Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Bigtop (2nd nomination)


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

Bigtop
Final (0/4/3) Ended 2006-07-10 (UTC) ended - nomination withdrawn (considering editor review)'''

– I prefer trying to delete speedy deletion candidates, block users, as well as being part on admin-only projects. I also want to try out other administrator features available. Since I recently have VandalProof with me, I'm trying to keep Wikipedia clean. I'm trying to block users/IPs that are doing vandalism, as well as revert vandalism on a page. (see also my editor review) Big  top  ( tk | cb | em | ea ) 20:32, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Update - I haven't been experiencing a lot of features an administrator have - I'm going to study for a while. -- Big  top  ( tk | cb | em | ea ) 21:00, 10 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept my second nomination. -- Big  top  ( tk | cb | em | ea ) 20:44, 10 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Support


 * Oppose
 * 1) Oppose, Your opening statement and answers to the questions show me that you don't have enough experience to be an adminstrator. You need to get more and then run again when you are ready.--John Lake 20:58, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose - statements lead me to believe user is not ready -- Tawker 21:01, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose per above. Roy A.A. 21:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose per above. Nacon kantari  22:14, 10 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Neutral
 * 1)  I have some good things from this user, not without his/her merits, but from what I've read, the editor needs to get a deeper understanding of policy, especially in relating to adminasterial (not a word, but whatever ;) jobs. H ig hway Batman! 21:07, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) I would advocate closing this RfA early and seeking an editor review instead. This will give you specific areas upon which to improve in order to demonstrate good admin potential.  The answers to the questions below do not currently demonstrate such potential.   (aeropagitica)   (talk)   21:14, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Neutral per others. I would also like to see some more mainspace and Wikipedia-space edits. --Mr. L e fty Talk to me! 22:01, 10 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Total edits	1242
 * Main:	164
 * Talk:	14
 * Image:	26
 * Image talk:	1
 * Wikipedia:	144
 * Wikipedia talk:	13
 * User:	474
 * User talk:	362
 * Template:	36
 * Template talk:	3
 * Portal:	0
 * Portal talk:	0
 * Category:	5
 * Category talk:	0

Crazynast 21:20, 10 July 2006 (UTC) 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:
 * Questions for the candidate
 * 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: I need some help on most administrator jobs, such as how to delete as well as participate on 3RR noticeboard. I'm thinking I want to help the community not to vandalize pages too much. I should watch out on the Administrators' noticeboard and I should watch most-vandalized pages, such as Italy (because the country won the 2006 FIFA World Cup; for example). Note that I recently signed up for VandalProof. The biggest thing I'm focusing is how I want to keep Wikipedia clean. I'm trying to block users/IPs who are doing vandalism too much than the limit. Also, I'm trying to delete pages which are patent nonsense, advertising, etc., as because there's things what Wikipedia is not. I also want to revert pages which recent edit was vandalism to the page, as well as protect pages if a page was vandalize too much. I'll be learning how to be a good administrator during the summer so I can be doing well as an administrator in the future.


 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * A: I'm pleased on creating doppelganger accounts (currently I made three, including two Jimbo Wales-related users) because I'm trying to reduce impersonation to new users. Impersonation has been a concern as users might not know who's the real user or administrator. Impersonation may include role account (such as a username named "Wikipedia Administrator"), duplicates of existing administrators and other usernames, and more.


 * 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: I have been recently felt stressed by other users because I did not know I was a "vandalism-only account." I'm not a vandalism-only account, since I don't come here for vandalism. One example happened on July 9, 2006. I made an impostor tag to a Jimbo Wales imposter, and I did not know when I went to my talk page, I was blocked indefinitely . However, I was innocent - I was just tagging an impostor tag, not creating a vandal-only account! So then, I requested to be unblocked because I did not do anything wrong - I just only tagged an impostor, so then an administrator unblocked me. Starting now, I should watch pages when needed (such as watching most-vandalized pages) and I should add an edit description on what I edited.
 * 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.