I created a section dealing with the impeachment of TSPTF members. I have been meaning to do this ever since the attempt to remove Arstar as Constable happened and I finally gotten around to it. Anyway, please comment and share any ideas you may have. Mitro 22:23, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

First time in ages

This must be the first time in ages when we have had nominations for all three admin categories on the wiki! :o 1 Imp (Say Hi?!) 11:40, April 1, 2014 (UTC)

That's why I put "no vote" for Bfox's nomination, as that vote mean to little postpone the nomination. Three nominations at one time are too much for me. FirstStooge (talk) 11:44, April 1, 2014 (UTC)

Been more at once before. Should have seen it after I got promoted, lol. Lordganon (talk) 11:51, April 1, 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps, but were all of those unopposed?

Also, this must be the first time a single user was behind all three.

            Centriflag   Every Silver Lining has it's cloud- And HERE I AM!  20:39, April 1, 2014 (UTC)

Except for Oct. NonEuclidean ツ (Talk)

Oct never nommed anyone for all three simultaneously, and never won all three without a single opposing.

I think I just set a wiki record!


Nope. Had something like six of them up there at one point. And yes, all, unopposed and by myself. Lordganon (talk) 11:31, April 2, 2014 (UTC)


        Centriflag   I'm going to put you in my ashtray  cause you just got smoked!  20:58, April 2, 2014 (UTC)

LG what have you done. Guns is not going to stop now. ;) 1 Imp (Say Hi?!) 20:18, April 5, 2014 (UTC)

Nope. I'm shooting for 8- need to wait for Stooge, Chris, and Andy to reply.


        Centriflag   I'm going to put you in my ashtray  cause you just got smoked!  20:19, April 5, 2014 (UTC)

I've got a bad feeling about this.

            Great Seal of the United States (obverse)    SCRAWLAND INVICTUS || REX IMPERATOR   20:24, April 5, 2014 (UTC)

I second that. 1 Imp (Say Hi?!) 20:26, April 5, 2014 (UTC)
Hey! Hey! I was going for 9, but I decided Cookie, though he's been on the wiki for longer than Imp, has too few edits.
It could be worse, lol.
        Centriflag   I'm going to put you in my ashtray  cause you just got smoked!  20:32, April 5, 2014 (UTC)
By 3 days, not that long. 1 Imp (Say Hi?!) 21:23, April 5, 2014 (UTC)

Talk about wrong, Guns. Wanting some sort of "record" is not a reason to nominate people. Horrible motive.

And, on that note, don't nominate anyone else for a while. Rather obvious as to why you're doing it.

Lordganon (talk) 06:51, April 6, 2014 (UTC)

I actually agree.

            Great Seal of the United States (obverse)    SCRAWLAND INVICTUS || REX IMPERATOR   17:11, April 6, 2014 (UTC)

This is true. Just nominating popular people will give everyone some kind of power, which defeats the purpose of having the power in the first place. Cour *talk* PMII Mayan FlagCaborr Flag 17:16, April 6, 2014 (UTC)

Guns, Guns, Guns. I thought you might have grown up a bit more in the 7 months since my last visit of this place. Nominate people for a job because they are good at it, not because you want a little bit of satisfaction of getting a meaningless record. It saddens me to see you do this. VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 17:29, April 6, 2014 (UTC)

Yes. Sorry Guns but this string of nominations is going way too far. Fed (talk) 17:57, April 6, 2014 (UTC)

Wait, this was the record you were talking about? I am disappoint, son. Flag of South Korea PitaKang- My Life for Aiur! En Taro Tassadar 18:09, April 6, 2014 (UTC)

... I was going to nom exactly the same people over the next month or so anyway. Instead of that, I nommed them in 2 weeks. Uhh...

        Centriflag   I'm going to put you in my ashtray  cause you just got smoked!  19:44, April 6, 2014 (UTC)

Irrelevant, Guns. You've clearly stated your motive - can't backtrack now. Lordganon (talk) 22:35, April 7, 2014 (UTC)

I would never backtrack. My point is that it makes no difference. I'll nom the same people, just instead over a period of months rather than days.

        Centriflag   I'm going to put you in my ashtray  cause you just got smoked!  23:59, April 7, 2014 (UTC)

I call for a change of the rules, specifically, that the rules concerning future may be changed. However, there are certain conditions that should be used:

  1. If the POD is in the 19th, 20th, or 21th century, then it may not progress into the future.
  2. The POD needs to be quiet far back, something like 200 B.C.
  3. The future may only be ahead one to three years of the current year.

I will stand by my call. Does anyone second? Spartian300 (talk) 17:22, April 8, 2014 (UTC) 

This is completely the wrong page for this. Put it on the TSPTF talkpage, not here. 1 Imp (Say Hi?!) 17:27, April 8, 2014 (UTC)

Ye. Also, "21th".

            Great Seal of the United States (obverse)    SCRAWLAND INVICTUS || REX IMPERATOR   22:38, April 8, 2014 (UTC)

Not even remotely the right place. Your answer, fyi, is NO. Lordganon (talk) 10:21, April 9, 2014 (UTC)


There can only one administrator for every 1000 articles - should have a 'be' in it, and which side of 'only' changes the meaning slightly.

And should the 'number of edits' and 'number of months' have a time limit - some people could have been last on AHW 10 years ago (some of the articles have been languishing on Oldest Pages for that long). Jackiespeel (talk) 16:43, July 28, 2015 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.