Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Smitty494

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

[edit] Smitty494

Final (0/6/1) ended 15:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Smitty494 (talk • contribs) – i think i should be an administrader because im very helpful to other people.i think everyone would vote for me .  :) brendan smith 15:05, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I am going to be bold and close this RfA early. Obviously, there's no chance at all for this RfA to succeed, and I don't think a person with ~15 edits really would qualify in anyone's RfA guidelines. I don't want to drag this on for much longer, so I'm closing this RfA early. Nishkid64 15:35, 13 December 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 willl help with a new runescape page.:)

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

A: i love all articles that people have heart put into it

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 will help people behave in a ordernaly matter .

General comments

• See Smitty494's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

Discussion

Support

Oppose

1. Oppose, user has a low edit count (14) and is likely very inexperienced. _JD^talk 15:11, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
2. Obvious Oppose. User clearly does not understand adminship. Strongly suggest withdrawal. SuperMachine 15:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
3. Strong oppose <20 edits is not nearly the amount expected by an admin. User vandalized a page in the last week, and there is no participation in any other mainspace besides user and user talk (excluding the vandal edit). I strongly suggest withdrawal, participate more and come back with more edits and experience in a few months. –The Great Llama^moo? 15:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
4. Obvious oppose. – Chacor 15:15, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
5. Oppose. I really hate it when users do this. I'm sorry, you don't even have the slightest chance. --Majorly 15:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
6. Oppose. You need more experience. Nishkid64 15:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Neutral - Since this RFA isn't going to suceed anyway. Suggest withdrawal, and build up your experience. --Arnzy (talk • contribs) 15:33, 13 December 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.