Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/norge0209

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] Norge0209

Final: (0/6/0); Closed per WP:NOTNOW by Useight at 03:20 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Norge0209 (talk · contribs) - Bachelor's Degree in Literature: Creative Writing, familiar with many editing styles; although I may not have contributed much yet, I am looking to do additional contributing as much as possible. J.A. Hurley (talk) 01:48, 14 June 2008 (UTC)


Please consider me based on my potential for administrator-ship, regardless of my few contributions.

[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 am most interested in editing and WikiQuotes. Because of my education (and the fact that my sister works for television news), I often have knowledge of facts that regular users may not.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: My best contributions are my image of MSN Explorer 9, which was my first contribution; I worked hard on that. I have also offered contributions, but I have been unable to edit because of my status. I can assure you that future contributions would be useful and educational, since I have studied Wikipedia's credibility and capability of being used as a scholarly source, and I hope to improve wikis to ensure that what is written is factual.
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: No. I have not had any conflicts. I have, however, suggested editorial changes to pages that were not yet completed. If I were to come across a conflict, I would deal with it rationally and do what is best for the site. If necessary, I would contact an outside source for confirmation.

[edit] General comments

RfAs for this user:

    Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Norge0209 before commenting.

    [edit] Discussion

    [edit] Support
    [edit] Oppose
    1. I think your best bet would be to completely ignore adminship. Contribute, as you intend to, and adminship will come. giggy (:O) 02:04, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
    2. I can see you come with the best of intentions, but I'd ask that you get used to Wikipedia before requesting adminship. I'd recommend reading WP:NOTNOW - feel free to reapply once you have shown some experience with Wikipedia, it's policies and processes. All the best, Gazimoff WriteRead 02:08, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
    3. Please hang around and contribute more to the encyclopedia. Regarding your answer to Question #1, please read Wikipedia:No original research, one of our core policies. Darkspots (talk) 02:15, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
    4. Keep editing as you are. Too soon I'm afraid. I have no doubt you'll make a great editor. In the future, maybe in 6 months come on back to RfA. Wisdom89 (T / C) 02:17, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
    5. Sorry, but you don't have enough experience with Wikipedia. As Giggy said, put adminship out of your mind, and eventually it will come to you. I'm afraid this is going to have to be WP:SNOW'd. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 02:32, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
    6. Not Now--While I applaud enthusiasm, I'm afraid you do not yet possess sufficient knowledge/experience for the community to have confidence in their readiness to become an admin. You may find the following advice helpful. If you have not done so already, please read
      • Generally, It has been my experience that it takes at least 3,000 edits in a variety of areas to learn policy and guidelines well enough to attempt adminship. Also, nominees returning after an unsuccessful RfA should wait at least another 3,000 edits and 3 months before trying again. Nominees need to show the ability to contribute a number of significant edits to build the encyclopedia.
      • The Admin tools allow the user to block and unblock other editors, delete and undelete pages and protect and unprotect pages. Nominees will therefore do well to gain experience and familiarity with such areas as WP:AIV, WP:AFD, WP:CSD, Wikipedia:Protection policy, and WP:BLOCK to learn when to do these things.
      • Adminship inevitably leads one to 1) need to explain clearly the reasons for one's decisions, 2) need to review one's decisions and change one's mind when it is reasonable to do so, 3) need to review one's decisions and stand firm when it is reasonable to do so, 4) need to negotiate a compromise. Admins need a familiarity with dispute resolution. The ability to communicate clearly is essential.
      • Article building is the raison d'être of Wikipedia. I recommend significant participation in WP:GA or WP:FA as the surest way to gain article building experience. Alternatively, one should have added a total of 30,000 bytes of content, not necessarily all in one article. I find a large number of "Wikignome" type edits to be helpful.
      • My suggestion would be to withdraw and try again in another 3 months and 3000 edits. I recommend taking part in RfA discussions to help learn from the experiences of others. Many nominees have found it helpful to obtain an Editor Review or to receive Admin coaching before submitting their RfA. Hope this helps. Good luck and happy editing. Dlohcierekim 03:14, 14 June 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.