Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ww

Ww

Ww has been here since June and has >1500 edits. He expressed some interest in adminship, so I said I'd take a look through his contributions and nominate him if I liked what I saw. He's made good contributions to articles like Attack on Pearl Harbor and pseudoscience, and has greatly improved our coverage of cryptography topics. I didn't find any disputes he's been involved in, and he was polite in the one instance I found where he disagreed with someone (See User talk:Spellbot). He probably won't use admin powers much but I think he can be trusted not to abuse them. Isomorphic 01:32, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I accept the nomination, and am shocked, just Shocked! by how fast so many people noticed it and reacted. I expect Isomorphic will be found correct in his expectation that I won't wield any awesome powers I have yet to be told about with much vigour. But, on the other hand, I only thought I'd make a few changes/improvements to the cryptography article way back when... Certainly I'll continue to keep Our Reader foremost in mind in whatever admining I actually do end up doing. I'm a little surprised much of anyone had noticed the obscure topics I've worked on, but thanks to all. Mayhap it's more a WP trait than I'd imagined. ww 20:56, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Support:

1. I like what he did with the Tonkinese cat stub. Brian Rock 01:48, Apr 13, 2004 (UTC)
2. Good edit history. Charles Matthews 10:21, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)
3. I haven't come across this person myself but appears to be a good candidate -- Graham  :) | Talk 12:06, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)
4. Definitely a solid edit history. Support. Danny 12:31, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)
5. Nice work in crypto. Arvindn 12:34, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)
6. Great contribs to (at least) cryptography articles; has always been exemplarily polite and reasonable when I've had disagreements over articles with him. — Matt 16:55, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)
7. Great crypto editor. jengod 18:09, Apr 13, 2004 (UTC)
8. Decumanus | Talk 21:51, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)
9. Support Cecropia 22:00, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)
10. The little I've encountered Ww, I've been impressed. Good choice. Jwrosenzweig 23:38, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)
11. Don't know him personally, but edit history seems good. Meelar 23:43, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)
12. Solid. LUDRAMAN | T 01:49, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)
13. GrazingshipIV 04:02, Apr 14, 2004 (UTC)
14. Strongly support. Wikipedia's crypto section needs work, and Ww has done quite a bit of it. --Hcheney 20:01, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)
15. Support. Cribcage 06:13, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)