Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/nshesh


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

Nshesh
Final, (0/12/0); '''Ended 19 March 2008 SynergeticMaggot (talk) 18:03, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

- YOUR DESCRIPTION OF THE USER ShEsH (talk) 09:25, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:
 * 1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?
 * A: Check out wrongs in aricles and according to my knowledge fix that wrongs and provide

valuble articles to Wikipedia.


 * 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A: I have check some articles like 'maharagame and fix some wrongs. I have created

several articles to guid about sri lanka like pelawatte, wicramasinhapura and create article about Ananda Sastralaya (national school of Sri Lanka). Creating Ananda sastralaya is my best contribution because before there isn't article about Ananda Sastralaya.


 * 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:No, stress will cover your brain then you can do nothing from fresh mind. Get mind

fresh and decide what i have to do in fresh mind.

General comments
'''This nom is malformed and was transcluded by someone other than the candidate or nminator. We should suspend, or untransclude or something. Dloh  cierekim  14:19, 19 March 2008 (UTC)


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


 * Links for USERNAME:

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

Oppose

 * 1) Lacks experience. Early close.-- Kerotan Leave Me a Message  Have  a nice day :) 11:07, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose With fewer than 200 edits, I do not believe you have demonstrated enough understanding of the project for the community to be able to trust your judgment. Perhaps after more time. -- Avi (talk) 12:33, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * 3) Strong Oppose: not nearly ready yet. -- ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk | Contribs) 12:36, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * 4) Strong Oppose With so few edits I have no reason to believe that this user can be trusted. Jon513 (talk) 12:49, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose - Sorry Nshesh but generally almost nobody supports users with a count lower than 1000 edits in a variety of areas to learn policy and guidelines well enough to attempt adminship. As unwritten rule on wikipedia it would be wise to wait another three months until your next Request for adminship. Nominees, in particular self-nominaters, need to show the ability to contribute a number of significant edits to build the encyclopedia. Admin tools enable them to block and unblock other users, protect and unprotect pages and delete and undelete pages. You would therefore do well to gain experience in the following areas WP:AIV, WP:AFD, WP:CSD, Protection policy, and WP:BLOCK
 * My suggestion to you would to withdraw and try again in another 3 months. It is also recommendable to take part in RfA discussions to help learn from the experiences of others. Many nominees have found it helpful to receive Admin coaching before submitting their RfA (we have many friendly, enthusiastic admins that will be happy to coach you!). This information is actually adapted from my own failed Rfa. I you find it as immensely helpful as I did! Good luck next time! --Camaeron (talk) 13:01, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppoose, insufficient answers to the Qs. Mrprada911 (talk) 13:03, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose Not enough experience. Suggest close under WP:SNOW.  κaτaʟ aveno  TC 13:27, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose per above. Wizardman  13:46, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose - Similar concerns - Time spent, number of edits, feel this is pretty self-evident. An admin should close per WP:SNOW. Cheers.  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 14:01, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * 5) While I applaud enthusiasm, I'm afraid an editor with < 1000 edits does not yet possess sufficient knowledge/experience to become an admin. Nominees with < 1000 edits may find the following advice helpful. If you have not done so already, please read
 * Guide to requests for adminship
 * WP:Admin
 * the admin reading list.
 * Generally, It has been my experience that it takes at least 3,000 edits in a variety of areas to learn policy and guidelines well enough to attempt adminship. Also, nominees returning after an unsuccessful RfA should wait at least another 3,000 edits and 3 months before trying again. Nominees need to show the ability to contribute a number of significant edits to build the encyclopedia.
 * 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.
 * Adminship inevitably leads one to 1) need to explain clearly the reasons for one's decisions, 2) need to review one's decisions and change one's mind when it is reasonable to do so, 3) need to review one's decisions and stand firm when it is reasonable to do so, 4) need to negotiate a compromise. Admins need a familiarity with dispute resolution. The ability to communicate clearly is essential.
 * Article building is viewed by many as essential to adminship. I recommend significant participation in WP:GA or WP:FA as the surest way to fulfill this. Alternatively, one should have added a total of 30,000 bytes of content, not necessarily all in one article. I find a large number of "Wikignome" type edits to be acceptable.
 * My suggestion to any nominees with < 1000 edits would be to withdraw and try again in another 3 months and 3000 edits. I recommend taking part in RfA discussions to help learn from the experiences of others. Many nominees have found it helpful to obtain an Editor Review or to receive Admin coaching before submitting their RfA. Good luck and happy editing.  Dloh  cierekim'''  14:06, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose. Someday you'll have the experience necessary to be an admin, but it hasn't happened yet. –  j ak s mata  14:30, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose and snow close per all above. Tiptoety  talk 14:57, 19 March 2008 (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.