Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Azuran

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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

Contents

[edit] Azuran

Final (0/7/1); Ended Thu, 24 May 01:47 UTC

Azuran (talk · contribs) - I, Azuran, would like to nominate myself for adminship on Wikipedia based on the fact that I have an account here since I joined back in June 2006. I also feel like I contributed enough to the Wikipedia community to become an admin. I currently work on updating and creating sports since I have a lot of knowledge on sports, especially for soccer and baseball. As an admin, I would like to help Wikipedia become a vandal-free site that offers plenty of truthful material to the reader. I would also like to hunt down vandals in order to keep the site clean. I'm a good-natured user talks to people in "good faith". Thank you for your consideration. Azuran 18:19, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?
A: I would just like to stop and deal with vandalism and watch over pages that are consider possible targets. Sometimes, when I revert an edit by a IP vandal, the vandal always comes back and vandalizes the same page again and again. Sometimes I feel powerless against them.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I'm pretty good with soccer related articles so I'm always trying find a way to improve them to make them more reader friendly.. Most of these include updating or adding information about a club, updating a tournament or league on a daily/weekly basis and creating pages about new teams and leagues. I'm also pretty knowledgeable in baseball and basketball.
3 Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
A: So far, I have never experience any conflict with other users. If I ever get into one, I would like to discuss the conflict differences with the user in a calm and friendly way.

[edit] General comments

Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Azuran before commenting.

[edit] Discussion

Support

Oppose

  1. Oppose Sorry, but while you've been around for a good stretch of time and have made some very positive contributions, I don't think you're ready to become an admin yet. Your first attempt to create this RfA was malformed. Your recent vandal warning at User talk:190.6.195.58, while well intentioned, wasn't signed - which is very important if you are leaving message for other users - wasn't well worded and wasn't particularly helpful - which page are you referring to? Much better to use the standard user warning templates. You almost never use edit summaries - good communications are important for all editors and particularly admins. The warnings on your talk page indicate that you haven't yet fully understood fair use image policy, and you have run into some quite recent trouble with edits to Baseball articles. Each of these issues isn't terrible by itself, but together they tell me you aren't familiar enough with Wikipedia policies, guidelines and processes. Your answers to the standard questions above are also show you don't properly understand what an admin does. I'd suggest you participate in more Wikipedia discussions - for example at WP:AF then try an editor review instead of an RfA to get more feedback. I hope this is useful, Gwernol 23:26, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
  2. Oppose, per above; I had already begun typing my response. Unfortunately answers to the questions are weak. Experience in here in itself isn't reason enough for an upgrade. Edit summary usage isn't good enough for me. Only twelve edits to the Wikipedia namespace, and even worse are the two to the user talk space. -- Phoenix2 (talk, review) 23:28, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
  3. Oppose Very poor answers to the standard questions - no real idea about why Azuran wants to be an admin and no evidence provided to demonstrate their capability in the role too. This in addition to the two user Talk edits in total from May 22nd and the dozen edits to the policy space, 90% of which are to this RfA only serves to demonstrate that Azuran has a long way to go to show that he/she can participate effectively in admin-related tasks. Withdraw this RfA and come back again when you have some evidence of vandal reversion, user Talk edits to demonstrate warnings; reporting of vandals to WP:AIV; participation in XfD discussions; applying tags to articles for improvement or deletion, etc. There are many more tasks in which you can participate to show your aptitude. (aeropagitica) 23:36, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
  4. Oppose: I'm afraid I have to. Your stated goal is to use the buttons to fight vandalism, but I don't see many WP:AIV reports in your contribs, and you have <10 talk page and user talk edits. Warning potential vandals on their talk pages is a vital part of dealing with vandalism. I think you're a good editor and contributor, and your heart is in the right place, but I'd suggest a little more exposure and activity in the administrative areas you've expressed interest in, and maybe an editor review to get feedback, before applying again for the buttons. I'm sure you'll get there if it's what you want, but I don't think you're there yet. MastCell Talk 23:32, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
  5. Good editor, but not admin material, per above comments about warnings and WP space edits. G1ggy! 23:56, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
  6. Oppose Answer to Q1 worries me that you have no idea what an administrator does, or even the inner-workings of Wikipedia. Vandalism is the only thing you mention, yet you don't seem to know about user-warning templates. Also, you don't mention anything specifically that you'd do with the tools. And, when you say you feel powerless, you really shouldn't, if you know Wikipedia. If you were a first-time visitor, then I'd understand that, but you really shouldn't feel powerless if you know about WP:AIV, reverting, and Special:Recentchanges, and Special:Contributions. If you have those, there is no reason that you can't be able to stop a vandal. Oppose, I can't trust you with the tools right now. Cool Bluetalk to me 00:24, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
  7. Oppose His answers to the questions worry me. I would not like to see him running around with admin tools. --TREYWiki 00:32, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Neutral

  1. Neutral per the lack of involvement with the community. Outside of your RfA, your non-content edits to Wikipedia consist of less than thirty edits across Wikipedia space, User Talk space, and article Talk space. There's no way to judge how well you understand policy and how well you interact with others without some sort of context. Read up on WP:VAND, be sure to report vandals to WP:AIV after giving them plenty of warning using the warning templates, and I'll be happy to support you in your next RfA. Cheers, Lanky (YELL) 23:40, 23 May 2007 (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.