Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Redmarkviolinist 2

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.

[edit] Redmarkviolinist

Final (2/17/0); Withdrawn by WjBscribe at 04:49, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Redmarkviolinist (talk · contribs) - Self Nom. Redmarkviolinist ^{Drop me a line} 22:21, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

[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: Some of the admin work that I will probably be participating in will probably cover a wide range of topics. I will participate regularly in WP:AFD, WP:CSD, and others. While I'm not patrolling the pages of Wikipedia, I will most likely be participating in a variety of Wikiprojects, one of which being Military History. I have created a quite a few articles in this subject that I am familiar with, and I feel that with admin powers I would be able to contribute much more than being a regular user. Also, being the founder of the upcoming Wikipedia:WikiProject Technology History, I will be able to do more productive work. My first RFA was before I had any idea what I was doing at all on Wikipedia. As you would expect, it failed quite miserably. Now, having much more experience, I hope that I can get adminship to help out much more on Wikipedia.

2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

A:

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:

[edit] General comments

• See Redmarkviolinist's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

• Links for Redmarkviolinist: Redmarkviolinist (talk · contribs · deleted · count · logs · block log · lu · rfar · rfc · rfcu · ssp · search an, ani, cn, an3)
• I'm not convinced that the nominee was in control or his account when this was put up. The whole thing is from the start FUBAR. The last two cryptic edits here and here are too weird and were the last. We should probably SNOW this and this may need deletion if he did not indeed transclude it.] Cheers, Dlohcierekim Deleted? 04:38, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

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

[edit] Discussion

[edit] Support

1. Support, would not abuse the tools - but I'll see your answers to forthcoming questions in case. _{WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN} ^{it seems the winds have stopped...} 22:35, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

   #Support would use tools well. But like WBOSITG, I'll bear in mind other questions answers. However, it worries be that you put this then this on someone else's usepage that wasn't your own. However, that was last October, so I'll give you benefit of the doubt on this. Spencer^T♦C 22:40, 15 February 2008 (UTC) Changed to oppose

This is what happens when you leave your computer alone for a few seconds in a school library. Redmarkviolinist ^{Drop me a line} 00:00, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

1. Please explain - is this RFA set up by someone else ?00:04, 16 February 2008 (UTC)Pedro :  Chat  00:04, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

   No, the violent butt-sex edit. Redmarkviolinist ^{Drop me a line} 00:46, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

   Redmark - Gee, where to I begin with my prudishness. This is your RfA buddy. That's not a great comment IMHO. Pedro :  Chat  00:50, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

2. Moral support - You can be a helpful editor, but you really need to become more familiar with CSD. This has next to zero chance of passing, but come back in a few months. Nousernamesleft^{copper, not wood} 23:40, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Oppose

1. Oppose [1] Strange. And then I find [2] [3] [4] Plain wrong. Sorry, but low number of edits, lack of edit summaries, garish user page and very dodgy C:CSD calls all mount up I'm afraid. Pedro :  Chat  22:43, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

   In his defense, he reverted the first one. Maybe it was an accident with Twinkle? _{WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN} ^{it seems the winds have stopped...} 23:41, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

   Actually, scratch that, per Darkspots below. Sorry. _{WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN} ^{it seems the winds have stopped...} 23:48, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

2. Oppose per the diffs pedro gave. Spencer^T♦C 22:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
3. Oppose. Pedro's diffs are extremely worrying. Plus, your own coach doesn't think you're ready for adminship [5]. Malinaccier (talk) 22:58, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
4. Oppose Pedro's first diff was actually the second speedy tagging of that user page by RMV in rapid sucession: [6]. Hey, everyone deletes the main page makes an honest mistake from time to time, but twice in three minutes? Please edit slower. Also, please make your user talk page more legible. Darkspots (talk) 23:15, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

   I wanted to clarify my remark about your user talk page--in my browser (IE), the bright green background makes the black text really hard to read without eyestrain. Thanks, Darkspots (talk) 23:28, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

5. Oppose You request two times in a row the deletion of one of Wikipedia's main contributors as patent nonsense. One mistake can happen. Two in a row? And maybe you should stay away from CSD anyway, the other diffs are not ok for me too. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 23:27, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
6. Oppose Redmarkviolinist appears to have a poor grasp on deletion policy and unfortunately is too quick to nominate items for deletion. He gives no answers to two of the standard questions and a poor answer to the first - again indicating he doesn't understand the role and an admin and basic Wikipedia policies. I'm sorry but you simply are not ready yet. Gwernol 23:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
7. Oppose - Rushed RfA, along with diff's provided by Pedro. Tiptoety ^talk 23:41, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
8. Oppose. Not enough experience. CSD diffs are troubling. Vandalism in October on another editor's userpage is unacceptable. Doesn't meet my criteria. Useight (talk) 23:48, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
9. Oppose - Fails my experience meter by a long shot, no offense intended. Also the diffs provided by Pedro are..well...troubling to say the least. Complete lack of comprehension of WP:CSD, either that or tremendously rash. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 01:05, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
10. Oppose. Tagged User:Blofeld of SPECTRE for deletion here and here using WP:TW. He explained that it was a mistake, but I'm worried about the possibility of making such a mistake as an admin. I don't want someone to delete the Main Page by mistake. Also, walking away from a computer while logged in at a public library could invite someone to walk over and use admin tools to delete Main Page. Finally, I would expect answers to questions 2 and 3 from someone who's making a self-nomination. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 01:21, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
11. Was gonna sit this one out, but losing control of account during an RfA is not good. Suggest withdraw, get with your coach, consider advice I offer at User:Dlohcierekim/On_RfA#Snowball. Better luck next time. Dlohcierekim Deleted? 01:40, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
12. First of all, I'd suggest withdrawal, as I highly doubt that this RfA will pass at this point. Second, walking away from a public computer is a bad enough idea with a normal account, but doing it with a sysop account could have greater consequences. I don't like the lack of an answer to questions 2 and 3, especially if it's a self nomination they should be answered with at least a vague answer. I also have issues with this user's comprehension of WP:CSD. I would suggest admin coaching, and please do come back in 3 or 4 months' time, if you have shown improvement I would be delighted to support then. Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 02:19, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
13. Oppose, per my criteria, rushed and incomplete RFA, and Pedro's diffs. --Chetblong^{T C} 02:20, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
14. Oppose per all the above comments. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 02:53, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
15. Oppose - I think that enough has been said, but I would like to strongly suggest that you heed the advice of Dlohcierekim and Keilana and withdraw this RfA. —Travis^talk 02:57, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
16. Oppose, doesn't seem to understand what a CSD G1 is. Seems to be reckless with regards to account security, which is not something that we want in an admin. I invite you to read up on CSD criteria and wait another few months for another try. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 04:17, 16 February 2008 (UTC).
17. Oppose Frequently inactive, experience concerns, and questions 2 and 3 are not answered. Try again in a few months with much more experience and good answers to all questions and then I will support. NHRHS2010 04:23, 16 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.