Wikiquote:Requests for adminship/StaticChristian 2

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

Result is "not promoting". Closed early per WP:SNOW. ☺Coppertwig(talk) 02:12, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

StaticChristian

End date: November 22, 2008 Hello I`m StaticChristian (talk • changes) and I think I should be an admin so I can help everyone out here.

Candidate's acceptance:Self nom

Support

Oppose

Oppose — I'm opposing mainly per all the opposes at your recently failed RfAs at Wikiquote:Requests for adminship/StaticChristian and Wikiquote:Administrators/Archive_1#User:StaticFalcon. Okay, you said, "...I think I should be an admin so I can help everyone out here." You can do just that as a non-admin. I don't think you should be an administrator due to the problems you had an en.wikipedia and simple.wikipedia. That includes immaturity, disruptiveness, myspace issues, blocks, and many other things. I just can't see you as a good administrator anywhere near in the future. You are treating adminship as a game also since you have repeated RfAs after really short time periods. It's like you just want to be an admin to look "important". Administrators are no better than anyone else. They just have some extra tools to help with maintenance. You seem to be improving slightly, which I really appreciate, but adminship is just not for you. Stop thinking about adminship for a long while, and just work on content work for now. Thank you, – RyanCross (talk) 00:51, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose Editor will not be mature enough for this for a long while. He used his IP to attack RyanCross on en [1], was indefed blocked on the Simple English wikipedia last month and sent a crude ASCII image of a middle finger to several Simple English Wikipedia editors. In conclusion, this editor has a snowball's chance in hell of passing. Shapiros10 01:30, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose - I could give reasons, but I don't want this to get ugly, so I'll just oppose and leave it at that. I'll give reasons if I'm asked to, but I'd advise against it. ס (Samekh) ^Talk 02:04, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose per not now. Please come back in seven years. Synergy 02:05, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

StaticChristian has also canvassed here (note the stricken text) and here. Shapiros10 01:34, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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