Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Thomasiscool

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

Final (0/4/0); Scheduled to end 23:16, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Thomasiscool (talk · contribs) - I believe I would be a valuable and active administrator because 1) I have edited and will continue to edit pages about a number of different topics, and I can contribute to discussion about a variety of topics, 2) I use and will continue to use Wikipedia extensively every day, and 3) I have been a contributor to Wikipedia since 2005, and have gained much experience about it. Thomasiscool 23:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

I withdraw my nomination.

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? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog and Category:Administrative backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.

A: I have nominated, perhaps most notably, Middle La Have, Nova Scotia for deletion because I feel there is nothing notable enough about it to justify having its own article. I have also participated in discussion about undeleting the protected deleted article about TourettesGuy.com. I have also participated in discussion about including/not including images on articles such as Harlequin type ichthyosis, Anencephaly, Rubber Johnny and Computer Prank.

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

A: Among the many articles I have c articles I am most proud of are List of people who died due to bullying and August Sabe. I am especially proud of the former because it is a topic that I have strong opinions about and am particularly interested in. I created it as a replacement for the defunct bullycide article (the link redirects to the new article). I engaged a discussion on the bullying page, and after gaining support, created the new article. I am especially proud of the latter because I took a strong interest in the topic and after discovering he did not have a page, created one (you will notice I did not create it under the name 'Thomasiscool').

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 have been involved in many such conflicts. I have found the best ways to avoid them are to always assume good faith, and to 'listen' to what other users have to say; they will probably present a new side to the issue. If such a conflict does arise, I find the best way to not get stressed out by it is to assume good faith, and to stick to my opinion, even if it means engaging in an argument. If I am proven wrong, I will accept that I cannot win the argument.

General comments

• See Thomasiscool's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

Discussion

Support

Oppose

Please keep criticism constructive and polite.

1. Oppose - Sorry. You only have 305 edits, with only 18 to the wikipedia namespace. I don't believe you have nearly enough experience to be promoted. I suggest that you withdraw and give it a few months of good contributions, then I'll gladly support. ST47Talk 23:37, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Oppose With this little experience, you should consider withdrawal of your self-nomination. Agent 86 23:46, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Oppose - None of the arguments you gave seem valid; plenty of people edit Wikipedia every day; and the small amount of edits also proves that you're just not ready for the mop. Personally, I suggest withdrawal before you get embarrassed. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 23:48, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Edit-conflict Oppose You do not have enough experience in admin-related tasks at the moment. Consider vandal fighting and warning on their talk pages, with reports to WP:AIV for persistent offenders; new page/ recent changes patrols; contributing to XfD discussions with opinions based upon policies and guidelines rather than 'per nom'; helping new users find their way around; referencing, citing and sourcing articles - there are many things that you can do well in order to qualify for admin status. Try these and other ideas for six months to a year before returning with another application. Withdraw this one. (aeropagitica) 23:53, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

1. Neutral I have now withdrawn my nomination. --Thomasiscool 23:59, 6 February 2007 (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.