Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Crawfordknights

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.

[edit] Crawfordknights

Final (0/6/0); ended 08:55, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Crawfordknights (talk · contribs) – Though I have not been on wikipedia.org for very long and i havent had me=any edits. i look forward to helping the wikipedian community in any way possible. i will try my best to battle vandalism and help any new users become helpful to this community. i may have only helped bring in 3 of my friends into wikipedia, but i look forward to helping many more people joi. my sincerest apologies if you do not see me capable of this position. Crawfordknights 03:18, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

and yes i accept my nominationCrawfordknights 03:23, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I am going to be bold and close this RfA, as it won't be so much of a snowstorm as a hailstorm. Twenty-three edits in total is very far away from the minimum number of edits required for admin candidacy, which currently runs between 1500-3000 edits across the main Wikipedia spaces. Try again in six months when you have built up edits in the article/Talk, project and user Talk spaces. You should then have enough experience to handle the admin tools and quite a few scenarios in which admins can find themselves. You can also get an editor review to receive some contructive criticism and you can opt for admin coaching for more directed education. (aeropagitica) 09:01, 9 December 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: i look forward to fight against vandalism and help new users become better wikipedians
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I am especially pleased of my few contributions, an extension on the article Barney (dog) for i am a pet lover
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 have been in one edit conflict but i soon saw i had made the mistake. i have not been under any stress for many friendly wikipedians have helped me get used to this wonderful place.
General comments

Discussion

Support

Oppose

  1. No need for tools. It's likely this will become a pile-on, so I'd advise you withdraw and spend some time editing and learning the ins-and-outs of the site and site policy. Get an editor review, too, before your next request. Oppose. – Chacor 03:27, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  2. Oppose While we appreciate your eagerness, your edit count and amount of experience is simply too low for a detailed analysis of your contributions. I may support after you have had a few months here and have acquainted yourself with Wikipedia processes. As for now, I urge withdrawal. Best of luck, 210physicq (c) 03:28, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  3. Less than 50 edits isn't really enough to assess your candidacy, let alone show you have enough experience here. Besides that, admin tools aren't required for vandal-fighting. It's pretty impressive that you've already found AIV. If you want coaching, I'd be happy to help you.--Kchase T 05:19, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  4. Oppose You have not enough history for us to be able assess your ability to be a sysop. At this time you have no need for extra tools. Give yourself at least three more months to become more familiar with Wikipedia process and policies. I too urge you to withdraw.--Dakota 05:27, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  5. No. I wish I could moral support, but no. Withdraw and try again in about 6 months. -Amarkov blahedits 05:28, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  6. Oppose - Inexperienced. -- Selmo (talk) 05:30, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

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.