Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/mcepitome

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] mcepitome

Final (1/3/3) Ended 01:44, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

mcepitome (talk · contribs) – I'm a 21 year old Law student from England simply keen on helping Wikipedia out with its upkeep. I have an eye for grammer, an intellectual mind, and am keen on helping Wikipedia provide the best service possible.

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: No, I'll withdraw based on the advice from those that have already posted.
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: The speedy deletion of files obviously unsuitable for Wikipedia was my first thought in this visinity. Also creating redirect pages for when those capital letters get muddled up. I also have an inherent ability to correct grammer, which comes through many years of writing essays. All my university friends choose me to "proof read" their essays.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: My "Sporty Thievz" article, because of the expansion of the article since I added to it by other people whereas previously it was uninteresting and lacked any subject matter. This is what I feel Wikipedia is all about.
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: A couple of articles I constructed surrounding WWE were deemed to be unnecessary fanfare. I spent hours constructing these articles with good information and presentation, so was a little disappointed, but no more than that. Perhaps it will drive me to upkeep the presentation in Wikipedia's articles.
General comments

Discussion (for expressing views without numbering)

  • Appreciate your enthusiasm but suggest withdrawal. To become an administrator here requires a substantial edit history and evidence that you are familiar with Wikipedia policies and procedures that require administrator tools. Your edits so far are good ones, and we can always use more editors and admins with legal expertise, but your contributions so far do not give the RfA "voters" enough evidence of your need for the admin tools and the ability to use them properly. Again, I suggest that you withdraw this RfA, continue making contributions as an editor, and come back down the road with a great deal more contributions under your belt. (P.S. It's "grammar.) Newyorkbrad 00:51, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Support

  1. Moral support, leaving a message on mceptiome's talkpage. This isn't going to pass, sorry. :( Daveydweeb (chat/patch) 00:51, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Oppose Fewer than 200 edits. Michael 00:48, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
  2. Oppose, too few edits to suggest familiarity with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Naconkantari 00:55, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
  3. Oppose, Needs more experiences. Daniel5127 (Talk) 00:56, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

  1. Clear-cut. You're not going to make it, please withdraw. – Chacor 00:46, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
  2. I suggest withdrawing this RfA. If you're interested in becoming more involved with the project, let me know and I'll be happy to help! hoopydinkConas tá tú? 00:51, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
  3. (edit conflict)Based on your background and personality, I'm sure that you'll make a qualified admin someday. However, please withdraw this time. RfAs rarely pass unless a user has more than 2,000 edits. - Mike | Talk 00:53, 22 October 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.