Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/YHoshua

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] YHoshua

Final (0/11/7) ended 06:02 10 December 2005 (UTC)

YHoshua (talk · contribs) – This is me YHoshua 18:40, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

I accept this nomination, because it's from me :)

Support

Oppose

  1. Oppose more time, more work, etc. Just work on it, stay around. Quentin Pierce 21:08, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
  2. Oppose. I'd like to see more consistent participation and more edit summaries (you really don't use them often). Less than 1000 edits is quite low, given how long your account has been registered. You do seem like a good editor, though; with a few more months of consistent, good work, I will probably support your next nomination. --Idont Havaname 23:03, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
  3. Oppose Needs more experience. --Rogerd 02:16, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
  4. Strong Oppose Besides the lack of experience, user's nomination statement is, well, very bad. Please take the time to say something about yourself, and why you want the job. I know that's what the questions are for, but I consider the nomination, "This is me", to be flippant, and that is a bad quality in admin. Next time, put a little more thought into this. Xoloz 06:44, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
  5. Oppose not enough edits. Dmn 12:51, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
  6. Oppose. Way too low an edit count 1) for us to make an accurate judgement on their suitability for adminship and 2) for YHoshua to have the knowledge of the ins and outs of the Wikipedia that an admin needs. BlankVerse 16:19, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
  7. Oppose i've recently been making a few contributions and have been surprised at both his lack of people skills and at times his editorial judgement. he also demonstrates an authoritarian style that would not be well suited for a collaborative environment such as wikipedia. Randella 22:25, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
  8. Oppose. A few more months, a couple hundred more edits, and a mission statement explaining your desire for adminship, and I'll change to support. Crotalus horridus 15:18, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
  9. Oppose. CDThieme 18:48, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
  10. Oppose. Seems like you want to be an admin "just because." howcheng [ t • c • w • e ] 21:52, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
  11. Oppose. I'm sure this user's great, but such a lacksiedaisical self-nom isn't a good teaser of what we could expect from this contributor. -- user:zanimum

Neutral

  1. I think you have great potential, and you've made good edits, but I'd like to see you stay involved at this level for another month or so. On the other hand, I have nothing against you becoming an admin, and wish you the best of luck. BD2412 T 19:16, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
  2. I'd personally say another two months would be better, but yeah. Wait a little and try again. ナイトスタリオン ✉ 19:42, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
  3. Neutral as per the two. However, your self-description is pretty bare, and may attract oppose voters. NSLE (讨论+extra CVU) 01:21, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
  4. Keep up the good work. --Merovingian 01:35, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
  5. per above. Oran e (t) (c) (e-mail) 06:27, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
  6. use edit summaries more often and you will gain my support.--Alhutch 02:23, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
  7. Neutral Would like to see a little more work, low ammount of User Talk edits, needed for effective vandal tracking and handling. xaosflux T/C 04:27, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Comments

  • Hi. I noticed that you signed up in January and got off to a roaring start, but then you virtually disappeared from February 1 to November 7 (with only two edits in that time, on February 17 and March 5)[1]. I'm curious about the reason for that long gap, since you've only had about five weeks of real activity, which some would consider to be too short a time. By the way, I welcome you to add your name to Category:Law student Wikipedians. Cheers! BD2412 T 19:01, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
    • There's no real reason for my absence, other than I decided to focus on website design and writing a column for a newspaper. I've since refocused my efforts here though, and I can assure you it will continue.--YHoshua 19:16, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong Oppose, has vandalized pages (cf. in "Lincoln Logs"). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.253.237.224 (talk • contribs) 02:42, 10 December 2005 anonymous users are not allowed to vote in RfA.--Alhutch 23:11, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
    • I appreciate legitimate criticism, but false charges leveled because of ignorance are dispicable. Lincoln Logs did in fact originally come with instructions on how to build "Uncle Tom's cabin". See Edward Pessen, The Log Cabin Myth (New Haven: Yale UP, 1984); and Lies Across America: What Our Historic Site Get Wrong by James W. Loewen, page 169. Get your facts straight next time before accusing someone of vandalism.--YHoshua 23:16, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate
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. I'm particularly interested in preventing vandalism, repairing vandalism, and working with users who commit it. I also feel like Afd is an important area that I'd approach with objectivity.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. As is evident from my user page, I have a fondness for the law and Indiana related articles. Therefore I'm pleased with Indiana University School of Law Indianapolis and Indiana Hoosiers, two that I created.
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 haven't been in any notable conflicts that I can recall, and I've certainly not felt stress, but that could just be because I'm a relatively laid back guy. But when and if conflict arises, I fully plan on approaching it with kindness and an open mind.
The above 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 article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.