Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Oliver202 2


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

Oliver202
Final (3/8/0); ended 22:04, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

- Self Nom, 1 Previous RfA removed by myself as advised as I had too little experience.

I currently spend most of my time NP & RC Patrolling using VP, VP2 and NPWatcher. I also am a member of the AMA, CVU and Cleanup Taskforce and I feel that I would be able to aid Wikipedia more if I had the power to, block users, and close actions like AFDs and SDs Oliver202 21:12, 22 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Self Nom. - I accept Oliver202 20:56, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

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 would concentrate most of my time on the Admin Noticeboard, Speedy Deletions, AiV and the backlog in AfD. Like most users, I am also involved in a fair amount of vandal fighting, and I am a recent changes patroller and a new pages patroller. I would hope to set a good example, resolve edit disputes, tackle incivility issues, and use my tools to aid Wikipedia.


 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * A: No articles in particular, but a majority of my edits vandal fighting (Contributions). Just like any WP user I try my best to correct any errors in articles that I encounter, but admittidly most errors I encounter are minor and so they don't really do much for my contributions. I also attempt to cleanup articles for the Cleanup Taskforce. But I can honestly say that I gave equal effort to every contribution I've made.


 * 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: Most users on WP are quite civil and respectful, so I can honestly say that no conflicts towards myself spring to mind. I say most users as there are those that do disrespect other users, that is why I am a part of the AMA and I try to resolve the conflicts of other users


 * General comments


 * See Oliver202's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.
 * See Requests for adminship/Oliver202 for previous nomination. &mdash;Dgiest c 21:21, 22 February 2007 (UTC)



Please keep criticism constructive and polite.

Discussion



Support Oppose
 * 1) Weak support User's been around since May, but editing has only recently picked up some. This leads me to wonder if the user is as familiar with Wikipedia policies as the an admin needs to be. However, looking at their talk page and talk page archives, as well as some of their contributions makes me think that this is the sort of user who does mainly stuff that admin tools would be useful for.  The user seems sensible and level-headed and willing to learn from mistakes.  I'm willing to go out on a limb here. (But I bet I'll be the only one (post-edit conflict:I guess not!))~  ONUnicorn (Talk problem solving 21:43, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Support Purple PowerRanger Eaterr 21:43, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Support yeah sadly this RFA is going to fail. And I urge you to withdraw as you really don't have a chance. However I will say this, when I look at a candidate for adminship and I say "do I trust this user with the extra tools" my answer to this candidate is yes. The answer to Q1 was actually good for me. I just think that you will need more time and more edits in the project space to pass a RFA. Good luck! ~ Arjun 21:50, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose - You're not very active, you have few contributions and you've come here today to submit an RfA, your last edit was the 29th.. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 21:00, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Last edit was the 20th Feb.  Majorly  (o rly?) 21:05, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Just over 400 mainspace edits, compared to 600+ on user talk pages. I think the former is too low, and the ratio of the two figures strikes me as very odd. I'd like to see you (or any candidate, for that matter) spend more time editing articles before getting the mop. | Mr. Darcy talk 21:03, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * He does a lot of vandalism warnings and welcoming using Vandalproof, which explains the ratio. I don't see any off-topic chatter, if that's what you're worried about. ~  ONUnicorn (Talk problem solving 21:35, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose per above, not active enough in the community tbh, and your editing ratio is a little odd. I think for a self-nom you could have put more effort into it, especially answer to questions 2 and 3.  Majorly  (o rly?) 21:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * OK I'll work an 2 + 3, not sure what you mean about edit ratio Oliver202 21:18, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I expect mainspace (i.e. article edits) to be the highest, with contributions to articles, which help develop them. 400 just isn't enough for me, especially if they are mostly vandal reverts, sorry.  Majorly  (o rly?) 21:44, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose per Majorly and MrDarcy.↔NMajdan &bull;talk &bull;EditorReview 21:14, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose I'm sorry, but you'll need a lot more experience and higher activity to succeed in an RfA. Unconvincing answers. Sorry. - Anas Talk? 21:26, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose Weak answers - no evidence provided, no diffs to examine; you do lots of vandal patrolling with VandalProof but I can see almost no contributions to the article space itself and zero contributions to the policy areas and XfD discussions. I would withdraw this and look at incorporating constructive edits to the encyclopedia along with your vandal revert contributions. That would give you something to talk about in question 2 for starters.  You need to me more rounded as an editor before becoming an admin. (aeropagitica) 21:43, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose per Majorly &gt;Kamope&lt;   Talk  ·  Sign Here  21:46, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose - No experience in policy or XfD matters. Minimal mainspace contributions besides vandal fighting.  Looks like a good vandal-whacker but not much other experience. &mdash;Dgiest c 22:00, 22 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.