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

Final (0/8/1); ended 01:02, 20 February 2011 (UTC) per WP:NOTNOW - →♠Gƒoley↔Four♣← 01:02, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Breawycker (talk · contribs) – I think I should be an admin now, because of my work on UAA, AIV, RPP, and requesting speedy deletion. I have also been on wikipedia for almost 5 years. Breawycker (talk) 22:04, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
About the G3 on the wrong pages
During my recent huggle I accidentally place g3 on the wrong page, when I was just trying change G1 to G3 on Japanese roll'd. I had my Huggle window open to the page, because it already had a speedy deletion notice it went to the last page I was one.--Breawycker (talk) 22:53, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:

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

A:I intend to help with blocking disruptive users (and usernames) reported on Administrator intervention against vandalism and Usernames for adminstrator's attention, protecting page requested on request for page protections, and accepting good request on requests for permissions. I will try to help where ever I can in the Admin's noticeboards.

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

A:My best contributions are reporting and reverting vandalism with Huggle, twinkle, and igloo. I have also participated in many XFD discussions.

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:One user that has cause me stress is Thedarkocean blamed me for something that 190.154.212.48 did, but I handled it like I was supposed to by not yelling at him or reporting him or anything like that I apologized to him, and told him it was 190.154.212.48, not me and that was the end of it. Another user that has given me trouble is User:Robby the Robot who vandalize my talk page and his after I warned him, but unlike with thedarkocean I solved it by reverting the edits and reporting him but with good reason as he had vandalized wikipedia, before I came along so it wasn't a "he upset me block him" kind of thing.

Additional optional question from Beeblebrox

4. You mention that you have been on Wikipedia for almost five years, but your edit history shows that your first edit was in September 2008, followed by two edits in August 2009, with another break until February of last year. Could you explain this apparent discrepancy?

A:I was very busy and couldn't edit Wikipedia at the time, but i'm more active now.--Breawycker (talk) 00:21, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2011-2008=3 years. That is the discrepancy I am referring to. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:29, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually... "# 04:02, 2 May 2007 Breawycker (talk | contribs) new user account", so four years, but your point still stands. Strange Passerby (talk • contribs • Editor review) 00:32, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Additional optional question from RJaguar3

5. You intend to work at AIV. What is vandalism? Can you give an example of some types of edits that would likely be reverted that nevertheless are not vandalism?

A:My view on vandalism is any deliberate attempt to ruin the reputation of Wikipedia, disrupt Wikipedia, harm someone, or just for humorous reasons. An edit that would be reverted, even though it's not vandalism is an accidental edit, an edit that's reverted, because it was tagged as vandalism, even though it may not be, but someone was rushing though, so the ignored the changed and reverted it.--Breawycker (talk) 00:21, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review his contributions before commenting.

1. Sorry, but with only 1500 edits and two months of activity, I don't feel comfortable that you're ready for adminship. Sven Manguard Wha? 23:47, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
2. Per Sven and lack of content contributions. How can you judge pages to be speedied without even contributing content? Strange Passerby (talk • contribs • Editor review) 00:04, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
3. Judging from the comments on your talk page, there appear to be a few areas of policy you're not quite up to full speed on. I'd need to see a couple more months of activity and a better understanding of policy before I could support. So not yet, but keep working hard, and hopefully I'll be able to support next time around. 28bytes (talk) 00:06, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
4. Oppose - Hello there! Although you say you have been on Wikipedia for 5 years, that is not the case. Your experience still seems rather limited. I actually had to fix the position of your RfA, as you'd put it in the incorrect place. You seem a very willing editor, and thus I suggest spending some more time getting to grips with things around here, and then giving it another shot. Just a bit early at the moment. Many apologies, Orphan Wiki 00:07, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
5. Oppose per WP:NOTNOW. Also, you simply don't have enough experience in the areas that you indicated you wish to work.   ArcAngel   (talk) ) 00:11, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
6. Oppose Not enough experince. Inka⁸⁸⁸ 00:22, 20 February 2011 (UTC) Boldface formatting fixed. Guoguo12--Talk--  00:33, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
7. Oppose. Lack of experience. Your revert here was only partially correct (fixed by User:Ian Rose). Furthermore, when the user asked you what he did wrong here, you replied, "If you can fit it into the article I will remove the warning from your page. Ok?" Sorry, but what is that supposed to mean, exactly? Guoguo12--Talk--  00:33, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
8. Oppose Candidate does not meet my standards at this time. --Strikerforce (talk) 00:59, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1. You haven't made any major mistakes in your short time here, but you don't have enough experience for me to support. Most of your contributions have been vandal-fighting. That's fine, but there's not enough of it for me to trust you with the admin tools yet. Your most significant content contributions that I could see were the following additions: [1] [2] [3] [4]; and this new page. If you can contribute more content, I'd be more comfortable supporting your second RFA.--00:19, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

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.