Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/ChuckCoke


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

ChuckCoke
(1/7/0); Scheduled to end 02:05, 20 August 2008 (UTC) closed per WP:NOTNOW  Enigma  message 05:13, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

- I regularly check nominated for deletion articles, and if make me admin, you'll see a large number of nominated articles decrease.. ChuckCoke (talk) 02:05, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

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: Deletion of nominated for deletion articles.


 * 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A: Removal of vandalism and contacting the source.


 * 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: Yes, and I thought through it and came to my senses and learned from it.

General comments

 * See ChuckCoke's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.
 * Links for ChuckCoke:

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

Support

 * 1) Moral Support Ice Cold Beer (talk) 05:05, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) Strong Oppose: User has barely any experience at all on Wikipedia. It would be ridiculous to give a user with 65 (at time of edit) (which almost all of them are on talk pages and absolutely none on WP:AfD, which they said would be their main area of interest as an administrator) edits administrative rights. – Jerry  teps  03:59, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose and recommendation for SNOW-y closure. Under two months of experience and with less than 100 edits. Only five edits to the mainspace.-- T B C  ♣§♠  (aka Tree Biting Conspiracy)  04:07, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose. WP:NOTNOW. When you have a couple thousand edits and some experience in adminny tasks, come back. You have less than one hundred edits. &mdash; Mizu onna sango15 Hello!  04:12, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose, and without the feel-good implications of WP:NOTNOW or any of that. Get to know how Wikipedia works first.  Get to know how to properly format an RFA first.  Understand what it means to contribute in Wikipedia project space (or in article space, come to think of it).  --Elkman (Elkspeak) 04:23, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 5) Strong oppose - Basically no experience in Wikipedia and the adminly areas. The answers to the questions are not good either. Less than 100 edits is certainly not enough for any user to become an administrator. Come back in a few months when you have amassed at least over 4000 edits with a good amount of quality edits within them in many adminly areas such as WP:XFD, WP:AIV, WP:UAA, WP:RFPP, WP:AN, WP:ANI and more. Also, add some article writing also. Try expanding/creating articles to WP:DYK, WP:GA and WP:FA. May I point out adoption? You could use it. Thanks, RyRy  ( talk ) 04:48, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 6) Not now —  Realist  2  04:58, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose. A very premature RFA. Somebody please close this. Nsk92 (talk) 05:00, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

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.
 * 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.