Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Plyhmrp

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

Final (0/4/0); Closed per WP:NOTNOW Enigma ^message 17:34, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Plyhmrp (talk · contribs) - YOUR DESCRIPTION OF THE USER Plyhmrp (talk) 22:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

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 admin work do you intend to take part in?

A: I intended to stop vandals and diruptive people. I want to improve articles and make sure all small articles are expanded.

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

A:

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 one conflict where I looked up info on the subject and corrected it. I also disscused the info with the user so he would know what was correct. Overall I have not been in stressful situations.

• See Plyhmrp's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

• Links for Plyhmrp: Plyhmrp (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)

---

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

1. Oppose and suggest you withdraw at this stage. With less than 400 edits, only 142 of which are in mainspace, there's not enough to judge how you'll act. – iridescent 17:28, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   Changing to Very strong oppose per this edit. WP:NPOV is probably our most fundamental policy and this is an awful breach of it. – iridescent 17:32, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2. Strong oppose - 387 edits including those made to this request (just noting). Poor participation in administrator areas, edit summary usage is low and the answers are too brief. I don't like what I see at the top of the nominee's talk page. Rudget (logs) 17:29, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   Acknowledging addition by Iridescent. Rudget (logs) 17:33, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3. Oppose, less than 500 edits, very little participation in adminly areas, and failure to read the self-nomination instructions. I also recommend withdrawal. –xenocidic (talk) 17:29, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
4. WP:NOTNOW. Try WP:ADMINCOACH and WP:ER after some time. Come back in a few months. Cheers. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 17:31, 23 June 2008 (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.