Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Wikifan798

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

Wikifan798

Final (0/3/0). Closed by Rje at 12:12, 9 November 2009 (UTC). Snowball.

Wikifan798 (talk · contribs) – I am qualified, trustworthy, and reliable enough to become an admin OneWikiFan 22:36, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

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:

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

A:

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:

General comments

• Links for Wikifan798: Wikifan798 (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
• Edit summary usage for Wikifan798 can be found here.

---

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Wikifan798 before commenting.

Discussion

Oppose

1. Thank you for submitting your RFA. While I applaud enthusiasm, I'm afraid you do not yet possess sufficient knowledge and experience for the community to have confidence in your readiness to become an admin. But that does not mean that we will never have confidence in you.

   For the most part, it requires at least 3,000 edits in a variety of areas to learn policy and guidelines well enough to attempt adminship. Nominees need to show the ability to contribute a number of significant edits to build the encyclopedia.

   However, if you work on vandalism patrol, most people would like a few thousand more.

   The Admin tools allow the user to block and unblock other editors, delete and undelete pages and protect and unprotect pages. Nominees will therefore do well to gain experience and familiarity with such areas as WP:AIV, WP:AFD, WP:CSD, Wikipedia:Protection policy, and WP:BLOCK to learn when to do these things.

   As an admin, you will inevitably have to...

   1. Explain clearly the reasons for one's decisions.
   2. Review one's decisions and change one's mind when it is reasonable to do so.
   3. Review one's decisions and stand firm when it is reasonable to do so
   4. Negotiate a compromise.

   Admins need a familiarity with dispute resolution. The ability to communicate clearly is essential.

   Article building is the raison d'être of Wikipedia. I recommend significant participation in WP:GA or WP:FA as the surest way to gain article building experience.

   If you are not the type of person who likes to write content, there's plenty of other article work you can do (WikiGnomeing for start).

   My suggestion would be to withdraw and try again in another 3 months and 3,000 edits. Many nominees have found it helpful to submit an Editor Review or to receive Admin coaching before submitting their RfA and after passing that benchmark. Hope this helps. Good luck and happy editing. Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 22:40, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

2. WP:NOTNOW. Pmlineditor ∞ 10:23, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
3. Oppose recommend snow closure to prevent further pile-on and embarrassment to candidate. ArcAngel (talk) 10:40, 9 November 2009 (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.