Wikiquote:Requests for adminship/Razorflame 2

This discussion is finished. Please do not change it. You can add comments to another page, but not here.

Razorflame 2

Result: Unsuccessful, with a tally of 0-3. This should have been closed earlier, but was forgotten. TheAE talk 19:25, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there all. I've made about 200 edits to the Simple English Wikiquote, and while I have been on IRC lately, I've noticed some vandalism that needed to be dealt with pretty quickly, but there were no active administrators on at the time. I believe that I can help the Simple English Wikiquote even more than I already do if I were allowed to be a sysop here and I believe that I would be a good sysop here. I am currently a sysop on the Simple English Wiktionary, and I have had very few complaints about my use of the sysop tool. All of the actions that I have made there have been beneficial towards the Simple English Wiktionary, and I believe that I can carry this over to here as well. Thanks, Razor flame 04:42, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate's acceptance:Self-nomination

Support

Oppose

Actually, what pushes me over the edge once and for all is this extraordinary demonstration of poor judgement. The issues below I feel are concerning enough, but giving an ultimatum to your fellow editors ("I will retire in a month if we do not fix our problems, and I am sure that many other active editors here will also retire when I retire because frankly, I think that I am the reason why some of our most active editors are still here.") and giving the project a "last warning" is absolutely pathetic. I cannot support you with these issues so prevalent. PeterSymonds (talk) 10:58, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You are simply seeking different access levels as endowments. A few weeks ago I recommended that you drop the petty attempts for different "tools" and instead focus on building the Wiki just like everyone else. This is another endeavor on your part to gain "power". Aiuw 23:38, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, it is not. It is to help deal with vandals on this Wikiquote whenever I notice it on the recent changes feed on the IRC and to help facilitate making this a better Wikiquote. Razor flame 23:48, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Would prefer you to be more active on-wiki before you become an administrator for Simple English Wikiquote. Also, the above opposes concerns me a bit. — RyanCross (talk) 03:20, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

As I am new around here, Razor, I don't know your work here. So, I will stay out of this, good luck though.-- † CM ₁₆ 07:11, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've been quite concerned about your judgement lately. Here you were criticised for your near-abuse of administrative tools through your blocking, yet you fail to mention this in your nom statement (despite mentioning the good things about your wikt: adminship). Here you accused two administrators on the English Wiktionary of administrative abuse and rushed to meta RfC without looking into the situation properly. Your judgement calls are a little concerning, so what would you say in rebuttal to this? (And before you say it, yes, it is relevant to your RfA here, because judgement is relevant everywhere.) Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 10:21, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry for not sharing that. I thought that I covered that with the statement that I've had nearly no bad comments about my use of the tools at the Simple English Wiktionary. Yes, I did get critized for that, however, if you would actually look at what I said in response to Tygrrr's post, I said that they do that all the time at the English Wiktionary, and that I thought that it would be an OK thing to do at the Simple English Wiktionary as well. I noted that since it seemed that it was not the right thing to do, I said that I would not do it again, and since then, I haven't had a single complaint about my use of the blocking tool at the Simple English Wiktionary. Thanks for sharing your concerns with me, Razor flame 16:19, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore you should cease with your palpable attempts to increase your edit count by making these minors edits. Who else makes seven edits in the course of five minutes? Aiuw 23:44, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Plenty of people make several edits in the course of a short period in time. Lots of people I know make upwards of 5-10 edits to each article, so it isn't that big of a deal. It is not an attempt to increase my edit count. This is not the way that you should go about telling people your opinion. Razorflame 23:46, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - If you know "lots of people" that commit heinous crimes, does that suddenly give you a free pass to do so as well? Just because the majority does something a particular way does not mean it is the proper or correct way. Telling people my opinion? I'm merely stating the facts, which are self-evident: you are hell-bent on being an administrator and gaining "power". You yourself admit your goal is to become an administrator. Now, please stop stalking the recent changes on IRC and making actual contributions. Aiuw 00:06, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - I am not stalking the recent changes on IRC, and I have made contributions to this Wikiquote. I've made more than 170 contributions to this project, which isn't not contributing to this project. I look out for vandalism on the IRC recent changes feed and do what I can with it, and no, my goal is not to become an administrator here, it is to help Wikiquote become a better place. Please stop twisting my words around. Thanks, Razorflame 00:09, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      - The fact that you have yet to contribute to any other page is res ipsa loquitur proof that you are not interested in helping "Wikiquote become a better place." Aiuw 00:25, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        Have you even bothered looking at my contributions, because if you have actually bothered doing that, you'll find that I have edited pages other than this. I also edit lots of other wikis, so I don't have as much time as other editors on this site to edit here. That does not mean that I am not interested in helping this Wikiquote. Thanks. Razor flame 00:37, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I have looked at your contributions. Of your last 21 contributions in the last 24 hours, 50% have been to this page or the main administrator page. You have edited one page in the main space in the last month. In the last two months you have edited two pages in the main space. The rest of your edits in the last two months have been attempting to remove a bureaucrat's permissions and accusing another of violating the privacy policy. Yet, you are "interested in helping"? No, you're merely wasting our time. Please response when you have a reply based on logic and facts rather then feelings and opinions. Aiuw 00:49, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Actually, my replies are almost always based on fact and never emotion nor feelings. Of my 210 contributions, more than half have been to the mainspace. I have created more than 10 pages on the Simple English Wikiquote, and while I do say that I make mistakes, that can be said about everyone who edits a Wikipedia/Wiktionary/Wikiquote. That should tell you that I am interested in helping. Furthermore, you can't make either claim that I attempted to remove a bureaucrat or accusing another administrator of violating the privacy policy without knowing the background of the situation, which you don't, because you started editing after those discussions were finished. I do help this Wikiquote, and I am interested in helping the Simple English Wikiquote, whether you like it or not. Thank you, and unless you have something positive to say, I will not be replying to anything else you post here, Razor flame 01:06, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion is finished. Please do not change it. You can add comments in another part.