Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Crisspy

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.

Crisspy

[edit]

Final (4/15/0) ended 18:40, 22 July 2006

Crisspy (talk · contribs) – A hardworking person who has created and contributed to many articles in countless topics. Crisspy 04:06, 21 July 2006 (UTC)Crisspy[reply]

I accept being nominated for admin.
Support
  1. Support I think that Crisspy would make a good admin. Wikipedia is way too bureaucratic and Crisspy would stop that.'sed 16:51, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support I'd vote for Crisspy b/c he does 3 strikes instead of 1 strike.The mann hu new 2 much 01:54, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Strongest Possible Support I think Crisspy is incredibly eligible for admin. He did not realize that no campaigning is allowed, so that would explain the links that the opposing parties show. He gave strong answers to all of the questions, using the three-strike method for promising justice. He has dedicated a lot of his effort, work and time to wikipedia, and that's what makes a terrific, respectable admin. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Armando341 (talk • contribs) .
    Comment The fact that he did not realize he shouldn't campaign, shows he can't have read the Guide to RfA properly, as it clearly advises against it. If the candidate can't even nominate himself correctly, why should anyone have confidence he'll not abuse the admin tools inadvertently? Gwernol 16:50, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Strong Support I have done some research, and Crisspy is just what we need for an admin: hardworking, respectful, dedicated, and intelligent. He will make sure that wikipedia stays in great condition, and he will deal with rulebreakers with justice and fairness. Mark ritzchkin
Oppose
  1. Strongest Possible Oppose - not listed properly on the main RFA page, weak answer to question 1, spamming user talk pages with this RFA, general inexperience (only 267 mainspace edits, oldest one at 31 March 2006), odd three-strike proposal which demonstrates lack of basic understanding of existing warning policies and practices. (ESkog)(Talk) 05:12, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose, Malformed nomination. Naconkantari 16:13, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oppose inexperience as demonstrated by malformed nom. --pgk(talk) 16:25, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Oppose per ESkog. --Siva1979Talk to me 16:42, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Strong oppose sorry, but if you can't follow the instructions to correctly list your RfA, I have no confidence in your abilities to correctly use the mop. The campaigning for your RfA is also a bad idea and you edit count is too low for me to support you. Gwernol 16:45, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Strong Oppose Malformed RfA, inapropriate campaigning, No project space edits outside of RfA, creation of inapropriate redirects to User page [2], [3], and [4] conclusively demonstrate lack of necessary policy knowledge and experience to be an admin. Eluchil404 16:49, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Oppose Don't meet my standards and isn't an exception, like ikiroid, but I thought he was a sysop so I voted for him. GangstaEB (sliding logs~dive logs) 16:56, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Stronger than the strongest possible oppose. Can some please de-list this RfA? Themindset 17:02, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Oppose Sorry, I never like opposing, but less than 1000 edits really is too little for an RfA. Also seems not to know even the bare minmum of policy required for admiship. I'm sure you're a good user Crisspy, why not just wait a bit longer 'till you ask for the tools again? Thε Halo Θ 17:04, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Oppose per the evidence provided by Eluchil404, Nakonkantari, others. No offence; you seem like a good user, you just need a little more experience.--Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Strong Oppose - Advertising an RFA by spamming people is an auto oppose out of me, vandalistic looking edits trouble me too, in short, no way -- Tawker 17:16, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. WP:SNOWBALL please, oppose Computerjoe's talk 17:23, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Merovingian (T, C, @) 17:26, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Oppose per all above --Guinnog 17:30, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Oppose too new. Please come back when you have more experience. SynergeticMaggot 17:48, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Oppose and add my voice to the call for a close to this RfA. Ifnord 18:56, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral
Comments
Username Crisspy
Total edits 563
Distinct pages edited 125
Average edits/page 4.504
First edit 05:19, March 31, 2006
	
(main) 292
Talk 9
User 177
User talk 76
Category 3
Wikipedia 6
Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
A: I would like to participate in every sysop activity possible, particularly counter-vandalism, blocking unruly wikipedians, reverting unwanted material, and protecting necessary pages.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I am particularly pleased with my contributions to Indian music-related topics (e.g. bhol, tabla, Punjab Gharānā and Delhi Gharānā) and my contributions to other Cuisine (Austrian Cuisine, Morroccan Cuisine), Music (King Kooba, J Boogie, Pescozada, Ingco Crew), and Gang-related (MS 13, Mafia) topics. I am pleased because I have great joy in sharing my knowledge with the world, especially with people who research here.
3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
A:To be honest, I have gotten in one small conflict with another wikipedian, (exchanging insults and verbal attacks by both) because he was giving my friend a hard time about one of his contributions. But, I resolved my differences with that user, and we actually became friends. Apparently, he and I both loved music and Cuisine. If I, by some tiny chance, become an admin, I will make sure to deal with vandals or other stress-causing users the way I deal with ordinary people: use the three-strike method. Because, if the user is new, he/she might be unjustly blocked, and that could put me in a bad image. This could also lead to more vandalism by friends of that user, or one of its sockpuppets. So, I would warn them once, with a calm but firm warning, and warn them a second time with a stricter one. The third time, I would block them indefinitely or however temporary the punishment fits the crime.
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Crisspy&oldid=1138649552"