Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Michfan2123

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] Michfan2123

Final (0/6/0) ended 02:40, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Michfan2123 (talk · contribs) - The vital stats: I started to contribute to wikipedia in July of 2006. I made football (soccer) edits from July of 2006 to September of 06. I then left Wiki for a good amount of time. I started to contribute again in July of 2007. Since then I have been very active on wikipedia. I mainly make contributions to golf articles. I also clean up vandalism and patrol new pages and recent contributions.

I hereby withdraw my nomination and intend to apply in the future. I didn't expect to get approval, I was curious to see what would happen if I applied. Thanks for all the input guys. michfan2123 02:28, 25 October 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: The main thing that I want to do is delete nonsense pages and block users who vandalize wikipedia. I would also like to revert vandalism at a faster rate.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I have created 179 pages including List of career achievements by Jack Nicklaus and List of tournament performances by Tiger Woods.This page lists some of my contributions. Golf is not as well covered on wikipedia compared to other sports. I think that overall I have improved the quality of golf articles on wikipedia.
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 have not ran into many problems. Whenever I do though I always remain civil. You have to respect the person you are arguing with. Argue the opinion, not the person.

[edit] General comments

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Michfan2123 before commenting.

[edit] Discussion

[edit] Support
[edit] Oppose
  1. Very weak oppose Your edits seem fine to me, you seem to understand discussion, policy & consensus, but with virtually no Wikipedia-space edits I have to oppose as there's nothing to indicate how you'd use sysop powers. — iridescent 23:44, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
  2. Oppose — Edits like this are unhelpful. Do you know how easy it is to categorize an article? Tagging an easily improvable article shows laziness and unwillingness to actually help the encyclopedia. Also, please remember to always use edit summaries, even if the edit you're making is really minor. Admins should always remember to explain their actions. Finally, this shows that you don't have much knowledge of the criteria for speedy deletion; an article that is "poorly written" on a subject that is "not very notable" does not meet the CSD; that's what AfD, or simply improving the article, is for. Sorry, mate. --Agüeybaná 23:51, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
  3. Inexperience. Daniel 00:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
  4. Oppose - You state that as an admin you will delete nonsense pages and block vandals, however I don't see enough experience in those areas. As Agüeybaná pointed out, you do not have a firm grasp on the criteria for speedy deletion. Looking through your contribs, I can't find a single report to WP:AIV, meaning you probably don't understand how to deal with vandals either. Focus on these areas (and possibly XFDs as well), and try reapplying for adminship in a few months.--Rise Above The Vile 00:38, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
  5. No per Rise Above the Vile. NHRHS2010 talk 01:55, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
  6. oppose per above. Miranda 02:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Neutral