Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Wikizach
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You have new messages (last change).
- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.
[edit] Wikizach
Voice your opinion (1/4/0) Ending 18:50, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Wikizach (talk • contribs) – Hi. I have been a member of Wikipedia for almost a year now. Even though I have had long periods of time that I have been away, I still have made many contributions. I have worked on many CNN anchors pages, and have helped in the Mediation Cabal. I have helped in Esperanza Elections, and I have worked hard to help make Wikipedia a better place.
- Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept (self-nom). -- WikieZach| talk 23:04, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- 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: If the users of Wikipedia allow me to have the job, then I will get right on the job. I will watch important pages, (George Bush, Iraq, Politics, etc.) that are often vandalised. I will make it so that those who break the rules will be punished, but they can always be forgiven.
- 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
- A: I have worked on many anchor pages for CNN, but besides that, I have no particular page I am mainly interested in.
- 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: Yes. When I first got here, I ignored the rules and violated the 3R rule. I apologized and have helped to clean up my mistake in the past. In the case that I have to deal with a person who is doing more than I can handle, I will notify someone higher to investigate.
Commentary
Discussion
Support
- Moral support to avoid pile-on. I suggest you withdraw this nomination and get involved in admin-related tasks. Try going on recent change patrol, and get involved in XfD (X for deletion) discussions, like WP:AFD, WP:TFD, WP:CFD, etc. Also make sure to become familiar with policies like WP:V, WP:NOR, WP:NPOV. Check out places like WP:ANI to see what admins have to deal with regularly too. --Wafulz 02:04, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Oppose
- Oppose per answer to question 1. Blocks aren't supposed to be punitive. T Rex | talk 00:10, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose - not enough experience. Only 96 mainspace edits. No particular page pointed out - only vague mention of "CNN anchors". Edit summary usage is too low (53% for major edits). Also, response to Q1: "I will make it so that those who break the rules will be punished" - demonstrates the wrong attitude. Carcharoth 00:15, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose per low edit summary/count and weak answers to questions (including no links & future use of "punitive" blocks and not "preventative"). Cbrown1023 00:43, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. Candidate doesn't seem to realize what adminship is all about. No indication that the canddiate is familiar with even basic Wiki policies related to admin actions. —Lantoka ( talk | contrib) 01:24, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Neutral
- See Wikizach's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.
- 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.
