Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/NulledLeak
From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a permissions request that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.
Closed WP:SNOW -- Enfcer (talk) 00:46, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
NulledLeak
[change source]- NulledLeak (talk · contribs · count)
| RfA of NulledLeak |
|---|
| global contribs · pie chart · edit count · list user · blocklog ·contribs · deleted |
| Last comment by: Enfcer. |
End date: 15:08, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
Candidate's acceptance:
Support
[change source]Oppose
[change source]- Close per SNOW - I do not believe this application to be in the best interests of this wiki, given past behavior with Huggle and the blocks other users have mentioned. I consider this request non-viable. DaneGeld (talk) 17:09, 1 March 2018 (UTC) (Edited per warning from Auntof6) 17:39, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- You have no meaningful article contributions, and have actually been causing disruption using Huggle. I would support a quick closure per WP:SNOW. J991 17:23, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- 1) User is not in good standing, as they are currently banned from using Huggle due to using it disruptively. 2) User has been here less than a month and has made few constructive edits. Since the Huggle ban was issued on February 19, user's only changes have been related to this RfA request. 3) User didn't understand procedures well enough to correctly set up this RfA. After finally putting it on the main request page, another user had to correct the syntax. A prospective admin should be able to set this up correctly. 4) User has made no statement about why they want to be an admin, or why we should support it. --Auntof6 (talk) 19:06, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Not yet ready, disruptive edits with Huggle, they have been here less than a month,they should earn more trust then we'll see how it goes --DJ Perez (✉ - ✔) 19:32, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy close: User doesn't even meet standards for patroller or rollbacker right now. StevenJ81 (talk) 20:18, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy close per above and the blocks they are currently subject to on ENWP and ESWP. I would recommend at least a year of constructive editing, demonstrating and understanding of policies. Green Giant (talk) 22:05, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
[change source]This page has not been listed on the request page. It's possible it was created as a test. I favor not responding until it's properly listed.Striking this because request is now listed. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:29, 1 March 2018 (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.