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

Panewithholder[edit]

Final (0/8/0); ended 05:56, 4 April 2015 (UTC) per WP:SNOW --Bongwarrior (talk) 05:56, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination[edit]

Panewithholder (talk · contribs) – YOUR DESCRIPTION OF THE USER Panewithholder (talk) 23:58, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vote for me ;) Panewithholder (talk) 23:59, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for the candidate[edit]

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: Naturally, I'm an alpha male personality and want to "have the steering wheel". I want to promote order and justice in the community and further the goal of the site. Panewithholder (talk) 00:03, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I don't have many contributions, BUT they are all positive. I'm honestly unsure of my best Panewithholder (talk) 00:03, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
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 haven't been in any conflicts. If I happen to be in one, I will do what is fair and best for the community. Panewithholder (talk) 00:03, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

General comments[edit]

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

Discussion[edit]

Support[edit]
Strongly, Strongly Support I vote for my self. Hater be hatin' aintas be aintin' Panewithholder (talk) 00:54, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose[edit]
  1. Strongly oppose The user has 1 day of editorial experience on Wikipedia, this is insufficient to be fluent in Wikipedia policies. They are far too inexperienced for such an important role. No intent to offend the user, but they need more experience contributing on Wikipedia, for example creating pages/vandalism control/new pages patrol or similar before being considered for adminship. Joseph2302 (talk) 00:07, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose Panewithholder is a very new editor and is still very much learning the ropes. While I certainly respect his enthusiasm, it's misguided to try and jump into adminship when you've just learned about how to use talk pages. Simonm223 (talk) 00:40, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Strong Oppose per what's been said on your talk page, WP:NOTNOW early close recommended. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 05:01, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Oppose The candidate has made only 24 edits to Wikipedia. — sparklism hey! 05:22, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Nothing much to say here. WP:NOTNOW sums up everything. Jianhui67 T★C 05:27, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Oppose, must I explain why? Just WP:NOTNOW. I do like the fact that you're trying just... not yet. Kharkiv07Talk 05:28, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Extremely Strong Oppose - Account created April 2, only 2 days before self-nomming, only a couple of dozen edits - and only 5 of those to articles, editor describes himself as an "alpha male" who "wants to have the steering wheel," and has a tag on his user page saying his an "Inspector" of the "Wikipolice". Whatever this is: naivité, foolishiness, getting some LOLs, or trolling it ain't serious. A bureaucrat should quickly close this as WP:NOTNOW -- and after this, probably WP:NOTEVER. BMK (talk) 05:35, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Oppose and suggest closure since this is going nowhere. Jusdafax 05:42, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral[edit]
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.
Category