Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/ChristianMan16 3

Ended 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Result: Not promoted - 2 support, 10 oppose (17%) -- Creol(talk) 12:58, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know this will probably fail but I have to give it a shot....I could use the tools to delete redirects quickly so I can move wrestling articles to their proper place when ready. Alot of people have said I've improved so I would like to community to entrust me with Admin tools.   † ChristianMan16  00:53, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate's acceptance: Self Nom.--  † ChristianMan16  00:53, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support

• Support He has had a bumpy road, but ya can't deny the fact he turned over a new leaf. Although, I am a little wary what he might do if he gets stressed too much.SimonKSK 01:31, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Support- I will support.-- Running  talk  23:54, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

• Oppose While I agree that you have improved, you still are not yet ready for the adminship tools. I took my time with this vote, so please don't feel like I am punishing you. I really have been thinking about this for a while, and you have made some improvements. Your attitude towards other editors on this Wikipedia have improved dramatically, as has your ability to correctly simplify articles. After looking at both your edit count on Wannabe Kate, and after looking through all 18 pages of your contributions Special:Contributions/ChristianMan16, I have found some things that you need to work on before I can support you:

The first thing that I believe you need to work on is your vandalism reverting. After looking through all 18 pages of your contributions, I could find no work done towards reverting vandalism. This is a critical aspect of an administrator's job. Without any reversions to vandalism, you, unfortunately, would have no use for the rollback tool.

The next thing that you need to work on is the fact that you have more edits to your user/user talk page than you do the mainspace. While a lot of the articles that you have been creating recently have been a good start towards this goal, you still have a bit more to learn about mainspace editing before I can safely support you.

Without the ability to see your deleted contributions, I cannot say whether or not you have marked any pages for quick deletion, but if you haven't, then that is something that you could work on for your next RfA. No paged marked for quick deletion equates to no use for the deletion tool.

I still don't fully trust you. While I have started warming up to you, you have a bit more to learn before you get my trust. Don't worry, though! You are on the right track!

Your activity is kind of low. I would like to see someone who is a bit more active.

You haven't shown to me that you know the policies like the Wikipedia:Blocking policy or Wikipedia:Deletion policy well enough to be able to handle the administrator flag yet. Keep editing, and over time, you will learn to grasp these fully. You just need patience :)

All in all, I cannot support you at this time, but if you work on these things, then you will definitely get my support in your next RfA, or you might even get nominated by me in the future! Good luck! Razorflame 01:33, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: Not vandal reverting in my opinion is not a valid reason - administrators have a rollback tool; others do not - therefore, not using the rollback tool does not follow not reverting whilst a non-admin. After all, it's easier as an admin. Microchip 17:20, Friday, June 6 2008 Utc 17:20, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, vandalism reversions are very necessary for becoming an administrator. If you didn't know how to revert vandalism, how would you be able to correctly use the rollback tool? The simple answer is you wouldn't be able to. Therefore, there would be no need for the rollback tool. That is the reason why I ask that people who are wanting to become administrators to have vandal reversions, so that I know that they understand what vandalism is and how to deal with it, as it is a bigger part of adminship than one might think. Razorflame 18:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: However, editors do have an undo button. So yes, they certainly should be able to have vandal reversions. -Djsasso (talk) 17:24, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Very weak oppose. I am voting this way because, though you have been doing very good and are gaining trust, I'm not sure about your overall understanding. I didn't like your reasons for this RfA. Everybody would like to have the Admin tools, and your stating that you didn't think that you could win anyway. I think that you're doing very well and aren't a sock-puppeteer anymore, but I know that this shouldn't be such a quick thing.

I really doubt that either of us are truly ready to become an admin, even though it seems so easy. Why I'm doing this neutral is it is obvious that you are doing better, so I don't want this to be an outright denial, I think that you have changed very much and are on your way to becoming one.

Just a little side-note: could you create this page with the same text as mine. So I can see your exact edits here. I'd want to see (1) how much, and (2) what pages you have edited. Cheers --  ✰AmericanEagle  02:35, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak oppose - You have improved a lot. That is a fact and it will be accepted without a doubt. However, like what American Eagle said, deleting pages to make way for the moving of wrestling articles? Your reason is too weak. Chenzw  Talk  07:48, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question: What makes that reason weak?--  † ChristianMan16  00:19, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Very (x306) Weak Oppose (and the longest vote type in SEWP history!) --  Da Punk '95  talk  00:15, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• not ready, oppose --vector ^_^ (talk) 16:23, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose lack of encyclopaedia-building is a concern - a large proportion of your edits are in the user space. Creating and enhancing more articles would help. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - user is unstable. Mønobi 19:25, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Elaborate, prehaps? Microchip 19:50, Friday, June 6 2008 Utc
• Oppose - really sorry, but not right now. You've come a long way in the last few months but I don't think you're ready for the sysop bit yet. Sorry again - Alison ^❤ 20:16, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak oppose - Sorry but I don't know you well and don't know why you would require the tools. You've not really given a good reason. --Terry ^{Talk - Changes} 21:16, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• not ready, doesn't have a need for the tools. Oysterguitarist 02:13, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak oppose - You have improve a lot lately, but I don't think you show a need for the tools quite yet. You said you needed deletion but what about blocking etc? The come with the package too. I believe if you keep going down the path you have been lately then you will recieve my support soon. Also, be proud in what you do! Try to be more confident and not say "I know this will probably fail..." Sorry to oppose man. Cheers, SwirlBoy39 18:14, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose could use few more months here. --Yegoyan (talk) 05:59, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• It you aren't assertive or confident, we won't be confident either and may either be more hesitant to support or switch to oppose because you seem to be not sure about wanting to become an admin. Cassandra (talk) 01:31, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]