Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Jftsang

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.

Contents

[edit] Jftsang

FINAL (0/4/0); withdrawn by candidate[1], closed at 17:40, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Jftsang (talk · contribs) - I think I am a good Wikipedian, having made contributions to many parts of Wikipedia in terms of adding information, making better linkage systems and correcting the incorrect, and I try my best to revert vandalism where possible. jftsang 16:46, 1 December 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: I intend to be a supporter of Wikipedia in stamping out vandalism, and punishing those who vandalise Wikipedia.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: In my opinion, my best contributions I would say to be my work on Colchester Royal Grammar School, having made substantial progress in adding information to the school. You may argue that the school is too unimportant to have all this information, but facts never harm anyone.
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: I can quite honestly say that to the best of my recollection I have not been involved in a conflict of any sort.

Optional question from Malleus Fatuarum

4. What's your view on using edit summaries? --Malleus Fatuorum 17:03, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
A: I use edit summaries when needed, but for most edits I make (including the reverting of vandalism) I do not believe that the edit was substantial enough for edit summaries to be needed. However, where needed (such as the removal of incorrect information or addition of a new section or substantial information that makes up half the article) I will make a note of it in the edit summary.

[edit] General comments

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

[edit] Discussion

[edit] Support
[edit] Oppose
  1. Oppose only 156 edits, not near enough for en.wiki. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:58, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
  2. Oppose You have only 156 edits total. This is far too few edits to judge your suitability for administrator status. You might find Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship illuminating. I suggest you withdraw your nomination as you have no chance whatever of being successful.--Fuhghettaboutit 17:04, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
  3. Oppose you don't use edit summaries enough. No edits to anything in the Project space outside of the sandbox and not relating to this RFA. The answers to the questions are too short, and your answer to question one bothers me since blocks are preventative and not punitive. I suggest you read some pages like WP:ADMIN, WP:BLOCK, WP:PROTECT, and WP:NFCC. Then start getting involved Deletion debates and reporting vandals to WP:AIV. ~Sasha Callahan (Talk) 17:07, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
  4. Oppose On two grounds. Insufficient experience with only 85 mainspace edits, and just as importantly the use of the word "punishing" in the answer to Q1. It's not an administrator's job to punish anyone. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:09, 1 December 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.