Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/TucsonDavid

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

TucsonDavid

Voice your opinion on this candidate (talk page)

Final (1/3/0); ended 08:09, 12 March 2012 (UTC) - Withdrawn by user -FASTILY ^(TALK) 08:10, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Nomination

TucsonDavid (talk · contribs) – YOUR DESCRIPTION OF THE USER TucsonDavidU.S.A. 06:27, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

I admit I dont have a huge edit count but all that I ask is that you evaluate my RFA in a fair and impartial manner.

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:

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

A: I plan on working heavily in UAA,AFD,AIV,CSD,XFD and basically responding to request for help from other editors when needed and other forms of vandalism prevention.

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

A: I would have to say that they are a couple of articles I started here [[1]] and here [[2]] This is because I put a lot of time and hard work into these articles even though the second is kind small.

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: No, I have not been in anything that I'd classify as a edit conflict. I have had disagreements in the past but they worked out in the end.

General comments

• Links for TucsonDavid: TucsonDavid (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
• Edit summary usage for TucsonDavid can be found here.

---

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review his contributions before commenting.

Discussion

Support

1. Support. I'm dismayed that those in the section below are saying things like "very helpful", and at the same time seemingly opposing just because the user "only" has about two thousand edits. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 08:06, 12 March 2012 (UTC).

Oppose

1. Unfortunate to be here, but this is a stonewall NOTNOW. Helpful enough user in the time he's been here but nowhere near the level of experience needed to make the decisions a administrator must. — foxj 07:32, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
2. I cannot say much more than foxj did. I have seen you around at AfC, and you have been very helpful, but you simply do not have the level of experience expected of an administrator, as is exemplified by the very weak self-nomination and the way you attempted to transclude this RfA. Sorry, but you're not ready yet. Thanks for all your work, though. CharlieEchoTango (contact) 07:41, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
3. Oppose Concerns with experience and policy knowledge. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 07:44, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Neutral

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.