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

Final (0/7/0); ended 19:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC) - [Withdrew] Aeroplanepics0112 (talk) 19:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

aeroplanepics0112 (talk · contribs) – Hello. I've been editing Wikipedia for over two years now, and I focus on improving articles on a variety of topics related, but not limited to, Cleveland, Ohio, airports/airlines, businesses, and local economies. I also edit any mistakes I catch as I go through the random article pages. I attempt to streamline and increase visualization on pages by creating infoboxes and adding images etc. I may have a low edit count for the amount of time I have been on the site, but I only really got into editing within the past two years, and I work to make my contributions large. I am honest and hardworking, and want to help Wikipedia grow and maintain its high standards. Please consider me for adminship. Thank you 00:10, 2 February 2014 (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 plan on working on streamlining the pages so that they all maintain a certain standard. I also plan on working on making sure all copyright guidelines are followed. I plan to work on closing discussions and maintaining a neutral, calm position.

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

A: My best contributions to Wikipedia are company infoboxes, as well as research I do so that I may add sourced information to articles. By research I mean spending much time finding good sources to add information to articles, using citations. I try to verify the information on two different sources to make sure that the information is reputable. I also work to add sources for under cited pages, and also work to make sure information is cited. If there are citations, I try to make sure that they are cited correctly.

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 had very little conflict with other Wikipedia editors. When I do, I deal with the conflict in a calm and civil way and will walk away from the situation if the situation is about a minor change. If the issue is for a major change I have contacted other editors to ask for their opinions, but do not get into Wikipedia arguements.

Additional question from Leaky

4A. Your first edit was 8 September 2011. Bearing in mind that you have edited for over 3 years, which previous accounts have you edited under?

A:

4B. Your answer to Q2 is incomplete. Please complete it and explain what you mean by original research being your best contribution.

A:

4C. Please list the RfA candidate background/guidance material you have studied before submitting your candidature.

A:Below is a list including the majority of the pages I studied before submitting my candidature:
*Wikipedia:Requests for adminship (Including current nomination section)
*Wikipedia:Advice for RfA candidates
*Wikipedia:Snowball clause
*Wikipedia:Not now
*Wikipedia:Successful requests for adminship
*Wikipedia:Unsuccessful adminship candidacies
*Wikipedia:Advice for new administrators
*User:Sven Manguard/Failed RfA Advice
*Wikipedia:What adminship is not
*Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship
*Wikipedia:Miniguide to requests for adminship
*Wikipedia:Administrators' reading list (All links)
After studying the material for some time, I believe that I fulfill the guidelines and qualities mentioned on the above pages, and that I would be a big help to Wikipedia. For those reasons I have decided to request adminship so that I may offer my services in a different way to this great site.

• Links for aeroplanepics0112: Aeroplanepics0112 (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
• Edit summary usage for aeroplanepics0112 can be found here.

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

• Thank you for your feedback. I have decided to withdraw my RfA at this time.

1. Oppose – User says he has been around for over three years, but according to the account, it hasn't even been 2 1/2 years. He has some admin work, but very little. I don't think he needs the extra tools at this point. Only having ~1,160 edits in 2 1/2 years is a big turn off for me. United States Man (talk) 16:11, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

   The account age has been fixed by the editor in his nomination "speech". United States Man (talk) 16:19, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2. Oppose Self nomination statement liable to mislead demonstrating lack of attention to detail at best. (difficult to see how two can be mistyped as three). Inadequate contribution volumes. Too young, too inexperienced. Cannot have taken on board the wealth of material they have read about RfA. Changing material details in an RfA - see WP:REDACT - is a pet hate of mine. Leaky Caldron 16:50, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
3. Oppose Low activity, low level of contributions, and no indication of sufficient familiarity with admin duties.--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 17:12, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
4. Oppose - Not much activity here, Perhaps participate more in AFDs & what not. -→Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 17:28, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
5. Oppose for the time being. Far too little experience. Sorry. --Stfg (talk) 17:37, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
6. Oppose WP:NOTNOW, too soon, almost zero interaction with other users, no work done that would show he has a need for the tools.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:35, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
7. Oppose Activity; would be willing to re-assess if your maintained a larger presence. I would also want to see more familiarity where sysops do work as it does not seem you have been involved in areas where the tools would be particularly useful. Mkdw^talk 19:10, 2 February 2014 (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.