Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/ProcEnforce


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

ProcEnforce
'''Final (0/9/2);

Nomination
– Well, I joined Wikipedia just a year ago, after deciding that my random edits here and there should have a user account behind them. I've been building up sections of Wikipedia, such as the Supermarkets in France and Les Mousquetaires articles and templates, as often as I can, but fitting in time between Wikipedia and school has been tough. I'm requesting adminship, so I can get myself known in the Wikipedia community. I've done hundreds of edits, many of which I cannot remember, but whenever I have free time, Wikipedia is the first website I click on. Although I may not have as many accreditations and numbers as the other candidates, please bear in mind I'm quite new compared, and have a lot less time. ProcEnforce (talk) 19:59, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:
 * 1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
 * A:


 * 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A:


 * 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:

General comments

 * Links for ProcEnforce:
 * Edit summary usage for ProcEnforce can be found here.

''Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review his contributions before commenting.''

Discussion

 * Perhaps you could answer the default questions to provide us with some extra guidance?  Connormah  talk 20:11, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I've added the other information back. — MC10 ( T • C • GB •L)  20:41, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) While you may have good intentions, I'm afraid you're barking up the wrong tree. Adminship is not how you get yourself "known in the community", that comes through editing articles, discussing, vandal fighting, gnome work, and various other means. Adminship is something that people who have been here for a while, who have already made themselves known can achieve. It is an end, not a mean. I would advise you to read WP:NOTNOW and User:X!/notnow for guides on where to continue from here. You have potential, but adminship is not the right thing for you at the moment. ( X! ·  talk )  · @885  · 20:13, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose Low edit count, (not even 600), looks like you removed the questions and several other things. Pilif12p :  Yo  20:15, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) Sorry, not enough experience.  Connormah  talk 20:18, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose You don't even appear to know what adminship is. WP:NOTNOW. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:22, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose. Sorry, but blatant WP:NOTNOW. Spend some time to find out what admin is and how to go about it, and come back after you've got a lot more experience. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:36, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * 6) Oppose per WP:NOTNOW – Not enough experience. — MC10  ( T • C • GB •L)  20:37, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose. You've done no work in areas that need the mop and you seem view adminship as some sort of badge of recognition. I'm sorry, but I think you need more experience and a valid reason for needing the admin tools. WP:NOTNOW. 20:47, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * 8) Oppose My criterion is not yet met. Have left a comment on your talk page. --Pgallert (talk) 21:03, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * 9) Oppose due to lack of answers to questions and not a lot of experience. I would recommend withdrawing from this RFA. ~ Nerdy Science Dude  (✉ • ✐ • ✍) 21:12, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Neutral

 * 1) Neutral I know about the lack of experience, but he's created a pretty good number of articles. He should be a good candidate for the future if he keeps this up. Minima  c  ( talk ) 20:40, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * However, looking at the first five articles he has created, four out of the five are stubs, and one has maintenance tags on it. It's supposed to be about quality, not quantity. — MC10 ( T • C • GB •L)  20:45, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Moral Support. Clearly a WP:NOTNOW, and thanks very much for your efforts so far. I'm afraid your opening statement shows your lack of experiene about the "norms" around Adminsip on Wikipedia - Adminship is not about "getting your name known" whatever your worthy intentions in that regard. Have a look a the notnow essay and I suggest withdrawal with my honest hope to see you back here soon enough. Best wishes. Pedro : Chat  20:55, 20 July 2010 (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.