Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Administrator/Nascar1996


 * User withdrew

— adminship
Hello, I have been editing Wikinews since June 24, 2010. I have created 16 articles; however, I created one other which was not published. I also have over 800 contributions. My editing has had major improvements since I started, and I learn quickly. I wish to become an administrator on Wikinews, and since I have been here for more than two months, and I believe that I am trusted by my fellow users it time for me to request the rights. Thanks and happy editing. -- Nascar 1996   21:59, 16 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I would like this to be closed. I'm clearly not ready. Maybe this time next year.  Nascar 1996   03:24, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Questions and comments
Do you have any articles, which you are particularly proud of? Bobby122  Contact Me   (C)  22:04, 16 December 2010 (UTC) Why do you want to be an administrator? Why do you feel you require adminstrative rights? If you receive administrative rights, what will you do with it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Microchip08 (talk • contribs) 22:07, 16 December 2010
 * I am particulary proud of Jimmie Johnson named 2010 Driver of the Year, NASCAR: Edwards wins O'Reilly Auto Parts Challenge, Brad Keselowski clinches Nationwide Series, and NASCAR: Edwards wins 2010 Ford 400; Johnson claims championship because I feel that the articles had good grammer and spelling.  Nascar 1996   22:18, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I would like to become an administrator because I would like to help the project more than I can currently. If I receive the rights, I plan to use them correctly, I would watch for vandalism, and I would like to help you all archive articles. I would also be fair with decided blocks and other protections.  Nascar 1996   22:18, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Votes

 * 1) -  At this time, you've created 16 articles in 6 months. Your edit count, while being over 800, currently only includes 322 to actual articles.  I don't see with the length of time you've been here, and what you've achieved in that time, that you are quite ready for this at the moment.  We're not short of administrators, we have roughly 60 at this point, I'd say leave it another month or two, get a few more articles out and spread your scope (widen the subjects you report on) and we'll have another look. BarkingFish (talk) 22:08, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The project may have 60, but more than 24 of them are not currently editing. I will tell you one thing, I plan not to create that many more articles until February. So it wouldn't change very quickly. This is school season also, so I only have a certain amount of time that I can use here. Everyone has their own feelings though, and thanks for participating in this request.  Nascar 1996   22:22, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) ¿Por qué no? --Diego Grez return fire 16:42, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) You only have 17 article creations, all of which are in your narrow field of expertise. It would be nice if you could demonstrate edits in other fields, but a quick summary-only perusal of your recent edits only simple minor edits. There are currently 56 administrators, and, according to you above, 24 are inactive, which 32 remain active: a colossal amount when compared to the current size of the project, and therefore I would require a convincing argument in order to vote to increase the number any more. You do not show many talkspace edits, so I have no reason to believe you have any experience of collaboration. Digging into the archives, it would appear that you retired late October, gave a hard-felt spiel or two, yet you edited the next day to correct your userpages; and then, just days after retiring, decided to return, citing "I can't stay away, people need me to give them the news". Please understand the difference between "wikibreak" and "retirement". During the buildup to your eight day 'retirement', you stated that any articles you were to create in the future would be "the same". Wikinews, in my opinion, has no place whatsoever, for formulaic articles. Endorsing such a statement is not something an administrator should be doing. You also appear to lack patience. For example, it's been a short week. Whilst we're on the subject of patience, canvassing is bad, and shows that perhaps you have a penchant for hat-collecting. Even though it was several months ago, it makes me hesitant. Regards, — μ 21:51, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * My articles will be similar, but not exactly the same. Which, I don't see 'you have to create anytype of article' as a requirement for adminship. I know I'm impatient, I have always been impatient. (I am here and I am in real life). Also the past is the past. Since then have you seen anything like it. I was about to retire because of school, but I found more time so I returned. Most admins retire anyway so does it matter?  Nascar 1996   22:07, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * You retired for eight days. That shows poor judgement, which is not a quality generally sought in your average administrator. Poor judgement in a user is disruptive, poor judgement in an administrator substantially increases its consequences, as an admin has blocks, deletion and protection at their disposal. A single bad decision from an administrator can, and has, bogged the wiki down in drama for weeks. You have also stated that you will not be active until early next year -- so why are you requesting adminship now? The past is the past, yes. But why should one ignore the past? He who controls the past, controls the future. It's not too far back for me to instantly dismiss it. To give a UK-centric example, you wouldn't dismiss Ian Huntley's past and give him a job as a school caretaker. An extreme example, perhaps, but to simply request dismissal of past actions outright is not something one should take lightly. Just because you have always been impatient, it does not mean that we should dismiss that either. It's still a trait I don't want an admin to have. — μ 22:22, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * By your standards I won't become one, which I want to become one because I'm starting to edit again because the project normally has 6 articles for review. Also, what really gave me the thought of this is watching in the middle of the night all the users who vandalize the project. Also the template on my user pages, is to tell you that I will not be fully active as last year. I'm not creating articles week in and week out like I will mostly next year. Many change from their past. One may be disruptive in their childhood, but it doesn't mean that you will be as an adult.  Nascar 1996   22:29, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Give me a decent reason as to why I should support, other than "I want to." Vandalism is less of an issue on this project, as everything for the end-user is checked and sighted: give me links to a few vandals that weren't reverted promptly, and therefore caused, or could reasonably have caused, disruption to an every-day reader. The child-adult transition does not generally take place within such a short period as five months. You don't need admin rights to edit; no-one is stopping you doing so.
 * That wasn't even a reason for you to support me, I'm not concerned with your vote. Two days ago, I was watching the recent changes and this user kept on contining to vandalise articles, and all I could do was revert, then finally a admin came along and blocked them. I'm not going change my editing to get your support. I just had this to see how I would do. I would like to become one but its not required and that important to me.  Nascar 1996   02:06, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Not at this time.  — fetch · comms   02:01, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) I just don't think your ready quite yet, come back in a few months and maybe yes. Happy Editing. Tofutwitch11 -Chat  03:07, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) I suggest you gain a bit more experience as per the above comments. Perhaps in a few months. Tyrol5 (talk) 01:13, 29 December 2010 (UTC)