Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Tuspm

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.

[edit] Tuspm

Final (1/14/4) ended 18:20, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Tuspm (talk · contribs) – I would like to be an administrator because I am dedicated to keeping Wikipedia the world's best encyclopedia. I have a zero-tolerance policy on vandalism and, just to prove this, I have armed myself with both the VandalProof software and the Popups tool and I use both tools properly. I have nearly 1,500 edits and no vandalism warnings. Ever since I joined Wikipedia, I've always wanted to be an adminisrator and I think now is the time. I ask all fellow Wikipedians to support me. I am definitely interested in Adminship. Thanks! Tuspm [Leave Me A Message] 21:43, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept.
Support
  1. (Moral) Support - I would suggest a kindly bureaucrat close this, or for you to withdraw, as it's no fun watching people pile on. Take notice of what the below people say, work on the areas they mention, and retry in a couple of months. Proto///type 10:13, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  2. (Moral) Support - per above. In 2-3 months, when you have, say, twice as many edits and 100 percent edit summaries, and some overall enhanced expeience and knowledge of the wikipedia system, then I'm sure you'd get a good 90 percent support count. — Deckiller 18:11, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Oppose Try again with question 1 - emphasis on sysop powers. The tasks you've named don't need an admin. I'll reconsider if you give a better answer. --Tango 00:53, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  2. Oppose, Malformed RFA listing. Naconkantari 00:55, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  3. Strong Oppose Very inexperienced. I know its lagging and stuffed but this is the best edit count tool available to me until we get the official edit count stuff and this displays 374 mainspace edits Ok now that we've got the official edit count, 602 mainspace edits are still very low out of which most are just one-off edits to different articles. User talk page seems pretty empty for an RFA candidate, but please correct me if I missed some archives. Will still ask questions in case you can change my mind somehow though...Edit summary usage is also inadequate. Answer to question 1 reveals that this user may not fully understand adminship. The article revealed in Question 2 also reveals a lack of experience as most admins have dealed in bigger articles than that. I hope I don't sound discouraging, you probably have potential for adminship in a few months. Nobleeagle (Talk) 01:02, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  4. Oppose Sorry, looks like a good user who does some good vandal fighting, but low project space edits and low edit summary usage are major concerns at this point. Try again in 3-6 months and I will reevaluate. Eluchil404 01:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  5. Oppose A malformed RfA never looks good, per my different standards. joturner 01:22, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  6. Oppose per above. On number 1, you didn't list anything that being an admin would help you do. You can do these things now.--Kungfu Adam (talk) 02:05, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  7. Oppose for low edit experience and usage of major edit summaries--Jusjih 02:48, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  8. Oppose don't take it too personally. The things that you want to do with your admin powers are things that you can do perfectly well right now. Cleanup definitely needs help! Hang in there and come back in a couple months.--Alphachimp talk 03:14, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  9. Don't-be-discouraged oppose. Doesn't show nearly the breadth of experience I'd need to see, but that could be overcome within just a few months. Keep up the good work. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 04:09, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  10. Oppose. A promising candidate who needs a bit more experience, particularly in the Wikipedia Space, before becoming an admin. Zaxem 04:49, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  11. Oppose. I'd like to see more experience time-wise. SushiGeek 04:57, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  12. Oppose No apparent requirement for admin powers, based upon answers to questions.  (aeropagitica)  (talk)  08:59, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  13. Oppose I'm sorry, I have to oppose. You don't pass my RFA criteria Anonymous__Anonymous 09:14, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  14. Oppose needs to spend a bit more time, the self-nom wasn't really to my liking. Just explains how the user is needy for admin and not a brief overview of what they do on Wiki. I believe the user needs a bit more patience and a bit more experience before they get the huge admin responsibility thrown at them.--Andeh 13:19, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  15. Oppose as an admin, strong support as an editor. —Xyrael / 13:50, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  1. Oppose, lacks of edits and needs more edits in the Wikipedia namespace. High edit count needed, needs more experience and try again in three months. --Terence Ong (Chat | Contribs) 14:29, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Neutral
  1. Neutral to avoid pile on. Sorry, but you're completely inexperienced and your answers are dissatisfying. I would suggest waiting a few months and getting more familiar with Wikipedia before the next nomination. Roy A.A. 02:17, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  2. Suggest Withdrawl - questions don't show need for tools / knowledge of what admins do --Tawker 03:20, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  3. Neutral Does spending a lot of time reverting vandalism prove any qualification for being an administrator? --HResearcher 03:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  4. Neutral to not pile on. First of all, you need some understanding of what an admin does. (Your first answer didn't even address what you will do... Only what you have done.) Take a look at my RfA criteria for the pointers I use in supporting a candidate. Grandmasterka 09:20, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Comments
  • See Tuspm's edit summary usage with Mathbot's tool.
  • Tuspm's edit count using Interiot's tool
Username Tuspm
Total edits 1514
Distinct pages edited 873
Average edits/page 1.734
First edit 01:40, 5 February 2006
(main) 602
Talk 49
User 274
User talk 554
Image 2
Wikipedia 33
Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
A: Well, I plan to cleanup articles listed in the cleanup category. I have done some of that work previously. I have also done work on articles that need to be merged. For articles with these tags, I see how many people oppose and how many people support the merging between the articles and if a majority of people oppose, I remove the tag. If a majority of the people agree, I merge the articles.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I am particulary pleased in the Jeff Dunham article I created because it started off as a single paragraph article and because of other Wikipedians, it has grown somewhat into a better, more reliable article.
3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
A: I have been in some conflicts with other users, like edit wars. What I do is I give the user a {{subst:test1}} warning at first and then go up the scale if they continue to vandalize pages. Once I (or any other user) gives them a {{subst:test4}} warning, I report them to the administrators. And I don't feel like anyone has given me stress because on my user page, I have a wikistress meter and it has never gotten past the "guarded" point, which is good.
Question from Yanksox (optional)
4. What is your knowledge of admin powers? Yanksox (talk) 00:50, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Optional Questions from Nobleeagle (Talk)
Q: What part of Wikipedia do you dislike the most or feel most frustrated with in your time here thus far (this can be a user, type of user, policy, restriction etc.)? Have you tried to overcome these and would adminship make life any easier for you?


Q: Above you can see a number of statistics about your edits. Do you consider any of these important? Which do you consider most important?


Q: Lastly, do you have any criteria when voting in RFAs? If so please present them, if not then it doesn't matter.

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.