Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Pursey

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

Pursey

Final (1/4/3) Ended 01:30, October 15, 2006 (UTC)

Pursey (talk · contribs) – Pursey Pursey 16:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: ~~I accept my own nomination.~~ I withdraw my nomination at this time. Pursey 16:47, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you may think I'm wasting my own time self-nominating just five days after creating my account on Wikipedia. However, I encourage you not to just judge me based off my time. Please take a look at my edits, and how I conduct myself on Talk Pages and Discussions.

I strictly adhere to Wikipedia's Civility policy, as well as 3RR, Not biting newcomers, Not insulting and peaceful correction of vandals (whenever possible). I spend large amounts of time reverting vandalism and nonsense, as well as participating in talk page discussion and making minor edits to article's. I have never been involved in an edit war, in fact, I believe I adhere to all official Wikipedia policies.

My primary focus is correction of vandalism, and indeed the correction of vandals. I believe that all people can contribute constructively to Wikipedia.

I have been around on Wikipedia as a registered user for five days. And before that, I frequently made minor edits, corrected typographic errors, and read extensively on Wikipedia policy.

I am very familiar with (I wouldn't dare say all) the vast majority of policy. Please, ask me further questions if you have any :) Pursey 16:46, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: I'll just pin on here, that I'm actually serious, in case you were wondering :). I do believe I am capable of handling admin tools and using them effectively and usefully. Pursey 17:26, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: I'll take the general advice offered here and withdraw my nomination. And don't worry, I have been discouraged :) Pursey 20:28, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 voters:

1. What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog and Category:Administrative backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.

A: I intend to focus on vandalism, requests for vandalism intervention, articles proposed for deletion, and NPOV disputes. This of course does not exclude other area's where my assistance is required. Pursey 16:47, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

A: Overall, my contributions to attempting to keep Wikipedia vandalism free, and never being involved in an edit war or incivility. Most of all I am incredibly proud of my ability to admit mistakes, and ask for assistance, and certainly not afraid to state that I am proud :) Pursey 16:47, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?

A: Because I assume good faith, and don't take comments personally, I have never been stressed by my editing on Wikipedia or any user interaction. Conflicts over article editing occur, but I always react in a civilised manner and encourage discussion rather than edit warring. Pursey 16:47, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

General comments

See Pursey's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool.

Discussion (for expressing views without numbering)

I appreciate your motives, but you're far too inexperienced for a responsibility like adminship. If you'd like other editors to guide and advise you, I suggest you try WP:ER - WP:RFA is really not a place for a personal review. A piece of advice - don't be too idealistic. Wikipedia is a human enterprise - it has many flaws but it will keep chugging along in its own way. Don't worry about changing the hearts and minds of vandals - just build an encyclopedia. Rama's arrow 17:18, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You say that you know Wiki policy through extensive reading. Can you back that assertion up with evidence of putting the policies in to practise in the form of difs, please? XfD, Wikiproject edits, vandal fighting, etc. (aeropagitica) 17:20, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support

Moral support Your enthusiasm is most welcome. But please allow some more time to gain wider experience. Don't be discouraged with this RfA. --Hús ö nd 20:43, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

You're like a nobody at this time - I don't even know you, and I think most other Wikipedia editors don't know you either. Please try this again in a year. Scobell302 17:08, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't be harsh on new editors. He's got a positive attitude, which is certainly a big plus point. Rama's arrow 17:19, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Scobell302 please refrain from using such bitterness against Pursey. Being nice doesn't cost a cent.--Hús ö nd 20:38, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose You're doing a great job so far and I commend you for your work, but I don't think you have the experience (come on, you have only been here for a total of 5 days) to actually handle the admin tools. I suggest you withdraw this RfA and try coming back in a few months after you rack up 3000+ edits. Nishkid64 17:18, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Consider withdrawing it before you get scalded --Ageo020 (talk • contribs • count) 18:11, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Inexperience. Continue at this rate, suggest you participate in some processes such as XfD, come back in 6 months and I'll reconsider. - Mailer Diablo 19:46, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. You are a good editor, but not yet experienced enough to become an admin. Most successful admin candidates have made at least 2,000 Wikipedia edits (you currently have 300), and a track record of several months as a consistent, positive contributor. This allows the community to develop the trust in them to agree to give them the adminship tools - 5 days is nowhere near enough for that to happen. Good luck if you decide to apply again sometime in the future. Zaxem 23:35, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

Neutral - needs more time on wiki. I dont want to bite the user.Bakaman _Bakatalk 19:27, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Withdraw this RfA because it will not succeed owing to your lack of experience. Spend more time on WP editing & improving articles, talking to users, reverting vandalism and warning vandals, getting involved with Wikiprojects and assisting at the Help and Reference Desks. You can also assist with the Featured Articles and Good Articles programmes too. This will improve your Wiki-editing skills, allow you to become familiar with policies and guidelines and raise your profile amongst your peers so that a future RfA will have a higher probability of succeeding. (aeropagitica) 20:06, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I do not wish to add in the potential pile-ons and discourage this user. I also wish to follow the guideline of WP:BITE here and to encourage this user to go through past successful and unsuccessful RfA nominations. Do not be disheartened by this and continue to contribute to this project and re-apply again after three or four months of solid editing. In the mean-time, I wish you all the best. --S iva1979^{Talk to me} 20:17, 14 October 2006 (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.