en.wikipedia.org

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Uga Man - Wikipedia

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

Final (1/10/1); ended 04:36, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Closed as per WP:SNOW - editor requires more experience. (aeropagitica) 04:38, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uga Man (talk · contribs) - I am an editor who makes edits to articles mostly about political matters. On List of Presidents of the United States I replaced the existing pictures of presidents with the Official White House portraits. On List of Roman Emperors I added pictures to all emperors that were available in order to make the article more encyclopedic and to give a researcher of the subject that ability to place a picture with what they learned. I added an extensive description to the City of Kirby, Texas and created the articles about Hopkins Elementary School, Kitty Hawk Middle School, and Kirby Middle School. I feel my best contributions came when I was able to make a compromise with another editor on Historical rankings of United States Presidents and we allowed the article to show a more neutral point of view. The best qualities that I will bring if I am made an administrator is continuing to make wikipedia more neutral in its point of view, stopping small, hidden vandalism (which in my mind is the worse kind), helping people who want to make constructive contributions to the site and stopping people who want to make deconstructive contributions to the site. I ask you to look over my contributions see all the good I have done and make me an administrator so that I can have a better ability in my goal to make wikipedia, a better, more encylopedic site, that can help people not only get facts, but provide help in their daily lives Uga Man 23:35, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for the candidate

[edit]

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?
A: As an administrator I plan on searching for small bits of vandalism that gives out misinformation and causes problems. I plan to find out if these edits are tests or if there is a trend and if there is, I will block the user. I feel that this is the biggest threat to wikipedia. Wikipedia is about providing fact and if vandals want to misrepresent the facts, they do not belong here. I would also like to help new users who want to do good for this site, because the more good users we make the smaller the impact of the vandals becomes. I would also like to make sure that wikipedians follow the Neutral Point of View idea, and I will warn users who want to put their personal opinions in articles and if they persist, I will block them. I see wikipedia not as a political forum but as a place to present the facts and I will see to this.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: My best contributions are when I try to better an article that is on borderline in regards to trying to show a neutral point of view such as Historical rankings of United States Presidents. The list on this article that showed the failures and accomplishments were very hard to put a neutral view without opinions but by making comprimises with other editors, I am very proud of the article today and I regard these kind of tricky situations as my best contributions to the site.
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 not had any major conflicts with other editors but instead to deal with differences about what should be on an article I choose to discuss the problem with the editor on the article's talk page than engage in an edit war. No stress has been caused because I don't let the little things bother me. I see a problem and I fix it, no stress, no worries, just dealing with whatever comes my way. This is what I would like to do as an administrator. Not be stressed by other editors but use the tools I have been given to keep the editors that want to make constructive edits and block the editors that want to make deconstructive edits while I continue to build up the quality of wikipedia. I will not be bothered by vandals because I believe that there is more good people on this site than there is vandals. The good people will eliminate the bad and progress will be made.

Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Uga Man before commenting.

Support

  1. Support I have to support Uga Man, he helped me through a tough time. I was blocked for an unnecessary reason and he stood up for me. He helped me and allowed for my block to be turned around. I looked at his contribs and he doesn't have many but he has had enough to prove a point. That point is that this is somebody that has the moral capacity and respect for wikipedia that deserves to be an admin.--William Henry Harrison 01:24, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. Oppose I'm sorry, but you do not demonstrate a clear need for the tools, and I can't judge whether you understand policy with less that 500 edits in total. Evilclown93 00:59, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. 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 - 3,000 edits, and have a solid track record of several months as a consistent, positive contrubutor. You have currently made less than 150 edits, all within the last two months. You also need more experience with editing in the Wikipedia space (which builds experience and familiarlity with the type of processes and policies that admin are expected to deal with), which you've currently edited in less than 10 times. Right now, keep editing because you don't need to be an admin to be a postive contributor. Good luck if you decide to apply for adminship again in the future when you've gained more experience. Zaxem 01:19, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oppose. Sorry, you are doing some good work, but you aren't ready for adminship yet. As has already been pointed out, we have too little evidence available to have confidence that you know Wikipedia policy and have the long-term temperament to apply it fairly. A few other points you might like to consider: you should try to use edit summaries more, you rarely include them and they're important. Creating unsourced stub articles like Kitty Hawk Middle School isn't too helpful. More information and proper sourcing is advisable. Avoid edit wars, particularly over contentious article; your insistence on including this edit isn't helpful and your edit summaries here verge on the incivil. I'd suggest you continue to make positive contributions, get some experience at forums like AfD, get another couple of thousand edits done then try an editor review. Good luck, Gwernol 01:31, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Oppose. Through your minimal experience and edit count here, I can't judge you at this time. Sr13 01:32, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. I realize that this entire article is a POV quagmire, and you're hardly the only user involved, but this edit tells me you really don't understand WP:NPOV or WP:V yet. ··coelacan 01:39, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Oppose It was only two days ago that you considered this an acceptable edit summary, while it's less than six weeks since this was your user page. Additionally, you recently deleted what looks to be a bona fide attempt to add information to a very stubby article as "vandalism" — iridescenti (talk to me!) 02:14, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Oppose Insufficient experience with Wikipedia at this time. --Celain 02:18, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Oppose Far too little experience. Sorry, but less than 150 edits is nowhere close to enough. Try again a few months from now. Jmlk17 02:41, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Oppose - Low edit count, little experience and for reasons stated above--$UIT 02:52, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Oppose - The fact that you have below 1000 edits worries me. Perhaps you should try a few months down the road. --Random Say it here! 03:02, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

  1. Neutral - You seem like you are on the right track. Stick around, make more edits, participate in a Wikiproject, as well as participation in adopt-a-user. Good luck. Real96 03:30, 25 May 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.