Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Xp54321

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] Xp54321

(talk page) (0/6/0); Scheduled to end 01:18, 30 May 2008 (UTC) Closed per WP:NOTNOW Enigma message 02:09, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Xp54321 (talk · contribs) - I have worked tirelessly on Wikipedia. After realizing how useful the extra tools admins have,I am putting in this RfA. I do promise if granted adminship to use them properly,to help other users, and to follow Wikipedia policy. Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 01:18, 23 May 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: I will be very busy at RPP,AIV, and other areas that require admin attention. I believe when users put in a request in one of those areas, They should get a quick response with an explanation of the action taken.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: My best contributions are the ones other users consider to have best contributed to 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 been in one edit war over updating the storage counter for Gmail. I thought it should be every 100MB Another user wanted to stick with the original 500 MB limit. The war was resolved and was suggested for the silliest edit wars ever page.

Optional question from Zginder

4. What do you consider the most important English Wikipedia Policy and why?

The free documentation license. It allowed the formation of a great encyclopedia and one that will hopefully last the ages. I am proud to be part of the community contributing to it.Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 01:57, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] General comments

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Xp54321 before commenting.

[edit] Discussion

  • Registered March 1, 2008, was blocked once per checkuser evidence, and is still a newbie. Fair point. Enigma message 01:46, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
  • And, unless he provides good excuses in the next half hour, is about to have rollback taken away. Metros (talk) 01:48, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Somebody close this. Wisdom89 (T / C) 01:58, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Note the comment below was not by me. Want to request checkuser?;)Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 02:04, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Look, he's just in 7th grade. People can make mistakes. I must point this out.Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 02:03, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

You realize that you signed a comment made by the IP address right? Wisdom89 (T / C) 02:06, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Support

Support-- Sorry, that I'm not logged in, the computer won't accept my password, but I think that this person has many of the qualifications to be an admin, and all the dedication required. I know how hard it is to be at school and edid Wikipedia at the same time —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.182.108.14 (talk • contribs) 01:57, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Sigh. Wisdom89 (T / C) 01:58, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
IPs can't vote. Sorry. Metros (talk) 02:04, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

OK I'll try to log in —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.182.108.14 (talk • contribs) 02:06, 23 May 2008

[edit] Oppose
  1. Oppose - Given your tenure here, and the number of edits (but mostly the former), I can't get a good grip on how you'd behave/act if you were granted the bit. Sorry. Inexperience concerns for me. Wisdom89 (T / C) 01:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
  2. Oppose - quite inexperienced, but more crucially practically no projectspace edits at all. Black Kite 01:35, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
  3. Oppose due to lack of experience. Majoreditor (talk) 01:38, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
  4. Strong oppose per Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Xp54321 as well as this use of rollback just an hour ago. Metros (talk) 01:39, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
  5. Strong oppose per Metros. --Ave Caesar (talk) 01:41, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
  6. Absolutely not It's less than three days since I last issued you a warning for your behaviour, and I see no reason to trust you; on the contrary, I see someone frantically abusing automated tools to boost their edit count, who appears to want adminship to add to their trophy cabinet, rather than to do anything useful. — iridescent 01:50, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
    Regarding your post on my talkpage that accusing you of editcountitis was a personal attack, would you care to explain this? — iridescent 02:02, 23 May 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.