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

Final (0/10/4) ended 11:32 March 11, 2006

DChiuch – I have been a regular user of Wikipedia since early 2005 and have been editing anonamously ever since. I created my user account at the start of 2006 and have since been editing a whole lot more. I always revert vandalism and edit pages when I see something that can be improved. Also I regulary discuss pages on talk pages to decide on how the article can be designed better. DChiuch 09:49, 10 March 2006 (UTC) reply

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept. -- DChiuch 02:13, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply

Support

Oppose

1. Oppose Sorry. Less than 1000 edits, 13 to project space. Needs more experience. CanadianCaesar The Republic Restored 02:17, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply
2. Oppose. I like the enthusiasm, but I do think you need more time editing Wikipedia, that you need more interaction with other users, and that you need more project experience. Maybe I'll support in the future, but I think it's a bit too soon for the time being. — TheKMan ^talk 02:17, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply
3. Strong oppose, too new, lack of edit summaries, lack of edits, lack of time spent on Wikipedia, etc. NSL E _{( T+ C)} at 02:19 UTC ( 2006-03-11)
4. Oppose too new, suggest withdrawal and re-try in 2 months. -- Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 02:56, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply
5. Oppose. Zero experience in Wiki space. Practically no experience in vandal fighting. Eight contributions to user talk space (five of which are on his own talk page). You need much more experience than that. JHMM13 ( T | C) 03:09, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply
6. Oppose introduction and answers to questions are simply truisms. Lacks sufficient experience, but has potential. KI 03:10, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply
7. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 03:49, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply
8. Oppose, lack of project space edits, and needs more experience. -- Ter e nc e Ong 05:01, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply
9. Oppose Needs more time. Gizza ^{Chat ©} 06:40, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply
10. Oppose time and edits. But I wouldn't be able to support you anyway because your apparent copyvio at Greenvale Primary School suggests you do not understand policy. Sarah Ewart ( Talk) 09:06, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply

Neutral

1. Neutral, too early. - Mailer Diablo 04:33, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply
2. Neutral, ditto. (consider withdrawing and coming back in a six months.) ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 05:06, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply
3. Neutral per Jossi, would support in ~3 months assuming more usage of edit summaries. - Wezzo (talk) (ubx) 11:08, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply
4. Neutral Its a shame you didn't create a user account earlier. I am assuming that you are telling the truth as to the matter of when you started editing on Wikipedia. Unfortunately we can't tell one way or another when you started contributing to Wikipedia as an anomyous user. Judging by the number of opposes I would suggest you withdraw your nomination. --Signed by: Chazz - ( responses). @ 11:13, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply

Comments

• Edit summary usage: 44% for major edits and 43% for minor edits. Based on the last 150 major and 40 minor edits in the article namespace. Mathbot 02:15, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply
• See DChiuch's edit count and contribution tree with Interiot's tool.

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 voters:

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

A. I regulary try to fight vandels and people who are reducing the quality of Wikipedia by doing things such as uploading illegal images and other things. If I was an administrator of Wikipedia, I could counter vandalism a lot more easily and efficiently, I could also influence other people to do the right thing.

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

A. I am particulary proud of my edits to do with articles relating to The Simpsons and Australia. These are my biggest areas of interest and the pages I view the most. I try to edit a page whenever I see something that can be improved, so another thing I'm proud of would be the stubs I've fixed.

3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?

A. I have been involved in many conflicts, where it was either just people vandalising or sometimes there was something we didnt agree on which way we should do it. When it was just vandalism I reverted it and also asked them to stop. When they kept going I consulted an aministrator and they dealt with it. If I was administrator I could have done it straight away and it would have been a lot more quick and efficient.

The above 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.