Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Desalvionjr 2


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

Desalvionjr
[ Voice your opinion] (talk page)
 * Withdrawn by administrator Tiptoety  talk per WP:SNOW at 05:14, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

(1/9/1); Scheduled to end 02:10, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

- This is a self nomination. Entering my who knows what month with Wikipedia, and somewhere around 260 edits(a bit low for a RFA, I know), I now feel(a bit more) confident in asking the community to grant me the opportunity to better serve the project as an administrator. According to Interiot's edit counter, my editcountitus addiction has launched me somewhere into the neighborhood of the 260's...

I current focus is mainly on the reverting of vandalism. My edit count should be rising... I currently use Lupins anti vandal tool. I am Interested in studying vandalism. I am often available during the vandalism peak during the day. I am part of the Counter-Vandalism Unit. I am much more in touch with wikipedia than I was at the time of my last RFA.

With the added privileges and responsibilities that come along with being a sysop, additional tasks I intend to help out with include catching and reverting vandalism much faster, Ability to ban repeat offenders, protect pages under siege, and whatever else may come my way.

Also, Please ask optional questions for me to answer, as the more questions answered the better a sysop can be chosen (I think...)

Thank you for your consideration. DeSalvionjr Talk Contribs 02:28, 21 March 2008 (UTC) Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept. DeSalvionjr Talk Contribs 02:29, 21 March 2008 (UTC) DeSalvionjr Talk Contribs 02:10, 21 March 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: Wiping out Vandalism.


 * 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A: Vandalism reverts, because they improve the quality of the article and wikipedia as a whole


 * 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: Not much and I will probably deal with it in a mature way.(I hope)


 * 4. Other than vandalism, which you have stated above as your primary work as admin, what other admin work do you intend to take part in (in general)?

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

Support

 * 1) Moral Support - Shoessss | Chat  04:02, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) Hello, Desa, and thank you for submitting your RfA. While I applaud enthusiasm, I'm afraid an editor with < 1000 edits does not yet possess sufficient knowledge/experience to become an admin. Nominees with < 1000 edits may find the following advice helpful. If you have not done so already, please read
 * Guide to requests for adminship
 * WP:Admin
 * the admin reading list.
 * Generally, It has been my experience that it takes at least 3,000 edits in a variety of areas to learn policy and guidelines well enough to attempt adminship. Also, nominees returning after an unsuccessful RfA should wait at least another 3,000 edits and 3 months before trying again. Nominees need to show the ability to contribute a number of significant edits to build the encyclopedia.
 * The Admin tools allow the user to block and unblock other editors, delete and undelete pages and protect  and unprotect  pages. Nominees will therefore do well to gain experience and familiarity with such areas as WP:AIV, WP:AFD, WP:CSD, Protection policy, and WP:BLOCK to learn when to do these things.
 * Adminship inevitably leads one to 1) need to explain clearly the reasons for one's decisions, 2) need to review one's decisions and change one's mind when it is reasonable to do so, 3) need to review one's decisions and stand firm when it is reasonable to do so, 4) need to negotiate a compromise. Admins need a familiarity with dispute resolution. The ability to communicate clearly is essential.
 * Article building is viewed by many as essential to adminship. I recommend significant participation in WP:GA or WP:FA as the surest way to fulfill this. Alternatively, one should have added a total of 30,000 bytes of content, not necessarily all in one article. I find a large number of "Wikignome" type edits to be acceptable.
 * My suggestion to any nominees with < 1000 edits would be to withdraw and try again in another 3 months and 3000 edits. I recommend taking part in RfA discussions to help learn from the experiences of others. Many nominees have found it helpful to obtain an Editor Review or to receive Admin coaching before submitting their RfA. Good luck and happy editing.  Dloh  cierekim'''  03:12, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose. Not experienced enough, and requested protection on that's received only a handful of edits in the last month.  --Elkman (Elkspeak) 03:27, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) Strongly oppose Way too little experience. I would recommend the nominee gain a lot more experience before reapplying. Stephenchou0722 (talk) 03:39, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose Not enough experience. Suggest close per WP:SNOW.  κaτaʟ aveno  TC 03:56, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose Please don't take this personally - I LOVE your enthusiasm for wanting to be an admin so early, and with a certainly well-intentioned and important primary reason - vandalism. However, generally admins need a LOT more experience (usually about 3000 edits) before their requests are successful.  Don't worry - it really isn't as hard as it seems to get so many edits.  I also recommend that you expand your areas of working in Wikipedia, and not just work primarily with vandalism.  Try looking at the WikiProjects available, join one (or a few) that you like, and improve the articles about subjects and interests you are knowledgeable in.  If you are more active in Wikipedia, I think your next RfA will be more successful. -- Shruti14 t c s 04:05, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose Inexperienced and doesn't seem to have a clear idea of what an admin's job is. We don't give the admin tools to people who simply revert a lot of vandalism. I suggest broadening your Wikipedia horizons. Get involved with RfAs, AfDs, CSDs, and work on doing some article-building.  Enigma  msg! 04:45, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * 6) Oppose. I like your enthusiasm, but it will take quite a bit more experience to give the community evidence of your knowledge of policies and procedures and gain the community's trust. Your work so far is good, but you'll need more of it. I also recommend using edit summaries on every edit. For an example of what is often expected of RFA candidates, please see my RFA standards. If you every have any questions about anything, feel free to contact me. Useight (talk) 05:08, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose - I didn't want to contribute to a massive pile on, but I feel compelled to offer my own criticism/comments, as too much is never enough. Generally users wait until they have reached at least 3000 edits before considering a self-nom, and usually after going through several editor reviews and being under the tutelage of a mentor at administrator coaching. Also, besides general article building in the mainspace, talking in the talkspace, you should familiarize yourself with admin-related areas such as WP:CSD, WP:AIV, WP:UAA, WP:RFPP, the help desk, WP:ANI and perhaps the reference desk. Cheers and happy editing.  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 05:12, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * 8) Strong Oppose You need alot more experience. I have been at wikipedia for 1 month and 1 day and I already have 1750+ edits so you can increase your chances if you wait. Please drop out.-- RyRy5   talk  05:17, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Neutral

 * 1) Enthusiasm is fine and good, but you need more experience... suggest pulling this RfA...Balloonman (talk) 03:24, 21 March 2008 (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.