Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Astroview120mm

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

astroview120mm

FINAL (0/4/0); withdrawn per WP:SNOW by EVula 05:26, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

astroview120mm (talk · contribs) - Astroview120mm 03:51, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept my self-nomination

I have been an active editor since 2005, in which time I have made hundreds of contributions. I have not contributed as much as many others, but my experience may keep me in. I have read many "wikipedia:" articles as well.

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?

A: I intend to help prevent vandalism and to help improve the quality of articles in Wikipedia. I have been at Wikipedia for years and have gained much experience in the process. When I become an administrator, I will do my best to insure that Wikipedia is accurate and will remain that way. I will also fight vandalism and fraud to my fullest abilties as an administrator. In addition, I shall improve Wikipedia in any way I can, not for the glory, but to help the community.

2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

A: Although I have not made very many contributions, I have learned much and have made many significant contributions. My best contributions are probably my work in the Star Wars and Computing articles like Windows 2000 and Windows 98. I suppose that's because most of my edits have fallen in to this category. I have also uploaded several high quality pictures that are currently in use at Wikipedia. Pictures such as winexplore.png are uploaded by me. You can see a list of my contributions here:

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: Yes, I have had many conflicts while editing articles. One such conflict is taking place as I write this (See talk:Windows 2000). Most of these issues have been resolved. I have dealt with such disputes by calmly replying to other editors' remarks; I have also, instead of directly contradicting them, stated the advantages and disadvantages of my edits, then moved on to their weaknesses. I have been searching for better ways to deal with article disputes, too.

General comments

• See astroview120mm's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

• Links for astroview120mm: Astroview120mm (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)

---

Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/astroview120mm before commenting.

Discussion

• Suggesting that it would be cleaner and efficient to use an electric oven on User:Kelly Martin as opposed to burning at the stake is beyond the pale (see userbox fourth from the bottom at [1]). That a person would consider themselves ready for adminship while maintaining such a position is absolutely unacceptable. I don't care if you absolutely despise someone on Wikipedia. Suggesting they be killed in an electric oven, even in jest, is completely unacceptable. No other review in my mind is necessary. This user is not suited to being an administrator. --Durin 05:21, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I've speedy deleted that template, but Durin's description is accurate.--Chaser - T 05:28, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Support

Oppose

1. oppose and suggest withdrawl Sorry, you've got nowhere near enough edits or consistency to show you're ready to be an admin. This RFA isn't going to pass, I suggest you withdraw and contribute more than a few hundred edits before you try to run for adminship. You need edits to at least a few admin related areas, and you need more edits, most RFAs have over 2000, most people would probably recommend 3000-4000 with a good spread through mainspace, talk, user talk, and Wikipedia project pages. You just aren't ready yet. --lucid 05:24, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
2. You're not very active and haven't done much to demonstrate a need for the sysop tools (by themselves, these aren't strikes against). In A1 you mention vandalism, among other things, but haven't done any counter-vandalism work. I suggest you go to WP:RCP or WP:CVU to learn about and practice counter-vandalism. As of now you don't really have the experience or record for me to support your request, although there's also nothing too bad, either (some light vandalism in the first twenty edits--meh). Ideally, administrators should archive their user talk pages into subpages instead of removing comments.--Chaser - T 05:25, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
3. Oppose and suggest withdrawl - Er, your conflict at Windows 2000 is fairly recent, and you seem to be always "cleaning up" warnings. This isn't a good idea. Also, 31 edits to the project space doesn't prove that you are knowledgeble in admin work. Try again in a few more months. --Hirohisat ^Kiwi 05:28, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
4. Oppose User has not made nearly enough edits to wikipedia, not proven to be active enough. And talk page shows that user has engaged in a very recent edit war, I would recommend trying again later once user has made more edits and gained experience. Tiptoety 05:31, 31 August 2007 (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.