Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Dr.Szląchedzki


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

Dr.Szląchedzki
Final: (2/12/1); Ended 10:22, 26 October 2009 (UTC); closed per WP:NOTNOW.

''

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 administrative work do you intend to take part in?
 * A: I would like to help with possibly unfree images, be involving in the unbocking and blocking policies, and help with template editing.Dr.Szlachedzki (talk) 04:09, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A: My California Lizardfish article is my best contribution (DYK) probably followed by fighting vandalism. Dr.Szlachedzki  (talk) 04:09, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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: I don't think I've ever been in any serious conflict with regard to content or whatnot. when confronted with such a situation, I would first try to discuss it as thoroughly as possible with the other parties involved; then, ask for external input if it was requested, or if I thought it would help—from WikiProjects, and/or (other) administrators Dr.Szlachedzki  (talk) 04:08, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

General comments

 * Links for Dr.Szląchedzki:
 * Edit summary usage for Dr.Szląchedzki can be found here.

Discussion

 * Edit stats posted at talk page. 7  04:22, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * See here for stats via Soxred93's tool, as the link in the template seems to be broken.

Support

 * 1) Support per nom. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr.Szląchedzki (talk • contribs) 04:14, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) Moral Support - Dr.Szląchedzki - I've seen you at WP:ACC and all over the place and you do good work, but as the opposes below are saying I think you may need to give your self some more time. I can sympathize with your situation... it is very easy to come here and see the Admin role and think of that is the ultimate goal and to do whatever you possibly can to get the rights as quickly as possible.  After all, we all help do things but we feel like we could help just a bit more and do things just a bit quicker if only we had the access to do things ourselves.  Unfortunately, like anything worth doing, it takes time to do it right.  Just like a marriage proposal, you don't want to rush in to this doing only what you expect the other party wants to see from you because when you finally get what you want you won't know how to act.  Better to be yourself, try a bunch of different things, even fail at some of them and learn from your mistakes, and show the community how valuable you are over time.  Good luck, both this time and in the future.    7  09:16, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) Oppose - Not enough experience; 3 months isn't really long enough for me. Answers to the questions above also seem rather short. It's hard to determine much from them. Edit stats look good, perhaps try again later. Equazcion (talk) 04:43, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose. Not enough experience in the various places necessary for being an admin. I recommend working in some of those areas and then coming back in 4-5 months. Also, you gave no statement about why you want to be an administrator (see the other current RfAs for an example of a statement), and your answers to the few questions above give barely any information about who you are and why you would be a good admin choice. WP:NOTNOW. ··· 日本穣 ? · 投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe 05:12, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose. I haven't seen any significant changes from your RFA dated September 24, 2009. This looks like a first RfA because of the name change I guess, but at this point I'd suggest developing more experience in different parts of the project and come back after a few months. - Spaceman  Spiff  05:25, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose Too soon since last RFA, also, while I refrain from commenting on whether or not the following should be an issue, anyone posting an opinion in their own RfX indicates someone who has not groked the wiki way, where such behavior is not the norm. Personally, I want the sysops of this project to have a better understanding of what makes this project tick, and thus must respectfully oppose until such time as Dr.Szląchedzki gets a better feel for the project and its members. Good Luck! -- Avi (talk) 05:34, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose per all of the above. Strongly suggest you close this RfA, work hard in areas that you love to work in, and come back no sooner than six months. Wishing you the best, Jusda  fax  05:48, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 6) Weak Oppose Come back in couple of months. Be patient and you will become a great admin some day. Have fun fighting vandalism. Remember to try again after some more experience :)  Ilyushka88   talk  05:57, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose per the unsigned vote you cast in favour of your own nomination. Also too many recent uses of the tag.    An admin should be able to respond to requests for help, not be the one asking for it in those matters. Also per your RfA from last month. Take the time to familiarise yourself with Wikipedia and how it works. Also your customised signature links to your former user page which then redirects to your current userpage. I would suggest updating your signature to your current username. Sorry i missed that you have already changed that.  delirious  &amp; lost  ☯ TALK  06:20, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 8) Oppose. You state you wish to work with non-free images but you've only made a grand total of three edits in the file namespace.  I'd recommend getting some more experience first and perhaps coming back in a few months.  Recommend early close per WP:SNOW or WP:NOTNOW. -  F ASTILYsock   (T ALK ) 06:34, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 9) Oppose. Not yet enough Wiki experience.--Epeefleche (talk) 06:43, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 10) Oppose - What Avi said. Crafty (talk) 08:40, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 11) Oppose - WP:NOTNOW -- Kraftlos  (Talk | Contrib) 08:46, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 12) Oppose. Can become an administrator after he gathers more experience and makes more Wiki contacts... ARUN KUMAR  P.R  Talk  08:49, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Neutral

 * 1) I'm afraid that 2 RFAs in two months and, in particular, this "help me" question indicates a misguided focus on adminship. Although it is a common misconception among new editors, adminship is not a goal. Wikipedia is not a contest. My best advice is to focus on content, policies and helping to build an encyclopedia -- and to consider adminship only when experienced editors suggest it. Good luck with your continued editing. — Cactus Writer |   needles  10:17, 26 October 2009 (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.