Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Stormtracker94

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.

Stormtracker94[edit]

Final (1/8/1); Closed per WP:SNOW - 01:01, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Stormtracker94 (talk · contribs) - Hello all fellow Wikipedians. I'm Stormtracker94, and would like to nominate myself for adminship. I was an IP editor since December of 2006 and created my account on July 28. I soon started to add speedy tags to vandalism and patroled the Recent Changes page. I always wanted to be able to delete those pages myself instead of another person doing it for me, and than block the user if they were a repeat vandal. I know that I may be a little young, and I may have just over 1,600 edits, but I will use the admin toos for deleting vandalism. Thanks. STORMTRACKER 94 Stormtracker94 20:28, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Questions for the candidate[edit]

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 admin work do you intend to take part in?
A: I most definitley would dedicate myself to cleaning up vandalism. As mentioned above, I would use these tools for good, cleaning up vandalism and blocking repeat vandals.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I think my best contributions to Wikipedia are my many sports articles (25 and counting) that I created and heavily edit. I also think that my contributions to the article Walpole, MA are some of my best ones.
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 have been in one minor conflict with Magictito, who got angry after I marked his article with a speedy deletion template. He vandalized my userpage and some articles I created. I quickly reported this to the Administrator intervention against vandalism and Magicitio was blocked. I plan to do the same if a conflict comes up again, or possibly block the valdal myself.

Optional question from iridescent

4. 13 days ago you didn't think you'd be ready for an RFA for another 4-5 months. What has happened to change your opinion? — iridescent (talk to me!) 20:54, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A: I looked at how some editors got Adminship status and wanted to give it a try. I also wanted to use the deletion tool for vandalism.
Optional questions from O (talk)
5. What is your interpretation of WP:IAR?
A:
6. What is the importance of using good edit summaries?
A:
7. How would you deal with a conflict that has been through RFC and is currently in RFAR, for which you are involved in?
A:

General comments[edit]

Please keep criticism constructive and polite. Remain civil at all times. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Stormtracker94 before commenting.

Discussion[edit]

Support

  1. Giving advice in the support column rather than in the oppose: first off, you're not too young: there are no age limits on administrators; no one should care how old you are as long as you do good work and demonstrate knowledge of policy and admin-related areas (I myself am 16, and there are many administrators, as well as a bureaucrat, younger than I am). Secondly, I suggest you use edit summaries more often. That is fixed very easily by going into your preferences and selecting "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary". Finally, I suggest you enable E-mail, as administrators need to have E-mail on. With any luck, after some more time and experience, your next RfA should pass. Good luck. Acalamari 22:02, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. I've seen no experience in admin-related areas (notably the Wikipedia namespace), the answer to Q1 suggests limited experience with Wikipedia in general, and there are limited interactions with other users. Your edit summary usage is extremely low; please use it more so that others will know what you have edited. Because of all this, I'm opposing. —O (说 • 喝) 20:52, 28 September 2007 (GMT)
  2. Strong Oppose Your recent edits seem to consist of a flurry of welcome templates. You didn't bother to even use an edit summary for transcluding or creating this RfA. The answers to the questions are, well, basically weak. Some 18% of your edits are to your user space. I'm sorry but please do not be discouraged, because your work is appreciated and I look forward to interacting with you in the future as a fellow Wikipedian. Pedro :  Chat  21:05, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Make that a strong oppose per this and this Blanking of helpful advice on your talk page followed by an immediate rework of you user page demonstrates total immaturity. And your "What can I do to be an admin" comment on my talk page further upsets me. Pedro :  Chat  21:38, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Way more experience is needed. Use an edit summary, and come back in a few months. -Lemonflash(O_o) 22:06, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Strong Oppose Well, I'm a broken record on this point, but let me go beyond my usual reasons for opposition. I couldn't get past the poor answers to the standard questions. Needs to get a lot more experience. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 22:32, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Oppose By judging this link, I'm opposing here. Please come back with more patient. --NAHID 22:39, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Oppose: On the one hand, I hate to pile on; on the other, I can't really vote Neutral when there's scarcely any reason to back. The nom has yet to demonstrate experience, any wide grasp of Wikipedia activity or much skill in answering the customary questions.  RGTraynor  22:51, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Oppose Per above. Not yet ready. M.(er) 23:11, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Strong oppose, lacks maturity and judgement. Daniel 23:12, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

  1. Neutral to avoid pileon. You have never participated in any kind of XfD; you almost never use edit summaries, and the multiple edits to Walpole, Massachusetts you say are your best work consist - in their totality - of this. As per your own comments last week, get some experience in admin areas - particularly deletion - and come back in January or February; I'd personally strongly recommend getting some substantive article-writing experience in as well. — iridescent (talk to me!) 21:01, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
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/Stormtracker94&oldid=1088280672"