Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Dagadt

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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

Contents

[edit] Dagadt

FINAL (1/8/0); withdrawn per WP:SNOW by EVula at 16:30, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Dagadt (talk · contribs) Hi! I´m Dagadt and have done a few hundred edits. I´m most interested in the airline articles and in Area 51. For about 10 month I´m working on wikipedia as a user. I´d be a honor for me to become admin. I´ve copied my user page, because now everyone can see the articles I´m working on. In addition you can build you own opinion about me.

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

[edit] 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 admin work do you intend to take part in?
A: I´d like to fight against Vandalism and thefore I would protect pages and block users, which only Vandalise. Over and above I´d wish to help new users.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: My edits to the airlines articles (listed on my user page) and to Area 51 are my best, because I´m highly interested in this fields, and now a lot about it.
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, one time I created the article Lloyd Paxton. In a users opinion this article wasn´t important. After that incident I gave my best to improve it. Now the article has some interesting, usefull information. Since my improvation I´ve never heard bad comments. Another time I asked a question on a talk page. Two user answered me, but there was a user being impolite to the user answering me. I said "thanks you" to the user who answered my question friendly. The impolite user was angry at me because I said thanks you to the answer, and said he don´t want to answer my question, he just wants to critizice the friendly user. I explained him ,that i have no idea why he´s angry at me and that he should leave me alone.

[edit] General comments

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

[edit] Discussion

[edit] Support
  1. Moral support - I have no doubt you will become an admin someday. Until then, there are many tools available which you may find very useful. I look forward to seeing what you can do on the vandalism-fighting front. The Transhumanist 14:07, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Oppose
  1. Oppose - Sorry, friend, but I don't believe you have enough experience. Perhaps you could read WP:ADMIN to get an idea of what admins do? Why not gain more experience by reporting persistant vandals to WP:AIV? I'd be happy to put you on the right path, friend. All in all, it's just experience :-) - Your mind is in the right place though :-) ScarianCall me Pat 12:02, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
  2. Oppose, strongly recommend withdrawal or early closure due to inexperience. --Coredesat 12:18, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
  3. Oppose lack of experience. Half your edits are to your own user page--it makes you seem focused on yourself, not helping other people edit the encyclopedia. You should turn on the preference to always give an edit summary--you make a lot of edits without an edit summary, which makes you look inexperienced. You need to get both experience working on deletion policy--WP:AFD isn't a bad place to start--and much more editing of articles. Darkspots (talk) 12:23, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
  4. Oppose - per above. General lack of experience. Rt. 12:37, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
    And, even though maybe in good faith, some canvassing has occured. Rt. 12:39, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
    Comment - I think it can be overlooked; it's fairly neutral and I do believe this RfA will fail per WP:SNOW either way unless the candidate withdraws. ScarianCall me Pat 12:54, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
    I agree. Thanks for commenting. Rt. 12:55, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
  5. Oppose, per Darkspots. Unschool (talk) 13:25, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
  6. Oppose - I'm sorry, but we're talking about improving an encyclopedia here. I know that this is non-article space here, but you should really look at your spelling and grammar when you're responding here. It's highly easy to scrutinise and if I don't believe you have good written language skills, I don't believe you should be administrating the editing of an encyclopedia. Sorry. Stick around a while, learn a LOT more about the ropes and what you can do to swing on the right ones, and you'll be fine, but give yourself at least 3 months. --lincalinca 13:41, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
    Oh and, canvassing? Eek. Not good form. --lincalinca 13:43, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
  7. Regretful Oppose - You seem like a person who is very interested in Wikipedia, but I am going to have to oppose you based on your edit count and your pronlonged periods of not editing. Trevor "Tinkleheimer" Haworth 13:59, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
  8. Apologetic Oppose. Per all above. Besides, we'd hate to lose such an outstanding mainspace contributor to the boring admin tasks! Happy editing :-) Pumpmeup 14:34, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Neutral
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.