Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/TheNewPhobia

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

TheNewPhobia

Voice your opinion (talk page) (0/4/0); Scheduled to end 00:28, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

TheNewPhobia (talk · contribs) – Hello.

I have been editing actively since May 2007, piling up over 7,500 edits, nominating hundreds of pages for speedy deletion, and reverting thousands of vandalisms to this wonderful encyclopedia. I have went through several RfA's in the past, all failing very miserably. Those RfA's were failed mainly because I had recently messed up in a way I had never done before.

Very recently, I had messed up in likely the worst way anyone ever could. I continually reverted a constructive edit on the Scott Slutzker page, by removing a {{hangon}} tag that was supposed to be there. This was because I wasn't in the best of moods, so I was quite stubborn. I started a revert as it was in the wrong place, but then I thought, "Why didn't I just fix it and move on?" However, my mind quickly brushed this thought away when I saw another similar edit. I reverted due to a bad habit I had, until now. If the next-to-most-recent edit previously was a revert, and the most recent edit was made by the editor who was reverted before it, it should be reverted. Most of the time, this worked. However, I realized after this that this was one of the stupidest habits I had on wiki or real life, and I feel like I've driven away an editor, and feel horribly about this. I now check each edit and do my absolute best to not get trigger-happy like I did that night.

Since joining Wikipedia, I have realized no matter what can happen to people here, it's an excellent encyclopedia. I know people mess up, and I have many times. And I apologize for any inconveniences that I have ever caused anyone. I have developed some friendships here in which some are stronger than my real-life friendships. Wikipedia has changed my life, and I'm ready to make a long-lasting commitment to this excellent encyclopedia. Thank you for all !votes and criticism. -phobia don't be afraid to drop a line! 00:28, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

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

A: I would do my best to help out in almost everything. However, I would likely try to be around WP:AIV and WP:RFPP the most, as I am mainly a vandalism-fighter and feel that is my job. Also, I would assist with WP:CSD and most WP:XFD's. I would also be sure to stick to regular work, such as helping people out and reverting vandalism to keep the wiki clean and informative. I would also keep a watch on RfC's, occasionally making the result of the debate true, such as a

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

A: Many of my edits are vandalism reverts, but I do have some contributions. I am particularly happy with Nicktropolis, an article I created in March of 2007. It's come a very long way since then, and I have fought to get it to GA status. Other than that, however, most of my edits involve reverting vandalism and the subsequent warnings.

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: I have been in several edit conflicts in my time here, most of which have been solved. Also, with those edit conflicts and other situations, users have caused me stress. I know this happens occasionally, and I normally attempt to leave it and cool down, then move on. I will do this in the future, as it seems to work best for me and the other person(s) involved in the conflict.

General comments

See TheNewPhobia's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

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

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/TheNewPhobia before commenting.

Discussion

Support

Oppose

Oppose. Contributions and talk page archives show that this user does not posses the temperament necessary for an Administrator. Rollback revoked barely two months ago for inappropriate use, leaving a month ago and even the candidate statement admits making "recent mistakes". In addition I can't seem to find any high-level article writing; Nicktropolis is a start-class article with a GA review the length of my arm. Ironholds (talk) 01:24, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Nicktropolis hasn't been reviewed for quite a while. It is probably a bit higher if it were to be reviewed. However, I am working on getting WikiProject Nickelodeon back up from the near-dead right now. -phobia don't be afraid to drop a line! 01:28, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Does not have the maturity to be an administrator. I've lost count of the number of times you've retired this year. Suggest withdrawal. seresin ( ¡? ) 01:36, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
At least I came back. -phobia don't be afraid to drop a line! 01:41, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Editing in an inappropriate manner because you are "[not] in the best of moods" is not acceptable in my book. If you are in a bad mood or, specifically, in a mood that predisposes you to be "stubborn," you should not be editing at that time. The very thought of an administrator acting in such a "moody" manner, scares me. I am going to have to oppose. —Łittle Älien ¹⁸² 01:42, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Sorry about this, but there are too many niggling problems with you to support. First and foremost, it's only two months since you had rollback removed for abusing it. At that point, rather than either attempt to defend your actions, or put your hands up, admit you were wrong and promise to be more careful, you flounced out of Wikipedia in a puff of drama (admin-only link, I'm afraid). Since then, and despite the fact that you have a stated desire to work on deletions, you have a grand total of three successful speedy nominations, no successful {{prod}} taggings, and no successful XFD nominations of any kind. In the case of users with a superb mainspace history, where they've demonstrably shown they can cooperate with other editors and work within Wikipedia policies, the lack of admin-related experience, tendency to drama-monger (while I appreciate off-wiki activity generally isn't relevant to on-wiki behaviour, did you really think creating a WR account and reviving a dead thread of theirs headed "Nude photos of Jimbo's wife" four days before an RFA showed good judgement?), and userpage politicising ("I'm a democrat, because I'm smart", indeed) – not to mention that of your 8000 edits, around 10% are to your own userpages – could all be overlooked, but you have virtually no significant mainspace history other than the one article you mention, only 14 Wikipedia Talk edits (which is way too low if you want to demonstrate any kind of understanding of policy), and only 92 Talk edits. – iride scent 01:43, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral