Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/SVera1NY


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

SVera1NY
removed at (0/14/0) ending 23:50 January 20, 2006 (UTC)

– Self nom-- I think I would be a great admin because although I have not been a long time member I have made significant effort to welcoming new members and working on my "pet" projects. I think that I would be able to help make Wikipedia a better place for everyone.SVera1NY 23:40, 13 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:As a self-nom, I accept

Support

Oppose
 * 1) Oppose too little experience --pgk( talk ) 23:54, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose. While edit counts is not the most important thing, 209 edits means that  SVera1NY needs more experience.  Also, please use edit summaries. Would be happy to consider your candidacy again after a couple of months. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 00:07, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose too little experience and edits. Dustimagic *\o/* (talk/contribs) *\o/* 00:13, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose Need more experience. Ronabop 00:17, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose Please withdraw Olorin28 00:44, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 6) Oppose I agree with Olorin28 --Jaranda wat's sup 00:48, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose for lack of experience.  &mdash;Quarl (talk) 2006-01-14 01:33Z 
 * 8) Oppose.Not enough experience. It would be best to withdraw and try again in a few months.-- Dakota ~  ε  01:52, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 9) Oppose--Masssiveego 02:47, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Note to closing 'crat - seems Masssiveego is the new Boothy. BD2412  T 03:17, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Strongly oppose.Too little experience. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tdxiang (talk • contribs)
 * 2) Oppose not enough edit experience. xaosflux  Talk  / CVU  05:04, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose – 214 edits... --Admrboltz (T | C) 06:28, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose Same as everyone else, little experience and poor use of edit summaries. In a few months, with quite a bit more experience, consider nomination then. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 09:07, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose. Much like the others. Needs more experience. Kusonaga 12:35, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

Comments


 * Edit summary usage: 18% for major edits and 3% for minor edits. Based on the last 72 major and and 15 minor edits outside the Wikipedia, User, Image, and all Talk namespaces. Mathbot 00:00, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * See information about SVera1NY's edits with Interiot's edit count tool or Interiot's edit history 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 anticipate helping with blocking repeat vandals and reverting vandalism.


 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * A. I am most proud of my creation of and maintaining the article on La Salle Academy, as I am a graduate of the institution.


 * 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. I have not been in any editing conflicts and I do not feel stressed by other users. I would deal with editing conflicts by peacefully conversing with the other editor.


 * 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 article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.