Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Jupiter Optimus Maximus


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

Jupiter Optimus Maximus
Withdrawn by admin Tiptoety  talk per WP:SNOW at 19:04, 21 April 2008 (UTC)  Final (0/5/0); Originally scheduled to end 21:12, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

- YOUR DESCRIPTION OF THE USER Jupiter Optimus Maximus (talk) 21:12, 18 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

I'm afraid I don't know what you mean.

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: Removing vandalism, preventing sockpuppetry, deleting irrelevant articles and categories and working to improve articles relating to fiction.


 * 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A: I have created an article for the character Lamia from the film Stardust, I have also created a category for articles relating to said film and the novel upon which it was based, entitled Category:Stardust. There are quite a few articles relating to the book and the film and I thought this would make them easier to find for the many fans of the Stardust franchise. I have also worked toward stopping a sockpuppet of the UPN Vandal. On a side-note a user named Arcayne has expressed admiration of my edit history saying that he was "mightily impressed", something which is a source of pride for me.


 * 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 have been in a few conflicts. I count two. I contributed to the Lord Voldemort discussion page in a manner that was removed and deemed unconstructive by a user named jdelanoy. I attempted to apologise on his discussion page but got confused and ended up editing his user page, upseting him and leading to an argument. I also inadverstantly offended User:Arcayne by teasing him slightly on the afore-mentioned Lord Voldemort talk page.

General comments

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


 * Links for Jupiter Optimus Maximus:

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

Discussion

 * Someone should close this as WP:SNOW ASAP. Tan   |   39  18:17, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * You want this closed after 1 vote? Let it run for a few hours at least. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not love) 18:43, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * People familiar with RfA will recognize that with <1000 edits and the answers/information given above that this RfA meets closure per WP:SNOW. I do not mean this in a malicious or bad faith manner; in fact, this will save the candidate from having pile-on opposition. If you think I am out of line, I respect that, but do not agree with it. Tan   |   39  18:46, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not contesting the WP:SNOW close. I'm just saying the first oppose doesn't really help the user understand why they won't pass this RfA. I would like to think that RfAs were closed per WP:SNOW only after the candidate gets some actionable feedback (e.g., work on AIV, XfD, article building, etc.). Nishkid64 (Make articles, not love) 18:54, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair enough; although that feedback might be better given on the user's talk page. I see your point that having this RfA active will generate responses. I partially retract my original statement - it should be closed shortly. :-) Tan   |   39  18:57, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) Little to no experience in administrator related areas. Candidate isn't aware of importance of accepting the (currently) short nomination. JOM needs to look towards expanding his involvement in various admin projects, become a member of a wikiproject and frequently discuss topics with other editors. Rudget  18:17, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) Lackadaisical tranclusion, lack of experience, vague answers. Give it 3 months at admin-related areas then come on back!  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 18:19, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 3) More experience needed in article-building, conflict resolution and admin-related work. Edit summaries also need to be used more. Epbr123 (talk) 18:23, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 4) I think this candidate will probably make a great admin one day. However, the risk of giving them the tools right now seems to outweigh the benefits. Deliberate abuse is far less likely than the prospect of good-faith errors that nonetheless disrupt wikipedia. More experience is needed. S HEFFIELD S TEEL TALK 18:43, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose. Under 500 edits, not nearly enough experience in any given area. Vague and lacking answers. Seems like candidate is on right track, but this RfA is extremely premature. Tan   |   39  18:49, 21 April 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.