Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/qinshihuangdi

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

[edit] Qinshihuangdi

Voice your opinion (0/1/0); Scheduled to end 03:37, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Qinshihuangdi (talk · contribs) - YOUR DESCRIPTION OF THE USER Qinshihuangdi 03:37, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

I accept. --Qinshihuangdi 14:12, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with?

A: I am something of a polymath, with a bachelor's degree in religious philosophy and psychology from Alfred University, with minors in fine arts and religious studies. I have an associate's degree in humanities and social science from Niagara County Community College, and will be starting the Master of Liberal Arts program at Lock Haven University of Pennsylvania in August, 2007. There is very little that does not interest me, and if I see a statement I know to be in error, or to be an oversimplification, or in need of development, I never hesitate to make an edit or an addition. That is, after all, the only way the Wikipedia will grow and develop.

2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?

A: As a member of the International Association for Jungian Studies, I was very pleased to have seeded that article.

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: I started the article for Faye Turney, and some editors and contibutors thought that it was spurious. I'm not yet convinced of that fact, but I let the democratic process go forward and accepted the result -- which was a redirect to 2007 Iranian seizure of Royal Navy personnel. I believe the only approach to universal truth is consensus, and consensus is the only thing Wikipedia has to keep its individual members honest. I'm glad so many users weighed in in finding a solution that best corresponded to the consensus.

General comments

Please keep criticism constructive and polite.

Discussion

Support

Oppose

1. Oppose. With a nomination statement like "YOUR DESCRIPTION OF THE USER", how could I support? Please reapply once you have more experience, as this RFA will not pass. I suggest you withdraw. --Deskana (fry that thing!) 19:22, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Neutral

The above 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.