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

Final (0/7/1); ended 19:28, 10 December 2010 - closed by Secret per WP:NOTNOW - Waterfox ^~talk~ 15:37, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Laptopmaker (talk · contribs) – Would like to help out, think I deserve the tools. thanksLaptopmaker (talk) 18:33, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Laptopmaker (talk) 18:33, 10 December 2010 (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 would help in WP:AIV and WP:AFD

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

A: All of them are great

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: People have yeelled at me before.

4. Additional question by Milowent: Do people laugh at your jokes like this outside Wikipedia?

A:

• Links for Laptopmaker: Laptopmaker (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
• Edit summary usage for Laptopmaker 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 evidence of helpful contributions; no answers even to the basic 3 questions. Apart from certain exceptional cases which are well-explained beforehand a user with 26 edits should not be running for adminship. The average edit count of a Wikipedia administrator is somewhere around 20,000. Many have passed with less, some with much less, but all of them have had significant experience that has convinced users to ignore the low edit count. —Soap— 18:38, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

   I have answered the questions now, please re-consider. I have seen users in the past 2002 get it with less than 50 edits. —Laptopmaker— 18:49, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2. Oppose. Please close per WP:SNOW. Saebvn (talk) 18:50, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

   You should read up on policy, you can't close because of SNOW. You have to let me prove myself. —Laptopmaker— 18:52, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

   Don't worry about it getting closed per WP:SNOW, since even an RfA by somebody like me would get closed for the same reason. I would recommend contibuting to Wikipedia for a while before thinking about adminship, since it simply isn't for new users like us. Good luck, and happy editing! Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:12, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

3. Oppose. Please read WP:NOTYET. Only 31 edits is simply not enough. I would strongly recommend thinking about this again in about 6 months. Richwales (talk · contribs) 18:58, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
4. Oppose – This user has been active for four months. In which time s/he's clocked up 32 edits. Out of these nine have been to the Wikipedia name space, all of which are for this RfA. Meaning that the user has never made a single report to WP:AIV or commented on a single WP:AfD. But the user's only reason for wanting the tools if AIV and AfD! Suggest a close per WP:SNOW. — Fly by Night (talk) 19:05, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
5. oppose by the way, most of their mainspace contributions appear to be vandalism. Why put up with it?Bali ultimate (talk) 19:11, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
6. Oppose; Close per WP:SNOW. TJRC (talk) 19:22, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
7. Oppose - per WP:NOTNOW. With only around 30 edits and two of those on 27 August were really not quite the right thing to do, you are not yet ready to be considered for adminship. Do take the advice the others have given you above, and make a couple of thousand good solid contributions you can be proud of, including the creation of some new articles. You don't need to vote for yourself on your own RfA - do take a look at some of the recent RfA of other candidates, especially some that have failed, to understand the process, and to see what you will need to learn about all the different Wikipedia policies.Kudpung (talk) 19:27, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1. Please close per WP:SNOW. Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:23, 10 December 2010 (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.