Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Mapalazoo


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

Mapalazoo
Final (0/10/0); ended 22:47, 31 October 2012 (UTC) per WP:NOTNOW — cyber power Online Trick or Treat 22:47, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Nomination
– Hi everyone - I'm Mapalazoo. Mapala-who?, you might be wondering. Yep, Mapalazoo. I'm an established Wikipedian...here since 2010...who's recently switched usernames. While aware of WP:CHU and such, I chose to go the basic route... by simply creating a new account. Please note that I am fully are of the 1-account-at-a-time-policy... my other account has gone usued since the creating of this one.

But now is not the time for rambling. Rather, I'd appreciate it if you'd !vote based on my answers/links/statements, not my edit count... after all, aren't edit counts meaningless? Mapalazoo (talk) 21:16, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:
 * 1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
 * A: I intend to partake in the always-amusing tasks of, a) page protection and that ilk, b) the ever interesting task of WP:AIV/WP:UAA, and c) CSD/NPP. I'll be happy to lend the mop wherever most needed! :)


 * 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A: I'm quite proud of my authorship of --, a featured article ... working with others to write it was quite rewarding. I also really enjoy page patrolling...it's fun to interact with new users, and I have no plans for stopping!


 * 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, most definitely. In writing -- (the FA from #2), I encountered a few...interesting...references, with my and another editor's interpretations differing. By consulting with the applicable DR group (WP:3O in this case), we were able to resolve the dispute satisfactorily. I'm also well aware of talk page guidelines and would guarantee to adhere to those.


 * Additional question from Ceradon
 * 4. What was your former user name?
 * A: Hi Ceradon. Due to some rather unfortunate circumstances (outing, stalking, etc.), I'd rather not reveal it. However, rest assured that I have a firm grasp of both policy and wiki-behavior ... I do realize that this is a rather unusual RfA, and I appreciate your understanding that. :) Mapalazoo (talk) 21:42, 31 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Additional question from Gilderien
 * 5. What was your featured article?-- Gilderien Chat&#124;List of good deeds 21:40, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * A: Much like in my answer to the above question (no. 4), I don't feel comfortable - and have been urged by friends/consellors - revealing this, as I believe it would lead to myself being put into real physical danger... which, regardless of how many mops anyone throws at me, is not something I shall subject myself to. Mapalazoo (talk) 21:45, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

General comments

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

''Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review their contributions before commenting.''

Oppose

 * 1) I hope that you will consider withdrawing this RfA. You are clearly being deceptive either here or in the rest of your edits.  In this edit, you pointed out that you were new here and you didn't know what administrators were.  On your user talk page, you made this edit which was either one of a new editor who happened to know quite a bit, or someone who had edited before attempting to pass himself off as a new editor. Ryan Vesey 21:40, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Hiya Ryan. I agree that those previous statements of mine are falisities - I didn't really have a clear grasp of where I was heading when I first created this account...rather, I was just trying to get away from my previous experiences - and not thinking it through. It's pretty interesting what fear will do to oneself. My apologies to Ironholds/Jesse, as well as my admirations for their treatment of a 'new' editor... their assistamce was quite fantastic, and they should be commended. I'll ask that you disregard these edits, though, in making your !vote...they were made not while I was in a correct state of mind, and don't reflect my true nature... rather, they reflected a scared horse...galloping frantically toward some sort of safe haven. Mapalazoo (talk) 21:51, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I apologize, right now I can only assume you are lying, a sockpuppet, or are not ready for adminship by experience or by state of mind considering those edits and the information I am able to gain from your edit history. I will note that I have initiated a sockpuppet investigation. Ryan Vesey 21:57, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose Per the diffs provided by Ryan Vesey, this user is not ready for adminship. Automatic  Strikeout  21:43, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose per Ryan. If you want clean start (assuming it's true), then it's a clean start, i.e. you can't rely on any previous reputation. KTC (talk) 21:47, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose per Ryan. Taking this at face value, suggest speedy closure via WP:NOTNOW. Jus  da  fax   21:53, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose because you've not disclosed your previous account, as far as I can see. Unless you do that, we can't even be sure that you're following WP:ADMINSOCK.  I would be willing to reconsider if you disclosed the old account name.  Nyttend (talk) 21:54, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose per Ryan's diffs and the whole 2-accounts thing. Not good. GiantSnowman 21:55, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * 6) Oppose I am not going to reconsider even if you disclose your previous account and even if it proves good. You have misjudged that people could assess you with just your answers here. -- Anbu121 ( talk me ) 22:01, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose per Ryan. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 22:01, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * 8) Oppose -- Rzuwig ► 22:03, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * 9) Oppose Does not meet my criteria. Dori ☾Talk ☯ Contribs☽ 22:05, 31 October 2012 (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.