Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:
1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
A: Whatever the corps most needs of me.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A:Every single one. Because I put a lot of thought before each action to ensure it is a well intentioned effort to improve this encyclopedia.
3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
A: I have had some stressful situations. I have wished I would have handled a few of them better, but that was always after the fact. I take medication to maintain an even keel, and it does help. Other than that, walking away is my best new friend.
Q. If you had to choose between eating a live kitten or destroying Wikipedia, which wouldn't you not decide against rejecting?
A: Very interesting question; If faced with such a situation, I would definitely not withhold deciding against rejecting both propositions, unequivocally! My76Strat (talk) 06:56, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Q.But does it float? And if it does float, will it blend?
A: This question reminds me of a saying, I presume many have heard; When learning to ride a horse, if you fall off, it is best to get right back on. It may not float or blend, but it makes a lot of practical sense. My76Strat (talk) 10:21, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Q If company A is ISO:9000 compliant, company B produces fifty varieties of player piano, company C' CEO is on a train moving north at 48 MPH, and company D is bankrupt, then how much wood can a woodchuck chuck?
I did consider that some would not appreciate seeing this 2nd RfA. I should apologize up front, and state it was not my intention to offend. If it could be considered bold, I would accept that, and of course the discussion that comes with it. My76Strat (talk) 07:28, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
To the extend it is said "I reached the end of Wikipedia and brought nothing back"; Please consider that I brought back a better version of myself, and that was for each users benefit, especially my own. I hope a better reflection is apparent. My76Strat (talk) 09:01, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This RfA is a spontaneous action which did have 04/01 as impetus. There were many attempts at humor across the site. I participated in some, and imagined that people would see this, as the one they didn't see coming. I also assumed I wouldn't be able to transclude the RfA, because of the proximity to the other. So the best humor I imagined, was if someone observed by watchlist or recent changes and noticed me preparing the RfA. And perhaps they would find humor. I was very surprised when the main RfA page accepted the tansclusion. So I decided to go as far with it as it would go. And I will avoid the errors of my last. I challenge each participant, to challenge themselves to do better than their last as well. My76Strat (talk) 23:16, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support Well-timed RfA. Seriously, user has overcome his verbosity, which was the only thing we asked in the previous round of bashing. --Pgallert (talk) 08:24, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Im not sure if this is an April Fools Joke or not, but commentators are treating it as one, and the candidates playing along. Self deprecating humor is something I consider a sign of maturity. -- ۩ Mask09:30, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to state that it is an opportunity, not a joke. And seeing you append support, is not a vain sentiment, but a true source of pride. My76Strat (talk) 09:42, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support - OHHH YEEEESSSSSSSSS!!!!!!! Best answers to the questions I have EVER seen, from any condidate ever. At least we're now starting to use PROPER, SENSIBLE questions now guys!! Good, good, we're starting to get the message. OrphanWiki09:48, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support. As a candidate who openly declares his use of medication to control his editing behaviour — a practice that, if applied more widely, could save a lot of work for Wikipedia and certainly for those of us at the WP:MEDCOM and WP:MEDCAB — I support his adminship with a view to his future work at the Medication Cabal and, should his track record there prove good, a formal nomination to the Medication Committee. --NicholasTurnbull | (talk)10:29, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Because you were so keen to notice this shortfall, and compassionate enough to provide more cowbell, which I correctly did need; I have in fact already received more cowbell, although I will admit to still needing more. It is worthy of thanks however. My76Strat (talk) 07:06, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, suggest nominating this RfA for worst April Fool's joke ever after previous RfA closed as unsuccessful two weeks ago. – Athaenara ✉ 07:15, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I respect Athaenara's position. I have noticed that each of the so called April fools pages have been given proper serious regard by this user. It is my hope that it will become apparent this is not a joke, and I might earn the support I seek. My76Strat (talk) 10:32, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I realise this nom is probably an April Fool's joke (at least, most people are treating it that way) but someone needs to have a lack of sense of humour about these things. I don't think My76Strat is suitable for adminship at this time. Can't blame him for giving it another try, though... :) Robofish (talk) 12:04, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose If this is a 4/1 joke oppose as unfunny. If it's not, strong strong oppose for coming back 2 weeks after previous RFA has closed.--Cube lurker (talk) 14:24, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The candidate's behaviour at Rfa has been odd enough that I truly cannot tell what this is, joke or not. He's either got a great sense of humour about himself or... I don't know. Whatever it is, it has made my April 1 memorable and for that I thank him and wish him the best! 15:52, 1 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shawn in Montreal (talk • contribs)
Oppose This is a joke whether it was intended as one or not. Strat is just about the biggest wiki-diva I've ever seen, having announced his retirement twice in the brief interval since his last flaming ruin of an RFA. This nomination is either a completely not funny April Fools joke or one of the most ill-considered attention seeking RFAs in the history of RFA. Or both. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:11, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Judging by the terse answers I think he was sincerely going for a second attempt at success based on not being so verbose this time, but his timing was a little off, and maybe just wasn't aware of the customary 6-month delay interval between RfAs. -- Ϫ19:29, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I hope this wasn't intended as a serious RfA, but I am not sure anymore... if it was it failed. That being said, 6 months? It has never been six months, 3 months yes. Six months only when dealing with problematic individuals.---BalloonmanNO! I'm Spartacus!20:09, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I certainly LOL'ed as well. Out of all the things I expected to see, "My76Strat 2" was certainly not on the list. Strat has, either intentionally or unintentionally (though I do hope it's intentional) created a brilliant bit of April Fools' humor. April Fools' jokes are supposed to be taken seriously, that's the point. SwarmX21:41, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Though some of his comments here and on his talk page give the impression that he (seriously) wants this to be taken seriously. -- Ϫ21:43, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - lack of responses to opposers indicates the user does not wish to engage in productive conversation, which as a result suggests he does not adhere to the consensus-built foundation of Wikipedia. Juliancolton (talk) 21:04, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for that counsel. I understand that such a signature has negative detractors. I adopted returning to the default method, which seems the best way forward. However I do like yours, and some other truly unique signatures which I have seen. My76Strat (talk) 06:13, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.
