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

Final: (0/4/0); Ended 21:35, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Hirak 99 (talk · contribs) - YOUR DESCRIPTION OF THE USER Hirak 99 20:55, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

I accept the nomination for adminship. -- Hirak 99 21:20, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have withdrawn the application since I do not have enough edit count. -- Hirak 99 21:37, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Administrative backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.

A: I have no preferences, and I wish to help with all of the categories listed in the backlog. The amount of work that I have seen many administrators doing is astounding. I want to declare however, as I may not get a lot of free time, the rate at which I may be able to help will probably be slow compared to their pace - at least initially.

2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?

A: I have created the article on De Bruijn Graphs. The reason why I am most proud of this is that it is the first (and only so far) article that I have given birth to!

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: At least once I had a conflict with another user/group of users who felt that part of information about a movie (Apocalypto) should not be placed in the Trivia. It was regarding a frame which appears in the movie, which is like an Easter egg (and does not a part of the actual screenplay or storyline). There have been a few sites on the Internet claiming the existence of this frame. It was removed from the Trivia section as it had no citation. After validating it myself from an original DVD, I put it back with citations to some of the places in web, and also put a message in the Talk section. To my surprise, after I put it there somebody removed the entire Trivia section. This happened in the recent past, and I have posted an entry in the Discussions trying to make the person aware that removing the Trivia section altogether is not a good way to deal with the situation (as opposed to, probably incorporating the points in the section in proper places of the rest of the article). I hope to have a proper discussion regarding the issue, and in the end of it to find a way to reinstate the fact about the frame since I know that it is true. If however, in the unlikely case the other user manages to prove by citing regulatory rules that according to current Wikipedia standards it is not allowed, I will refrain from any further requests for adding it. In that case however, I will seek to have a discussion with the proper authorities regarding whether it will be possible to modify or amend the specific rules to allow inclusion of the point in the article.

General comments

• See Hirak 99's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

Please keep criticism constructive and polite.

Discussion

Support

Oppose

1. Oppose sorry but a malformed RFA coupled with only just over 100 edits total over a year-and-a-half means I can't support your application. I would suggest withdrawing this application and gaingin a load more experience across all facets of Wikipedia before re-applying. The Rambling Man 21:27, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Oppose and motion to close-per Rambling Man. Obvious to be unsuccessful. Keep working and become more active. --TeckWiz ^ParlateContribs_@ 21:29, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Oppose per above. Please withdraw. - Anas ^talk? 21:31, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Oppose Most editors like to see about three thousand edits, including a good paricipation in WP:NAMESPACE. We need to see that you have a thorough understanding of Wiki policy, which is at present not demonstrable. Please come back, if you wish, after about six months and about 3,000 edits.--Anthony.bradbury 21:34, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

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.