Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:New adminship proposals


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was : Author requested deletion. Talk page has a couple of useful comments, it's up to those folks if they want to delete the talk page too.Nick (talk) 23:30, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

New adminship proposals
We don't vote on this kind of thing, and even if we did, this particular instance of trying to encourage RfA reform seems quite misguided - there's no discussion that I can find regarding it's creation and seems to be a decision by one editor to further bureaucratise the RfA process (a process to change a process?). Including Template:NRFA_questions in this nom too. A quick look at that template shows that this is an attempt to treat reform of RfA as if it were an RfA itself. (sorta ironic, no? using a "broken" process to fix a process) -- Naerii  20:33, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Deleep 86.139.87.45 (talk) 20:51, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominators argument. The whole New adminship proposals smacks of "I want to be an admin so I'll just change the process to become an admin". Nick (talk) 20:54, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Not true. I was planning on running before any change was made, if I even did run. Please delete this page to avoid any assumption of this. Sorry. STORMTRACKER    94  Go Irish! 22:43, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.