Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Minan


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

Minan
Final (0/5/0) ended 18:56 28 February 2006 (UTC)

– I am a Wikipedia user that has been active in discussions on the ICOC. I manage other discussion forums outside Wikipedia on this topic. I believe a few members would vouch for me to help out to manage the ICOC article edits and discussions as an admin. I much appreciate your consideration. Thanks ! ma 16:43, 28 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I accept this nomination. ma 16:45, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Support

Oppose
 * 1) oppose To new, to few edits, to little everything. And pretty much all the edits he has done are talk page edits  I  Love Plankton 17:20, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose; only 71 edits to 5 different pages, almost all article space.  smurray  inch e  ster (User), (Talk) 17:25, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose--Urthogie 17:30, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose. While I'm sure the candidate's edits to ICOC-related pages have been constructive, the answers to the standard questions indicate an interest in being an administrator for a particular and very small set of articles. If there have been "an increased number of controversial changes by anonymous users that have taken place without any discussion", you don't need administrator tools to deal with that. Discuss changes on the talk page and bring any policy violations to administrator attention or perhaps to the attention of a broader set of editors. With only 20 edits in article-space to two distinct articles, and no edits to user talk or project-space, there is nothing to show whether or not the candidate is worthy of administratorship.  android  79  17:31, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose for now per Standards, and recommend withdrawal of nomination per WP:SNOW. Please feel free to re-apply when you have gained more experience of Wikipedia. Essexmutant 17:55, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

Comments


 * Edit summary usage: 13% for major edits and 0% for minor edits. Based on the last 16 major and 4 minor edits in the article namespace. Mathbot 17:30, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * See Minan's edit count and contribution tree with Interiot's tool.



Questions for the candidate

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 voters:
 * 1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
 * A. I can help out with incidents that may require admin intervention on the ICOC page, as there are have been an increased number of controversial changes by anonymous users that have taken place without any discussion.
 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * A. I have participated in extensive discussions on the ICOC article "external links" section with another admin/editor, which resulted in a balanced and fair set of links that show both sides of the ICOC story. I hope to maintain this fair & balanced view with regards to the History and Controversy sections.
 * 3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
 * A. The above mentioned discussion began as a conflict over what to consider a fair list of external links on the ICOC. It was very new to me, after moderating several external forums on the topic, to debate about this with someone from outside the ICOC discussion community - but who was a regular Wiki contributor. I came to value this person's input very much; lengthy and fair-minded discussion reveal people's motivations to edit and in the end, people will agree on what is fair. In addition I believe it is important to give all viewpoints air time, no matter how emotional the discussion, because the appropriate resolution to problems usually becomes abundantly clear this way. There may be no resolution on the actual topic, but it is helpful to maintain the principle that all sides be free to discuss, and display, their view - on both the article and discussion pages.


 * The above 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.