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

(talk page) (1/8/0); Scheduled to end 20:14, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Manadude2 (talk · contribs) – Once I get into the swing of editing, I really go for it. I have recently helped out with reverting vandalism by both registered users and anonymous users and spelling errors, I have also helped out with a recent edit war on the William Rodriguez page which resulted in another sockpuppet of Wtcsurvivor being found and blocked. I also received a barnstar for New Page patrolling last year which I have been activly involved in over the last 4-5 months on and off. I also try to identify continuous offenders, especially IP offenders. I also have a few anti-vandal tools installed on my monobook.js page. Overall, I have helped out on Wikipedia a lot and I think that the admin tools will help me fantastically. manadude2 (talk) 20:14, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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 intend to take part in anti-vandalism and finding and blocking sockpuppets.

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

A:I suppose my best contribution was helping with the edit war which resulted in a sockpuppet ban. My other best contribution have been the removal of vandalism.

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: I have been in a conflict with the two sockpuppets of Wtcsurvivor which resulted in a ban and I think I handled the situation well, although there was one situation I didn't really want to get into which involved an email sent by the sockpuppet to me.

Additional optional questions from Groomtech

4. Do you believe that Wikipedians have rights? If so, what will you do to uphold them?

A: I believe that Wikipedians to have some rights: the right to edit, the right to create, the right to stop vandalism, but there are obviously some right which need to be withheld, such as the right to disrupt other users etc. manadude2 (talk) 21:12, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Additional optional questions from TravisTX

5. In light of your answer to question 2, please explain the differences between a block and a ban.

A:

• Links for Manadude2: Manadude2 (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
• Edit summary usage for Manadude2 can be found here.

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Manadude2 before commenting.

Dear Candidate. Your Q2 "I really have no idea. I have created a few pages on Wikipedia which haven't been deleted so I assume that's good?" Is a bit worrying, to say the least. Not getting stuff deleted is not really a "best contribution". Can I suggest you reconsider that answer. Pedro :  Chat  20:37, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I understand what the opposers are trying to get at, but the only issue is how many edits I have made. I would like to draw your attention to an WP article I read, from which I quote: "It is not the number of edits that really matters, but the quality." therefore saying that lack of edits is a downside is pretty poor. I think my edits have been of good standard.

As I have said already, I have been busy revising and studying for my upcoming exams which are very important, and editing Wikipedia is not one of my main concerns at the moment. When my exams finish, which is about the middle of June, then I can start getting involved in Wikipedia more as I will then have 3 and a half months of doing nothing before I start my course at college. Don't get me wrong, I understand what the opposers are saying, but please give a little thought into what I have to do, not something I do to keep me occupied, i.e editing Wikipedia.

I think I have the potential to become and admin, and I think my edits would help a lot. I fully regret the edit block I was given at the start of my WP "career" but I can assure you that I have changed since then and become less naive and a bit more mature. It was stupid of me at the time. I hope you give this some thought. manadude2 (talk) 21:34, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

User:Neurolysis/Counters.js

1. Moral support - You are obviously a good faith editor, and a good contributor, too. If you become more active and get a few thousand more edits, this process will no doubt go more swimmingly the next time. :) — neuro^(talk) 00:29, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1. While I appreciate that you've been here for over a year, I don't like the frequency of your editing. 25 edits in April, 16 in March, that's less than 1 edit a day. I prefer to see admins be more active than that (especially anti-vandal admins). In addition, you just picked up anti-vandal work earlier this month, and I'd like to see a bit more time with it before you get the block button. Keep working, and stay active, and I'll support you in the future. Xclamation point 20:23, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. I want to support, but if there's one type of admin that worries me, it's an inactive one. Wizardman 20:28, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

   Comment: If you look though my edit history, I have been involved in anti-vandalism throughout last year. I understand the "rareness" of my editing, but this is due to exams coming up soon and I have been busy studying. I will have more time to edit in the next month or so. manadude2 (talk) 20:30, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

3. I closed your last RFA per WP:NOTNOW and I'm afraid that still applies. On the plus side I like User:Manadude2/CSD and your counter vandal work. On the negatives I don't see any real main space work, your editing is sporadic as noted above (not a big deal - this is free labour after all) and your overal edit history is insifficent for me to get a handle on your abilities in terms of policy. I'm sorry but this is far too premature. As an aside, the personal information on your user page would be better off gone - trust me on that. Good luck, and best wishes. Pedro :  Chat  20:32, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Oppose per the above concerns. Timmeh! 20:35, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
5. Oppose Per above, maybe next time.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 20:49, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
6. Oppose Maybe after a few months of work and a few thousand more edits. -download ׀ sign! 20:49, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
7. Oppose Concerns about lack of activity and experience. Cirt (talk) 21:08, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
8. Not really active enough. Stifle (talk) 21:32, 10 May 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.