Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Bobsmith319

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

bobsmith319

[edit]

Final (3/14/0); Originally scheduled to end 00:59, 10 September 2007 (UTC). Withdrawn by bureaucrat. --Deskana (talky) 10:58, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

bobsmith319 (talk · contribs) - YOUR DESCRIPTION OF THE USER bobsmith319 00:00, 29 August 2007 (UTC) Hello, My fellow Wikipedians. I have decided to nominate myself to be an admistrator. I have been a Wikipedia user for 1 year and since then, I have learned a lot from other users and from exploring Wikipedia. I have adopted one user and I'm planning on teaching him all there is to know about this wonderful place. I acknowledge my mistakes in the past and I now look at them as chances for me to grow and learn more about this great place which is Wikipedia. I have put all of my mistakes behind me and I'm looking ahead to making positive edits on Wikipedia and working constructivly with other user to help make Wikipedia a better place learn. Below are the five reasons why I believe I should become and administrator.[reply]

1. I talk to my fellow Wikipedia users before do anything which would upset someone or cause a problem.

2. I have been on Wikipedia since August 26th, 2006. Meaning I have been a Wikipedia member for one year, which shows that I have an extensive knowledge on how to edit a page, add tags, add templates, and more.

3. I have made over 500 positive and constructive edits to Wikipedia which shows my fellow users that I have what is takes to deal with my fellow members. It also shows that I have extensive knowledge on how Wikipedia works.

4. I am a very kind user. I use my words instead of starting edit wars. I welcome new users to Wikipedia. I talk kindly to other users; I don't use rude or offensive language and I don't attack other users by words. I always asume good faith with users when editing Wikipedia. When someone makes a mistake, I don't attack the user. I fix the mistake and move on. This my fellow Wikipedia uers that I can deal with users and talk others in positive ways that will help Wikipedia.

5. I have seen my fellow editors do things on Wikipedia tha have helped me learn more. I have seen how people talk to other users, I see how people add tags in articles, I have seen how to file rfcs and much more. This shows members that I am expirienced and know what I'm doing.

Thank you, and if you have any questions, please feel free to leave me a messgae on my talk page. --bobsmith319 00:00, 29 August 2007 (UTC) I'm bobsmith319. I'm a very hard working and very diligent member of Wikipedia. Though I have my made share of mistakes in the past, I'm looking forward to a bright, postive, and active future on Wikipedia. I have been a member of Wikipedia for 1 year. I edit many articles for places in Illinois and Connecticut since I know those 2 states very well. I have always looked up to those users who are experts and I wanted to be one someday. Now I believe my day has come to shine on Wikipedia and truly make a difference. --bobsmith319 01:47, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

bobsmith319, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept my own nomination to be an adminstartor of Wikipedia. --bobsmith319 01:02, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Questions for the candidate

[edit]

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?
A: I plan to take part in giving users warnings for bad behavior and block those who continue to violate the rules of Wikipedia. This will make Wikipedia a safer, and more pleasant place for all of our users out there who are devoted to Wikipedia. By doing this, Wikipedia will see far less vandilism and Wikipedia users will have a better experience editing articles. I also hope to take part in reverting. This help stop the spread on vandalism very quickly.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: Some of my best contributions to Wikipedia include my addition of the two cleanup tags to the Waldbaum's. These tags let users know that the article is in need of attention and that the article may have incorrect, insuffient, or missing facts. One of my other contributions which I consider to be one of my best includes. My recnts edits to the NBC5 Wmaq-tv article. Someone included some incorrect info about the current and former on air talent. I quickly corrected this and the edits I made are still present. This shows users that I am dedicated to making all Wikipedia articles as acurate as possible.
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 agree that I have made mistakes. One of biggest was my continuing of editing the pregnancy article. I would always delete the nude image after people always told me not to. I would always leave rude comments to users who told me to stop. Often I felt that I was treated unfairly but that mostly beacause I was acting in a way a I shoudln't have. I no longer edit that article. I have since made peace with all editors that I have offended through my apology on my rfc. In addition, I was recently engaged in a edit war with the user known as lamontacranston. I would also attempt to edit his talk page after he deleted parts of it. I truly apologize for my mistakes that I have made in the past and I will look ahead to the future and only work positivly with other users. In the future, i will not engae in edit wars. I will deal with problems I have through the use of kind words, and I will no longer use harsh words.

General comments

[edit]
RfAs for this user:

Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/bobsmith319 before commenting.

Discussion

[edit]

Support

bobsmith319
Candidate vote, so I indented it. Feel free to revert it. --Hirohisat Kiwi 01:07, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Moral Support - Well 533 Edits ain't bad but really low for most Editors but looking at the fact that you have 1 year experience, I think I will Support you..Good Luck (you'll need it ) : ..--Cometstyles 01:11, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Moral Support - Miranda 02:01, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support I have no reason to oppose this user. All I can advise is that bobsmith319 listen to the opposition's suggestions, and try again in a few months time. Acalamari 02:02, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. Oppose - You have been on wikipedia for about a year, but barely any project space edits except for this Rfa. Also, I believe there was a RFC regarding you 2 months ago. This may show lack of experience with the policies. You have also cited for your civilness, but just violated 3RR a few days ago, which might not abide with your description of your self. Try again in a few month, being active with WP:AFD, WP:XFD, or otherwise admin coaching. Good Luck next time! --Hirohisat Kiwi 01:07, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose Not enough edits as of yet. Candidate voting for self demonstrates a lack of knowledge of wiki practice. Both of these can be corrected by time, so I'd suggest withdrawing and trying again in a few months. -- Avi 01:50, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oppose - You don't seem to be very active; you were here for over a year now yet you only have 530 edits. And your answers don't really show knowledge of what admins do.--$UIT 01:57, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Oppose with apologies. You'll need to get some in-depth knowledge on the infrastructure of Wikipedia, before applying again. First, I'd strongly suggest that you go into your preferences, and under the "Edit" tab, check the box to prompt you when there is an empty edit summary. This is very important, to assist others in knowing what changes you made. Second, you will need to really get into a variety of areas, including (but not limited to) WP:AIV, WP:UAA, WP:RFCN, WP:AFD, etc., and participate in some of the other areas, such as talk pages, user's talk pages (to illustrate how you interact with others), and perhaps some projects as well. I wish you luck, but honestly you are not, at this point, ready to be an administrator. I would suggest that you get an experienced editor and enter the adoption program with them. (Time does not necessarily equal experience.) Good luck in the future, Ariel♥Gold 01:59, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Oppose Just give it some more time and try in a few months. Wikipediarules2221 03:05, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Oppose You are a good editor, but I think you need more experience. Try again soon, and I will be honored to support you. I do, however, suggest withdrawl, before WP:SNOW. Good Luck!! Politics rule 03:29, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Oppose. The candidate lacks experience. Sorry, but you're not ready yet. Majoreditor 03:33, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Oppose Per experience. Jmlk17 05:22, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Oppose, per lack of experience. Try to participate more on WP:XFD to gain experience about WP:PG. Keep with your good contributions. Carlosguitar 06:26, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Oppose. Excellent editor, however, more experience is needed in different areas of Wikipedia. I'd especially recommend WP:XFD as a good way to learn policy. I'd also like to see more activity per month. I respectly suggest withdrawing this RfA. Useight 07:22, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Oppose per all the above reasons. I suggest you withdraw from this nomination and try again after three months. In the meantime, do not be discouraged over this failure. --Siva1979Talk to me 07:36, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Weak oppose adminship may not be a big deal but the way the community has swung I suggest that the user gains a bit more experience before reapplying. Anyway being a sysop isn't required for anything out of the ordinary, and just brings with it a boring backlog and jobs to do. --Benspeak 08:07, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment - Also I suggest using the edit summary more and maybe going on editor review for some more feedback on how to improve. --Benspeak 08:10, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Oppose - Less than 600 total edits in a year is frightfully low. The edit summary needs to be used much more. Out of a very few Wikipedia-space contribs, your RfA is the greatest at just 14 counts. Definately not ready at all this time. Lradrama 08:48, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Oppose Insufficient Wikipedia-space edits. Participate in things such as XFD and try again in a few months. Pursey 10:53, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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.