:23, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[]

+CheckUser

He can already cause plenty of trouble and has resisted any evil urges to do so. -- AlbertCahalan 22:27, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[]

I accept the nomination under the policy of having at least one other person to monitor the others who have access to the check user facilities. I hope that my outspokenness hasn't offended too many people, even though I do have a somewhat different view of Wikibooks than some. I believe that some of reasons for a huge difference in opinion about the Check User privileges have to do with a culturual difference about attitudes towards privacy. Still, my only purpose to using these options is to help fight sock puppetry and squash hard-core vandals that are being obviously destructive. --Rob Horning 13:36, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[]
Could not achieve in several months' time. Stagnated and thus failed. -withinfocus 02:37, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[]

-Administrator

  • Last Contribution: August 20 2008
  • Last Tool Use: Once on January 2 2009, prior to that November 9 2007

Per policy on inactivity. User may request tools again should they become active and have a need for them again.

  • FYI - While I'm not exactly active on Wikibooks at the moment (I'd like to come back eventually with a couple of other projects), I am "lurking" and trying to keep tabs on the community. Be that as it may, the decision to desysop due to age... something I've also been against for some time... is something that is up to the community at large. --Rob Horning (talk) 23:41, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[]
Not sure what "due to age" means? It isn't the length of time you've had the sysop bit, it's the length of time since you used it - unless I'm completely missing the point here. Unusual? Quite TalkQu 07:57, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[]
Done Removed at Meta Kylu (talk) 03:10, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[]
This article is issued from Wikibooks. The text is available under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 unless otherwise noted. Additional terms may apply for the media files.