Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Iamawesome800


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

Iamawesome800
FINAL(1/8/2); Closed 06:33, 13 December 2008 (UTC) by Icewedge (talk) per WP:NOTNOW; your eagerness to help in administrative tasks here is appreciated Iamawesome800, however administrators are expected to have significant experience with the Wikipedia community and a sizable record of contributions to the encyclopedia. While their is no exact numeric that is the prerequisite for adminship, candidates usually do not succeed with less than four thousand edits and five or six months on-wiki. Icewedge (talk) 06:33, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

– Hi, I very much wish to be an administator here on Wikipedia. I would like to be able to be one because I would like to help in the admin areas of blocking (if needed) and page protection (again if needed). Basically I feel that I could do a lot of good in the admin areas and feel that my contributions although small are making a difference.  Iamawesome  800  02:33, 13 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept--  Iamawesome  800  02:39, 13 December 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 administrative work do you intend to take part in?
 * A: I intend to work in the areas of vandal fighting and page protection because I notice that there are many pages that may need page protection and would like to be able to stop vandals before they can damage this great encyclopedia.


 * 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A: Probably my contributions to the NFL, MLB and NBA free agency markets because I think they reflect me as a person and an editor because I love sports and would like to make sure Wikipedia is up to date in these areas.


 * 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, but I made sure to keep my cool and either I would leave the conversation or I would calmly try and explain my beliefs.


 * Additional questions from Davidwr:
 * 4. Find 2 pages that need or recently needed page protection. Discuss why page protection would be the best way to address the issue, what type of page protection best fits, how long it should be, and what alternatives exist to page protection in that particular case.  I'm more interested in your reasoning than the specific type and duration.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  03:36, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * A: A.J. Burnett and CC Sabathia for semi for 2 days because of IP's jumping the gun on their signings and I would like to preserve the pages dignity.


 * 5. How do you currently fight vandals? How often do you require the assistance of an administrator?  How often do the administrators agree with your recommendaitons?  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  03:36, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * A: I usually just revert and warn and if persistent I just keep telling them and although it hasn't gotten that high with me yet I would tell an admin of the situation.


 * 6. Note: Rhetorical question Your relatively short tenure here - basically 3 months and under 2000 edits - usually results in a withdrawn or failing RfA. It's a lot easier to get to know a candidate when he has been editing longer.  If your RfA fails due to inexperience, will you continue editing and growing as an editor so that you are likely to pass RfA a year from now, should you decide you want to be an administrator at that time?  This is a rhetorical question, if the answer isn't "yes, I will continue editing and growing" then you should withdraw now.  :)  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  03:42, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * A: rhetorical questions don't get answers


 * Additional question(s) from flaming
 * 7. If you came across a page that (you thought) should be obviously be deleted, but it didn't fit into any of the WP:CSD requirements, what would you do? Would you "Delete now and explain later," or would you take some other course of action? flaminglawyerc neverforget 03:47, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * A: I would discuss with other admins and try to get a consensus on what they believe should be done before proceeding.


 * Follow-up


 * Why not share your discussions with the entire community, instead of limiting it to other admins? If you're not going to delete it on the spot, why wouldn't you go through the formalities of PROD or XfD (in which discussions are not limited to admins)? flaminglawyerc neverforget 04:25, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

General comments

 * See Iamawesome800's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.


 * Links for Iamawesome800:

''Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Iamawesome800 before commenting.''

Discussion

 * Request to not speedy-close until candidate has an opportunity to answer questions 4 and 5 and been given an opportunity to withdraw. This won't affect the outcome of this RfA but his answers and how he edits in hte future in light of them may help his next one.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  03:47, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, he's seen this msg and answered the questions. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  04:18, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Support

 * 1)  Moral Support  I did this when I wasn't fully experienced too, but you got to have some more experience. And remember, it is not that big of a deal. Try again in a couple months.    'K50 Dude the Great Talk to me! Look at me!

Oppose

 * 1) Oppose not enough experience yet. User needs to take time to mature and learn the policies of Wikipedia.  This speedy deletion tag is a prime example, either way (talk) 02:58, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose. Enthusiastic, but unfortunately Iamawesome800 does not have enough experience to demonstrate a good understanding of application of policy/guidelines or collaboration/interactions with other users.  Axl  ¤  [Talk]  03:02, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose - Not enough experience, particularly in policy areas, sorry. But you're on the right track; keep contributing, start testing the waters in projectspace, and come back in six months. // roux   03:09, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose Icewedge (talk) 03:12, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose Consider helping around at "admin-ish" areas (XfD, RfA, etc.), then get a good rep on the RefDesk (that's never a bad thing...), then perhaps you can try again with more success. flaminglawyerc neverforget 03:36, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I concur with Flaming, hang around the admin-ish areas. Not only will they build experience, but you may decide that adminiship is too big a headache and doing admin work takes too much time away from editing.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  04:11, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose/notnow because overall answers to questions confirms general inexperience. In particular:  Answer to question 5 was incomplete, answer to question 4 did not discuss possible alternatives to page protection, including using the article talk pages to announce a reminder after the 1st or 2nd such IP-posting that the signing should not be included in the article until it's official. Again, semi-protection may be warranted, but the candidate's lack of depth of understanding the options confirms he needs some time to grow.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  04:08, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose Inexperience evident on user's talk page and in answers in this RFA. Townlake (talk) 05:19, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose Not enough enough experience yet; did not delete acceptance line. Don't worry, none of the opposes are personal.--Xp54321 (Hello! • Contribs ) 06:29, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Neutral

 * 1) WP:NOTNOW... RockManQ Review me 03:58, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) Neutral see my comment here Foxy Loxy  Pounce! 04:42, 13 December 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.