Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/mr kc

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

mr kc

Final (2/7/2); originally scheduled to end 18:22, 11 January 2008 (UTC). Closed to avoid piling on, per the unfortunately-named WP:SNOW. --barneca (talk) 23:08, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

mr kc (talk · contribs) - Mr_KC (talk) 18:22, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

--Mr_KC (talk) 18:23, 4 January 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 admin work do you intend to take part in?

A: I hope to be a big part this year... I have school so it will help me expand my knowlegde

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

A: I realy dont have any right now, but I intend to contribute alot this year. but my best would be http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posadas

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: Yes, there was someone on the same server and I got banned along with him... but i contacted an admin and got it fixed

General comments

See mr kc's edit summary usage with kc&lang=en mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

Links for mr_kc: Mr_kc (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/mr_kc before commenting.

Discussion

Reccomend withdrawal. Malinaccier (talk) 22:10, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Second that. Tiptoety ^talk 22:35, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support

Support--♥♦¢åŗđş♣♠ (talk) 19:55, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note - I removed the above vote because it was made by the user requesting adminship. Can't vote for yourself. Tiptoety ^talk 22:39, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moral support Not sure what benefit there is to very strongly opposing someone who doesn't really know how RFA works yet, and who is just offering to help. Thank you, mr kc, for offering. In a few months, hope to see you back here. --barneca (talk) 22:10, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Moral Support I'm going to be frank. It is Extremely unlikely this RfA will pass. But all the same, I don't wish to join in with the pile-on. Come back with more experience in a few months, and I'll be ready to support. Cheers! Perfect Proposal ^{Speak Out!} 22:32, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Strong Oppose - Bad answers to all three questions. You need a lot more experience so that you can get trusted as a good admin. This is likely to be snowed. D.M.N. (talk) 21:25, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Sorry, you're just not ready, as exemplified by your answers. J-ſtan^Contribs_{User page} 21:27, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Very Strong Oppose I'm sorry but your really not ready yet, you seem to have no experience in admin related fields at all, as your answers to the questions show. Harland1 (^t/_c) 21:32, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - per the above concerns. Make sure to get a pre-determinate experience before listing here. Good luck with the next one though. Rt . 21:36, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - answers and record do not reflect understanding of Wikipedia or need for administrative tools. The answer to number 2 just completely blew it. --Qmwne2 3 5 22:06, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As of right now, this user has 173 edits, 23 in the mainspace, and few with edit summaries. Please get to know Wikipedia and get some experience, and I hope I'll be able to support you next time around. --Qmwne2 3 5 22:13, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not enough edit experience. The answers don't show understanding of wikipedia. S♦s♦e♦b♦a♦l♦l♦o♦s ^{(Talk to Me)} 22:36, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No XfD's until after RfA was submitted, and then his !votes were I see nothing wrong, No comment, No comment and <literally no comment>. Also, used different signatures in the nomination and in the first support vote. Needs to gain much experience and earn trust over time.--12 Noon ^2¢ 22:44, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

Neutral. You haven't been contributing long enough for us to trust you with the tools. Come back in a few months when you get some experience. Malinaccier (talk) 22:09, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - To avoid pile on, this RfA will not pass, but do not be discouraged, try contributing in admin related areas and come back later and try again. Tiptoety ^talk 22:35, 4 January 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.