Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Finale Wiki Geek

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

Finale Wiki Geek

Final (1/11/3); ended 16:20, 24 November 2007 (UTC) - closed early in accordance with WP:SNOW. Acalamari 16:20, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Finale Wiki Geek (talk · contribs) - I have been on Wikipedia for about a year. I am great person. I think Wikipedia is the best place to go for a project. I am always on Wikipedia and I am addicted to Wikipedia. I spent the Thanksgiving on Wikipedia. I love to work with codes and templates. Finale Wiki Geek (talk) 00:45, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

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 and Unblocking

2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

A: I love Wikipedia I've been on Wikipedia since 2006 on a diffrent account, but I lost my password and made a chain of events. I have turned alot of Yamaha Pacifica into a article that has two lines into a article that had a picture and a alot of info on it. All of this work was on Night Rider and Tigger and Green Day is The Best, these are both of my accounts. To me, I am proud to be a Wikipedian.

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, I have with a blocking problem. I don't think users have caused me stress. I've went up on the wrong resons. I will in the future give a clean written explonation why I have done this.

General comments

• Links for Finale Wiki Geek: Finale Wiki Geek (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/Finale Wiki Geek before commenting.

Discussion

• I suggest that the candidate withdraw their nomination, as it will clearly not succeed. I wish them all the best, and encourage them to continue contributing and make another request at some later date. — Thomas H. Larsen 02:12, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Support

1. --U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 07:19, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

1. The answers to the questions, at this point, are not sufficient. Q1 does not effectively outline what you plan to do as an administrator, not many contributions to the encyclopaedia, and edit summary usage is minimal. Strong oppose. 哦， 是吗？(User:O) 01:54, 24 November 2007 (GMT)
2. Oppose: Sorry, I don't think you have come close to sufficiently demonstrating your knowledge / understanding of the policies and guidelines here. Your answer to Q3 suggest to me that you have been blocked, perhaps another username? What is that username? Also, your answers to the questions do not help. - Rjd0060 (talk) 02:19, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
3. Oppose, normally I do not like to dwell on edit count and prefer to look at less tangible qualities when I vote. In this case though, the users contributions speak for themselves. Sorry, please try again when you've got more mainspace and and Wiki-space edits. Lankiveil (talk) 03:18, 24 November 2007 (UTC).
4. Oppose due to lack of experience. Majoreditor (talk) 03:36, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
5. Oppose due to lack of experience shown here (and the glaringly long red bar for no edit summaries), answer to Q1, and failure to disclose previous username. JPG-GR (talk) 05:51, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
6. Oppose per all the above reasons. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 07:32, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
7. Oppose. Not yet. It's going to take some more time to gain the community's trust and demonstrate sufficient understanding of policies and procedures. Your answer to question one was also unsatisfactory, should have been a little more in depth. Not great edit summary usage and a vast majority of your edits are to your userspace. Sorry to sound so harsh, but RFA's can be brutal. I recommend withdrawing this RFA, spending a few months to get more experience, and then trying again. However, if you ever have any questions, I'm always available on my talk page. Useight (talk) 08:13, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
8. Oppose Sorry. GlassCobra 08:52, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
9. Oppose - Per not that much experience relevant to admin duties. Rudget.talk 12:07, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
10. Oppose. Not enough experience, bad answer to questions and bad grammar. Maybe another time. Jack?! 13:18, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
11. Oppose and sugest withdrawal. Sorry to pile on but "I am great person" ? Er, no thanks. I'm sure you are a great person but a bit of humility goes a lot further to representing yourself. Sorry, and best wishes. Pedro :  Chat  14:34, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Neutral To avoid the pile-on. May I suggest a look at WP:ADMINCOACH? Jmlk17 06:03, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
2. That, and also WP:ARL. I dorftrottel I talk I 08:19, November 24, 2007
3. Neutral. Have a look at the above links and give some thought to what sort of an admin you would be. Blocking and Banning may be necessary, but there are boatloads of other tasks which require an admin's involvement. Also, look through some successful recent RfA's and see what those candidates did - that might give you some input on how to frame your next RfA. Don't get discouraged. ZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 15:07, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

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.