Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/kylekieran


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

kylekieran
Final: (0/6/0) Closed early by non-bureaucrat Dylan620 per WP:NOTNOW and WP:SNOW.

Nomination
– I know I like editing work but it telling the real history and information of the article. And it good to apply my adminship to wikipedia and to be a good one and I find important information of the article. And it not about the article,it all about what we belive in like belive this sorry or that sorry it about what we belive I belive too. And not all about what people say it telling the truth of them. Kylekieran (talk) 19:28, 22 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

Questions for the candidate

 * 1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
 * A: The administrative work do I intend to take part in to work for the community of the world and make each article bigger than siting below level where lot of people don't look at the article.


 * 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A: Carriacou because to make people belive this is the real article story and make people wikipedia is the number one web Encylopedia article of Carriacou.


 * 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: Trying to article better to me and I can think my mind clean on wikipedia to be better but no better than me or them or others.

General comments

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

''Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/kylekieran before commenting.''

Discussion

 * Editing statistics have been posted on the talk page. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 20:22, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) Thank you for submitting your RFA. While I applaud enthusiasm, I'm afraid you do not yet possess sufficient knowledge and experience for the community to have confidence in your readiness to become an admin. But that does not mean that we will never have confidence in you.
 * For the most part, it requires at least 3,000 edits in a variety of areas to learn policy and guidelines well enough to attempt adminship. Nominees need to show the ability to contribute a number of significant edits to build the encyclopedia.
 * However, if you work on vandalism patrol, most people would like a few thousand more.
 * The Admin tools allow the user to block and unblock other editors, delete and undelete pages and protect and unprotect pages. Nominees will therefore do well to gain experience and familiarity with such areas as WP:AIV, WP:AFD, WP:CSD, Protection policy, and WP:BLOCK to learn when to do these things.
 * As an admin, you will inevitably have to...
 * 1) Explain clearly the reasons for one's decisions.
 * 2) Review one's decisions and change one's mind when it is reasonable to do so.
 * 3) Review one's decisions and stand firm when it is reasonable to do so
 * 4) Negotiate a compromise.
 * Admins need a familiarity with dispute resolution. The ability to communicate clearly is essential.
 * Article building is the raison d'être of Wikipedia. I recommend significant participation in WP:GA or WP:FA as the surest way to gain article building experience.
 * If you are not the type of person who likes to write content, there's plenty of other article work you can do (WikiGnomeing for start).
 * My suggestion would be to withdraw and try again in another 3 months and 3,000 edits. Many nominees have found it helpful to submit an Editor Review or to receive Admin coaching before submitting their RfA and after passing that benchmark. Hope this helps. Good luck and happy editing.  iMatthew   talk  at 20:01, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose I am sorry, but you are not yet ready for adminship. You only have 88 edits. Usually the community desires candidates to have at least 3,000 edits, and even then it can be a bit iffy. You also need to have your edits spread around a larger area of the Wiki, and to gain more experience in other areas.(Ironically I'm having a similar problem at my RfA...) Please don't take this personally, but you are not ready yet. Try coming back when you have around 3,000 or more edits spread across about, say, 3 or 4 months. Until It Sleeps Wake me 20:04, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose per User:IMatthewFrancium12 (talk) 20:37, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose for the reasons listed by iMatthew. You only have about 90 edits, which isn't enough experience for an administrator. As a general rule of thumb, administrators usually need have at least 5,000 3,000 edits and 7 or 8 months of active editing experience. This RfA will most likely not pass at this time, but you may wish to review past unsuccessful RfAs and successful RfAs to get a feel for what the community wants to see in admin candidates. Try coming back after another few months of experience in various areas of Wikipedia, and let me know if you have any questions. :) Jamie  S93  be kind to newcomers 20:54, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 5000 edits? Really? --Aqwis (talk) 21:33, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, nowadays it's rare for a successful candidate to have less than 10k edits, actually. Good point, though; edit count isn't a very accurate representation, and there's another RfA right now which is an unusual exception, so I've altered the estimate number. Jamie  S93  be kind to newcomers 21:36, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I passed with 2900 edits in January 2008... Thanks for enlightening me about the current state of RfA, I guess. --Aqwis (talk) 22:09, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose. While I do love your willingness, yu are just not ready for the role of an admin, as highlighted above. Come back soon (say 6 months) with more edits (say 5000) and we will go from there.  Athe Weatherman   21:58, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose Sorry not yet. Suggesting a closure per WP:NOTYET and WP:SNOW.-- Gordonrox24 &#124; Talk 22:02, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * yes check.svg Agreed.  Athe Weatherman   22:12, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * yes check.svg Agreed.  Athe Weatherman   22:12, 22 August 2009 (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.