Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/MasterA113


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

MasterA113
Final (2/16/0); Ended 06:49, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

- This is a self-nom, and I think that I am ready to handle administratorship. I have had this account since this summer, and have made roughly over 1000 edits. On my userpage, I've made mention that I used to edit at Encyclopædia Dramatica, but I don't want to scare anybody. I'm not going to abuse power, and I plan on helping in AFD, and vandalism, as well as helping block and unblock users. MasterA113 20:27, 15 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

I accept, myself.

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for participants:
 * Questions for the candidate
 * 1. What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog and Category:Administrative backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
 * A: I'd like to help new users, help block and unblock vandals, and delete and/or recreate deleted pages. I'd also be glad to help settle fights between Wikipedians, and assist in any other administrative chores I'd be dealt with.


 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * A: I am very pleased with my contributions to the Metra article, as I have rewritten it several times, and added a ton of information to it, although I did fail to get it to featured status, I feel that I did a nice job. I think my Star Warp'd article was pretty good, considering that I had little to work with.


 * 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 haven't really been into any conflicts with other users. My friend (User:Brianydan) jokingly blanked my userpage, and I gave him the vandal warning, and my little brother used to constantly vandalize Wikipedia under his "Bulish" accounts, but I've gotten him to stop, so no, I've never really gotten into altercations with any other users. If someone finds an incident in my contributions, just post it in comments, and I'll gladly respond.


 * General comments


 * See MasterA113's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.


 * Like I mentioned earlier, I edit at Uncyclopedia, and used to edit at ED, but don't let that scare you into opposing. I'd never abuse my abilities as an admin, and I would take it very seriously. And if I don't make it now, I'll work on my shortcomings, and I'll be back to try again! So, happy votings!

Please keep criticism constructive and polite.

Discussion



Support
 * 1) Support, been here long enough to understand policies. Jim Pooele 00:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Note to anyone who's going to close this; this user has been blocked by myself as an account whose sole purpose was to disrupt Wikipedia. This was his first edit ever, and his last edit was to add to the top of an article. His other contribs were to list the sockpuppet categories for CFD and sockpuppet for TFD.— Ryūlóng  ( 竜 龍 ) 01:50, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Support I think this user won't misuse sysop tools based on his edit history, and will help the admin backlog get smaller. I wish we had an RFA were we judged a user by the content of the edits they make, not how many they make.--Natl1 (Talk Page) (Contribs) 02:07, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Nat1 - opposing based on pure edit count is over-the-top. Opposing based on the experience demonstrated by edit count, however, is legitimate. Yuser31415 03:21, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oppose


 * 1) Oppose give it more time, and I'll support probably. Your edit count, while not particularly low, shows you aren't as active as I'd like a new admin to me. You'd like to close AfDs? You haven't had nearly enough experience in that area. I suggest you withdraw, and get an editor review instead. -- Majorly  (o rly?) 22:12, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, I don't think anyone has been promoted with less than 1500 edits for over a year, and I don't think you'll be the exception. Sorry. -- Majorly  (o rly?) 22:14, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose - Sorry, very little experience in administrative-type activities. Suggest withdrawal. &mdash;Dgiest c 22:17, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose - Not enough edits in WP space. --After Midnight 0001 22:18, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose, please spend some more time before expecting admin tools. Shyam  ( T / C ) 22:22, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose You've made a start on admin-related tasks, vandal fighting, warning and contributing to XfD and other policy areas but your contributions are too few in number at the present time to give a good idea of how you would use the tools effectively. Take some more time to contribute in the above fashion and to the article space as well before reapplying or being nominated in six months or so. (aeropagitica) 23:27, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose You are inexperience in many areas. Come back in 6 months or so. Good luck in editing.-- PrestonH  | talk  |  contribs  |  editor review  | 04:07, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Oppose 1000 edits isn't going to cut it. Dionyseus 01:18, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose sorry, just too inexperienced, keep editing and try getting involved more with WP edits.  Darth griz 98 01:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Oppose, not experienced enough yet in wikispace.-- Wizardman 02:32, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Oppose You seem to be a great user, but your edit count is a bit low and you don't have much experience.-- TBC Φ  talk?  02:54, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) Oppose 1000 edits and 57% edit summary is questionable. Answers to questions were confusing and unimpressive. No choice but to oppose. Captain panda   In   vino   veritas  02:55, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) Oppose. You are a good editor (keep it up!) but you need a little more experience, especially in admin areas. Yuser31415 03:21, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) Oppose. The candidate needs more practice doing the kind of activities admins do.  If he wants to handle deletions and undeletions, why hasn't he been much on AFD?  If he wants to protect and unprotect pages, why hasn't he been much on RFPP?  Experience is critical, and it can only come with time. YechielMan 03:37, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 13) Oppose - this looks premature. I'll be willing to be persuaded next time. Metamagician3000 03:43, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 14) Oppose, suggest withdrawl Sorry, but you're severely lacking in the experience department. EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 03:54, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 15) Oppose, needs more experience in admin activities. Needs some xFD participation and take a look administrator's noticeboard. You will know how admins work. Suggest withdrawal. Terence Ong 恭喜发财 04:04, 19 February 2007 (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.
 * 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.