Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/RuleOfThe9th

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

RuleOfThe9th

Final tally: (0/9/0); closed per WP:SNOW by Juliancolton at 14:15, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Nomination

RuleOfThe9th (talk · contribs) – I have made good use of the Twinkle feature, proposed a WikiProject, active in WikiProject NASCAR. BoeingRuleOfThe9th-700 (talk) 10:33, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

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 administrative work do you intend to take part in?

A: Contribute to edits that are under investigation, in which the contributor thinks it as a credible edit, and an anon editor may have considered it a vandalism, reverting vandalism.

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

A: Proposing a WikiProject, as WikiProject Kidzania.I intend to increase the notabilities of the park as a public figure, and that the credibility would be anonymously increased.

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.

Additional optional questions from Graeme Bartlett

4. Can you please explain the conflict of interest policy?

A:

Optional questions from NotAnIP83:149:66:11 (talk) 13

47, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

5. Do you have any other accounts? Have you used any other accounts? What are the usernames of those accounts?

A:

General comments

• Links for RuleOfThe9th: RuleOfThe9th (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
• Edit summary usage for RuleOfThe9th can be found here.

---

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/RuleOfThe9th before commenting.

Discussion

Oppose

1. 134 main space edits and less that 600 overall edits. Way way too soon to form a view of the candidate. In addition, I cannot make sense of the answers to questions 1 and 2. I appreciate that editors may come from all over the world but strong communication is one of the traits needed for administrators and I think there is a chance for significant confusion. --Cameron Scott (talk) 10:51, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
2. Oppose per this. Biting other users only reflects badly on yourself. decltype (talk) 11:10, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
3. Super-Absolutely Strong Oppose This seems appropriate. ƒ(Δ)² 12:07, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
4. You don't need to be an admin to do what you have suggested. Projects can be proposed, created and got up to speed without any admin assistance, so you are free to recruit members and get going. Also if you spot activity that is not really vandalism, you are welcome to add comments to the WP:AIV board or even remove nominations if they are clearly wrong, and you can talk to the people involved. Admin privileges are not needed to do this. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:12, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
5. Oppose. Attacks like this, even if they were due to wikistress are not signs that he will be able to keep a cool head in a problem. Needs to learn proper etiquette as to when he can answer questions on other people's talk pages - I think it was me correcting him a couple of times that led to his initial comments on the user page (If I am wrong, please feel free to put me straight). Stephen! ^Coming... 12:18, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
6. Oppose Your !vote on Gaelen's RfA shows me that you have one set of standards for yourself and another for other RfA candidates. -- Soap ^Talk/_{Contributions} 12:42, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
7. Oppose Per above.Abce2|This isnot a test 13:27, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
8. oppose. Also, that en-5 ubx needs changing. Much of what this editor says is semi-comprehensible. NotAnIP83:149:66:11 (talk) 13:45, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
9. Oppose Your answers make no sense. You don't seem to have done anything here outside nominating users in unwanted RfAs. \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 14:03, 26 September 2009 (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.