Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/B&W Anime Fan

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

[edit] B&W Anime Fan

Final (0/13/0) ended 23:48, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

B&W Anime Fan (talk • contribs) – I have made several good edits. I cleanup articles a lot.--B&W Anime Fan 22:01, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog and Category:Administrative backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.

A:I would like to block vandals. I also anticipate protecting pages. I would especially like to view protected articles.

2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any of which you are particularly pleased with, and why?

A:I like my Hermit Village article. Even though it is a stub. I am pleased with my images too.

3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?

A: I was in an edit war over a splitlong tag on Fist of the North Star. Kungming2 caused me stress when he falsely accused me of vandalism to his userpage, when I was only trying to protect it.

General comments

Discussion (for expressing views without numbering)

Support

Oppose

1. Set condition one throught the wiki.. - Wow! Weak answers, and serious ownership problems. Never even accepted self nom. This edit summary concerns me, oh and this one too, You also fail to use fair use rationales on fair use image uploads, and rarely use edit summarys. You've shown a lack of understanding of Wikipedia guidelines and policys to me, (Advice: Withdraw, return in 5000 edits or 4 months, also please read WP:CIVIL). thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 22:36, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
2. Oppose. You have only ~780 edits, hardly enough for a potential admin. I suggest you keep up with the good work, and come back a few months later when you have a few thousand more edits. Also, I suggest you re-think your answers to all three questions above. They have to be thoughtout and thorough, not one-liners. For now, I also think you should just withdraw your RfA because the consensus will definitely be against granting you adminship. --Nishkid64 22:37, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
3. Strong Oppose user was blocked 3 days ago for personal attacks which the user believed were okay because they were in an edit summary; shows a lack of understanding of Wikipedia policy and a contempt for other users. Gwernol 22:39, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
4. Speedy Oppose per recent block. Naconkantari 22:41, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
5. Strong oppose. This edit summary, and others from Matthew above tell me "no" for a start. The edit summary is very rarely used, and was blocked 3 days ago (above). Lack of civilty, and basically all of above. A bit of a bad time for an RfA I think. --Alex | talk / review me | 22:43, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
6. Oppose. The age of the account scares me (July 2006), as well as the weak answers to the questions. I'm also questioning some of the page moves I've seen, as they don't seem particularly helpful, especially because you did not notify Shanel before moving one of his/her subpages. The block log is also a source of concern. I would recommend withdrawing this RfA, then giving it some time (around 4-6 months) to show that you deserve adminship. Shadow1 22:48, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
7. Strong Oppose Recent block, and a limted number of contributions. Block especially makes me issue a strong oppose. Lack of civility also in my opinion. Hello32020 23:04, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
8. Strong Oppose per any conceivable con.--Húsönd 23:06, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
9. Oppose. Sorry, maybe later. íslenskur fellibylur #12 _(samtal) 23:08, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
10. Strongest possible oppose, lack of experience (account created July 2006), has been blocked six times for vandalism and personal attacks. Very young (born in 1995) - while I don't consider age to be a hindrance to adminship, this is a bit extreme. User page violates Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Strongly recommend withdrawal or early closure as a failed RFA per WP:SNOW. --Coredesat talk! 23:12, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
11. Strong oppose. This diff only 3 days ago show that you have issues with "owning" articles as previously stated. I'm afraid that if you were an admin then you would protect "your pages" from edits that you disagree with. Also placing Sprotect template on peoples user page without their permission could easily be seen as vandalism, especially from a non-admin. T REX_speak 23:13, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
12. Oppose per above. Please read WP:OWN and get more experience here. Grandmasterka 23:40, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
13. Very strong oppose. Cannot put tools into this user's hands. Misuse very likely. – Chacor 23:44, 25 September 2006 (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.