SuperCarnivore591 (talk·contribs) – I am SuperCarnivore591, I have been a member of the Wikipedia community for two years now, mostly editing and creating articles like many good Wikipedians. I have decided to broaden my horizons and help out in other ways, which is why I'm applying for adminship. I believe very much that I can further the quality of Wikipedia with my administrative input. SuperCarnivore591 (talk) 02:55, 4 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[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: I intend to work further my work stopping the vandals that are rampant around here, as well as take part in deletion nominations, which I've noticed can get very heated and need level-headed, unbiased admins for closing.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: My best contributions to Wikipedia would be all the content articles that I have created during my time here. I am most proud of Mario Merola (lawyer), an article on the late Bronx District Attorney, and the second article that I am most proud of is the Paul Gentile article, on another Bronx DA who contributed a good deal to the American legal world. I've also created some significant stubs such as Bagger Dave's and Grupo Habita, which I pretty much did on little-known things, but with well-referenced sources.
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, I have, in the past during when I gave my input on certain RFA candidates pages, and why I opposed them. I was frequently called a troll and unhelpful, which at times annoyed me, although it didn't particularly cause me any stress. A long time ago, I actually was just joking around and got a short, 24 hour block for it. However, I guarantee that I have learned my lesson since that time, and have only contributed constructively now.
You may ask optional questions below. There is a limit of two questions per editor. Multi-part questions disguised as one question, with the intention of evading the limit, are disallowed. Follow-up questions relevant to questions you have already asked are allowed.
Hey, troll: please stop wasting people's time or you will be blocked indefinitely. --Floquenbeam (talk) 04:27, 4 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My RFA was in good faith, and I think my constructive article creations demonstrate that I am not a troll. Also, the nasty violation of WP:NPA in this edit summary was unnecessary. SuperCarnivore591 (talk) 04:47, 4 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(edit conflict × 1) Oppose – An edit count of 2,000 is well below expected and this demonstrates immaturity. A block from trolling at rfa and also a report at ANI afterwards for the same thing? WP:NOTNOW. J947 04:32, 4 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose - Looked over your edit history and noticed you've had a lot of arguments/edit wars with other users as well as a fair amount of your edits being just that. I'm sorry but my vote is no, i would suggest working on not having heated discussions with other users/not edit warring. AryaTargaryen (talk) 04:51, 4 March 2017 (UTC)AryaTargaryenReply[reply]
It hasn't even been seven days yet. And I have contributed a lot of articles constructively. Why not let the people decide? SuperCarnivore591 (talk) 04:44, 4 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[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.