Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Supdiop 2

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); Closed in lieu of recommending the nominee be blocked for disruption. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:43, 13 November 2015 (UTC) [reply]

Supdiop (talk · contribs) – Hello everyone, I am nominating myself for adminship again. I started editing on 2 March 2015. I started to actively edit in april. I started to patrol new pages. I started to do anti vandalism work later. I have rollback and reviewer rights. I also contributed to AFC project. I created 19 articles, I got one DYK and second DYK will appear on main page in few days. - Supdiop (T🔹C) 22:09, 13 November 2015 (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 would like to work in WP:AIV, WP:RFPP, WP:ANEW, WP:PERM, and WP:UAA first. I will start slowly and carefully. I have experience in dealing with vandals. I think I am net positive to the project.

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

A: I created 19 articles and my favorites are Moula Ali hill, Ardstinchar Castle, Calmella cavolini and Sampsonievsky Bridge. I frequently patrol recent changes and revert vandalism, tests, and BLP vios. I consider my anti-vandalism work to be the best contribution to Wikipedia. I want to help wikipedia more.

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 never been in any serious conflicts but there are some instances where I felt some stress. I do get angry sometimes. I try to make myself feel better by watching funny videos. When I am angry, I didn't and don't make personal attacks. If there is a content issue I will try to discuss it on talk page.

Additional question from WJBscribe

4. Why have you decided to disregard the community feedback at Optional RfA candidate poll/Archive 1#Supdiop, which you said was "enough for [you] to stop thinking about [your] future RFA"?

A:

Additional question from Ahecht

5. You recently opposed Wikicology's RfA with a NOTNOW vote, and later clarified that you "think he doesn't have enough experience to become admin". Give that you have a similar number of edits and your account age is similar to Wikicology's, if you were to vote on this RfA, how would you vote and why?

A:

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

---

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

1. Oppose - What has changed since 4 October 2015 when your last RfA was SNOW closed? I don't think you have enough experience at the moment to become an Admin. JMHamo (talk) 22:27, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
2. I recommend reading Wikipedia:Advice for RfA candidates and requesting again in six months time, if you feel you are ready. You're doing great things here, there's no need to rush to attain adminship. Trust me, it's not that great — MusikAnimal ^talk 22:28, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
3. With 1 moral support, 13 opposes, and 4 neutrals (which were only neutrals because they didn't want to pile on in the previous RFA last month... and the poll WJBScribe refers to above... Supdiop's judgement is too immature for me to support an RFA in the next 18 months. Supdiop, your first RFA could have been overexuberance; this one is incompetence. My estimate is that, for every hour you leave this up, you're probably pushing the earliest date for a possible successful RFA back another week beyond that 18 month guess. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:32, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
4. Oppose Your last RFA was snow-closed only a month ago. Also, this seems to be some serious hat collecting per the responses you received at m:SRGP, where you have an open request for global renamer. Also, you retiring and then coming back three days later shows a lack of judgement and thought in your actions. --I am k6ka ^{Talk to me!} _{See what I have done} 22:33, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

   And his "un-retirement" occurred after this RfA was transcluded! --Ahecht (TALK
   PAGE) 22:41, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

5. Oppose While I wholeheartedly believe in second chances and think that a clean blocklog is a ridiculous requirement for admins, I cannot support a candidate at RfA when they've been blocked multiple times in the last six weeks. Give us six months of good behavior at least before trying again. --Ahecht (TALK
   PAGE) 22:35, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
6. Given how you were blocked on in October for vandalism and disruption following the failure of your first RfA, even having talk page access revoked, with the agreement of several administrators, you clearly do not have the temperament to be an administrator at this time. Recommend WP:SNOW close. BethNaught (talk) 22:36, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
7. Oppose Per all above opposes. Datbubblegumdoe^talk_contribs 22:41, 13 November 2015 (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.