Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Bobabobabo

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

[edit] Bobabobabo

Final: 2/11/2 Ended 03:54, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

• • • I would like to withdraw and work on the things I have problems with... (03:36, 29 October 2006 (UTC))

Bobabobabo (talk • contribs) - I've been watching her for a while, and she has made very large contributions to Yu-Gi-Oh pages and Wikipedia. She was a great help. She has been around Wikipedia for a short while. It think that she deserves to be nominated to for adminship. She was a great help to a user Mangaboy712 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mangaboy712. - — Starwarsrebel (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. (17:02, 28 October 2006 (UTC))

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I guess I accept.. Bobabobabo (17:10, 28 October 2006 (UTC))

I need feedback on what I'm doing wrong. If you have some advice for me, please leave me a comment. Talk Page --

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 intend to go the the RC patrol and the Category:Administrative backlog, I would also like to help stop vandalism on the Pokémon pages, and Yu-Gi-Oh pages.

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

A: I'm rather pleased with the is the Pokémon theme songs page, and the images on the Yu-Gi-Oh! media and release information and Yu-Gi-Oh! GX media and release information.

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: When I first started I had no conflicts with anyone. But recently I was having some problems with the Template:Pokepisode / images. In the future, i would try to just let it go and not get involved with the problems.

General comments

• See Bobabobabo's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool.

Bobabobabo's editcount summary stats as of 17:45, October 28 2006, using wannabe Kate's tool. (aeropagitica) 17:49, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

• I think that this is a bad-faith nomination. [Starwarsrebel's contributions started on October 28th. Bobabobabo has many warnings about incorrect use of images on their Talk page [1], [2], [3] and edit-warring, amongst other things. Bobabobabo has a long way to go to become ready for admin status. (aeropagitica) 18:07, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Support

1. Spiritual support Another newbie admin request, but I'm not going to oppose this one. Childish grammar mistakes indicate that this user can't do both admin work and editor work very well. Please gain experience and come back within one year. Michaelas10 (T|C) 19:56, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
2. Moral support Please withdraw and reapply after more experience. --NMChico24 03:20, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose Lots and lots of image fair use warnings on user's talk page. ~ trialsanderrors 17:45, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
2. Oppose, user hasn't said why they'd need the admin tools. jd || talk || 18:52, 28 October 2006 (UTC) changed to strong oppose, see below

   What do you mean? Bobabobabo (19:03, 28 October 2006 (UTC))

   You need to say in one of your answers why you feel you need the tools. You can do RC patrol and stop vandalism on Pokémon and Yu-Gi-Oh articles without the admin tools. jd || talk || 19:06, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

   What are the tools? Bobabobabo (19:11, 28 October 2006 (UTC))

   Based on that comment, strong oppose; user doesn't know what being an administrator involves. I'm starting to think that the user wants to be an administrator just for the sake of being one. Please read the pages linked in the first question, especially WP:ADMIN and WP:ARL. jd || talk || 19:17, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

   That is not true, I read though the link. I understand know.

3. Strong oppose mucking up this RfA, which is still wrong (look at the end time) and per J Di. --Alex (Talk) 19:20, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
4. Strongly oppose it would be best for everyone if this nomination were quickly retracted. Nomination by new user, nominee with little experience and no knowlede of admin tasks. Pascal.Tesson 19:39, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
5. Strong Oppose user does not know what an administrator does. - Mike | Trick or Treat 19:41, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
6. Strong oppose, per (aeropagitica)'s comments.--Caliga10 19:42, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
7. Oppose I'm going to have to oppose this RfA because of the following;"what are the tools" and "I need feedback". Feedback can be obtained at an editor review. I suggest that you withdraw and obtain such a review, as none of your answers inspire confidence that you are aware of the nature and tasks that admins have to perform. I am more than happy to expand upon this answer when you submit yourself for review. (aeropagitica) 19:50, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
8. Strong oppose, this user has only been here a few months, and gotten on my bad side in her first few edits. She is also more than likely an abusive sockpuppeteer per Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Interrobamf, in which at least 20 registered accounts were used by the range that she is on to vandalize.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 20:43, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
9. 'Strong Oppose Obviously doesn't know what being an administrator is or defintly doesn't meet qualifcations. Hello32020 21:15, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
10. Strong Oppose very unsuitable candidate per the comments above. Also this user recently emailed me asking to be unblocked. However the user wasn't blocked and the email was an incoherent rant that shows this user cannot communicate effectively and completely misunderstands the nature of several key policies, not to mention making serious and unfounded allegations against several editors in good standing. I strongly suspect that this user is involved in sockpuppetry as well from evidence in the email. Gwernol 22:27, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
11. Strong Oppose. I don't even want to comment this for obvious reasons listed above. I suspect the nominator is a sockpuppet anyways.AQu01rius (User | Talk | Websites)  00:54, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
12. Strong oppose. Few project edits, dismal use of edit summaries, and most importantly, no evidence she needs the tools or would use them non-abusively. Recommend withdrawal.

Neutral

1. Neutral. I am inherently suspicious of nominations from editors like User:Starwarsrebel. The user has 18 edits, 5 of which are this nomination. --Lord Deskana (talk) 17:35, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
2. Neutral when a user nominates another editor on the very first day.  Doctor Bruno  23:18, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

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.