Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Masssiveego

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

Masssiveego

Final (0/6/1) ended 05:47, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Masssiveego (talk · contribs) – Please vote! Masssiveego 05:19, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

I accept my own nomination for RFA. --Masssiveego 05:27, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

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: Depends on where the requests are probably highest at.

2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?

A: I feel all of my articles are pretty good. I like to edit my articles over, and over again until they are easy to read, and useful to the reader.

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:

Many times, most notably with User:Zoe. It seems just about everybody gets something with Zoe. I mainly quit writing in the article in question until I can get a better opinion. After that I've noticed that large number of users seem to get into trouble with Admin, and often quit, or get blocked out for minor matters. Which leads me here to ask for your vote, so I can continue to deal with this situation.

Comments

• See Masssiveego's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool.

---

Current tally: (0/6/1)

Support

Oppose

1. Oppose - for no reason. You never give any either. pschemp | talk 05:33, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
2. Oppose - weak answers. Michael 05:34, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
3. Oppose Simply not enough contributions in areas that matter. Questions answered indicate there is no need for this editor to have admin tools. This definitely looks like a WP:POINT situation.--MONGO 05:35, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
4. Oppose Agree with MONGO, very weak answers. Massiveego are you taking this RfA seriously? KOS | talk 05:38, 4 September 2006 (UTC
5. Oppose doesn't meet my standards -- tariqabjotu 05:41, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
6. Oppose Because. Danny Lilithborne 05:47, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

1. WP:POINT, don't feed the troll, people. – Chacor 05:31, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Please vote, your opinion counts! --Masssiveego 05:34, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

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.