Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Policyofmankind

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

Policyofmankind

Nomination

Final (0/4/0); Scheduled to end 15:54, 14 March 2009 (UTC) Closed per WP:NOTNOW. PeterSymonds (talk) 17:38, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Policyofmankind (talk · contribs) – YOUR DESCRIPTION OF THE USER Olusegun 15:54, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

Questions for the candidate

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 administrative work do you intend to take part in?

A: Watch Vandalism and correct then

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

A: Editing of the article "Advanced Fee Fraud" because it was likely to raise criticism for Wikipedia from my country

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, when i tried editing the above-mentioned article. I wrote a newspaper article on the issue but i would like to edit such articles with full-right next time and thats why i am requesting for Adminship

General comments

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

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

Discussion

Support

Oppose

1. Oppose You've made 21 edits, I have to oppose.--Giants27 ^T/C 16:29, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Oppose I wouldn't bother completing the nomination, you've got far too little - well, actually, you've not got any experience. WP:NOTNOW. Esteffect (talk) 17:04, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Oppose You were strongly advised not to do this and you don't seem to understand the role of an Administrator. Apparently you think that if you are an administrator you will have more rights to edit articles than you have now - which is incorrect. You will have the same rights that you have now so far as basic editing goes, and you can correct vandalism without being an administrator. I don't know why you went ahead after 3 editors advised against it. dougweller (talk) 17:15, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Oppose Answers here and on user talk page indicate that user has no idea what adminship entails.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:21, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

   Also, user has no constructive edits to mainspace under this username.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:29, 7 March 2009 (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.