Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/StephenHjellum13


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

StephenHjellum13
Final (1/13/0); end 08:28, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

- I am a hard working class type, and i try my best to succeed. StephenHjellum13 23:17, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I have closed this RfA as per WP:SNOW. The candidate should contribute many more productive edits to all of the main spaces for several months in order to demonstrate their worth as a potential admin. They currently have too little experience to show their effectiveness as an admin at this time. (aeropagitica) 08:30, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following optional questions to provide guidance for participants:
 * 1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?
 * A: Anything


 * 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A: Davis (Amtrak station), Sierra Northern Railway


 * 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: Yes. I did what i was told, and i will continue to do so.

General comments

 * See StephenHjellum13's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.


 * Links for StephenHjellum13:

''Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/StephenHjellum13 before commenting.''

Discussion


Support
 * 1) --U. S. A. 02:19, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) Oppose - I'm sorry :-( You haven't got enough edits, you need to show in your editing that you can be trusted, this is the same for the length of time you've been editing - you've only been here a couple of says. I'd suggest re-trying when you have around 2-3000 edits and 4 months of experience. You are doing a good job however so keep it up! :-)  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  01:26, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Strong Oppose - per reasons above. You are just not experienced enough yet — take Ryan's advice, wait a while. ~ Spe  bi  01:27, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose with fewer than 250 edits in total, there isn't enough evidence for me to tell if you have the understanding of Wikipedia's policies and the right temperament to be an administrator. You didn't correctly transclude your RfA to WP:RFA. Unfortunately you just aren't ready yet. More seriously you uploaded Image:DBmap.png and tagged it as a work you had created, which is extremely unlikely - this is clearly scanned from a book; this is not the only incorrectly tagged image you have uploaded. Incorrectly licensed images are a serious problem and admins cannot be confused on this issue. As I suggested on your talk page, get some more experience on Wikipedian, then try an editor review in a couple of months. Gwernol 01:28, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose You simply must get more experience before your application will be successful. Anyone prepared to go through RFA is to be applauded but you must understand some of the basic requirements - some months of presence here, some evidence of understanding of Wikipedia policy, some proof of time making this a better encyclopaedia.  Sorry to oppose but you should continue to contribute positively and re-apply when you have more experience.  The Rambling Man 01:30, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose No where near enough experience. You have less than 200 edits, almost half being edits to your userpage. Admins need to know there way around here. They need knowledge of policies and a sense of how things work. I don't think less than a month is enough time to know all that. And having 0% edit summary usage is bad in my eyes. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 01:55, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Oppose: While the experience is an issue, your edit summary usage is also pretty poor and the answers to the questions is not very great. I think with a bit more time you may be able to have a successful RfA, but not at this moment.   Or f e n     User Talk |  Contribs 02:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose. WP:SNOW. Let's end this.  Jody B talk 02:51, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Oppose common newbie mistake. &mdash; Selmo  (talk) 02:54, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow.... -- Phoenix  03:31, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) Oppose - No way. You didn't even try to answer the questions and you don't have enough experience, or edits for that matter.-- $U IT  05:21, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) Oppose, lacks of experience, edits, and very weak answers to questions. Just too early for adminship. Terence 06:02, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) Oppose. You are a good editor, but not yet experienced enough to become an admin. Most successful admin candidates have made at least 2,000 - 3,000 edits, and have a solid track record of several months as a consistent, positive contrubutor. You have currently made just over 150 edits and have only been a reistered editor at Wikipedia since 17 April. Right now, keep editing because you don't need to be an admin to be a postive contributor. Good luck if you decide to apply for adminship again in the future when you've gained more experience. Zaxem 06:54, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 13) Oppose. Beside your lack of experience, your answer to Q3 is hair-raising. I will not elaborate further, since I would be even more abrasive, but a candidate stating that he will just "do what he's told" is a non-starter for me. Stammer 07:46, 12 May 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.