Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Billy227


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

Billy227
Final (2/11/5); ended 23:23, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Closing as per WP:SNOW. (aeropagitica) 23:24, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

- I am Billy227. I would like to nominate myself for adminship. I think I would make an excellent admin. I have a large amount of edits (over 1,100 to date). I am dedicated to improving Wikipedia. I have never been blocked or warned for vandalism. I am also a very active vandalism fighter, with over 500 reverts of vandalism. I am a significant contributor to several articles, notably Ben Bulben. My edits are done in the formal manner that one should expect from a quality user. I am responsible and don't deny my mistakes. I hope that others will feel the same about me as I do. Thank you! Billy227 talk contribs sndbx usbx 17:13, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I accept.

Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following optional questions to provide guidance for participants:
 * 1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?
 * A: Helping users with their problems, participating in AIV, and continuing by everlasting fight against vandalism.


 * 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A: My edits to Ben Bulben. These edits are good, quality edits, that include adding the infobox, citing sources, fixing tags and spelling, and improving the article's overall quality.


 * 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: Once, I was in an edit war with a vandal, Blt024. They were continually vandalizing the same image page repeatedly (The image has been deleted). I kept reverting this vandal's edits. After a while of this, the vandal grew angry, and began putting profane and unacceptable comments on my userpage. In the end, I reported this user. The user was blocked indefinitely. My interaction with this user was always polite, even in the wake of having my userpage vandalized.


 * 4. In the event that a vandal kept vandalizing a page, thinking that they were helping, what would you do?

General comments

 * See Billy227's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.



''Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Billy227 before commenting.''

Discussion

 * I'm a bit confused by this edit where you move the neutral section above the oppose section, stating you are changing it to the default. Granted it has been a while since my Rfa, but I don't think the default (RfA) has the neutral section in the middle. Certainly not a reason to oppose, but I'm confused. -  auburn pilot  talk  21:53, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) Support - experience seems sufficient. I disagree with AQu01rius's suggestion below that vandalism reverts are unencyclopedic; they are a very important part of maintaining the encyclopedia. Wal  ton  Need some help?  18:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Support - I agree with all his statements and believe he would make a great Administrator. -Klownox Wow, That&#39;s Smart... 19:18, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) Oppose Sorry but you have less than 1000 edits to the main article space, many of these are vandalism reverts, it would be nicer to say some article work, I would also suggest some participation at AIV and XFD and using an edit summary more, I think you could be an admin in the future but I think you need 3-4 months of more experience and contribs.The Sunshine Man 17:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Just a quick note: the candidate actually has around 700 mainspace edits. -- Black Falcon (Talk) 17:36, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Apologies, forgot to add the extra zero to make it read 1000. Thanks! The Sunshine Man 17:40, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose - 300 edits in userspace, 500 vandalism reverts (as claimed), that makes 800 out of 1100 (72%) of the edits unencyclopedic. Not very acceptable. (AQu01rius &#149; Talk) 18:03, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose per above. If you continue the great work, stay active in the community and get a little more familiar and active with policy I would be happy to support you in another 6 months. NeoFreak 18:18, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose edit, while to the sandbox, is far from the level of maturity expected of an admin. Keeping lists of users you've labeled "evil" is an inappropriate use of your userspace, as is this one. Aside from automatically generated Twinkle edits, you rarely use edit summaries. Your interactions with User:Tim.bounceback are also problematic, for example . Some of your early edits are either vandalism or inappropriate, for example and the creation of User:Game_Maker. Sorry, but I'd need to see more maturity and a greater demonstration of your understanding of policies. I'd suggest getting a admin coach and then an editor review. Gwernol 19:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * These edits were all made several months ago. During these months, I have gained much experience and maturity in my editing. Hope you agree! -Billy227 talk contribs sndbx usbx 19:10, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, I agree with your saying that the pages are not acceptable of an admin. the pages have been nominated for speedy deletion by user request. Never again will such stuff be created or written by me. Thanks! -Billy227 talk contribs sndbx usbx 19:13, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose - per above. Consider adoption by an experienced user.  Real96  19:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose Your experience is still leaning toward a new user stage, while your mainspace edits are very inexperienced. Try broadening your edits across Wikipedia, perhaps getting an coach when the time is right.  Then try again sometime in the future. Jmlk17 20:50, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose Along with all of the above, I feel that you can go a little more it to detail with answering the questions. Also might I suggest you get experience in the feild of XFDs. Tarret 21:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose per Real96. Boricuaeddie Talk •  Contribs  •  Spread   the love! 22:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose. not enough edits actually contributing material to the project; answers are poor. -- Phoenix  22:19, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Oppose Your seem to be sincere but I don't think your ready, just by proving that your the bigger man and handeling one situation properly doesn't prove that your ready for adminship. I think with some coaching, and some more experience you'll be ready for adminship.--Acorn98 22:55, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose Looking through your edits, I think that you need more experience of contributing to the policy spaces and the article space with something other than vandal reverts. These are not bad in themselves but you also have to be able to communicate ideas effectively, in article contributions, user Talk edits and policy/ XfD discussions.  You can force your edit summaries in your preferences too.  Work on these areas and try again in six months or so. (aeropagitica) 23:03, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Neutral
 * 1) Neutral. You state that you would use the admin tools primarily to help out at AIV (which is really needed), but I noticed that you generally do not warn vandals (using the templated messages here) after reverting their edits. I would encourage you to make use of the warning templates and, if this RfA does not succeed, to re-apply for adminship in a few months. Best of luck, Black Falcon (Talk) 17:46, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Neutral while I appreciate your enthusiasm towards fighting vandalism, I am afraid you don't have the experience yet. Also, you don't block vandals on the request of users; do you mean AIV? — An as  talk? 18:16, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry! I meant AIV. -Billy227 talk contribs sndbx usbx 18:19, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Neutral to avoid a pile-on. I'd recommend withdrawing for now. You've got the makings of a good admin, though. Cheers, Lanky ○ Yell ○ 18:21, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Neutral I have no doubt you have the temperament, but I'd like more experience. Ditto to Lanky. David Fuchs( talk / frog blast the vent core! ) 21:32, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Neutral I graded you at a B-, which is not bad, but not quite what I'd like to see from an admin. Just get some more experience, and next time around, you'll do better. ¿SFGi  Д  nts!  ☺ ☻ 23:19, 9 May 2007 (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.