Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Hezzy

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

[edit] Hezzy

(0/9/5) Ended 03:05, 2006-08-12 (UTC)

Hezzy (talk • contribs) – I want to be a sysop because I feel that I can be a useful asset to Wikipedia, help out, and have fun doing it. I feel that I am ready for this responsibility, and I hope that you agree. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hezzy (talk • contribs) .

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

I accept the nomination.

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, if any, would you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.

A: I would primarily help eliminate vandalism from Wikipedia. I would also help to keep Wikipedia free of censorship. I hope to excel in all of my duties.

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

A: I am particularly satisfied with my work on my own Wikiproject, Wikipedia:WikiProject Atheism. We now have almost twenty members, and, in my opinion, we have the potential to greatly impact Wikipedia, now and in the future.

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: No. I am happy to say all of my discussions with Wikipedians have been productive and conflict free. So far, my experience with Wikipedia has gone quite smoothly.

Comments

• See Hezzy's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool.
• Edit count:

Username   Hezzy
Total edits     884
Distinct pages edited   255
Average edits/page      3.467
First edit      17:26, March 19, 2006
        
(main)  101
Talk    87
User    227
User talk       66
Image   6
Template        25
Template talk   4
Wikipedia       351
Wikipedia talk  17

Support

Oppose

1. Oppose With fewer than 1000 edits over four months, many of them to your user page, you don't have enough experience yet. Back in April I gave you a legitimate vandalism warning and you responded with this extraordinarily incivil and inappropriate response. That's back at the end of April, but it still doesn't give me confidence that you have the right temprament to be an admin. I need more evidence of calm and civil interactions with other users before I am ready to support. Sorry, Gwernol 23:35, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
2. Oppose per Gwernol AdamBiswanger1 23:46, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
3. Oppose -- ADNghiem501 23:48, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
4. Strong Oppose. Lacking experience and it appears that very little thought was put into this nomination. I believe that this user would likely misuse (but not necessarily abuse) admin tools. Aren't I Obscure? 23:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
5. Strong oppose, probably a good future admin candidate, but not yet. Fails mamy of my standards. —Mets501 (talk) 00:18, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
6. Strong Oppose - was going to be simply oppose then I saw this - Glen 00:55, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
7. Oppose per lack of experience. Michael 01:29, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
8. Oppose learn to be civil at all times, at all times, at all times. Always. There is no bigger jerk than a jerk with power. Stick around though, there's lots you can do without adminship. Pedant 01:34, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
9. Opppose and speedy de-list please. Recommend that the candidate read through Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Standards to get an idea of the criteria people set for adminship. Themindset 03:03, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Neutral. Not quite enough experience yet. DarthVader 00:22, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
2. Neutral Much more experience required by this user before they become an admin, preferably in the projectspace, articlespace and user Talk pages. Incivility may well be due to lack of knowledge & understanding of protocol. (aeropagitica) (talk) 00:32, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
3. Neutral as no reason to pile on. Please close this per WP:SNOW. Ifnord 00:47, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
4. Neutral, also to avoid pile-on. The nominee definitely needs more time and experience. Agent 86 00:57, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
5. Neutral to avoid pile-on. Hezzy's incivility wasn't very cool, but it was in his first fifteen edits and Gwernol's cool response eventually led to Hezzy realizing he'd misunderstood, which is good. Still, he'll get lots of nastier comments as a vandal-fighter and 800 edits isn't really enough to assess knowledge of policy.--Kchase T 02:34, 12 August 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.