Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Juggernaut0102 2

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] Juggernaut0102

Final: (0/7/0), 12:58, 11 February 2008 (UTC), closed by Daniel; scheduled to end 07:13, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Juggernaut0102 (talk · contribs) - by Juggernaut0102 (talk) 07:13, 10 February 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 admin work do you intend to take part in?
A: Vandalism mopping, contributions to all kinds of articles.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I think that although admittedly i haven't contributed that much compared to others, but my best contributions are to Halo articles.
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: Yes, Internet Explorer - resolved now.

[edit] General comments

RfAs for this user:
Requests for adminship/Juggernaut0102 Requests for adminship/Juggernaut0102 2 Requests for adminship/Juggernaut0102 3

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Juggernaut0102 before commenting.

[edit] Discussion

[edit] Support
[edit] Oppose
  1. Oppose - edit counts are not always important in RfA's, but when you only have 130 edits (half of which are to your blanked talk page), it's clear you don't have enough experience with Wikipedia to apply for adminship. Could I suggest some solid article-writing experience, followed by contributions to the main non-article pages like Articles for Deletion, the Help Desk or Village Pump, and maybe involvement in a WikiProject or two? You're also interested in vandal-reverting - most vandalism-reversions can be done without admin tools, so just jump right in and give it a go. Euryalus (talk) 09:35, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
  2. Oppose. I don't like doing this, but I can't go any other way. Although your account has been around a while (editing since late 2006), your edit count and patchy use of edit summaries is reasonable grounds to say you don't have the experience. I would go with Euryalus' suggestions and build up some experience editing articles and participating in "admin areas". And next time, I would suggest letting someone else nominate you. 1ForTheMoney (talk) 09:48, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
  3. Oppose Nowhere near enough experience. Jmlk17 10:06, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
  4. Not anywhere enough experience. While I maybe wikipediholic and all that stuff, 136 edits is not much more that what I do in, say, one hour and half. And in this 136 edits, you managed to candidate for adminship twice. Also I can't say that I appreciated your answer to Q3. Snowolf How can I help? 10:35, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
  5. Oppose, I appreciate your enthusiasm by coming here, but I'm afraid that you simply don't have the experience. Your answer to Q1 in particular is illuminating; you do not need the admin tools to contribute to articles or fix vandalism. Lankiveil (complaints | disco) 10:52, 11 February 2008 (UTC).
  6. Oppose. Would not normally pile on a self-nom which is obviously going to fail, but this is a second one? I'm no fount of wisdom, so ignore this if you will. But have a look at my own criteria for RfA - which are probably a little on the liberal side for some editors. Until you can meet these, I don't think any RfA is going to have a chance of succeeding. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 11:44, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
  7. Oppose - per all the above. Regarding the answer to question three, have you misinterpreted what it's asking you? Rudget. 12:37, 11 February 2008 (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.