Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/nathannoblet

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.

[edit] nathannoblet

Ending 15:44, 2006-08-26 (UTC)

nathannoblet (talk · contribs) – Long term wikipedian wanting adminaship Nathannoblet 12:22, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I Accept my 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, 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: Keeping wikipedia a good research place

2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?

A: I have none of these,no

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: No I have not had any suck incidents and will just give an friendly "Plz stop"

Comments

• See nathannoblet's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool.
• My edit count (Interiot's Tool) as of the time on this stamp. nathannoblet (Talk) 13:51, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Final tally: (0/9/3)

Support

Oppose

1. Oppose Normally, edit count wouldn't be that much of a biggie, but you have made only 20. That makes me feel you lack much experience needed to be an administrator. Also, because of your low edit count, there's nothing for me to see how you would handle conflict or stressful situations. I think you need heaps more experience in a lot more areas of Wikipedia before trying for RfA. _{talk to} JD ^{wants e-mail} 12:31, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
2. Sorry, but no. Less than 25 edits in two months, weak answers to questions. Makes me wonder if you even need the tools - adminship is not needed to "keep wikipedia a good research place". I would strongly suggest you withdraw before a pile on. — FireFox ^(talk) _{12:32, 26 August 2006}
3. Don't think I need to say much. Per above. – Chacor 12:34, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
4. Oppose per above.--Jusjih 13:51, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
5. Oppose, needless to say, user has very low edit count, enough said. --Terence Ong _{(T | C)} 13:53, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
6. Oppose, obviously. Aren't I Obscure? 14:29, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
7. Oppose you've not really been around a long time, and only have 20 edits. Also, it's good to have some experience of a conflict as admins have to deal with these regularly. Sorry. --Alex ^{talk here} 14:41, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
8. Extremely Strong Oppose and move to BJAODN Is this a joke? --CFIF ☎ 14:58, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
9. Oppose I just don't think you have enough experience - in time or in edits. --Db099221 15:33, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Neutral Far too few edits and no demonstration of understanding of the role of an administrator. I suggest that this RfA is closed early and that you go off and get some experience in other areas of Wikipedia. Article editing & creation is a minimum, then on to project areas. Come back again in six months/3000+ edits, whichever is sooner. If you don't fancy that, please try an editor review to see where your peers think that you could improve.  (aeropagitica)   (talk)  12:56, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
2. Ask for withdrawal Sorry, nathan, but it's not going to happen (at least, not right now). -- Kicking222 13:20, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
3. Urge withdrawal. Nathan, you're too new. Most editors require at least 2,000 edits before they even consider a candidate for adminship. Try editor review in the meantime, and keep up the great work! :) Srose (talk) 13:55, 26 August 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.