Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/TheMagnificentist


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

TheMagnificentist
Final (0/10/0); ended 21:14, 1 January 2017 (UTC) per WP:SNOW Mkdw  talk  21:14, 1 January 2017 (UTC) '

Nomination
– I present myself as an aspiring candidate of adminship and a passionate editor on the English Wikipedia who regularly contributes to electronic dance music articles. During my first few months as a registered editor, I have created one article which was deleted shortly after, before I went on a three-month hiatus to return as a regular contributor who knew very little about the Wikipediatic environment. - The   Magnificentist  20:37, 1 January 2017 (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: I intend to get involved with requests for page protection and moves. Over the past few months I have been familiarizing myself with the guidelines and policies set out here despite getting into several conflicts with editors and having a bad behavioral history of which I’m not proud of, but recently I started to understand how things work here and have adapted to the Wikipedia culture by attempting to try and solve disputes amicably. I have been fighting vandalism for a long time and I would like to pick up the administrator privileges as an upgrade to my anti-vandalism weaponry. Other than that, I have also been contributing to articles, especially ones related to electronic dance music and music in general. My moves history is not really significant as I have moved less than one hundred pages. However, the administrator tools can make it easier for me to move pages without leaving a redirect which was the main issue of my history of moving pages because it wouldn’t let me to get the task done smoothly.


 * 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A: My best contributions to Wikipedia would be to the electronic dance music articles. I have helped improved stub class articles to C-class and have created almost thirty page. I also regularly participate in deletion discussions to help and save an article from deletion unless there’s no hope at all for the article to be saved. Last month, I began reviewing at Articles for Creation with over fifty reviews. I also welcome newcomers by posting on their talk pages encouraging them to create an account.


 * 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: There were several but the most notable ones would be with an editor on a Lady Gaga song about the genre and another editor about several measly issues. I have dealt with them properly by discussing it through. I have been blocked two times (one for three days and the other indefinitely). I was blocked because for edit warring and personal attacks but that was months ago. I have overcome my behavioral issues in order to pursue my ambition of becoming an administrator on the English Wikipedia.

You may ask optional questions below. There is a limit of two questions per editor. Multi-part questions disguised as one question, with the intention of evading the limit, are disallowed. Follow-up questions relevant to questions you have already asked are allowed.

Discussion

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

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

Support

 * Moral support but this is unlikely to pass. Your enthusiasm is appreciated, and your mainspace % is miles better than mine! I would suggest you withdraw this at this time, but please don't get discouraged - please email me or leave me a talk page message, I will happily mentor you Happy new year! --  samtar talk or stalk 20:50, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Strike support, I can't even morally support when personal attacks such as this have been made recently -- samtar talk or stalk 21:00, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1)  Oppose Strong Oppose I don't normally oppose for edit count, but you need at least 5,000 edits to become an admin, in my opinion. Has had an indef block fairly recently, and doesn't have a need for the tools, as less than 5% of their edits are to WP space. Strong Oppose for these edits. Blatant personal attacks, indeffed on commons. '''This user also has sockpuppets, see here ThePlatypusofDoom (talk) 20:53, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose Block log that contains a NOTHERE block (and only in October...?), zero need for the tools (only 212 edits to project space), and low edit count. Sorry. --Majora (talk) 20:54, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose due to recent block. User is also blocked indefinitely and suspected of sock puppetry on Commons (see c:User:TheMagnificentist). — MRD2014  (Happy New Year!) 20:55, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose Unclear need for the tools, bad block log, and this Commons edit doesn't exactly scream "conduct befitting an administrator" --AntiCompositeNumber (Leave a message) 20:59, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Change to Strong Oppose User has socked, see Sockpuppet investigations/TheMagnificentist/Archive --AntiCompositeNumber (Leave a message) 21:05, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose - One half of what the user expressed they'd like the mop for can be accomplished by making a request at WP:PERM/PM. Less than a year tenure (approximately 9 months) and less than 5,000 edits is a bit low. Other, perhaps more serious concerns, have already been raised above. — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 21:00, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
 * 2) Their block log is sufficient to Oppose (particularly worrying is failing to disclose the full details of the block log which includes an indefinite block only weeks ago (subsequently rescinded, rather obviously). Block log on Commons fully worse, user is currently blocked there for "intimidation/harassment" and has an issue with socking. There's also the issue of describing ambitions of becoming an administrator as if it's some sort of career move or something. Technical stuff limited, little/no CSD nominations to sift through etc. Content contributions are decent but the user is fundamentally untrustworthy. Nick (talk) 21:02, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose This is not a NOTNOW !vote... However, the account is less than a year old with less than 5,000 edits which is my minimum for serious consideration. There are also recent blocks. I would encourage to withdraw and come back in 18 months if they have no new issues in their background. I see no realistic likelihood of their passing RfA at this time and if the community believes its time is being wasted the oppose !votes can get rough. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:03, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose Seems a tad bit too early for an rfa. Full Rune Speak, child of Guthix 21:04, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
 * 5) Strongest Possible Oppose - Block log here and at Commons are enough for the oppose. Zero need for this user to have the mop. — Jkudlick &#x2693; t &#x2693; c &#x2693; s 21:04, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
 * 6) Oppose I don't believe you have enough experience yet and your block log is concerning. Although you may have good intentions, I would urge you to withdraw. Also, the personal attack (per Samtar) is extremely concerning. st  170  e  21:05, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

General comments



 * 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.