Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Doctor Evil

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] Doctor Evil

Final (2/12/7) ended 10:19 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Doctor Evil (talk · contribs) – I have been editing Wikipedia for about 6 months now, although i used to do it anonymously before one of my friends suggested that i make an account.After making the account I have already made close to 100 edits in about two months.I regurarly discuss issues on Talk Pages.I am very active in editing articles and have read the wikipedia rules and guidelines to make myself familiar with them.I have NEVER been cought doing wrong things nor have i ever been reprimanded.Thus I follow the Wikipedia code of conduct.I feel i will be ablte to help Wikipedia greatly by making speedy deletions, fight vandalism, deal strictly with pranksters whose aim is to disrupt the strict functioning of Wikipedia.I hope people here will be satisfied by my explanation and will support me in becoming an administrator and if i become one, help me in my duties.Hoping for the affirmative.Thank You.:) Doctor Evil 19:35, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

Yes, I agree to the nomination.Thank You

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, if any, would 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:As mentioned in my statement above, my prime motivation is to deal with vandals more efficiently, and help Wikipedia as much as my capabilities permit me to.I will also be helping out at WP:AIV, where I have seen backlogs of over 40 minutes. Also I frequently deal with image tagging problems, so I would like to help out with deleting images without sources.I have done some New Page patrol before (though not so much recently), I would probably do some speedy deletions of violating articles and help out at Category:Candidates for speedy deletion. These are the areas that I am thinking about currently and where I would like to help the most, but I am confident to help out at any other adminship chore that i be entrusted with.Thank you.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A:Well, I am especially pleased with the 'Boyzone Words' song one, which is my favourite for two reasons.Firstly, I it is one of my most favourite songs and I was quite sad to see that a page with it's name existed, yet there was no information on it.So i entered as much information that i could at that moment.I am determined to make it more informative so that it is no longer a stub.Secondly, I was happy since even after a few days of my editing that article, I saw no other user editing it.This made me feel that users across the world must have been hapy with my article, since it did not have even a SINGLE edit!
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 never had any direct conflicts with users before.I say that they are not direct as, after editing a page on Saurav Ganguly, i found out that someone else had edited it removing some things i wrote.So, i just re-wrote what i had written earlier, to find that a few days later it was again removed by another user.I then realised that since two different users have edited my writings, there must be something wrong about it, and i left it at that.In future, I will continue to follow that same procedure.I will always take into account what is good for Wikipedia, and what most users feel about my editings and the general consensus,and give it more importance my own beliefs, and change my writings suitably. This is because I believe that if the general to not agree with my beliefs, then there MUST be something wrong with them, cos Wikipedia is all about the common people who take pains to write each and every article.Thank You.
4 Under what circumstances would you consider blocking an established user. --Mcginnly | Natter 21:02, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
General comments

Discussion (for expressing views without numbering)

Support

  1. Morale support - Get some more experiance first, also this editor did except his nomination (it was a hidden message which is now unhiden) thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 21:30, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
  2. Support, awesome user.--Andeh 21:58, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Oppose You have been here on this account since August... I see no contributions to any admin areas whatsoever. You use edit summaries sparingly and you messed up this RfA (you still haven't accepted it). --Alex | talk / review me | 20:02, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
  2. Strong oppose: lack of experience. I have 12 500 edits on hungarian wiki, nearly 4000 here, have admin flag in different projects and I'm still afraid of nominating myself. You have less than 100 edits... NCurse work 20:04, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
  3. Strong Oppose. 43 edits total. You said you were close to 100. Sorry, but you need more experience. --Nishkid64 20:09, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
  4. Strong Oppose, malformed RFA. Naconkantari 20:13, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
  5. Oppose: You only have 43 total edits and have been around for almost 2 months. Lack of experience, try again when you have a lot more edits and have been in Wikipedia for a while.  Orfen User Talk 20:20, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
  6. Oppose - why on earth should we avoid a pile-on?. Per everyone else: recommend self-withdrawal or a bureaucrat killing this nonsense right now, if that's legal, so to speak. No way. Moreschi 20:44, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
  7. Oppose - 43 edits is not enough, and your contributions don't show 6 months experience. Michael 21:03, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
  8. Oppose Sorry, you definitely need to gain much more experience and get involved in administrative-oriented tasks. I suggest withdraw RfA.--Húsönd 21:10, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
  9. Oppose far to inexperienced. Suggest withdrawal--Mcginnly | Natter 21:26, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
  10. Oppose your edit count is way too low to tell if you would be a good editor. I'd be looking for at least 2500 edits to give a good representation of how you would handle the admin tools. I recommend you wqithraw this nomination and come back in several months. Gwernol 23:48, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
  11. Oppose Too inexperienced.-- thunderboltz(Deepu) 08:29, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
  12. Oppose, way too early, low edit count, inexprienced. Don't be discouraged and continue to edit more. --Terence Ong (T | C) 09:37, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

  1. You need a lot more experience. Usually new admins have thousands of edits. Keep up the good work and try again later. Lapinmies 20:03, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
  2. Avoiding a pile-on. Doctor Evil, please read through Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship to see what voters look for in a candidate and try again when you have more experience. - BT 20:07, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
  3. Neutral To avoid the pile-on. I suggest you withdraw this nomination as soon as possible and analyze successful nominations. Try again after a few months and in the meantime, do not be discouraged by this. --Siva1979Talk to me 20:49, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
  4. Avoid pile on oppose Neutral - We really have no idea as to your true colours yet, please don't take this as a negative, your edits look great, we just haven't seen quite enough to determine who you really are. Keep up the good work! -- Tawker 21:23, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
  5. Neutral You seem to have good intentions and a lot of potential. If you put it into practice, you'll become an administrator someday. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 22:04, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
  6. Neutral I recommend withdrawing this RfA and going for a editor review instead. You can use the responses to improve your contributions to WP and try again in ~3000 edits' time. (aeropagitica) 22:24, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
  7. Neutral Your Words article in question 2 contained a copyright violation, I removed it. Maybe later I will support. T REXspeak 23:29, 24 September 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.