Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Islaammaged126 5

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

Islaammaged126

[edit]

Final: (2/10/2); Withdrawn by candidate at 22:45, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Islaammaged126 (talk · contribs) - Hello, I's me again. As i look back at all my previous RFA's it's hard to believe I've come all this way! But know I am very anxious to try again-for the 5th time. I completely understand that all my begging, pleading and convincing was not going to get me anywhere. So now I admit that it was wrong. I have collected a few edits and, although not many of them are mainspace, I have a little trouble with finding an article I can edit well! I understand Wikipedia's policies, such as The 3 revert rule and sockpuppetry. I also now understand about copyright. My time on Wikipedia is great, I use edit summaries most of the time and I am prepared to be an Admin. Thank you for yur time. Islaammaged126 (talk) 20:52, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

i nominated mysefl, so of course I accept!:)

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: Well, I regularly browse the special log page on Wikipedia, so I guess some of my best Admin work I would take place in would be blocking/unblocking, welcoming new users, protecting pages that need to be protected (seen at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection) and reverting vandalism. I am open to help new users with anything else, adopt, denying/accepting unblock requests, and tracking down WP:SOCK. Oh, and also trying to help solve problems at WP:ANI.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: Some of my best contributions were to my own userpage and talk pages, images, Lilo & Stitch articles, and some medical pages, such as diseases and conjoined twins. Tagging socks, aiding users and contributing to some AFD's are also part of my best contributions. Why? Because, I guess, I know a lot about that stuff and how to keep my cool when the going gets tough.
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 not been in many conflicts except User:Kavin5fan where I thought users were not allowed to place an external link on their page (although they were) and asked them to remove it. A small disagreement broke out, and as far as I know they left.

Optional question from xenocidic

4. As an administrator, you will come across some extremely vulgar language and often come under attack for your actions. You will most likely have to deal with some fairly troublesome users. The users you block will sometimes ask to be unblocked. Please review the very NSFW scenario outlined at User:Xenocidic/RFAQ and describe how you would respond to the IP's request to be unblocked.
A:Well, most likely I would revert the work done by the user and warn them gently. If it continues, I would probably block them. With the unblock requests, I would revert htem and watch the page to see if unblock requests like that continue. If they do, I will probably protect the talk page for a while and remind the user kindly but firmly that unblock requests like that are unacceptable, then show them WP:GAB.
Followup: How would you respond to the final good faith unblock request made at 11:35 ? –xeno (talk) 22:23, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A: Well, I would like to know how long the user will be blocked. If they are blocked for 48-72 hours, I would say, 'Edits like the one you made at 11:45, are unnacceptable. You are welcome to make constructive contributions once the block expires (in 48/24/72 hours).'

General comments

[edit]
RfAs for this user:

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Islaammaged126 before commenting.

Discussion

[edit]
Yes, that was my old account. I once tried to log in, but it failed as something was wrong with my password. I tried to email a new pasword, but it failed. I was forced to create a new account to remain on Wikipedia with a registered account. --Islaammaged126 (talk) 21:20, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Now, do you mean accounts or username changes? I have no other accounts,but have changed usernames to Iamsocool!, Veggies-R-Us and back to Islaammaged126.--Islaammaged126 (talk) 21:32, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/IslaamMaged126 3,Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/IslaamMaged126 ,Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/IslaamMaged126 4, Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/IslaamMaged126 2.--Islaammaged126 (talk) 21:32, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support
[edit]
  1. Moral Support I am afraid, this one will be a victim of WP:SNOW as well, but don't let that discourage you. With not even 200 mainspace edits you will get opposed certainly but if you continue to contribute in a good way and make yourself known and if people one day think you should be admin, then I bet someone will nominate you. I doubt tho that many self-noms will get you there, now some people will oppose just based on that fact. So#Why 21:13, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Moral Support. Sorry, but this is going to fall under WP:NOTNOW. I admire your spirit and willingness to help out, but it's going to take some more experience (both in the mainspace and in the project space). It's an extremely rare day that an editor with fewer than 2000 edits pass RFA. You're on the right path, it will just take a little while longer to gain the necessary experience. If you ever have any questions about anything, don't hesitate to ask me. Useight (talk) 21:23, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    SupportVery impressed with your work. I'll be proud to support you as long as you dont enter another five RFAs if you fail this one. You've earned trust and have done your time. Now it's time to be a sysop. Gears of War 2 21:34, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
[edit]
  1. Oppose You definitely need a higher mainspace count. With only about 1/10 of your edits being to the mainspace, and half to the user talk namespace. Also, listing your userpage as your best contribution to the encyclopedia worries me. Shapiros10 contact meMy work 21:12, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose - Strange phrasing in question 1. You don't need to be an admin to revert vandalism or adopt users. Makes me question your knowledge of the role of an WP:ADMIN. Also, you don't have much experience in the project space, especially in the areas you wish to work: ANI, AVI (from your allusion to vandalism) and RFPP. This means you fail my criteria. Wisdom89 (T / C) 21:14, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Your edit count has been very low for the past few months. I'd like to see a little more dedication to the project. Wizardman 21:32, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Strong, Strong Oppose! The answers to the questions reflect a complete lack of understanding of adminship, and when a user claims that some of his best contributions have been to his own User page I get worried about his quality as an editor nevermind as an admin. Question three worried me even more; you had a disagreement with a user where you were clearly in the wrong and "as far as I know they left". You have 170-odd mainspace edits in almost a year, and I normally average that in a week; again, not too certain you have the experience. Ironholds 21:37, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Oppose. I'm not one to cite WP:NOTNOW, but with only 200 or so mainspace, I have to do it. S. Dean Jameson 21:42, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Oppose Nearly no mainspace experience as well as nearly no experience in admin related areas as far as I can see. All in all not enough experience to be an administrator, sorry. —αἰτίας •discussion• 21:44, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Switching to opposeOkay just caught something. Shapiros reminded me of Kate and I reviewed it again. I'm not happy with those numbers. My gut said "Support" but not good numbers. Also, you've been here since late 2007, you should be a bit more experienced. Gears of War 2 21:47, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Very Strong Oppose Lack of knowledge about adminship, believes best edits are to userpage,lack of mainspace edits,failure to follow self-nom instructions correctly,5 self-noms.--Xp54321 (Hello! • Contribs) 21:48, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Oppose, WP:NOTNOW. Nowhere near enough experience, either in admin areas or in Wikipedia as a whole. I seriously recommend having at least 1000 mainspace edits and some more concrete contributions outside userspace to point at before trying again. Nothing personal about you, but it's just that right now it's just very hard to see how you'd work as an admin. ~ mazca t | c 21:50, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Oppose Editor has good intent, but doesn't have nearly enough experience. I almost always hate to go by edit count, but just over 1,000 altogether and 175 mainspace edits just aren't enough. The answers to the questions are odd, and don't seem to show that the user has a comprehensive understanding of policies. Also, a user who believes his best contributions are to his userpage clearly doesn't understand the concept of the encyclopedia. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 22:31, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral
[edit]
  1. Neutral — Failed to follow self-nom instructions thoroughly. Also pending answer to Q4. –xeno (talk) 21:11, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. To avoid a pile-on, but the quality of this RFA indicates that the candidate doesn't have much in the way of familiarity with policy/procedure or what is really required of administrators. I would encourage the candidate to look in to beefing up their participation with the project, become a little more familiar with the finer intricacies of how the place is run and try again in a while. Shereth 21:58, 31 July 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.