Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Sasha Callahan

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] Sasha Callahan

(talk page) Final (3/9/4) - closed early per WP:SNOW - Alison ☺ 01:08, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Sasha Callahan (talk · contribs) - Hello all, I'm Sasha. I've been editting WP for the last couple of months and feel ready to be an admin. I go around and revert vandalism, and being an admin will help me do this (I could block users rather than report them to AIV. Sasha Callahan 21:19, 7 September 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: Blocking vandals I find and those reported to WP:AIV. I would also check WP:AN3 and WP:RFPP to help deal with backlog.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I created a page on the Eric Clapton song Lay Down Sally. I also liked my edits to some sports-related pages when I first joned.
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. A user (who I will not name) once started launching ad-hominem attacks on me because of my age and gender. It didn't bother me much since I just ignored him and he went away.
Optional question to myself:
4. Do you think your inexperience is an issue?.
A. I don't. I editted as an anon user before singing up. I've also takentime to read alot on WP policies, guidelines, etc. and they helped alot. And, like Gracenotes said on WikipedianProlific’s RfA
There are tons of guides for admins out there! If you need to do an admin-y task you're unfamiliar with, merely read one, and take a look at how it's done.
So no, I feel my inexperience isn't an issue.

[edit] General comments

Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Sasha Callahan before commenting.

[edit] Discussion

Support

  1. Moral support - this RfA is likely to fail but don't give up hope. You're definitely on the right track here, just take a little more time. You could maybe get more involved in AfDs and general wikipedia namespace, get some more experience and come back in a few months - Alison ☺ 22:41, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
  2. Support good user, from what I've seen. I suggest that Sasha Callahan work on the concerns the opposition has raised, and come back in three or four months. I also recommend you enable E-mail, as administrators need to have E-mail enabled. Acalamari 23:10, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
  3. Moral Support - This user isn't crap. That's definatly for sure. Just some more experience should make this user a excellent admin candidate. Don't be discouraged; many people fail their first Rfa. Look over the oppose comments and improve-then everyone should be glad to support the next time. Cheers, --Hirohisat Kiwi 00:06, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Oppose albeit reluctantly; You may indeed be ready for adminship, but there is very little evidence that supports that view. Indeed, there is so little evidence that I cannot be certain that you wouldn't run amok with the mop were it handed to you - and for that reason I will have to oppose. I am likely very wrong, but I would like it proven to me by a few months consistent editing and encyclopedia building.LessHeard vanU 22:06, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
  2. Oppose Soory but I don't think you have enough experience. You have only been a few months, and that is not enough time to be experienced enough. You do great work here. You have a solid edit count, but there is also a lack of mainspace contributions. Keep up the good work, and try again in a few months. I am also opposing because of this current edit dispute you are in, and this rude comment about another user to another user. I also don't believe the optinal question to yourself is not funny. PatPolitics rule! 22:10, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
  3. Oppose, but with moral support. I really like the work you've done considering the small number of edits you've done since creating an account. You've done quite a bit of vandal reporting and your edits are well balanced. However, a few more months of continued edits will be necessary before you gain the support of many editors here. I recommend you continue what you are doing for a little while longer to created a longer track record. Keep up the good work, your contributions are very valuable to Wikipedia. If you ever have any questions, I'm always available here. Useight 22:11, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
  4. Oppose per lack of overall experience at this time. Jmlk17 22:59, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
  5. Oppose - Not enough experience. Try again in a few months. Wikidudeman (talk) 23:12, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
  6. Oppose, SNOWBALL I'm sorry Sasha, but you need more experience. Comeback 3000 edits and 3 months from now, and we'll look again. It might be best to seek an editor review before self-nomming. You need more experience all the way around. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 23:13, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
  7. Oppose Unsatisfactory answers to the questions and lack of experience convince me that you are not ready for the mop. That's not say that you never will be, get more experience and try again in several months.--Sandahl 23:40, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
  8. Regretful Oppose I would love to support when you have a little more experience. -Lemonflash(do something) 00:23, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
  9. Oppose - not even time editing under the username Sasha Callahan for the community to develop trust. Will likely succeed in future nomination after more experience. Johntex\talk 00:46, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Neutral

  1. Neutral I do feel that your inexperience is an issue. A couple of months is a very, very short time. You may very well have edited as an anon prior to registering your account, but you haven't provided an IP (though understandable) to see the full extent of your pre-registration experience. Sorry, but not right now. EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:37, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
  2. Neutral I quickly went through your contributions, and they seem good in general. I think that you could use the tools for the types of work you've done. However, I too think that with two months (named) editing and less than 1000 edits, it is too soon. This is not a question of pure counting, but that I like to be better able to judge your interactions with others. I encourage you to continue doing what you do, keep leaving the informative edit summaries, and keep on contributing. -- Flyguy649 talk contribs 22:06, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
  3. Neutral Well, I do commend you for going right in to this. It is great to see that you would LIKE to be an admin, and I'm confident that you would not abuse the tools if you received them. My only issue is that I don't see enough socialness. Your few usertalk space edits are warnings to other users, and I don't see evidence of communicating with other users. Your heart's in the right place, so I will remain neutral. GrooveDog (talk) (Review) 22:11, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
  4. Neutral. I won't go into the experience discussion, but rather I'll make my point regarding trust. Receiving the mop requires that the community trust you; and the extremely short time you've had your account has given no opportunity for that to happen. Take time to know Wikipedia and, just as importantly, make yourself known and trusted by people here. Right now I'd say that's what's missing. Also, if you're serious about being an admin, you should spend a significant amount of time perusing RfAs so you learn what people look for in admin candidates and how best to achieve that profile. Should this request fail, don't be discouraged, take it as an opportunity to learn and improve and try again soon. Given your level of activity I don't think even editcount would be an issue in 6 months - 1 year. Best of lucks. Roadmr (t|c) 22:17, 7 September 2007 (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.