Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/DavidJJJ

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] DavidJJJ

Final (2/13/3) Ended Fri, 10 Nov 2006 06:38:38 (UTC)

DavidJJJ (talk · contribs) – I have been on wikipedia since May of this year, and I mainly edit Rock music related articles. The majority of my edits are small edits which help improve the article. I also do some anti-vandalism work, and revert vandalism immediately when I see it. DJJJ 11:55, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

I accept nomination of adminship. DJJJ 12:02, 9 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: I am looking forward in using admin tools, and I think it will be a very interesting and enjoyable experience, but I will also need to be responsible in using admin tools such as blocking tools.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I am pleased with all of my contributions to the free encyclopedia.
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 no conflicts.
General comments

Discussion

Support

  1. Moral Support - Just so you don't feel alone out here. You have avoided conflict, but you need to edit more mainspace articles. Try getting involved in admin-like things, such as AfD, working on templates, or getting into a Wikiproject. It's good to see you are interested in helping wikipedia, but try again in a few months. --Shrieking Harpy......Talk|Count 00:23, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
  2. Moral Support Please don't be discouraged by this RfA. Consider withdrawing and reading Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship in order to better understand what's expected in a candidate to adminship.--Húsönd 01:37, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Thelb4 21:11, 9 November 2006 (UTC) - Not enough edits, not been on Wikipedia long enough.
  2. -- Reaper X 21:30, 9 November 2006 (UTC) - as per above, sry Dave.
  3. Sorry but very strong Oppose, less than 1,000 edits, bad answers to questions, vote stacking, vandalized before [1]. Please withdraw Jaranda wat's sup 21:31, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  4. Oppose. 860 edits, 129 to your own user page. NO conflicts ... Sorry, but please come back in some months after you've got some experience. --Pan Gerwazy 21:41, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  5. Sorry, but no per all above. Don't care much for answers. What would you enjoy more, blocking other users or deleting pages? Calling another user dumb (jaranda's dif above} is probably , well not something I look for in an admin. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 21:45, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  6. Oppose I appreciate your enthusiasm, but I would suggest withdrawing this nomination; you are quite unlikely to garner sufficient support given your lack of experience and specific rationale for requesting admin tools. You may of course try again once have become more experienced, though. Dar-Ape 22:42, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  7. Oppose and suggest with-drawl. Get some more experience with all of wikipedia, then re-apply here. Adminship isn't a reward. -Royalguard11(Talk·Desk·Review Me!) 22:59, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  8. Oppose, please withdraw --Steve 00:13, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
  9. Oppose, the user has not been on wikipedai long enough --H-BOMB 00:46, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
  10. Oppose: As per above. After some more experience and some more major contributions then I could see you possibly becoming an administrator.  Orfen User Talk | Contribs 01:28, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
  11. Oppose inexperienced. --Duke of Duchess Street 02:48, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
  12. Oppose due to inexperience and issues raised above. Come back in a few months, also have a look at what other (successful) candidates have to their names. Hopefully will see you back here in a few months with more experience. James086 Talk | Contribs 03:57, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
  13. Sorry, but Oppose. The answer to question #1, along with a small number of edits for a candidate really turns me away from supporting this nomination. Spinach Dip 05:09, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

  1. Neutral Looks like a hard-working Wikipedian. I thank you for your contributions, especially for the Rock Music articles. JungleCat talk/contrib 21:36, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  2. Neutral to avoid a pile-on. I would just add that your usage of edit summaries is very low. I recommend enabling the option to require one for every edit. --cholmes75 (chit chat) 21:53, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  3. Neutral Withdraw this RfA as your answers above reveal a lack of knowledge about the role of an admin. Get some experience in editing articles, finding and citing sources and participating in Wikiprojects as well. This will assist you in your learning about policies and guidelines, something that all admins should have a working knowledge of. Before you submit yourself to another RfA, try getting an editor review first. You can also go to Wikipedia:Esperanza for some admin coaching beforehand. Don't take this as a knock-back, it's really just a learning experience. (aeropagitica) 23:14, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  4. Neutral per Cholmes75. I urge the candidate to withdrawal and contact any of the voters of this Rfa on how to become the kind of candidate we all can support. Jcam 02:18, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
  5. Neutral - (aeropagitica)'s advice is, as always, very sound. You're still a little too new - another few months, and you may be ready. riana_dzasta 05:39, 10 November 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.