Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Businessman332211 2

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

[edit] Businessman332211

FINAL (0/3/0); withdrawn by candidate[1] at 05:19, 31 October 2007 (UTC) I withdraw my own nomination - Will try again in a few months businessman332211 05:18, 31 October 2007 (UTC) Businessman332211 (talk · contribs) - I have specific reasons why I would like to become admin. I will fill that out in detail on the page where the questions/comment are. businessman332211 04:02, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I tried this before, just 5-6 days ago. I (based on some advice) felt I wasn't ready (he was right). I spent a lot of time thinking after that, if I wanted to try to become an admin. What an administrator is all about, what they do. I got involved in wikipedia more, and decided I definitely want that to be a goal. I did everything I felt I would need to succeed. I studied every possibility, I experimented and learned. I got advice from other admins/editors about things I didn't know. I really fleshed out my knowledge greatly about wikipedia, it's policies. I read through the policy pages (and admin pages) MANY times, reading every line carefully. Trying to make sure i had a full understanding of everything. I hunted down archives of MANY admin actions,and pages where admins where under fire for specific "things" they did that made them open for recall (arbitration). I read through what they did that was bad, good, and how the entire arrangements are ready. I think with all the time I put into studying the stuff, and getting involed, and learning. I think I have the knowledge necessary to make a good administrator now. I am planning on seeing this nomination through until the end (Whether declined or accepted) and if I am accepted I will go off to try and do even more for wikipedia. If I am declined I will do everything I can to strengthen my weak points and be even better the next time I nominate myself in 1-2 months from now. However it is a goal, that I am trying for now to see the outcome.businessman332211 04:13, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?

A:

There is so much I want to get involved in I don't even know where to begin. Just being able to get involved on that level will probably keep me busy. I average a good amount of hours to wikipedia per day, and this'll just give me more fire/drive to try my hardest to make it even better.businessman332211 04:13, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

A:

So far I think my best contribution is just being here doing what I do. I created some articles, I have done a lot of "good" editing. I have done vandalism help, and trying to help in every way I possibly can. There are so many things to do I can start working on one task, and stay busy for 3-4 hour stretches working on just one thing. Then find something else to keep me busy another 5-6 hours. businessman332211 04:13, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

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:

No I have avoided arguments. I have found all editors I have dealt with to be very good. I have only had problems with people from random ip addresses, for example sometimes they vandalise needlessly, so I try to revert there changes at all costs. I had 1 person who added something. Someone reverted, he added it back, I agreed and reverted myself (first time). Then he added again and I reverted a second time, but then felt it wasn't my place at that specific point so I undid my last revision, apologized. I mentioned to him that I assume he was just trying to contribute, and instead of reverting him I would try to rewrite the content and cite verifiable sources for him, so he would feel more at home at wikipedia. Aside from that, nothing near an argument with anyone. I have voiced my opinion a few times, then when I was in the wrong someone told me and I quickly apologized if I felt my actions where wrong. businessman332211 04:13, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] General comments

• See Businessman332211's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

• Links for Businessman332211: Businessman332211 (talk · contribs · deleted · count · logs · block log · lu · rfar · rfc · rfcu · ssp · search an, ani, cn, an3)

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Businessman332211 before commenting.

[edit] Discussion

[edit] Support

[edit] Oppose

1. This nomination is way too soon according to your other one. You definitely are not ready yet; come back after a few months with edit summaries, participation in the Wikipedia namespace, and more interactions with users, including getting into conflicts. O₂ (息 • 吹) 04:19, 31 October 2007 (GMT)

   thank you for your comments. I will take them to heart, however I wish to see this one through. Even if it's a declined, it's my goal to find out. As far as

   • participate in wikipedia namespace
   • more interactions with users
   • edit summaries

   I will start working on those even now, but I don't "feel personally" that it's wise to get into conflicts. I have had real life conflicts so I have the basic knowledge of them, and ability to deal with them appropriately. I just feel it's against policy for "me" if I go out and get into conflicts for experience. I believe in avoiding them if at all possible. Except under specific situations, in which they should still be dealt with civily. Thank you for all your feedback, and advice. businessman332211 04:25, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

2. Could you please withdraw this nomination? Businessman, 388 edits are not quite enough to judge your merits. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 04:53, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
3. Oppose, while you've done some good work, the short period of time here makes you an unknown quantity, and continuing to run RfAs repeatedly despite repeated and clear advice not to do so shows either an inability or unwillingness to respect and respond to community input, a very questionable trait in any editor, let alone a potential admin. Please withdraw this nomination, and we'll see your next nomination after a few months when we've gotten to know you better. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 05:12, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

   So be it, I will withdraw. If more than one person is asking me then I will wait. When I was asked to withdraw last time I did. Then after spending nearly (not lying) 48+ hours on wikipedia in the last five days doing nothing but reading, learning, memorizing policies/and potential policies. That I was making the necessary knowledge I needed. I will withdraw, I am not very "happy" about it, as this was one of my goals. However I understand, and i will withdraw, and continue to work towards my goal. I will re-open again in a few months, and see if I get better luck. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Businessman332211 (talk • contribs)

   You'll be welcome but please don't set adminship as a 'goal'. It is not a wise approach to such things. I also do not believe that it is a question of luck. It is about merit mentioned above. Do not hesitate to ask for assistance if you need any help. Thanks. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 05:29, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Neutral

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.