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

Rjd0060[edit]

Final (1/5/5); ended 14:17, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Rjd0060 (talk · contribs) - I am nominating myself for adminship. I greatly look forward to any and all feedback (whether it is positive or negative) that I will receive from this process. Thank you all in advance for your comments. Rjd0060 02:41, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am officially withdrawing my nomination, per the comments below by Siva1979. I appreciate all the comments everybody has left me, and look forward to improving my contributions, and coming back here a few months down the road. - Rjd0060 13:38, 17 October 2007 (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: If I become an administrator, the bulk of my contributions would be vandalism related (as they are now). Specifically, I will continue reverting vandalism and warning users for vandalism. I believe it is very important to give users proper warning for their disruptive edits. As an admin, I will also be able to (and fully intend to) block problematic users (i.e.: users who are persistent vandals, and users who repeatedly violate Wikipedia’s policies, with emphasis on NPA and NLT-which I currently see (and report) a lot of). I would also take part in protecting pages that are constantly being vandalized, as I believe page protection is an important part of upholding the encyclopedic integrity of Wikipedia). In addition to that, I plan to work on deleting (or keeping) pages that are marked for speedy deletion. Finally, I am aware of the huge amount of work that needs to be done with the administrator’s backlog, so I plan to help reduce the massive backlog.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I don’t have a “best” contribution. I like to think (and I really believe) that every vandalism revert that I do is an important contribution on my part. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so it should be priority to make sure that the pages are accurate, and vandal-free.
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 been in conflicts with many vandals. Dealing with vandals is sometimes a hectic and somewhat chaotic thing. A lot of times, they dispute the warnings that I give them, which causes conflict. I, as most users should, always try to assume good faith. However sometimes that just is not possible with blatant vandalism. Even with that in mind, I always give proper warnings and / or explanations to the vandals, to try and help them realize what they are doing wrong, and get them back on the right track. Typically, this works and stops the users from vandalizing. But sometimes, the situation escalates and I have no other options other than to report them to AIV or even ANI in extreme cases. As far as actually getting stressed about it, I don’t. I enjoy contributing to Wikipedia, and plan to be here for a long time.

General comments[edit]

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Rjd0060 before commenting.

Discussion[edit]

Support[edit]
  1. Moral support. You already have done a lot and seem to be a fast learner. --Tikiwont 09:11, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose[edit]
  1. Oppose, you need more experience outside of vandal reverts and AFD discussions. T Rex | talk 03:14, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose adminship isn't all about reverting and blocking vandalism. Per #2, I really would like to see some article building experience, since Wikipedia is first and foremost an encyclopedia. Miranda 06:38, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. The makings of a good administrator, but experience is not sufficient at this stage. Daniel 07:34, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Daniel says it well above. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 08:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Oppose I need to find my words, because Pedro stole them. Seriously though, don't get discouraged; come back in a couple of months with a little more experience and I'll be happy to support. east.718 at 08:50, 10/17/2007
Neutral[edit]
  1. Neutral for now, but heavily leaning toward support. You have done quite a lot of editing, including 76 reports to AIV, I like that. However, over half your edits are in the last two weeks, I don't like that. I don't know if your time here is enough to demonstrate knowledge of policies and procedures, but your editing does demonstrate it. I will take a little extra time on this one to take a closer look into your contributions. My cursory look through your contribs shows that a lot of your recent edits were via Twinkle, and you comment on AFD extremely rapid-fire. Could mean that you'd be too quick on the "delete" and/or "block" buttons. Useight 02:55, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I believe that Twinkle is a very valuable tool to help against the vandals. It helps revert vandalism, and do it quickly (as it should be). I understand your comment about my AfD contributions, and would like to say that sometimes I just wait for AfD's to be added (continuous purging of the cache), thus I am able to comment on them within a few minutes (after reading the article, of course) of their post to the AfD log. - Rjd0060 04:03, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Twinkle is definitely a good tool for reverting vandalism. I don't use it because I use Internet Explorer and it doesn't work. However, 337 of your last 500 contribs were Twinkle reverts, which is pretty one-dimensional. Plus not a lot of mainspace edits. Useight 04:31, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Neutral I've seen this editor tagging CSDs, but not enough experience per T Rex. Phgao 04:28, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Neutral You are a very good editor and I feel that you will use the admin tools wisely. However, the lack of experience in this project is a major concern here. I would like to advise you to remove this nomination and try again after a few months. --Siva1979Talk to me 05:26, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Neutral You are certainly getting there, but I do think some more experience is required. This MfD was a bit odd, although I appreciate that you felt that C:CSD wasn't working for whatever reason. In addition most of your edits are made with Twinkle, and although you've made significant volume contributions to some of the Big Brother articles the actual edits seem to be very minor. Please do not be discouraged I see from your archive talk that other editors already thought you were an admin so you are clearly doing a lot right. Basically I'm just nervous about your full understanding of policy, evidenced by some AfD comments that don't seem to bring a lot of value to the table. Focus on some solid article work if possible, keep up the AfD stuff and ever important vandal fighting and I look forward to a full support at a later time. Also Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so it should be priority to make sure that the pages are accurate, and vandal-free - yes - totally agree - excellent comment. If you could help out on some of the accuracy part as well as the anti-vandal part your next RfA will sail through. Well said though, that's what being a Wikipedian is all about IMHO.Pedro :  Chat  07:42, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Neutral. since you're withdrawing you nomination. Keep up the good work and see you back here in a few months. Majoreditor 13:44, 17 October 2007 (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.
Category