Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Runningblader 2

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

Runningblader (2nd nomination)

(First nomination)

I've created several articals and i'm trying for adminship once again Runningblader, Proud owner of OGame artical 00:28, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate's acceptance: - self-nomination

Support

Support I believe in you. Yes, I do. You tell'em sister! IuseRosary? ^(talk) 17:42, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Oppose Although you've been creating more articles recently and edited here for over three months, only about 14% of your edits are to mainspace compared to about 77% to user/user talk. Try to focus on mainspace more.--♠ Lights talk 01:55, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Most of your edits are to your user page and user talk pages, while a very small amount are in the mainspace. Please see this page before putting yourself up for nomination. It can be a harsh process for those who try too soon. --Isis ♠(talk) 02:18, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose You do not have enough mainspace edits and you have not been active at all in the past few months. You have shown no need for the tools and I also agree with Creol here. Cheers, Razor flame 03:01, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per mainspace. --Gwib^-(talk)- 05:38, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose strongly - In the nearly four months you have had this account, you have been active a total of 18 days. This is including 1 edit for the entire month of April and 5 minutes in March. Of your 71 total mainspace edits, 29 were to a single article (article, not artical) of which you claim ownership of. No one owns any article. Essentially all of your edits to the wikipedia namespaces (wiki and wiki talk) are solely to nominate yourself for admin. You do have a ton of deleted edits, but only one is an actual QD request (most of the rest are .. you guessed it.. your own User page edits) and that one QD was adding a {{non}} tag to an article that was already tagged with that same template. With the limited wikipedia space edits, the fact that there are zero VIP reports is not surprising at all. All told, you have shown no need for the ability to block users or protect pages and the only possible need for deleting pages would be to delete pages that you yourself created. You have also given no indication that there would be any reason to trust you with these tools or that you have any understanding at all about policy and guidelines. In addition there does not seem to be enough activity from you to show that even if you were qualified for the tools that they would get any use at all. The only aspect you are actually qualified for admin is the age of the account and just creating an account and letting it sit for a couple months without doing anything useful is basically the same as not having it. -- Creol(talk) 06:09, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - You have created a few articles. Despite this I do not think that at this moment you could use the tools. As pointed out above, most of your edits have been to talk pages - Compare how often you are around (editing articles) whith how often other users (some of them admins, others regular users are around) are. I have no reason to believe that you need the tools now. Before reapplying, make sure you have read The Criteria for Adminship page here. People who do not meet most of these criteria have little chance of being granted the flag. --Eptalon (talk) 11:32, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- And even some that do still have a hard time :P Razor flame 13:56, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - And I have nothing to add to what is already said by others. - Huji ^reply 16:29, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose With virtually no contribution to the mainspace and an overwhelming bias in the edit history towards editing your own userspace, I can't support. And while I hate to criticise, your spelling and grammar is poor and doesn't set a particularly high standard that I would expect to see in Wikipedia. Finally, having to ask an admin "What are the requierments for adminship?" only two days ago shows that you're really not ready for the tools yet. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:27, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for all the well-elucidated reasons given above. Cheers, User:Jack Merridew a.k.a. David 11:01, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Result - Closed per Snow. -- Creol(talk) 11:55, 23 May 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.