Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/TheListUpdater


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

TheListUpdater
Final (2/16/2); ended 17:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

– I've been visiting Wikipedia since late 2004. After the Vandal Attack, I decided it was time to register before things got worse. I noticed a lot of things were not updated, lists in particular. I wanted to work on List of United States companies, but I soon lost interest and moved on to games, redirects, and more. Eventually, I learning how to link things (for I did not read New Member stuff). Granted, I've made mistakes: the Mouse Surplus incident and the moving Wii come in mind, but that's behind us. I helped destroy the Mario Paint Wii article, drastically expand the Six Flags Splashtown article, moved the vandalized Yoot Tower and expanded it, and more. I broke apart MacHack and let one part of it, Mac Hack (chess) mature into a seperate article that was nominated for "Did You Know?". I am expanding my reach by reaching beyond things relating to video games, Macintosh, and McDonald's to retail, such as All Wound Up (store, Orange Micro, and to people as well like John Bardeen. I've made about 500 edits, but I am already diversifying and expanding. I no longer am a simple list updater, I do more. I am restoring several articles, such as Stage Debut to mature articles. If you do not find me worthy of adminship, I won't take it too hard, I will try again later once I have fully matured as a Wikipedia user. TheListUpdater 03:23, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

I have withdrawn this RfA due to the overwhelming number of opinions regarding the applicants' experience, which totals 457 edits as of this timestamp. An expanded response will be provided on TheListUpdater's Talk page. (aeropagitica) 17:24, 16 January 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 voters:
 * Questions for the candidate
 * 1. What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog and Category:Administrative backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
 * A: I wish to delete articles that are unreferenced piles of junk (stuff as crystalballery and rumors from places like Spong) and bring back articles that were originally poorly referenced but need a little help to become notable once again.


 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * A: I really like Yoot Tower, because I mentioned 3 new locations, only through a Japanese site through the Internet Archive. I also like Six Flags Splashtown, I added all the rides. And of course, McDonald's menu items. It was a total mess!


 * 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 was really mad when someone deleted my Mouse Surplus article and wrote an angry message on the talk page of that person. I later apologized, and put the article source into User:TheListUpdater/Mouse Surplus. I eventually lost interest, but it was very early in my Wikipedia career. More important things had to be done.


 * General comments


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



Discussion



Support
 * 1) Moral Support I suggest you withdraw this now and try to follow their suggestions and then renominate your self. Cbrown1023 03:52, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Or better, be nominated by someone who values you. --Dweller 09:08, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Moral Support You haven't done anything seriously wrong that the opposers have found, but this RFA is premature. I suggest you withdraw and try a little participation in WP:AFD and New Page Patrol. You need more time, more experience.--Kchase T 11:01, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) 500 edits might be passable, except that you have next to no projectspace edits. Adminship is not about writing articles, so article contributions are irrelevant. -Amarkov blahedits 03:34, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose- sorry, you don't have anywhere near enough edits for me, and you aren't active in Wikipedia: space.  Jorcoga Yell!  03:36, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose your answer to Q1 shows you have no idea of the deletion processes, and the role that admins play in those processes --Steve (Slf67)talk 03:39, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Strongest oppose possible, and further; the candidate did not accept his self nom before posting it on the RfA page. This indicates lack of respect for process. // Yuser31415 03:51, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Yuser, there's no need to be so harsh. Please be nice.-- Hús  ö  nd  04:03, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose as above. Carpet9 04:38, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose per Amarkov, Slf67. Not nearly enough edits (I prefer around 5000). Understanding of deletion process is woefully inadequate: admins can only speedy delete articles under WP:CSD category, and undeletion without comment is wheel-warring. Try adding to your contributions, and coming back. :) -Patstuarttalk
 * 3) Oppose and suggest withdrawal per Q1.-- Wizardman 05:25, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose The nomination and answer to question one don't really give a detailed understanding of the scope and nature of the role of an admin on Wikipedia. I suggest withdrawal and working in the project space in addition to your regular tasks in order to demonstrate knowledge of policies and guidelines. (aeropagitica) 05:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose: Sorry, not enough experience per evident contribs, summary use (42%) and weak answers to standard questions. Try again in six months. --Slgrandson (page - messages - contribs) 07:14, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Oppose per Slgrandson, weak answers, and insufficient contributions. Work harder, use your edit summary, try hanging around here at WP:RFA to see what other editors consider important in an admin.  The Rambling Man 07:56, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose though you're on the right track you might need to put more experiance under your belt. Follow the suggestions above for a while and see where they take you. --Matthew 07:58, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Oppose impossible to support you now. Please withdraw and if you're nominated in a few months time, drop me a line on my talk page (although that's no guarantee of support). --Dweller 09:08, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Automatic Oppose per lack of edits and weak answers.  Insane  phantom   (my Editor Review)  09:16, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) Oppose, the fact that you thought this RfA had a chance means you don't know enough about administrative matters yet. yandman  10:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) Oppose, not experienced enough and weak answers to questions, suggest withdrawal. Terence Ong 11:37, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) Oppose per the above. Much more experience is needed. ← A NAS  Talk? 12:24, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Neutral
 * 1) Neutral no need to pile on. I would suggest taking some time to participate in deletion discussions and maybe get involved in the talk page for a proposed guideline.  Once you get a bit more experience in the project space you could always try again.--Isotope23 14:30, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Neutral to avoid pile on.  Please withdraw, spend several month participating in the Wikipedia: space, such as xfD discussion, and consider applying for RFA later.-- danntm T C 16:45, 16 January 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.