Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Andrewrp

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

andrewrp

Final tally (0/4/1); Originally scheduled to end 21:52, 28 April 2009 (UTC) – closed by non-bureaucrat Dylan620 per WP:NOTNOW and WP:SNOW. --Dylan 620 _{Efforts · Toolbox} 17:17, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination

andrewrp (talk · contribs) – YOUR DESCRIPTION OF THE USER Andrewrp (talk) 21:52, 21 April 2009 (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 take part in protecting lesser-known pages from vandelism, I would edit some articles to correct information, and I would tag and delete useless information.

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

A: I added some pictures and edited errors numerous times.

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: none, except Maundy Thursday.

Optional questions from Giants27

4. Can you explain question number three more in-depth?

A:

5. Let me introduce this page to you, with the information there can you re-asnwer question one?

A:

General comments

Links for andrewrp: Andrewrp (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
Edit summary usage for andrewrp can be found here.
Promote andrewrp (bureaucrats only)

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

Discussion

Comment I suggest that this be speedily closed per WP:NOTNOW, with no prejudice against the user. The nominator has less than fifty edits, and there is really no way this can possibly pass. tempodivalse [☎] 16:57, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm certainly prepared to do so. --Dylan 620 _{Efforts · Toolbox} 17:00, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support

Oppose

Oppose - Sorry, but I don't view you as active enough; you've made less than 50 edits over a span of 8 months or so. Also, the answers to your questions are vague, and this edit summary was quite arrogant, ~~and also included a personal attack~~. --Dylan 620 _{Efforts · Toolbox} 22:13, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What personal attack? Majorly talk 22:15, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"You are not familiar with the church." --Dylan 620 _{Efforts · Toolbox} 22:17, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thinking it over, it doesn't really sound like it would be a PA. --Dylan 620 _{Efforts · Toolbox} 22:19, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
While questions are fine, I believe we're supposed to wait until the RfA has been properly transcluded before we start adding our !votes — Ched : ? 00:41, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've fixed the transclusion. Meanwhile, let it be known that that edit summary was made only 20 minutes or so before he nommed himself... --Dylan 620 _{Efforts · Toolbox} 16:17, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Thanks for offering to take up the mop but I don't think you are ready yet. 46 contributions is not really enough to demonstrate the depth of understanding of Wikipedia that we expect from our admins, also you seem to be leaving the edit summary field blank on most of your edits. Ϣere SpielChequers 16:29, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not yet. Not ready.--chaser - t 16:40, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose This user doesn't seem to be heartfelt in his nomination. As a side note, you're supposed to replace the script "YOUR DESCRIPTION OF THE USER" with a passage that will convince others that they should support your nomination.--Iner22 (talk) 16:43, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

Neutral to avoid a pile-on of opposes. I would suggest that the candidate read Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship for an idea of the minimum standards that are expected of admin candidates, and reapply later. tempodivalse [☎] 16:59, 22 April 2009 (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.