Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/07bargem
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.
Final (0/6/0); Scheduled to end 19:28, 6 October 2010 (UTC) Closed per WP:NOTNOW -Tommy! 20:50, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nomination
[edit]07bargem (talk · contribs) – YOUR DESCRIPTION OF THE USER 07bargem (talk) 19:12, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Questions for the candidate
[edit]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: Helping to remove non-encyclopaedic content and confirming Wikipedia a universally trusted institution.
- 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
- A: My articles on various subjects relating to Politics and Dogs because they are informative and useful.
- 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: Once. Due to a slight misunderstanding on my part. Other users have nominated by articles for deletion for trivial reasons but I stated my case and the settlement was easily resolved.
General comments
[edit]- Links for 07bargem: 07bargem (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
- Edit summary usage for 07bargem can be found here.
Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review his contributions before commenting.
Discussion
[edit]RfA/RfB toolbox | |
|---|---|
| Counters | |
| Analysis | |
| Cross-wiki | |
Support
[edit]
Oppose
[edit]- Oppose. Sorry to be the first one, but you only have 37 edits to project space and your answers are definitely not impressive; even though you've been here a long time, I fear you're not experienced enough to be handed the mop; I'd suggest you to get more involved with the behind-the-scene aspects of Wikipedia and come back in a couple of months. Salvio Let's talk 'bout it! 19:42, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose. I feel that with your number of edits, and the RfA template wasn't fill out fully, templates are important in an admin's job, and taking your time to do things fully and properly is important as well. I agree with Salvio, that more behind-the-scene aspects need to be learned. --Wolfnix • Talk • 19:47, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose. WP:SNOW. You clearly do not have enough experience to become an administrator. Logan Talk Contributions 20:10, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose Sorry, I don't think you're ready for adminship. Also, your edit summary use stands at only 11%, which is very poor (IMO). Get some more experience, try doing some 'backstage' work and come back again (hopefully with a better edit summary usage!) :). Acather96 (talk) 20:13, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per your lack of experience. There even isn't a nom. ~NerdyScienceDude 20:43, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Oppose. I'm sorry, but after seeing your editing history (particularly in project space) and your responses to the above questions, it's obvious to me that you do not have sufficient experience to justify handing you the admin tools at this time. But please don't let this discourage you; I'm sure you'll make a great candidate for adminship at some point in the future. --SoCalSuperEagle (talk) 20:50, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral
[edit]- 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.