Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Yuser31415

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] Yuser31415

Final (2/10/9); ended 19:25, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I am going to be bold and close this RfA discussion as the consensus is clear from the opinions given so far - a lack of experience in all of the main areas of Wikipedia. This can be resolved with time spent editing and contributing constructively in the article space; policy; XfD discussions using policies and guidelines to back up opinions; user Talk and performing admin-related tasks such as vandal reversion and warnings. This isn't a reflection upon the character of Yuser31415 - it is a brave decision to open oneself up to the community in this fashion. This isn't so much WP:SNOW as a hailstorm of opinion. (aeropagitica) 19:31, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Yuser31415 (talk · contribs) - Hi! Welcome all to my RfA. Before I get into detail I'd like to express my gratitude to all those who have influenced me on Wikipedia, helping me become a better editor; special thanks to Deskana, SUIT, TheMadBaron (and the vandals, for giving me an opportunity to revert them and warn them Template:Emot).

I'd like to express my wish to serve Wikipedia as an administrator, and believe that I would use the extra tools in a responsible and reasonable way. My primary uses for them would be, of course, reverting and protecting pages, blocking users after a discussion at the administrator's noticeboard, and intervening during personal attacks.

I'd like to note that I may be away for the 23rd, 24th, and part of the 25th of December leading up to Christmas, so I may not be able to reply to queries during this time (I may, or may not, have Internet access). The exact length of time is not yet confirmed, but I will be away on the 24th (in New Zealand, it's the 25th of December then).

Thank you all,

Best regards, Yuser31415 04:51, 22 December 2006 (UTC).

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Of course I accept my self nomination.


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 do you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog and Category:Administrative backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
A: Well, some areas I would like to help out with would be WP:ANI, where I would be happy to deal with general requests requiring admin attention; WP:AIV, where I can help block users if required, escalating lengths of blocking (although IPs cannot be indef blocked, since other users than the culprit may use them); CAT:CSD, where I can help delete pages that do not warrant inclusion in our encyclopedia; and WP:PAIN, dealing with users who are being attacked or insulted by other users. I also expect the tools would be useful while RC patrolling.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I do not own any of my work, and instead I am happy to help other users improve my contributions. I am, however, proud of my Wikignomic work: reverting vandalism, fixing grammatical errors, punctuation, and spelling, and welcoming users. I enjoy helping newbies.
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: As noted above, I'm a Wikignome, so I generally don't make edits that would likely be caught in a conflict - I have never been in an edit war yet.
Optional Question for the candidate from User:Renesis13 I told you I would!
1. If you found out (conclusively) that George W. Bush was using an account to change all instances of "Google" to "The Google", would you block it as a "vandalism-only account", and, if not, what action would you take?  :)
A: I would block it as a vandalism account. I'm a New Zealander, so I don't have much to fear. Template:Emot
Real question. Had you considered that no matter how much you have learned in two months, it would be too short of a time for some people to support you? If so, what motivated you to start an RfA in spite of this?
A: I realize that the standards of RfAs have risen in the past years, and therefore I realize some people will oppose based on my number of edits. However, the main reason I made a request is because I genuinely feel I can benefit Wikipedia and its users more as an administrator, and I want to help out as much as I can. Wikipedia needs more admins; the number of Wikipedians is growing as our encyclopedia does. I wish to be one of that number and help as much as I can. Yuser31415 06:48, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Optional questions from Malber (talk · contribs)

5. What do the policy of WP:IAR and the essay WP:SNOW mean to you and how would you apply them?
A:
6. Is there ever a case where a punitive block should be applied?
A:
7. What would your thought process be to determine that a business article should be deleted using CSD:G11?
A:
8. What is your age? (Candid and thoughtful responses are appreciated, however if you feel uncomfortable giving a specific answer, providing an age range is also appreciated.)
A:



General comments

Discussion

Support

  1. --dario vet ^_^ (talk) 11:46, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  2. Moral support. I suggest withdrawl, but I think you should get experience in the different areas and policies. Check out places like WP:AFD, WP:CFD, WP:IFD, WP:MFD, WP:TFD, WP:DRV (this should cover the main deletion places). Make sure to read through WP:AN to see how admins handle more complex problems. Also, it's never a bad idea to have a read through core policies such WP:NPOV, WP:OR, and WP:V. And finally, be sure to contribute to the encyclopedia through actual article-building, such as joining a WikiProject. This will expose you to pretty much every process, policy, and conflict possible. --Wafulz 18:30, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Oppose Sorry to start your RfA off like this, but you are unfortunately just not experienced enough for me to feel comfortable giving you the admin tools-- you have been here for less than two months and only have about 2000 edits. You seem to be on the right track, though. I would recommend coming back in several months after you have gained more experience. Dar-Ape 05:39, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
    What do you believe I could boost my experience on? Is there anything in particular? Yuser31415 05:54, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
    For me, I would say that you need to be familiar with other namespaces in Wikipedia (Image, Category, Template, Mainspace Talk). AQu01rius (User • Talk) 06:04, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  2. Oppose - Sorry, but you have only been active in Wikipedia for two months (First edit: 26 October 2006), which really is not enough. Also, your mainspace contribution is very low, and majority of them are merely fixing typos. You need to contribute to the content of a article sometimes. AQu01rius (User • Talk) 05:56, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
    You are correct that one needs to contribute to articles. However, I don't think that is a legitimate reason to oppose (though of course it may be), since admin tools are not necessarily related to large article contributions, but rather to judgement and responsibility. Yuser31415 06:00, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
    Right, but your judgment and responsibility are demonstrated through the depth and quality of your contributions. The way you interact with other users is of particular interest...that type of thing really only bears itself out over time. Alphachimp 06:09, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
    I understand your point of view, but this is a encyclopedia, and proving yourself as a capable contributor is always the priority. You may not have to edit articles very often after you are granted adminship (because you will then have to devote time on admin-specific duties), but before that, you will need to prove yourself. As a suggestion, I encourage you to improve Yabasic article to featured quality, and participate in article talk pages way more often (you currently have 17). Besides mainspace contribution, I think you are okay with other prerequisites. If you can improve that and apply again after two months or so, I believe you will then be in a good position. AQu01rius (User • Talk) 06:15, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
    Thank you for your suggestions, they are very much appreciated. Your advice will help make me a better user. I will consider bringing Yabasic to featured status. Yuser31415 06:57, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  3. Oppose. Keep doing the things you're doing right now for a few more months. There's nothing wrong with your experience, there just is not enough of it. Your first edit was near the end of October. We just don't have enough to base a support on. Alphachimp 06:09, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  4. Oppose - got nothing against you, but 2 months isn't really enough. I would be neutral but I'm not seeing an actual need for the tools. Most of the stuff you mentioned in Answer 1 is dispute resolution-style stuff, but do you have any actual experience of this? Much in the way of Newpage patrol - a must if you're going to keep an eye on CAT:CSD? I'm not seeing any quality articles either - WP:GA or WP:FA - and that does count for something. Moreschi Deletion! 11:20, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  5. Oppose - same reasoning, simply too little time and experience, but you sure are on the right track.--Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 11:22, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  6. Oppose, lacks of experience, needs more time though. Terence Ong 12:04, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  7. Oppose, lack of experience as others have said. Give it time! --teh tennisman 14:24, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  8. Oppose, experience concerns as above. Deizio talk 14:40, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  9. Oppose. You haven't been here long enough to understand the details of Wikipedia. Nishkid64 15:31, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  10. Oppose. I hate to rub it in, but you do need some more experience around here. You're on the right track, though. Keep up the good work, and try to interact more with users on article talk pages rather than on their user talk pages (on related issues of course). —LestatdeLioncourt 17:25, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

  1. Sorry, but just over a month under two months is simply too little experience. -Amarkov blahedits 05:36, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
    Can you elaborate on that, please? What do you believe I need experience with? Cheers, Yuser31415 05:54, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
    Everything. --Centrx→talk • 06:21, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
    That wasn't very helpful. --Deskbanana 10:31, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
    Yes it was. There's no particular thing he hasn't participated in as much as I like, he just needs more time on the site. -Amarkov blahedits 15:04, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  2. As others have said...keep up the good work for a while longer...spend time in as many areas of wikipedia as you can...you should be ready before too long and back with a nomination. Kukini 07:31, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  3. Neutral. I can't oppose you, but I think you should have waited a bit longer before starting this RfA. Keep up the work and reapply in a few months and I'm sure you'll get adminship. --Deskbanana 10:53, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  4. Neutral This could be considered as a moral support. I believe in the saying "better surely than quickly". Elaborating on this would be like "it is better to go on w/ the good work" until you get some more experience. I see this move which was done w/o prior discussion. I know it was a bold move but it was innacurate and didn't follow neither a policy nor a guideline. You hadn't refered first to Wikipedia:Requested moves. You hadn't consulted Lowercase second and subsequent words in titles neither because "Compact Disc" (CD) is written and spelled in CAPS wordlwide. So it is "better late than never". -- Szvest - Wiki me up ® 11:20, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  5. Neutral - A bit too early. Insanephantom 13:11, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  6. Neutral You're doing well and you're on the right track, but you need much more experience and time around to be more familiar with the community and Wikipedia' policies. All the best. ← ANAS Talk? 13:21, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  7. Neutral per above comments. sign here — s d 3 1 4 1 5 13:32, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  8. Neutral The comparatively small editcount does not worry me at all, and the short time on WP is only slighty troublesome, but only 17 talk edits is unavoidably low. -- Kicking222 14:43, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  9. Neutral- You are a good editor, but I think you should have waited a bit more before running for an RFA--SUIT 17:23, 22 December 2006 (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.