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

Final tally: (0/3/0); closed per WP:SNOW by Juliancolton at 20:46, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander.hugh.george (talk · contribs) – YOUR DESCRIPTION OF THE USER Alex (talk) 19:56, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?

A: I feel that I would be most productive continuing my regular editing of pages that I visit, but would be better off with the tools and abilities to block users who constantly vandalize the pages that other editors work hard to maintain, and rollback these unproductive edits. While many people given these tools would be tempted to abuse their privileges, I would only use them when needed. I would not go overboard, but if I noticed that there was a problem that required administrative tools, I would certainly help out, or seek advice from other administrators if I wasn't sure was to do.

2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

A: Right now I don't really have any particular areas that I contribute to the most. I just browse Wikipedia looking at pages, but if I notice errors, whether major factual errors or just minor grammatical errors, I change it. However I have contributed to Royal Conservatory of Music, Piano Examination Requirements (Royal Conservatory of Music), David Archuleta, David Archuleta discography, Lady Gaga and Lady Gaga's music pages the most. I also like to start pages for new and emerging artists and expand on pages on artists who have little information on their pages. Right now the page Divine Brown (singer) is my biggest contribution for emerging artists.

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: Just recently on the page David Archuleta, there were issues regarding his stay in the Philipines. Several users (mostly IP users), began revert wars on the page. While most of the information was sourced, it was lax in neutrality, so I changed it to meet Wikipedia's standards. I thought this would stop the revert wars, but they just continued, so I had two of the users blocked that broke the 3 revert rule, had the page semi-protected, and told people to use the talk page to discuss disagreements of the pages.

• Links for Alexander.hugh.george: Alexander.hugh.george (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
• Edit summary usage for Alexander.hugh.george can be found here.

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Alexander.hugh.george before commenting.

User:Neurolysis/Counters.js

1. Oppose Here at RfA, voters look for experience to show them that the candidate knows the policies and can be trusted with the tools. Please see Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship. Timmeh!_{(review me)} 20:43, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Thank you for submitting your RFA. While I applaud enthusiasm, I'm afraid you do not yet possess sufficient knowledge and experience for the community to have confidence in your readiness to become an admin. But that does not mean that we will never have confidence in you.

   Generally, It has been my experience that it takes at least 3,000 edits in a variety of areas to learn policy and guidelines well enough to attempt adminship. Nominees need to show the ability to contribute a number of significant edits to build the encyclopedia.

   • The Admin tools allow the user to block and unblock other editors, delete and undelete pages and protect and unprotect pages. Nominees will therefore do well to gain experience and familiarity with such areas as WP:AIV, WP:AFD, WP:CSD, Wikipedia:Protection policy, and WP:BLOCK to learn when to do these things.
   • Adminship inevitably leads one to 1) need to explain clearly the reasons for one's decisions, 2) need to review one's decisions and change one's mind when it is reasonable to do so, 3) need to review one's decisions and stand firm when it is reasonable to do so, 4) need to negotiate a compromise. Admins need a familiarity with dispute resolution. The ability to communicate clearly is essential.
   • Article building is the raison d'être of Wikipedia. I recommend significant participation in WP:GA or WP:FA as the surest way to gain article building experience.
   • My suggestion would be to withdraw and try again in another 3 months and 3000 edits. Many nominees have found it helpful to obtain an Editor Review or to receive Admin coaching before submitting their RfA and after passing that benchmark. Hope this helps. Good luck and happy editing.  iMatthew :  Chat  20:44, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

4. Oppose Only been editing since February, I'd like to see some more time.--Giants27 (t|c) 20:46, 12 June 2009 (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.