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

There are lots of people who remember how to correctly close one of these; I always have to look it up. So if someone for whom this is easy could do it, that would be great. But I'm doing it this way to stop people from pointlessly voting "oppose". --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:17, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to oblige... WJBscribe (talk) 17:32, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Final (0/7/0). Close per WP:SNOW by Floquenbeam (original message above) @ 17:32, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

FAMASFREENODE (talk · contribs) – this user, referring to the self, utilized wikipedia for purposes of knowledge attainment since 2009 common era. the user is familiar with the wiki environment via unregistered observation as in lurking and wishes to roll in for adminship to help the cause as a metapedian. this user strongly holds the belief that any lapse in performance and abuse can be immediately retributed via removal of the privilege. FAMASFREENODE (talk) 16:28, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

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:blocking of vandals, protection and deletion of articles.

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

A: insertion of small details, notifying others about minor issues.

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: none.

You may ask optional questions below. There is a limit of two questions per editor. Multi-part questions disguised as one question, with the intention of evading the limit, are disallowed. Follow-up questions relevant to questions you have already asked are allowed.

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

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

1. No one qualifies for adminship after being here only 5 days. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:53, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
2. Not a chance. Try again in 2017, and get a nominator who knows how to transclude RfAs. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:04, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
3. WP:SNOW. Glrx (talk) 17:06, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
4. Too soon. Suggesting that you try again once you have more experience and that this is closed as per WP:SNOW.--5 albert square (talk) 17:07, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
5. SNOWCLOSE. In fact: possible sock? _Muffled ^Pocketed 17:09, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
6. I know this is piling on the WP:SNOW, but this is definitely an editor that is way way too soon for the tools. RickinBaltimore (talk) 17:08, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
7. Can someone please guide this new editor properly and softly? This is just a mistaken RfA. Xender Lourdes (talk) 17:09, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• in reply to opposition vote number 5, familiarity of wp process and inner workings despite young account age does not correlate with "possible sock" as there exists an unknown number of longtime observers who can choose to participate recently.FAMASFREENODE (talk) 17:19, 31 May 2016 (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.