Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Fortyniners9999

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

Fortyniners9999

Voice your opinion (1/7/0); Scheduled to end 05:11, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Fortyniners9999 (talk · contribs) - This user has been around for about one year and has edited and done well on wikipedia for that time. He is responsible and committed, and you can count on a helpful administrator by accepting him. Thank You Fortyniners9999 05:21, 8 June 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?

A: I intend to stop vandilism and make sure all recent changes are appropriate

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

A: I think I can contribute a fair way of thinking, to both users and admins. I hope to resolve conflicts and help wikipedia be a better place.

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 myself have been involved in my own form of vandilism, which I deeply regret. I know that I will deal with vandals calmly and politely, and make sure they do not feel scared to come back to wikipedia.

General comments

Links for fortyniners9999: Fortyniners9999 (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)

Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/fortyniners9999 before commenting.

Discussion

Support

Moral Support. Unfortunately, not enough experience yet to become an admin. I suggest withdrawing this RfA; get some more experience, and in a few months I will be happy to nominate you. In particular, you need to involved in XfD discussions and vandal-fighting. If you need any help or advice, contact me on my talk page. Walton ^{alternate account} 09:02, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Fewer than 250 edits implies unfamiliarity with Wikipedia's administrative processes. Naconkantari 05:36, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Per Naconkantari. User is unfamiliar with Wikipedia's policies, especially as he seemed to have supported himself... --Dark Falls ^talk 05:43, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've been here for a month tommorow, and I have more contribs. And I don't think this guy has enough experience, personally. Cheers, JetLover (Talk) (Sandbox) 05:45, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose if the lack of edits weren't enough, there is also this pagemove you tried to make. And you tried to vote for yourself. BH (T|C) 05:49, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Far too little experience. Jmlk 1 7 05:52, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Not to be an edit-counter, but 250 edits is just not enough to become an admin. Sorry mate, but I think you should withdraw, and try again when you have a bit more experience. Anonymous Dissident ^Utter 06:31, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per edit count. However please do not be discouraged. Keep up the work, remember that adminship is not a medal, and someday when you need the tools they will be granted. meantime WP:SNOW for this RfA I'm afraid. Pedro | Chat 07:14, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Pedro. Please do withdraw as soon as possible. —Anas ^talk? 09:49, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm, sorry but your edit count is just so low. I think that the standards for adminship are way to high but there should be some standards --St.daniel ^Talk 11:58, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Close this.

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.