Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Pie Man 360


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

Pie Man 360
[ Voice your opinion] (0/6/1); Scheduled to end 03:02, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

- Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you, myself! I have been an user of Wikipedia slightly less than a year, and only have been actively editing for a few months, BUT do not go and oppose me just because of this. I know the expectations are high, and getting higher, and my edit count is only around 950, but remember, edit count does not necessarily represent the significance of my edits. I frequently revert vandalism, and am trained in the use of the anti-vandal tools, and adminship can only enhance my vandal fighting ability. I know, I know, I have made very little non-anti-vandal edits, but it's the edits that count, not the particular type of edit. Again, involving edits, the number represented is lower than it should be, I should have around 450 mainspace, not 380, as I frequently list pages for speedy deletion. I diligently report repeating vandals, and I do make mistakes, but I am only human, and we all make mistakes. With all that over, I hope you will support me. — [[User:Pie Man 360|UserPage Talk about me! ]] 03:02, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: This is a self-nom, here goes (nearly) nothing. -- [[User:Pie Man 360|UserPage Talk about me! ]] 03:13, 10 April 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?
 * A: I anticipate helping on CAT:CSD and WP:AIV, deleting those needed for speedy deletion and blocking vandals.


 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * A: All of my anti-vandal edits. They help show my positive intentions on Wikipedia and that I am dedicated to the cause.


 * 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 no edit wars or conflicts, but some things cause me stress, i.e. when people are somewhat impolite in telling me I messed up, but I always assume good faith and let them go, making a note on what I messed up on, and reflecting on it.


 * General comments


 * See Pie Man 360's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.


 * Please see the talk page for my edit count.

Please keep criticism constructive and polite.

Discussion



Support
 * 1) Support I for one am stricken by Pie Man. Seldom do we see such great potential.  Pie Man is obviously a natural.  Why get in the way of his fast track to admin-dum?  One thing that I admire most about Pie Man is the cut of his jib.  The guys got guts and that goes a long way in this world.  I for one suggest that Pie Man crush his opponents when he receives his inevitable adminship (crush in good faith of course).  I also sense sockpuppetry coming from the Oppose section.  I would go so far as to say that it is an anti Pie Man cabal, but that may not be civil. Nevertheless, their attempts are fruitless.  This is in the bag, congrats Pie Man.  El hombre de haha 07:04, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) Oppose per poor answers, plus I find it a bit disconcerting that your selfnom focusses solely on edit count. Also, your sig isn't even working. – Chacor 03:20, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I think his sig is supposed to be like that. --Mus Musculus 03:45, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Intresting, but personally I find it a bit irritating. – Chacor 03:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose and I advise you to retract the nomination. Your first Wikipedia-space edit was three weeks ago and you don't show much experience in interaction with any editors other than vandals. You might one day be a fantastic admin, but there is no way any of us can tell right now and I'm afraid this RfA doesn't stand a chance. Pascal.Tesson 03:29, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose too few mainspace edits and weak answers. WooyiTalk, Editor review 03:32, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose. alas, adminship is not a reward for just doing anti-vandal work. Gotta expand your horizons. Participate more broadly and try applying again in a few months.-- Wizardman 03:46, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Edit conflicted oppose, not enough experience and weak answers. --Core desat 03:47, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose not enough experience. Captain   panda  04:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Oppose. I suggest withdrawal. And you may want to fix up your signature.  bibliomaniac 1  5  04:46, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Never mind, it was deliberate, although it's still a bit frustrating.  bibliomaniac 1  5  04:48, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose - Due to lack of experience. I suggest you withdraw-- $U IT  04:54, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose -- Too low of an edit count. Also, lack of significant article contribution. Real96 05:47, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Neutral
 * 1) Neutral From what I've seen of you, you do good work, but judging by historical trends you are far too new here to have any chance of passing an RfA at this time. I suggest you withdraw your nomination, keep on doind what you're doing, and come back in 3 months.  &mdash;dgies tc 03:40, 10 April 2007 (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.