Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Hyano czespony

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] Hyano czespony

Ended 19:04, 26 January 2008 (UTC); Final: 4/15/2; Withdrawn by Agüeybaná per WP:SNOW.

Hyano czespony (talk · contribs) - I have edited Wikipedia since March 2006. I have made about 2000 edits with all the IP addresses I have used. I am very happy to become an administrator soon. Hyano czespony (talk) 03:10, 26 January 2008 (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 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: Pretty much every one. Delete unnessecary pages, block silly users, etc...
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: A wide variety of articles. As an autism sufferer, I learn things much earlier than one normally would, and I am very smart for my age. Infact, I have been known to edit pages relating to games I have not even played.
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: Many users have caused me stress. They are sometimes ignorant, so I will do things that they have refused to do.

Question by DarkFalls

4. What is your understanding of fair use?
A: I understand it well.
Okay... what is fair use? — DarkFalls talk 05:10, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
It's when an image can be used in (a) particular articles(s).
5. What is the biography of living people policy?
A: An article relating to a person could be deleted if that person is not notable.

Question by Wizardman

6. What is the difference between a block and a ban?
A: A block is when a particular account or IP address cannot edit Wikipedia for some time. A ban is when a person themselves cannot edit Wikipedia under any circumstances, although a ban does not really stop that person from editing.

Questions by Kylu

7. If a user continually removes warnings from his user talkpage, would you block that user for disruption, and if so, how long?
A: Yes, for 1 week if an IP address, and 1 month if an account.
8. An article was recently converted into a redirect and improperly merged. What is the correct procedure for dealing with the situation?
A: Check if the redirected article is notable.
9. A user reverting obvious vandalism has reverted the vandalism on an article four times in a 24-hour period. Do you block for WP:3RR violations? Why or why not? If so, for how long?
A: This is reverting vandalism. Why would I block someone for reverting vandalism?

[edit] General comments

(3/12/1)

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

Discussion

Support

  1. Support. Not quite ready for the tools just yet, but I like the answer to my question. Wizardman 05:19, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  2. Certainly isn't packing blanquillos. east.718 at 07:34, January 26, 2008
  3. Admin Coaching miranda 09:27, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  4. To avoid piling on. Any 'crats up for WP:SNOW? Nousernamesleftcopper, not wood 17:17, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Technical Oppose - Only the 90 or edits made from the registered account can be examined, these do not indicate the kind of experience required to convince me that the user will not misuse the tools. Still good luck with this RfA and future editing. Guest9999 (talk) 04:51, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  2. Oppose Sorry but without some sort of verification, there is no way for anyone to judge your anonymous IP edits, thus we can only judge you by your account edits, which only number 94 as of this post, which is nowhere close to the amount of experience needed for the community to judge your experience. Also, the many malformed requests that you had over the last hour shows that you have not fully grasped the way things work here and wiki syntax. Recommend close per WP:SNOW. Good luck though.
    Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 05:00, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  3. Oppose Judging from the answers you have provided to the questions, I think that you definitely need some more time learning about adminstrator functions. "Blocking silly users" alone is cause for me to be more than a little concerned. Being "silly" is not a blockable offense by itself. Also... I suggest you follow and perhaps participate in some RfA's to learn more about how the process works. Trusilver 05:14, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  4. Oppose per above. well stated concerns. Please User:Dlohcierekim/standards for an idea of what I look for in an admin candidate. Good luck for the future. I look forward to your next attempt 3 months & 3,000 edits from now. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 05:20, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  5. OpposeYou haven't been here long enough to have enough experience and knowledge of policy to use the tools. Oysterguitarist 05:23, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
    1. Comment Incase you didn't read the top of the page, I first edited in March 2006. Infact, the first article I ever edited was Michael Stark. Hyano czespony (talk) 06:41, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  6. Oppose As put above. Experience is a major negative factor. Jmlk17 05:26, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  7. Oppose Q7. Nakon 05:51, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  8. Oppose Although he seems willing, he needs much more experience. Marlith T/C 05:54, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  9. Oppose. Thank you for helping out at Wikipedia. I'd suggest that you gain some additional experience before considering sysoping. Cheers, Majoreditor (talk) 06:53, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  10. oppose I do not trust admin tools to users who have autism as they may be unstable. Lack of experience as shown by his answers (eg. "blocking silly users", calling others "ignorant") Stupid2 (talk) 06:58, 26 January 2008 (UTC
    I would respectfully submit that there are stable, autistic editors here, as well as unstable, non-autistic admins. The presence of a disease should not in and of itself be a reason to oppose, particularly when the severity and extent of its effect on the candidate is unknown. UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 07:03, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
    My apologies, sorry for being a bit harsh and jumping to conclusions. Still, this editor is inexperienced so I will still have to oppose. Stupid2 (talk) 07:08, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
    And your point is well taken; I happen to agree, per below. UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 13:45, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  11. Oppose Needs more experience and better answers to questions. NHRHS2010 12:16, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  12. Oppose Not good answers to questions. SpencerT♦C 14:55, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  13. Oppose I would like to support, especially considering the answers might only be short and non-descriptive only because of the user's autism. However, lack of experience moves me to oppose. Unless I am provided with the ip addresses that were used to edit since March 2006, I must oppose. Timmeh! 15:13, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
    Excellent points, and nom I think is well on his(?) way. However, < 100 edits over the 3 months using the current ID does not auger well. It would be helpful to review non logged in edits. Dlohcierekim 15:25, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  14. Oppose per all the above concerns. --Siva1979Talk to me 15:20, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  15. Oppose. Per Q4, Q5, Q7, Q8 and Q9. Sorry, but the answers to those questions show that you are very unfamiliar with Wikipedia policy. However, I like the answer to Q6 as well. NF24(radio me!) 17:12, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Neutral

  1. Neutral. I applaud the candidate's effort to support the project, and look forward to seeing them gain more experience as an editor. UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 07:06, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  2. Neutral. Get more experience with policy, and maybe an admin coach. Malinaccier (talk) 14:12, 26 January 2008 (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.