Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Davnel03

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.

Davnel03

Final (0/12/0); Ended 19:46, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Davnel03 (talk · contribs) - Davnel03 may have only been on Wikipedia since November 2006, but I have created a huge amount of pages. I have also extended many pages, and am currently working on 1995 Formula One season. Although I have not been on Wikipedia very long, I have got use to this website quite quickly and have managed to find my way around. Davnel03 16:07, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Administrative backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.

A: I probably will contribute to a few categories, and I tend to help out if somebody wants an article peer reviewed. I will also try and rate a article to the best of my ability.

2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?

A: I've made a huge amount of edits to Wikipedia, but some articles that stand out is the article that I'm working on at the moment 1995 Formula One season, but I've also extended race reports from the 1994 Formula One season, including the 1994 Australian Grand Prix. From time to time, if I find an article that should be extended, I will try and extend it.

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: Not many users have annoyed me, but TJ Spyke can sometimes annoy me, by reverting my edits, but also to try and get me blocked for things I haven't done. In the future, if this happens, I will either stay off Wikipedia for a few days, or try to stay away from the project.

General comments

See Davnel03's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.
I think that's about it. If you want to ask me any questions, head over to my talk page!

Please keep criticism constructive and polite.

Discussion

Support

Oppose

Oppose - Well you have been here for about 4 Months and you have about 1390 Edits which is Impressive but not Enough...Sorry..--Cometstyles 16:32, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose You're definitely on the right track, however a few problems: your edit summary usage is poor, your edit count is kind of low, you need better answers to the questions (mainly Q1). You'll need more time around and experience to earn the trust of the Wikipedians. Hope that helps! :-) - Anas ^Talk? 16:42, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, there is a mistake in your nom: at the beginning you use the third person point-of-view and then use "I", a first person pronoun. - Anas ^Talk? 16:42, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose besides the limited experience in Wikipedia, you seem to have no requirement for the tools whatsoever, you can already do everything you mention in Q1 without being an admin. The Rambling Man 16:53, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I am not convinced that Davnel03 actually knows what adminship entails. Rje 16:56, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Low edit count, low use of edit summaries, and your answer to Question 1 doesn't make me feel like like you know what an administrator does--양복⁴² 17:03, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per question #1 -Mschel 17:13, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The answer to Q1 does not give any indication of need for the admin tools, and suggests a defective understanding of the rôle of an admin. Also, your low edit count (1390 is not, I'm afraid, a "huge amount") does not show in-depth familiarity with the project.--Anthony.bradbury 17:28, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - quesion #1 and edit count. BJ^Talk 17:30, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, Question 1 shows zero need for any tools at all. And if Q3 is regarding pro wrestling article, TJ's done a great job of keeping kayfabe out of those articles, so his reverts were most likely justified if I were to examine them more closely.--Wizardman 17:47, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose your answers to the questions don't show any need for adminship or that you have a good grasp on what it entails. I am not even considering edit count in this. You need to gain more experience especially in AFD as your talk page shows an improper understanding of closure. You need to improve your use of edit summaries. Give yourself time to gain more experience and a better understanding of process. I suggest you withdrawn the nom and try again in three months-- Dakota 17:50, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It seems you do not require the tools for your edits, unfortunately you have very low usage for edit summaries - only 13% for major edits and less than half for minor edits, you are a good user but I think that making only making 1420 edits over a 5 month period and only approximately half of these being in the mainspace is too low, you are no the right track but to improve you could do some work at XFD debates. Good luck for the future! (also you forgot to accept and sign your self nomination) Regards - Tellyaddict (Talk) 18:56, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per lack of experience. Please considering withdrawing and trying again when you have accumulated more experience on the project.--Jersey Devil 19:34, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

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.