Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Jimwitz

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

Jimwitz

Final (0/4/0) Ended 21:54, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Jimwitz (talk · contribs) – A senior user who tries to help wikipedia as much as he can and would like the privellege of being an Administrator ~~

I don't accept. --Jimwitz 21:54, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 voters:

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

A: I want to help with getting rid of Vandalism and sometimes editing the main page when it does not include important current events. --Jimwitz 15:30, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

A: I wrote and article on St. Stephen's Episcopal School Houston in which I expanded. The only problem was that some of the people that work at the school (which I know) expanded it but also made the article sound more like something on they're website which in some areas is biast toward the school. But I did fix the article and it isn't taggged as NPOV anymore. --Jimwitz 15:35, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?

A: As I answered in the previous question they're was a dispute in which that school was tagged with NPOV but I did work with the opposing user abd we fixed the article together. --Jimwitz 15:37, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

General comments

See Jimwitz's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool.

Discussion (for expressing views without numbering)

Support

Oppose

Oppose. This user does not respect Wikipedia policies as demonstrated by this diff. This is certainly not the kind of comment we want from Wikipedia admins. Also, this user has only 150 total edits with just 101 in the main namespace. --דניאל - Danie lroc ks123 ^contribs 21:00, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose doesn't realise there is no such thing as "senior editors". Very low edit count and weak answers. --Alex (Talk) 21:12, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose based on the diff provided by User:Danielrocks123. Wikipedia works by consensus. Threatening to persistently disrupt Wikipedia to force your personal view on others against consensus is highly damaging and completely unacceptable for any editor, let alone an admin. Gwernol 21:13, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose — You talk about your self in 3rd person to much. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 21:15, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - candidate doesn't understand WP:POINT, nearly non-existant use of edit summaries, very low edit count. Nowhere near ready for adminship --Mnem e son 21:47, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Fine I withdraw my request for administratorship but I will keep working to save James Werner's article. I withdraw my request. Delete this article. --Jimwitz 21:52, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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.