Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/wolfpawz

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

Wolfpawz

Closed per WP:SNOW at 3/6/1. 21:51 26 April 2008. Non Bureaucrat Closure. Pedro : Chat 21:51, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wolfpawz (talk · contribs) - I am an applicant for admin with a technical background. I have been programming in PHP, VB, and C# for over three years. I have had an account on wikipedia for 3 years or so (my old account is no longer in-use). I am a CVU member and I currently work to restore articles that have been wrecked by trolls. Wolfpawz (talk) 18:14, 26 April 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 would mainly prefer to work with anti-Vandalism as I do now. I have the most skills and experience in that area.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I have edited a few articles that have to do with the autism/aspie spectrum to ensure a neutral view point.
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: N/A.

General comments

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

Links for Wolfpawz: Wolfpawz (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/Wolfpawz before commenting.

Discussion

I think it's about time somebody WP:SNOW closed this. Wisdom89 _{(_T / ^C)} 20:56, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support

weak support. Dan Beale-Cocks 19:05, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Moral Support - Give yourself another 4-5 months of editing here, learn about the Wiki. Visit as many areas as you possibly can. Read WP:ADMIN and possibly get yourself an WP:ADMINCOACH. Cheers. Wisdom89 _{(_T / ^C)} 19:08, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Moral Support Given enough time and experience, you too can become an admin. Just not yet. --Sharkface^T/_C 20:00, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Oppose sorry, but with only 12 edits (apart from this RfA) there is nowhere near enough evidence available to judge if you have the knowledge of policy and ability to act on it in an appropriate manner. I suggest you withdraw this request, since it is highly likely to fail. Keep making constructive contributions to the encyclopedia, and consider an editor review in 3-4 months to see how you are doing. Best, Gwernol 18:22, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Gwernol. Keep up your good editing, and come back to RfA in a few months. Assuming you continue to make solid and productive contributions, I'll be happy to support at that time. Cheers, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 18:26, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Gwernol's right, you should stick around on that account for a while longer so we can see that you are a civil, hard working admin-hopeful. Come back in six months or so, and I'll definitely support you next time. Regards, weburiedoursecrets inthegarden 18:48, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Gwernol. Macy (Review me!) 19:10, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose more project experience needed. Return to RFA in a couple of months, and perhaps then I'll support you. Better luck next time. Spencer^T♦^C 21:26, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per WP:SNOW Gary King (talk) 21:27, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

'Neutra - SNOW. ShoesssS ^Talk 21:01, 26 April 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.