Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Raghusri

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

• I had previously closed this per WP:SNOW, however I was asked on my talk page to revert my closure, and have done so. Legoktm (talk) 16:19, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re-closed - this is not editor review (✉→BWilkins←✎) 16:23, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Final (1/15/0); ended 16:31, 24 October 2012 (UTC) per WP:SNOW Legoktm (talk) 16:31, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Raghusri (talk · contribs) – I want to become an administrator on English Wikipedia. Raghusri (talk) Raghusri 12:50, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?

A: Such as blocking ip's or users who are doing Vandalism after warning also and i want to assign permissions to those who are trustworthy and experienced in editing. Importantly i want to delete the "orphaned non-free revisions" in lots of image files that have existing "orphaned non-free revision templates".

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

A: My best contributions to Wikipedia are adding citations from reliable sources such as The Times of India, CNN-IBN, India Today etc., All these are newspaper sites. Why? because according to "Wikipedia guidelines" we can add citations from reliable sources such as newspaper sites. And also i have added "awards" information from reliable sources to various film articles in English Wikipedia. And i have created 26 user templates ,31 images uploaded, 4,000 plus edits to English Wikipedia as of today.

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: Yes, but less conflicts with one user. I have understood what he told to me and corrected my attitude and editing skills in English Wikipedia. And in future, due to gaining lot of knowledge i won't repeat involving in conflicts or creating conflicts.

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

---

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review his contributions before commenting.

1. Raghusri, I think it's admirable that you want the tools, but your recent block log, your high level of user page editing (which would be fine if it didn't seem to be such a big focus of your total editing), and your relatively light experience is going to make this not a viable nomination. Don't get discouraged, and keep editing. Gigs (talk) 13:39, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1. Oppose Five blocks in less than a year is a lot for a candidate for administrator. Érico Wouters ^msg 13:33, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
2. (edit conflict) Oppose per Erico and the fact that you've only been here since April. Please read this essay. A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 13:41, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
3. Oppose - sorry, but you've not been here long enough and all that block activity as recently as May does not fill me with any confidence. Please keep working had and come back in the future. GiantSnowman 13:42, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
4. Oppose per this. AutomaticStrikeout 13:44, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
5. Oppose my apologies but I cannot support a candidate with only 7 months experience. Also there is not enough admin related experience in those 7 months to show that the candidate understands what is required of an admin. -- RP459 ^Talk/_{Contributions} 13:47, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
6. Oppose Recent block-evasion is a demerit. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 13:48, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
7. Oppose, this edit summary and various similar ones show a misunderstanding of what constitutes vandalism that would be troubling in an admin dedicated to fighting vandalism. Huon (talk) 13:49, 24 October 2012 (UTC) I think[reply]
8. Oppose For someone that wants to be involved in antivandalism work, I do not see a lot of experience in this area from reverting a lot of vandalism, making reports at AIV, and such as I would expect. Also, how is this vandalism? Because of this, I'm afraid that I am not comfortable supporting the candidate at this time. SassyLilNugget (talk) 13:50, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

   Changes in numbers like that are sometimes vandalism. I don't know if that was the case here, or whether the edit was in good faith. Gigs (talk) 13:54, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

   Even still, good faith should be assumed unless there is evidence for us to not. It might be an unconstructive edit but it is not blantant vandalism, as I regard it. For all we know, the IP could have been acting in good faith. Also, this and this. I don't feel that the candidate understands the difference between vandalism and good faith edits. SassyLilNugget (talk) 14:12, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

9. Oppose Concerns about block log. It looks as if the latest block might have been a mistake, though. --Stefan2 (talk) 13:51, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
10. Oppose Fairly certain this will flunk WP:NOTNOW when a bold editor or admin chooses to close it. I think the request is uninformed, but not unwell intentioned. I have never seen an admin with a block log this long, or any with any history of block evaasion. The Illusive Man^(Contact) 13:58, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
11. Very Strong Oppose _{Wow, my most serious oppose EVER.} You've been around for 5 months, and 26 days. Plus, no AfD to count. Low edit count and 5 blocks in less than a year (according to Erico) adds up to a no (signal) for me and I don't know for others. TruPepitoMTalk To Me 14:12, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
12. Oppose Block evasion is incompatible with being an administrator.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 16:17, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
13. Oppose. I didn't !vote before this was WP:SNOW withdrawn very sensibly. But it was an ill-advised submission and an even more ill advised re-opening. No way, not now and not until a considerable time of trouble free constructive editing has elapsed. Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 16:19, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
14. Oppose per the other Mr. Brown's excellent rationale. (no relationship) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 16:26, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
15. Wizardman 16:27, 24 October 2012 (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.