Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/CJ2005B
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 (0/7/0); Closed by Anthøny on 20:23, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
CJ2005B (talk · contribs) - I am a nice person and there are far too many users on here who are not. I should therefor have the mop! CJ2005B (talk) 20:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept
Questions for the candidate
[edit]Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:
- 1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?
- A: Blocking people. Deleting pages ect...
- 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
- A: Getting rid of stupid flagicons!
- 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: Yes, too many people on here quick to the revert!
General comments
[edit]- See CJ2005B's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.
- Links for CJ2005B: CJ2005B (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/CJ2005B before commenting.
Discussion
[edit]Support
[edit]- - Nom support!?! CJ2005B (talk) 20:22, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
[edit]- STRONG Oppose! This candidate appears to have some
maturitycivility issues, not to mention the fact they have less than 200 edits in the three some years they have been a member here. Come back when you have a level head and about 5000 more edits over a six month span, then we can talk about the mop. ArcAngel (talk) 20:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply] - Oppose, same reason. Way too soon. --Kbdank71 20:18, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per being warned about edit-warring over flags in TV show infoboxes. --Elkman (Elkspeak) 20:19, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- To be fair, User:Ckatz did later say that this was advise not a warning. CJ2005B (talk) 20:20, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry to pile on to your "bloodbath" (to use your edit summary words), but, No. Not ready yet. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 20:20, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Strongest possible oppose, per his behavior at User_talk:Islander. Tool2Die4 (talk) 20:20, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- As per my rationale in de-listing this RfA, far too inexperienced. Sorry. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:21, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose Less than 200 edits and a three year gap is insufficient, I am afraid. Sorry. -- Avi (talk) 20:23, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Opining in one's own Rf<whatever> is also indicative of someone who needs a bit more time "learning the ropes". -- Avi (talk) 20:24, 1 May 2008 (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.