Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kitia


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

Kitia
(talk page) (1/7/2); Ended 22:06, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

- Um, I'm not very good at his kind of stuff, but I'll do my best... I became a Wikipedia editor about a year ago and while I have been blocked once and have been accused of being a sockpuppet of User:IndigoGenius, those were mostly bad-faith attempts. I feel that if I am given the mop, I will use it to the best of my ability. I am eager to hear your opinion. &#39;&#39;&#91;&#91;User:Kitia&#124;Kitia&#39;&#39;]] 19:07, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

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: I don't know, cleaning up vandalism would be #1.


 * 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A: I have made many great contributions to Wikipedia, and it is hard to pick out a single one. I would like to point out a few of the Austrian page articles because they needed to be created.


 * 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: In the past, I have come into 3. In all, I think I handled them pretty well, although some other editors disagree.

General comments

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


 * Links for Kitia:

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

Discussion

 * Your answers to the questions are supposed to provide us with an idea of how you see yourself as an administrator candidate and how you expect to handle the task. An answer like "I don't know, cleaning up vandalism would be #1" doesn't suggest you understand what admins do. Have you read Administrator?  Leebo  T / C  20:34, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * That's because I spend most of my time editing. I'll check that page out.&#39;&#39;&#91;&#91;User:Kitia&#124;Kitia&#39;&#39;]] 20:39, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * That's understandable, but I would suggest withdrawing, reworking the answers, getting a solid Rfa together, then trying again. Jmlk  1  7  21:42, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) Moral Support - get involved with WP:AFD, WP:TFD, and WP:XFD discussions. Join a Wikiproject, and try again in three to six months.  Mi r a n da   22:00, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) Oppose sorry, per very poor answers to questions Jaranda wat's sup 19:19, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I understand. I'm not very good at that kind of stuff. &#39;&#39;&#91;&#91;User:Kitia&#124;Kitia&#39;&#39;]] 19:21, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose Does not appear to be taking this seriously. Hiberniantears 19:24, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose- per Hiberniantears. E  ddie  19:37, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose per above comments. Oysterguitarist 19:41, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose weak, unconvincing nom and answers. Suggest withdrawal. — An as  talk? 20:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Until I see some more compelling answers, I can't get behind this RfA. You are admittedly bad at "this kind of stuff", but that's not a particularly good excuse; nobody is forcing you to submit this RfA, or to do so within a set amount of time; you could give your answers months worth of time to think about your responses, and nobody would be the wiser. Even a demonstration of why you need the tools would be sufficient. EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 21:03, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|18px]] Oppose the way the questions were answered makes it look as if you don't give half a damn about this... T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 21:46, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|18px]] Oppose the way the questions were answered makes it look as if you don't give half a damn about this... T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 21:46, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Neutral
 * 1) Neutral To avoid pile-on...but still opposing due to overall lack of good answers and overall sense of adminship responsibilities. Jmlk  1  7  20:35, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Neutral also to avoid the bloodshed but this RfA will not pass. Strongly suggest to the candidate they withdraw and consider reapplying after they have had time to familiarize themselves with the role of an administrator and our policies, and see if they are even still interested in adminship at that point.  ɑʀк ʏɑɴ  &#149; (talk) 21:46, 10 July 2007 (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.