Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Razorflame 3
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.
Razorflame (3rd nomination)
[change source]Nomination declined 4 February, 2008.
I am nominating Razorflame (talk - Changes) to be an administrator. I know he has already nominated himself before, but he has now been editing for over 3 months and I think he will make a good admin. He has made a lot of very good, useful edits and has been helping prevent vandalism on Wikipedia. Terry (talk) - (changes)- 14:45, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I am sorry, but I decline this nomination. Razorflame 15:49, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Voting ends 11th February 2008
Support
[change source]- +0,5 ????? --vector ^_^ (talk) 16:34, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- That's one of the reasons I oppose him Vector. Just a tad offensive for us regulars here... --Gwib -(talk)- 17:44, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Its pathetic to oppose a potential admin's RfA. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 02:16, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
[change source]- Oppose - Far too eager for adminship. He also tends to stay away from deeply rooted issues such as the Benniguy fiasco. --Gwib -(talk)- 15:34, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose as with concerns raised by Gwib, I must also oppose, I have some concerns with block times, warning users, deletion requests and knowledge of range blocks(not that that's necessary to know) . Oysterguitarist 16:05, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I have taken the time to read the meta article on range blocks and have made successful range blocks over on the test wiki, not that it matters. Razorflame 16:01, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose I tend to agree with Gwib's comments above and also I don't think Razorflame knows enough about blocking policy yet (see here). Gwib's diffs also do suggest Razorflame is far too keen on becoming an admin. However, it should be stressed he does not seem to be aware of this nomination. Whitstable 16:25, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose Agree ^^^ --Yegoyan (talk) 02:04, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
[change source]- Correction. Razorflame has not been editing for three months yet, but two months and ten days. This is seen on a user box on this user page. IuseRosary (talk) 14:47, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- If Razorflame does not accept this RfA, will his next attempt at RfA be his 3rd or 4th attempt? IuseRosary (talk) 16:37, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Want it or not this is his 3rd nomination --Bärliner 16:52, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- It may be better if we hold off on voting until this nomination is accepted or declined. No use beating the poor guy to death with pointy sticks if he isn't even ready to accept the nom. -- Creol(talk) 16:41, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- ...Which I highly doubt he will when he see's everybody elses opinions. IuseRosary (talk) 16:42, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Indeed. I wish people would leave off for a bit. Majorly (talk) 02:52, 4 February 2008 (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.