Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/ChristianMan16 5

ChristianMan16 (talk · contribs)

Ended: 15 December 2008

Result: Not promoted (2 support, 14 oppose)

I would like to present myself to the community for adminship...yes a little quick but my last one was ended early cause I was being impersonated on ENWP. So here's why I think i should be an admin. First of all, I have cranked up on my Mainspace edits, I have cranked up on my QD tags and my vandalism reversions, I have about 8 reports to WP:VIP I currently have 4,178 edits to this Wikipedia with the earliest being 06:20, 29 August 2007 (UTC). I started regularly editing here earlier this year. Since then I have worked on expanding out wrestling articles. I have over 35% of my total edits in main space in my time here. I think I have greatly improved since my days on ENWP. I have seen the need for the tools more since I cranked up on my qd tagging and Vandalism reverting started. That's why. Thanks for listening.-- ✧ CM16  06:16, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate's acceptance:Self-nomintation-- ✧ CM16  06:16, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support

1. Weak support - You are a good user, and even with low mainspace, it's not that bad! And Majorly, please, I think your comments are disgraceful, and you should consider making them more appropriate. Yotcmdr ^{Sign up for the wikicup =talk=} 17:17, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   They aren't disgraceful. They may be honest and critical, but not disgraceful. If you want disgraceful, have a look at CM's own (frequent) opposes. Majorly ^talk 17:51, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   I don't want to make a big fuss about all this, but his comment aren't disgraceful in his opposes. However saying somone will never be an admin, immature, uncivil isn't helping, and maybe encouraging him with your comments, would be better. Anyway, they're your comment, and it's up to you. Yotcmdr ^{Sign up for the wikicup =talk=} 17:55, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2. My contact with Aaron has been nothing but pleasant, I think he would do nothing but good here. Steelerfan-94 (talk) 23:49, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   Not that your !vote will make a difference, but your only edits are pretty much to his talk page and you haven't edited here since October. If this isn't a canvas I don't know what is. -Djsasso (talk) 03:56, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   There's no canvasing going on here. He found this on his own I hadn't mentioned it in our email except to in our conversation of my impersonators last month, and I wasn't pushing him to come here and vote either way. He did this all his own.-- ✼ CM16^{Merry Christmas!!}  06:04, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   For the record. I'm an established user on Wikipedia so you really need to get your facts straight to think I'm "Canvasing". I saw in a email that my friend CM16 had an RFA and I voted in it. That's not a problem is it Djasso is it?! — This unsigned comment was added by Steelerfan-94 (talk • changes).

   If he emailed you to tell you he was running on an RFA, then yes, that is the definition of canvassing. -Djsasso (talk) 22:13, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   Uhh, er, no, he emailed me to talk about getting me unbanned at en, but he was making small talk and asked me what's going on in my life at which point I mentioned it....Canvassing mean you influence a persons vote which I did not.-- ✝ CM16   04:15, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   No canvassing is telling people you know will !vote the way you want them to about a !vote. If its someone you know will !vote for you, you don't actually have to tell them to !vote for you, just the act of telling them constitutes canvassing. To give you an example, say you want to delete a page and out of 10 users who have discussed deleting it before you know 4 will say yes and 6 will say no, but you only tell the 4 that will say yes about the new vote even if you didn't tell them which way to vote, you already knew they would say yes because of past discussions. Same thing goes with Rfa's if you mention it to friends then you are basically telling people likely to say yes that you are running for Rfa but failing to tell peole who are likely to say no. In future situations where you are running for Rfa you might want to remember its better to just post your Rfa and hope your friends stumble upon it, rather than telling them its there. -Djsasso (talk) 05:00, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   FYI, I had NO idea he would even come here. I didn't know he was gonna vote considering he never comes here. I didn't think he would. And the context of the email says "yeah you could talk to them about the pro wrestling wikia....another impersonation...who I don't know but it caused me to fail an RfA. And cause of it I'm failing my current one, but this time it's because it's "too close together"." Please don't judge cause you don't know the context unless they tell you.-- ✝ CM16   05:26, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   And it is my human right to tell my friends what's going on in my life, whether it be about this wiki or about anything. It's called communism if you don't let me.-- ✝ CM16   05:28, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   How is it Communism? Stalinism, maybe, but Communism? Be careful, CM, the two are very different. --Gwib ^-(talk)- 07:19, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

1. Weak oppose per the comments below. Also, I just don't think you are ready yet, and I have found that you can be a little bit uncivil at times. Perhaps in a few months, just not now. Sorry. BG^7even 09:53, 8 December 2008 (UTC) Changing to Oppose, I have seen some civility problems in this very page, but the comments are staying calmer than in the past, which is good, and I honestly do think it's just too soon. Leave it until the new year and keep on going... and it will most certainly be a " Support"! Thanks, BG^7even 18:53, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   I don't wanna botch it but I do have to disagree civily with the supposed "Civility problems", all my comments below were wrote out to be civil. I meant them all to be calm, cool and collected, I'm sorry if you saw it otherwise.-- ✧ CM16  18:56, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2. Oppose Not now, probably never. Simply too immature and uncivil. Majorly ^talk 10:52, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   You're looking at me as critically as en does, why? What have I one to upset you?-- ✧ CM16  18:02, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   I've seen far too much poor judgement from you I'm afraid. Also, fifth RFA? Self-nom? I'm certainly not one to oppose over minor issues like that, but I hope you're starting to get the picture here. Majorly ^talk 18:14, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   I don't mean this as an attack but your English Wikipedia wrapped up in one user when it comes to your view of me. They look at the bad things I've done in the past and never look to the future good in me. They think they know how I'll be forever. Daniel is one user who seems to just plain hate me. I don't want the same thing ending up between me and you, Majorly. But, I can't help that you look at my past and don't look for me to improve. I'm sorry you feel that way about me. I may not have the left-winged view of the world but I think I would make an awesome admin as early as now.-- ✧ CM16  18:25, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   No, I didn't even think of English Wikipedia. I thought of this Wikipedia. I know exactly how it feels when grudge-bearers show up and try to bring you down. I looked at this Wikipedia, and I'm simply not satisfied with you. I'm sorry. Please stop self-nominating, because you clearly are not ready, and probably won't be for a long time. Concentrate on something other than gaining adminship. Majorly ^talk 18:30, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   All I really wanted to hear you say is that your opposing this time but you may support in the future, and you basically have, thank you.-- ✧ CM16  18:33, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3. Oppose As Mentioned by Gwib this user only has 29% edits in main space articles. So i cannot support you sorry. Daisy (talk) 11:23, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
4. Weak oppose I have found you to be a good article writer, yet I believe you still need to mature a little. I will consider supporting in the future though. Shapiros10 ^{Flap the Yap} 12:25, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
5. Oppose No. I'm very concerned about this CM's neutrality, and his lack of understanding of how Wikipedia works. His comments during the fair-use images dispute showed a misunderstanding of fair-use images globally as well as in the United States. I had negative interactions with him during that incident. Further, summarily moving Mobile phone to Cell phone with no discussion at all is concerning, considering it was clearly not a non-controversial move. Finally, your last request was only a few weeks ago, too soon to reconsider. Sorry, not at this time. PeterSymonds (talk) 18:07, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   First off, in my eyes I thought it was gonna be an uncontroversial move, and I have apologized for that. Second, I have been on Wikipedia since 2006 as a whole, I know how it work, I have been on this Wikipedia since 2007, I know how this one works, the image thing shouldn't be an issue considering we do not allow fair use images here, all you really need to know there is that fair-use is not allowed, and what constitutes fair use which is easy to do. I believe I'm very good at being neutral cause I push it on others when I feel they haven't been. Lastly, I addressed the"too soon" thing in my nomination address or whatever you wanna call it. I said I knw this is a little soon but I was cheated out of my last one cause I was being impersonated and I was being opposed solely because everyone thought it was me. Now, please will you reconsider now that I've addressed those subjects, please.-- ✧ CM16  18:15, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

6. Oppose VandalFighterFR(V) Bad warning? 21:04, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
7. Oppose Sorry but you have shown yourself to be too unstable to be admin time and time again. -Djsasso (talk) 23:58, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
8. Oppose per mostly PeterSymonds (talk · contribs) and Djsasso (talk · contribs). Still some immaturity and civility issues which aren't good qualities for administrators. Sorry, adminship is just not for you at the moment. – RyanCross (talk) 02:12, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
9. Oppose I'm sorry but you seem to lack neutrality and Wikipedia knowledge. By this I mean, I don't think you have quite the right grasp on Wikipedia. Sorry, but like Majorly: Unless you change drastically, I will not support. Sorry. ѕwirlвoy ₪ 23:51, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
10. Oppose - Sorry, but I can't support. I have concerns with your neutrality, judgment, et cetera. I would suggest you withdraw. ס (Samekh) ^Talk 00:01, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Please explain these neutrality problem....cause I know of none? And I am entitled to my opinion but I'm not going to enfore it on wikipedia unless proper.-- ✼ CM16^{Merry Christmas!!}  00:24, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Neutrality can also mean bias. I think you have, as Kennedy said below, a strong pro-American bias, for example, this. ס (Samekh) ^Talk 12:51, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

11. Strong oppose - Uncivil. Immature. Blind pro-American bias. Kennedy ^(talk) 09:59, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't have an American bias I just don't know how things are in other parts of the world cause I've never been outside the USA, BIG DIFFERENCE. I'm also human and can make mistakes, no human is perfect.-- ✼ CM16^{Merry Christmas!!}  17:38, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Please don't feign lack of knowledge. You're blatantly pushing your own POV here, and edit warring to boot. Majorly ^talk 22:26, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    I didn't want to get nasty cause it would hurt the situation but IMO it calls for it right now. May be you should check your sources, and not attack me.-- ✼ CM16^{Merry Christmas!!}  06:02, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

12. Oppose as per my usual "instinctive" votes. MC8 (talk) 22:11, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
13. I am dreadfully sorry, but I have to oppose for now.-- Tdxiang 10:56, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
14. Oppose I'm sorry, but you have to be patient and improve. To be an admin you have to be civil and follow all the rules. Being an admin does NOT give you the right to ignore all rules. You are way to uncivil. Sorry man. Merry Christmas.SimonKSK 16:11, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Though I respect your opinion, I must challenge some of its content. Being an administrator does not change the status of an editor; it's a few extra buttons for maintenance. WP:IAR is for editors, and thus it is extended to every user, be they admin, checkuser, bureaucrat, steward or IP. Admins no more have to follow all the rules than I do, within reason. PeterSymonds (talk) 16:17, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Sorry, I think you misunderstood. Everything you just said, I also said. I know Admins have to follow all the rules. I know what WP:IAR is. I wasn't reffering to it. I was explaining why CM can't be an admin because he edit wars, which is ignoring the rules.WP:IAR is for editors trying to do it for a good cause.SimonKSK 16:25, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

According to the pie chart edit counter and Mediawiki's edit counter, you have around 29% of edits to the namespace with around 23% of other edits to your userpage. This would constitute the basis of an oppose for me, but you obviously know how edit articles already (which is why we look for high percentage namespace edits in the first place), so I'll make throughout checks of other factors before voting.

However, you have to edit articles more! 29% isn't enough, frankly, for an admin to have. --Gwib ^-(talk)- 06:30, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My information is based on this.-- ✧ CM16  06:33, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A note: The 23% is user namespace, not user page. His user page, all the other pages in his user space (100 of them currently) and any pages in anyone elses userspace. The number can be a little confusing given that edits to personal sandbox copies of articles, signatures, most wikiprojects and even Monobook.css edits get grouped in there. These may or may not help the wiki (for instance, my user space count had an extra 4-500 edits due to my template testing pages which were needed to get many templates working better or at all.) They may also just be groups of short quick tweaks to get something right. monobook.css and sig draw a lot of edits to get them working the way they should and CM certainly likes his many sigs and his monobook edit count is not small (60-70 on it alone). There is also a lot of pages in his userspace working on WWE articles. Many have been moved to the main space, but more still remain. That being said.. 29%-35% main space is still very low. -- Creol(talk) 07:33, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. I do not think you are ready for adminship just yet, but I do not share the feelings of some in the oppose section. I think you have a lot of potential, but you are a little too immature for adminship at the moment. My advice is to wait a long time for another RfA, and to work on how you present yourself to the community. How do you want to be viewed? Show us that you can work positively and maturely here on simple, and you will gain the Admin bit. This will take time, but be patient and it will come to you. Best of luck, Malinaccier P. (talk) 14:28, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Im not saying he won't make a good sysop. I wouldn't doubt for one minute that he will not become a good sysop. The point is i don't feel this user is ready to become a sysop. Please feel free to persuade me. I am open to change my mind with a bit of persuation. Regards Daisy (talk) 16:18, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SNOW? – RyanCross (talk) 23:57, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is winter, so it's time for snow. ѕwirlвoy ₪ 00:23, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, let it run full time please. Something I do in the next couple day may change peoples mind, you can't close everything per WP:SNOW.-- ✼ CM16^{Merry Christmas!!}  00:25, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, what are the chances of that happening CM16? Can you really boost your MS edits about ~20% in the next 5 days? Can you be mature enough to well, mature in 5 days and show it? I'm sorry, but per the number of opposes, your WP history, and the time limit I think your current goal is impossible and cannot be reached at this time. ѕwirlвoy ₪ 00:34, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can let me try can't you?-- ✼ CM16^{Merry Christmas!!}  00:45, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I don't think anyone would believe the changes were permanent if you made them in a matter of days. -Djsasso (talk) 15:08, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]