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

(0/2/0); Scheduled to end 10:34, 7 January 2010 (UTC); Closed per WP:NOTNOW by Timotheus Canens (talk) 12:42, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mrmuk (talk · contribs) – YOUR DESCRIPTION OF THE USER Mrmuk (talk) 10:34, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have made many edits to Wiikipedia and would be delighted if I could continue these skills as an administrator as I understand well what the site is for and how to use it.

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 intent to correct obvious mistakes on protected pages as I have done on non-protected pages and also help resolve factual conflicts among users.

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

A: I have edited many pages with obvious spelling or other typographical mistakes and used my politics knowledge to correct many factaul errors on pages of that subject.

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: No, but if I did, I would ask the other person to state sources. I would prefer, instead of making a mistaje on facts, to have "Some peope say this; other people say that" style information on the page so that the user can have both opinions and decide for oneself.

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

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

1. Oppose. I would close this as WP:NOTNOW, but I don't know how. Ks0stm ^(T•C•G) 10:55, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Thank you for submitting your RFA. While I applaud enthusiasm, I'm afraid you do not yet possess sufficient knowledge and experience for the community to have confidence in your readiness to become an admin. But that does not mean that we will never have confidence in you.

   For the most part, it requires at least 3,000 edits in a variety of areas to learn policy and guidelines well enough to attempt adminship. Nominees need to show the ability to contribute a number of significant edits to build the encyclopedia.

   However, if you work on vandalism patrol, most people would like a few thousand more.

   The Admin tools allow the user to block and unblock other editors, delete and undelete pages and protect and unprotect pages. Nominees will therefore do well to gain experience and familiarity with such areas as WP:AIV, WP:AFD, WP:CSD, Wikipedia:Protection policy, and WP:BLOCK to learn when to do these things.

   As an admin, you will inevitably have to...

   1. Explain clearly the reasons for one's decisions.
   2. Review one's decisions and change one's mind when it is reasonable to do so.
   3. Review one's decisions and stand firm when it is reasonable to do so
   4. Negotiate a compromise.

   Admins need a familiarity with dispute resolution. The ability to communicate clearly is essential.

   Article building is the raison d'être of Wikipedia. I recommend significant participation in WP:GA or WP:FA as the surest way to gain article building experience.

   If you are not the type of person who likes to write content, there's plenty of other article work you can do (WikiGnomeing for start).

   My suggestion would be to withdraw and try again in another 3 months and 3,000 edits. Many nominees have found it helpful to submit an Editor Review or to receive Admin coaching before submitting their RfA and after passing that benchmark. Hope this helps. Good luck and happy editing. iMatthew ^talk at 12:39, 31 December 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.