Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Paul2387 3


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

Paul2387
Final (0/3/1); Closed as WP:NOTNOW by  So Why  14:31, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination
– n/a Paul2387 (talk) 13:37, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:
 * 1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
 * A: I would like to take part in deletion and blocking work, of which I have read all related policy's and understand the procedure.
 * 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A: I would generally say that all my contributions are equally as good.


 * 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 have been in a few editing conflicts but have discussed the matter with the user on their talk page or on the articles talk page. I will carry on doing this in the future and discuss things before carrying it out.

Additional questions for the candidate

 * 4. Under what circumstance would you apply WP:IAR to a Speedy Deletion? Dr Dec  (Talk)  14:16, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

General comments

 * Links for Paul2387:
 * Edit summary usage for Paul2387 can be found here.
 * Although I am back at RfA just a few weeks after my 2nd RfA I thought I'd change a few things in my answers to the above questions. Paul2387 (talk) 13:45, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

''Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Paul2387 before commenting.''

Discussion

 * Why is it too soon, user:SpacemanSpiff created his account in 2009 a year after me as I had joined in 2008, and he's currently a Sysop. Paul2387 (talk) 14:14, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * has more than 13000 edits. You have a bit more than 600. Time since registration is not an important factor; time active is. Timotheus Canens (talk) 14:16, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, will try and be active more and will hopefully get my edits to 1000+ before March. Paul2387 (talk) 14:24, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) Sorry, still too soon. Ged  UK  14:02, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose. Way too soon! Although he's been a user since 2008, his activity levels have only been at a decent level for the last two months. He only has 39 deleted edits so his participation in CSD is nowhere near the level I would expect; even though this seems to be one of the areas he would like to work in. I'll have to oppose, sorry. Maybe try again in 12 months after getting some experience in the areas you'd like to work in. Dr Dec  (Talk)  14:09, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * P.S. Something that also raises questions about his knowledge and understanding is the fact that he displays the rollbacker icon on his user page when he isn't actually a rollbacker. Dr Dec  (Talk)  14:25, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose Even if your answers were perfect, your trustworthiness cannot be gauged from your meagre contributions. Please stop chasing adminship, settle in and become an established editor (ie by editing, not by existing) before requesting the tools. --Dweller (talk) 14:19, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Neutral

 * 1) I can't evaluate a candidate with only 600+ edits. Sorry. Timotheus Canens (talk) 14:16, 31 December 2009 (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.