Final (18/19/8); ended 03:18, 27 December 2010 (UTC) - Nomination withdrawn. - – MuZemike 03:18, 27 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Guoguo12 ( talk · contribs) – Hi, I'm Guoguo12 and I had not planned to attempt an RfA this early, but here goes. I have been Wikipedia actively for over half a year now, and in that time, I have become familiar with Wikipedia's policies, made some new friends, and learned a lot of stuff I had never heard of before. While I started out by making minor edits like adding refs. and fixing layout, I eventually discovered the pleasure of anti-vandalism work, and to this day, I have made over 2,000 anti-vandal edits, and I am a fluent user of both Twinkle and Huggle. Besides anti-vandal work, I have created three articles, two of which were featured on DYK. In addition, I have commented on various articles at AfD, and have worked in NewPages patrolling and hence have experience with deletion criteria and notability criteria. I have also worked temporarily at AfC and, more recently, as a writer for The Signpost. While I hope that some of you take it into consideration, I do not expect to be cut any slack because there have been no successful RfAs this month; I'm doing it for the experience for the comments, and my failure would be equally as productive as my success. Thanks and happy holidays! Guoguo12 --Talk-- 23:22, 23 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:
Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review his contributions before commenting.
RfA/RfB toolbox | |
---|---|
Counters | |
Analysis | |
Cross-wiki |
Countervandalism's an important function that I don't want to denigrate, but compared to writing content it's an easy way to rack up a lot of edits, without necessarily showing sufficient evidence of mature judgment in the process. It also involves deletion, and nobody's fit to delete material they think is bad faith unless and until they've learned to understand the position of good faith content contributors. The only way to do that is to write a decent amount of content, ideally in contentious areas so the administrator can show they know how to handle work at the sharp end.— S Marshall T/ C 16:47, 25 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Final (18/19/8); ended 03:18, 27 December 2010 (UTC) - Nomination withdrawn. - – MuZemike 03:18, 27 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Guoguo12 ( talk · contribs) – Hi, I'm Guoguo12 and I had not planned to attempt an RfA this early, but here goes. I have been Wikipedia actively for over half a year now, and in that time, I have become familiar with Wikipedia's policies, made some new friends, and learned a lot of stuff I had never heard of before. While I started out by making minor edits like adding refs. and fixing layout, I eventually discovered the pleasure of anti-vandalism work, and to this day, I have made over 2,000 anti-vandal edits, and I am a fluent user of both Twinkle and Huggle. Besides anti-vandal work, I have created three articles, two of which were featured on DYK. In addition, I have commented on various articles at AfD, and have worked in NewPages patrolling and hence have experience with deletion criteria and notability criteria. I have also worked temporarily at AfC and, more recently, as a writer for The Signpost. While I hope that some of you take it into consideration, I do not expect to be cut any slack because there have been no successful RfAs this month; I'm doing it for the experience for the comments, and my failure would be equally as productive as my success. Thanks and happy holidays! Guoguo12 --Talk-- 23:22, 23 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:
Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review his contributions before commenting.
RfA/RfB toolbox | |
---|---|
Counters | |
Analysis | |
Cross-wiki |
Countervandalism's an important function that I don't want to denigrate, but compared to writing content it's an easy way to rack up a lot of edits, without necessarily showing sufficient evidence of mature judgment in the process. It also involves deletion, and nobody's fit to delete material they think is bad faith unless and until they've learned to understand the position of good faith content contributors. The only way to do that is to write a decent amount of content, ideally in contentious areas so the administrator can show they know how to handle work at the sharp end.— S Marshall T/ C 16:47, 25 December 2010 (UTC) reply