Floquenbeam (talk | contribs) →Support: +1 |
Tanthalas39 (talk | contribs) unclosing; does not meet NOTNOW |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<div class="boilerplate metadata rfa" style="background-color: #fff5f5; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> |
|||
:''The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a [[wikipedia:requests for adminship|request for adminship]] that '''did not succeed'''. <strong style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</strong>[[Category:Unsuccessful requests for adminship|{{SUBPAGENAME}}]] |
|||
===[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/TParis00ap|TParis00ap]]=== |
|||
'''Final (0/6/1); Ended 4:47, 21 October 2009 (UTC)''' (closed per [[WP:NOTNOW]] by [[User:Ktr101]].) |
|||
====Nomination==== |
====Nomination==== |
||
{{User|TParis00ap}} – Hello and good morning/afternoon/evening. I would like to nominate myself for adminship with pure intentions to help the encyclopedia. I hope my contributions can speak on my behalf and I could go on a number of paragraphs on why I feel deserving, but I don't think RfA is about who is deserving. I think RfA is about who is capable and trustworthy enough to do good things for the encyclopedia, and I hope you feel I am. So I'd like to tell you a few reasons I may not be and let you decide. |
{{User|TParis00ap}} – Hello and good morning/afternoon/evening. I would like to nominate myself for adminship with pure intentions to help the encyclopedia. I hope my contributions can speak on my behalf and I could go on a number of paragraphs on why I feel deserving, but I don't think RfA is about who is deserving. I think RfA is about who is capable and trustworthy enough to do good things for the encyclopedia, and I hope you feel I am. So I'd like to tell you a few reasons I may not be and let you decide. |
||
Line 63: | Line 56: | ||
=====Neutral===== |
=====Neutral===== |
||
#See above. Regards, --—<small><span style="border:2px solid #340383;color:#5a3596;padding:1px">[[User:Cyclonenim|<b>Cyclonenim</b>]] |[[User_talk:Cyclonenim|<font style="color:#5a3596"> Chat </font>]]</span></small> 16:26, 21 October 2009 (UTC) |
#See above. Regards, --—<small><span style="border:2px solid #340383;color:#5a3596;padding:1px">[[User:Cyclonenim|<b>Cyclonenim</b>]] |[[User_talk:Cyclonenim|<font style="color:#5a3596"> Chat </font>]]</span></small> 16:26, 21 October 2009 (UTC) |
||
:''The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either [[{{NAMESPACE}} talk:{{PAGENAME}}|this nomination]] or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.</div> |
Revision as of 16:49, 21 October 2009
Nomination
TParis00ap (talk · contribs) – Hello and good morning/afternoon/evening. I would like to nominate myself for adminship with pure intentions to help the encyclopedia. I hope my contributions can speak on my behalf and I could go on a number of paragraphs on why I feel deserving, but I don't think RfA is about who is deserving. I think RfA is about who is capable and trustworthy enough to do good things for the encyclopedia, and I hope you feel I am. So I'd like to tell you a few reasons I may not be and let you decide.
- I am a fairly new contributors with only 1996 edits. However, I have indulged myself in not only learning policies and guidelines, but also asking questions so I understand them.
- I do not have a GA or FA, my best contributions are Cool cap, Colorado balloon incident, and The Faerie Path.
- I sometimes get a little hot headed sometimes as shown here, here, here, and I was accused of being insulting here.
- My edits are mostly focused in CSD, which I understand is not a highly regarded field in RfAs, but I try to keep WP:WIHSD and WP:10CSD in mind. I realize they are only essays, but they are pretty good at explaining community consensus as well as common mistakes. I do not feel that all new articles should be speedy deleted if I know they won't pass WP:N, but A7 isn't about WP:N, it is about the assertion of fame or notability, I often PROD instead with my WP:N concerns. I try to save articles when I feel I can such as Crimeface and Mercer_Pottery_Company. I am also trying to propose a new guideline User:TParis00ap/Protecting_Children
Thank you for your consideration.TParis00ap (talk) 14:51, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
- Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept the discussion and constructive criticism I am about to receive. Thanks.
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 administrative work do you intend to take part in?
- A: I would like to take part in WP:CSD, WP:AFD, and working on User:TParis00ap/Protecting_Children. As far as CSD, I would like to do my part to provide a little bit of oversight into CSD. What I mean is, if trusted with the tools, I will ensure that when I delete a G2 or A7 article, I am deleting it for the right criteria it is marked for and there is no way to improve the article, getting it right matters. As far as AfD, I already try to improve articles where I can, but I would take on the added role of closing and taking action on AfDs with community consensus. And as far as my proposed policy, I would like to help the oversight committee with an area of Wikipedia that hasn't had any community discussion since 2006. I would like to help keep children safe on Wikipedia without hindering their contributions.
- 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
- A: As I said above, my best contributions are Cool cap, The Faerie Path, and Colorado balloon incident. Not everyone is an artist and I definitely am not. I do my best to contribute to article space, but I am not the most descriptive person nor do I have the best writing abilities. I try to contribute where I can but I am usually only successful at a few good sentances.
- 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: When I first joined Wikipedia, I was in a conflict with an editor named User:Zephfya. Things became a bit heated, especially when legal threats were made at me. I said my words and when she began blanking the page, I decided to walk away. I've been in a few other disagreements as well, like I said above, but that was probobly the most heated. Since then, I've run into WP:FUCK that I find to be very useful and I recommend it to others wherever I can. I think that essay should be a guideline, it hits a very important point that would solve most conflicts on Wikipedia and greatly improve the encyclopedia.
{{subst:Rfa-question|4|You have experience in CSD and are using that as a basis for your RFA. Different non-admins do different things in CSD. Tell us about what you've done at CSD. Do you think your experiences at CSD and elsewhere in the project have prepared you well enough to use the delete tool in CSD without generating more than a small number deletion reviews or a small number of people people thinking "good riddance, so I won't DRV it, but it really didn't meet any speedy criteria, prod or AFD would've been more appropriate"? Why or why not? If not, what steps will you take as you learn to use the tools to prevent too many inappropriate deletions?
General comments
- Links for TParis00ap: TParis00ap (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
- Edit summary usage for TParis00ap can be found here.
Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/TParis00ap before commenting.
Discussion
Support
- Actual honest-to-God (i.e. not "moral") support. RFA
is reallyshould really be about two things: trust, and confidence. Trust that your judgement is sound and that you aren't a weasel, trying to get adminship in order to help push a POV, play a MMORPG, look at deleted edits for nefarious purposes, etc. Confidence that you either already know exactly what you're doing, or will cause limited problems while you continue learning what you're doing. After a review of your edits and talk page, you've got my trust; you seem to have the trust of the most of the opposers too. You don't quite have my confidence that you already know exactly what you're doing. However, you do have my confidence that you'll cause limited problems while you continue learning what you're doing; you seem to take constructive criticism well, and I don't see a tendency to get in over your head. I suppose I can understand the opposers' desire to see more experience, so they can have more confidence that you won't accidently break something that will be a bother to fix, but I don't share their concern. 2000 predominantly manual, thoughtful edits are enough for me to have enough confidence to support. You'll do fine, whether it's now, or some months down the road. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:48, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Oppose
- Oppose Sorry, I know your doing good, but I don't feel like you've, well to put it bluntly, got the experiance for adminship. Abce2|This isnot a test 15:06, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose - While the page says 2000 edits, most people (including me) want to see at least 3000.--Unionhawk Talk E-mail Review 15:12, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose This edit seems a bit harsh to me. People make mistakes; you don't need to talk to them like they're clueless. I think you will be a good administrator, but are not ready yet. I'd like to note, by the way, that I think the Protecting Children proposal is a great idea. -- Soap Talk/Contributions 15:16, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
- Understood. I just want to let you know, though, that I've known of Until It Sleeps for awhile and I have great respect for him. I was not intending to be harsh and I hope he didn't take it that way. As I said above, I am not good with expressing words and I sometimes can be seen as harsher than I mean.--TParis00ap (talk) 15:35, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose, with confidence that if candidate continues on current path, I'd be happy to support in the future. For the record, I see absolutely nothing wrong with the diff linked above by Soap. In fact, I find that comment to be thoughtful, pleasant, and respectful. Tan | 39 15:29, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
- Reluctant Oppose You could use more experience, and if you continue what you have been doing, I'm sure you would make a fine candidate. I also agree with Tan on the above diff... Until It Sleeps Talk • Contribs 15:33, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Also reluctant oppose - Agree with Tan, I don't see a problem with that diff, but I do not feel you have the necessary experience to be an admin just yet. Keep up the work though. Regards, --—Cyclonenim | Chat 16:20, 21 October 2009 (UTC)- Striking and moving to neutral. You've done good work, I don't think I should be opposing on that basis. Regards, --—Cyclonenim | Chat 16:26, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose - Not quite experienced enough. --Explodicle (T/C) 16:44, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Neutral
- See above. Regards, --—Cyclonenim | Chat 16:26, 21 October 2009 (UTC)