Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/GO-PCHS-NJROTC

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.

GO-PCHS-NJROTC[edit]

Withdrawn by candidate. Tiptoety talk 01:16, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Final (1/9/3)

GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk · contribs) - This is a self nomination. I would describe myself as a vandal fighter as well as a contributer to school articles in the mainspace. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 22:09, 6 April 2008 (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 intend to mainly work with WP:AIV and WP:UAA. I also hope to eventually become a check user so I can further contribute to WP:ABUSE. Dealing with cases in WP:SSP as well as WP:SPAM and WP:Requests for page protection also appeal to me. WP:WikiProject on open proxies appears to hold some interesting work. I might try some others as well, but I always try to stay away from anything that I know nothing about.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A:
I don't brag, I leave it to the community to decide what my best contributions are, but I'd have to say my most significant contributions in the mainspace are those I have made to articles about schools in the Charlotte County Public Schools district, including the constructive edits I have made to schools rival to my own as well as my edits to my own school's article. I think my contributions to Wikipedia:Abuse reports and the insertion of the {sharedipedu} and {sharedip} tags to many IP talk pages are also very significant.
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've been invloved in a few conflicts, but the only one I think I handled wrongfully was the one in the Wikipedia:Long term abuse/Mmbabies case when I viewed the actions taken and comments made against me as personal attacks. I handled the case the way I did probably because I feel I put a lot of effort into the case and I felt at the time as if I was being backstabbed. I can't say I'm not still offended over it, but I know I handled that issue wrongfully. I guess that's the good thing about mistakes, we learn from them. Other than that, I've been involved in conflicts over the User:LBHS Cheerleader and many minor conflicts that most people probably wouldn't even mention; the kind where a user is approached by a problem that they handle appropriately, so instead of becoming a big Wikiwar, those small problems are settled and forgotten. Examples include conflicts with vandals, and conflicts over minor errors. When dealing with conflicts, it is good to settle and move on whenever possible.

General comments[edit]

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

Discussion[edit]

  • Recommend withdrawal, or closure per WP:SNOW. I would do it myself but I !voted in this RfA. Tiptoety talk 00:38, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I withdraw, I've found the information I wanted. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 01:11, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support[edit]
  1. Support - Everyone needs at least one supporter! I admire your enthusiasm; however, there are some concerns that have to be addressed. First, as you state on your talk page here [1], you say; “…I need to try now because I'm going to be slowing down here shortly.” My question is why do you need the tools than? Secondly, thank you for the vandal fighting. We never have enough administrators in that area. However, to be an administrator you need just a little bit more experience. In reviewing your talk page, I noticed that you just recently joined Wikipedia in early December of 2007. Sorry to say, that in just four months ago, you have just scratched the surface of the responsibilities that come along with the role of being an administrator. Either way this goes, Good Luck, and keep coming back, remember this is only a very small speed bump. ShoesssS Talk 00:10, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank's for participating, and thanks for the support. I wanted the tools now because I was afraid after school starts slowing down for summer break and I have more time for Wikipedia I wouldn't have much of a reputation. Once again, thank's for participating in this RfA. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 00:19, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    "...I wouldn't have much of a reputation." GO-PCHS-NJROTC, you should start reconsidering your perception of the community aspect of Wikipedia. Sysops are not of higher reputation because they have (+sysop) in their UserRights log. Reputation and respect on here comes with participation and proven worth, just as in life. You can have a boss that you don't respect because they haven't earned it from you- they are just titled above you. You can have a co-worker that enjoys being in the subservient position because they don't want to accountability of promotion; it is often viewed as a distraction. We aren't moderators and we aren't bosses, we've simply shown through our contributions that we know and respect policy and the project as a means to an end of free knowledge and the additional buttons aid on maintenance of said project. Holding a flagged account should grant no leeway in how a user is treated. I appreciate your enthusiasm on Mmmbabies but obviously that was not the proper way to deal with vandalism and trolling. It's just my feeling that you should shift such excitement to the mainspace. Hope this helps. Keegantalk 00:51, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but I think there's a complete misunderstanding here. See, I know that just having admin power doesn't give someone a good reputation, a perfect example would be some of the administrators who have been desysoped and banned for abuse. By the comment "I wouldn't have much of a reputation," I meant that if I had been I wikibreak for a couple of months I wouldn't have much of a reputation on Wikipedia which would therefore make running for RfA more difficult. Thanks for your participation. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 00:58, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose[edit]
  1. Strong oppose Please see Wikipedia talk:Long term abuse/Mmbabies and its archives for examples of his ways of dealing with the Mmbabies vandal, which include trying to "out" Mmb's supposed real-life identity. These events are far, far too recent for this user to be trusted with the tools. szyslak (t) 22:52, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Not to sound hostile, but if you look closely, I wasn't the only one involved in some of the blatant sillyness on that page (no, I'm not pointing out that Rio de oro was also involved in that). I'd like it if you also took a look at Wikipedia:Abuse_reports/68.90.62.244 as this might help you understand why my rather nasty response regarding Mmbabies was brewed. Thank's for participating in this RfA. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 00:13, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    It doesn't matter if anyone else was involved. You are responsible for your own actions. And if you won't take responsibility for your own part in the Mmb mess, that's yet another reason why you are not ready for the tools right now. szyslak (t) 00:46, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I agree, but I fully take responsibility for my part, see the answer to question 3. It was a very bad thing to assume that, because some other editors had gotten carried away and no one said anything about it, it was find to participate in the silliness, and it was very bad to retaliate when I discovered that I was being banned from that topic, and I see now that, because I fooled around on that page, its shadow overpowers the light of the constructive behavior within abuse reports where my interest in the topic began. One bad mistake cancels ten good contributions in my opinion. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 01:08, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Oppose, sorry. Insufficient experience concerns, low mainspace participation. Also, insufficient edit summary usage. Húsönd 23:03, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose per the above concerns. --Siva1979Talk to me 23:04, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oppose Not comfortable with answers to questions. --Sharkface217 23:08, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Oppose - The Mmbabies comments aside, you simply lack the experience I'd like to see in a candidate. There are a few things that I suggest you work on. The primary one, never make abusive edit summaries. Additionally, I like what I see in your project space contributions so far, keep that up, but continue to garner experience and delve into other areas. Same with mainspace. If you continue down this path unmolested by incivility then you'll probably be ready for RfA in about 4 months. Cheers and good luck to you. This will probably be closed per WP:SNOW. Wisdom89 (T / C) 23:10, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Oppose per above about experience. 5 months is simply not enough. Try back in about 7. You might also want to check the box in the preference tab regarding edit summaries. ArcAngel (talk) 23:15, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Oppose - Concerns raised above lead me to believe that he will abuse the tools. Abusive edit summaries is not something I want in an administrator. Try back in a few more months. Tiptoety talk 00:20, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Oppose needs more experience (about a year or more) and I would like 100% in edit summaries. (check the box in the my preferences section) ~ LegoKontribsTalkM 00:57, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Oppose per above, low mainspace edits Antonio Lopez (talk) 01:00, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Strong Oppose - Please withdrawal, this will not pass, as I've seen this kind of nominations that close per WP:SNOW. Macy (talk) 01:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral[edit]
  1. Neutral - I'm a little concerned by your edits at User_talk:209.26.221.66. I don't really like to oppose vandal fighters (because i am one). So for now i'm neutral. I would like to think if this fails you will try again in the future. Then i will probably support. Thanks TheProf - T / C 23:11, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    May I ask which comments? I'm assuming you mean comments, not edits, since nearly all edits made from CCPS computers, including my own, are done as registered users except for a small percentage of recent silly users. Thank's for participating in this RfA. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 00:01, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, sorry, i do mean comments. And i think your comments on that page are a little provocative. In any case i wish you luck with this (and any future) RfA! Thanks and have a nice night :-) TheProf - T / C 00:04, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Neutral. Look at WP:ADCO and get more experience in other areas besides vandal fighting. Malinaccier (talk) 23:20, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Neutral Really sorry, but keep up the good work. SpencerT♦C 01:07, 7 April 2008 (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/GO-PCHS-NJROTC&oldid=1142576032"