Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/railsparks


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

railsparks
'''Final (0/1/0); ended 02:33, 8 August 2014 (UTC) - WP:NOTNOW. Antrocent (&#9835;&#9836;) 02:33, 8 August 2014 (UTC)'''

Nomination
– YOUR DESCRIPTION OF THE USER Railsparks (talk) 17:01, 21 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: yes

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: Factual


 * 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A: Fact


 * 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 will deal with it as per wikipedia guidelines

General comments

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

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

Support

 * 1) i support this user for adminship

Oppose

 * 1) Very Strong Oppose. A single purpose editor, 14 edits, the only ones to article space removed cited material that they disagreed with and where poor and left open brackets. This RfA is only to sidestep the subsequent page protection. The page is a regular visit spot for supports, and some members, of the DDI who disagree with cited material and fail, as Railsparks does, to edit from a NPOV. Total unsuitable RfA, and shows a a lack of understanding of what wikipedia is about. An ability to edit is not evident. Murry1975 (talk) 14:16, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

murray1975 on numerous occasions edits have try to be made to the DDI page which you will not allow for some reason some of the material used on it has very little bearing but it has been used to make a mountain out of a molehill,take idealogy for instance not one piece of the information has it said that DDI is right wing,secondly the idea behind Direct Democracy which was in our 1922 constitution articles 47&48 gave the citizens of ireland the power to call a referendum on any issue also know as "Citizen Initiative" would mean that DDI would Centre and not right wing,its funny how this isnt up on the DDI wiki page as if someone tried to do it you would delete it and return the page to what suits you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Railsparks (talk • contribs) 22:00, 4 August 2014 (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.