Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Coallen


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

coallen
[ Voice your opinion] (4/9/0); Scheduled to end 15:40, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

- this user is me and i believe I can, edit and be trusted with the new authority that mat be given to me Coallen 15:40, 5 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

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: To patroll in new or editing favored articles like (avatar, naruto, and bleach)


 * 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A: The Air Nomad article an avatar.


 * 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 with a article with avatar the last airbender and the date was disputed.

General comments

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


 * Links for coallen:

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

Discussion


Support
 * 1) Moral Support As this RfA is going to fail I dont want to add on to the pile-on, you could definitely be an admin in the futurure with some improvements. The Sunshine Man 18:43, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Well if you don't make it this time round, you can do it again. I'm sure you'd make a heck of a better Admin than many on the job at the moment. [[Image:Smiley.svg|20px]] Gold♥   19:50, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Support, run again! You're sure to succeed once you've gained the respect of other editors for good work here and there... -- Phoenix2  (holla) 19:53, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Moral Support per above. Clearly a good editor, but not experienced enough yet to understand the admin tools. I would advise withdrawing this RfA, getting some more experience, and coming back in 2-3 months; I'd be happy to offer help and advice. Walton Assistance!  19:56, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) Hi Coallen, sorry, but you haven't got enough edits to show you have the required experience to be an administrator. The community need to be sure you can be trusted. If I was you, I'd comment on some deletion debates and get involved in some wikipedia policy matters. Also, editing articles really helps to grasp the notability criteria which is essential for admins when they are deciding whether to delete articles or not. You do a really good job however so keep up the excellent work :-)  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  16:10, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Have to agree with the above. It looks like you're genuinely itnerested in helping the project out, but for the duties you've listed above you don't really need the extra admin tools.  As mentioned above, get a little more experience under your belt with policy and related tasks, get a little more familiar with the project and try again.  But definitely keeup wup the good work.  Ark yan  &#149; (talk) 16:17, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose per lack of edits, plus the fact that you couldn't even set this up on your own. See 1, 2, 3.  I also think that you're the one who signed Frye2387's name under support.  According to his contributions he's never commented on an RFA before, see 4.   BH  (Talk) 16:19, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Fine, if you insist on readding this, have you got something constructive to say to the candidate instead of just biting their head off?  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  16:23, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Please explain why I'm newbie biting. Clearly he's been here for 4 more months than I have.  And plus, I think the fact that he couldn't set this up right shows he might not be the best person to trust with tools.  And he did sign another user's name under support, but someone removed it.   BH  (Talk) 16:29, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah I removed. A new user does not understand how wikipedia works, they do not understand what is required for adminship, so if somebody comes along with a super-wicked oppose - it is not helping the candidate whatsoever, and has servere civiity issues attached to it. Offer the candidate some advice, don't lay into them.  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  16:34, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * You know, I've been here six weeks, so who's to say your not Biting me for speaking my mind in a discussion. And please do not post on my talk page without reading my rebuttals of your points first.   BH  (Talk) 16:37, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * With all due respect, if you start biting users then you've got to expect to take what comes with it.....  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  16:39, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * This is perhaps not the place for this discussion, but this is not not the first time that Balck Harry's wicked strong commentaries have been found objectionable .  I consider snide remarks like this incivil.  &mdash; Gaff  ταλκ 19:58, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Sorry coallen, but I have to oppose. What you have done so far looks good, but there are a number of things you need to do to be considered at RfA:A) Edit! Many users will automatically oppose if your edit count is low, so that is likely, nay, is one of the largest things you need to do. B) Get involved in debates at WP:XFD. Admin work is mostly about deletion and such vandal fighting, so users need to know that you are committed to this never ending duty. C) Get your edit summary usage up. Though it may not be the most important thing, users who comment here often look at this category. I'd suggest that you go to Special:Preferences and click the box that forces you to make an edit summary. This will serve as a handy reminder, and it makes your edits look more professional. Best of luck! -- tennis man  16:50, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose. Really sorry about this, but we need admins who use the edit summary a bit more than you do, so we know what they are doing exactly. Secondly, your edit count is a tad low at the moment, come back when you've got a fair few more, and others may change their vote, cos some people base their vote on edit count alone, which I think is a bit like editcountitis, for the simple reason we need experienced admins who have a lot of experience editing, AND who are more than capable of handling the tools. So, I look for involvement in debates, like RFAs, among a few. Also, being an admin is being given a mop, not an award. This means you will be involved in a lot of maintainance work. Also, you say that you will just patrol new articles, which can be done by any editor. My advice to you would be to withdraw this request, then come back later, when you meet some of these criteria. Any questions can go on my talk page.  Stwalkerster  talk review 17:12, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose. I'm going to have to agree with Ryan on this one. You need to have a good enough experience so the community knows that they can trust you. Participate in those particular areas, otherwise, you're doing some good work here. Keep it up! Sr13 17:26, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose. I'm with the people who say to get your edit count and edit summary usage up first. In addition, you didn't fully answer the questions above.--SarekOfVulcan 18:26, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose Good to see that you want to help out! You will need to spend some more time around here before we can give you the admin tools.  Some suggestions: Work on adding edit summaries to your edits (you can set up your preferences so that it will remind you to do this);  Think about working with one of the Wikiedia Projects;  Do some work on WP:AFD, reverting vandalsim, etc, as those are places where admin attention is key;  Also, read through some of the other Requests for Admniship to get a sense of the sort of answers to the questions above that lead to successful RfA's.  &mdash; Gaff  ταλκ 18:45, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Oppose I'm sorry but you don't have enough experience under your belt yet, however you are doing some great work here. I would try again in a few months.  Æon  Insanity Now!  18:59, 5 June 2007 (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.