Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/TortoiseWrath

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

Voice your opinion on this candidate (talk page) Final (1/5/0); ended 04:23, 7 March 2013 (UTC) per WP:SNOW and [1], closed by —Soap— Originally scheduled to end 02:35, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

TortoiseWrath (talk · contribs) – I'm a fairly average and (unfortunately) quite young Wikipedian; I've been involved here since the age of eight; this was my first edit as a registered user.

Many of my edits through the next year or so were, in hindsight (which I would say is 20/20, though that's overly clichéd and my actual vision is 20/10 anyway), utterly embarrassing ([2], in which I blatantly violated WP:SPAM, and [3], which was just me being an idiot). Since then, I'd like to think my naïveté has decreased some.

I have edited under two accounts, Doggitydogs (through 2012-08-29) and TortoiseWrath (since then; I treated the process as a WP:CLEANSTART), as well as the rare IP edit. Between my accounts, I have made (here's the kicker) 369 edits, the majority of which were minor or in userspace.

Yes, that's it. I recognize that's utterly insignificant, and my chances of a successful RfA are incredibly slim at this time. In spite of this, I self-nominated anyway, just to make sure.  — TORTOISEWRATH 02:23, 7 March 2013 (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 intend to assist around C:SD, WP:CP, and CAT:EP, among other things as I may come across the need.

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

A: The majority of what I do is adding commas. That's necessary, too...

Recently, I've nominated a few articles for speedy deletion and done some general cleanup, but this is the gist of my contributions in mainspace: [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]

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: Yes; [9]; about like that.

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

---

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

TortoiseWrath: Doggitydogs:

1. Moral Support, while this is probably about to get closed per WP:SNOW and/or WP:NOTNOW, I would like to encourage tortoise to keep it up, and not be discouraged by this. Wikignomes are people too. If you keep your nose clean and rack up a few thousand edits, then we'll see. Good luck! Tazerdadog (talk) 04:12, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

   I'm hoping for WP:SNOW over WP:NOTNOW, myself. The latter seems silly.  — TORTOISEWRATH 04:18, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1. Oppose - Major lack of experience with less than 500 edits between the two accounts...I'm not one for editcountitis, but this is excessively low, plus there are contributions that aren't all that constructive. Go Phightins! 02:39, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

   While I certainly agree with your first points (as outlined above), could you give me an example of my unconstructivity, just for reference?  — TORTOISEWRATH 02:42, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

   The spam you mentioned in your nom; I agree that comma shifters are important, I just don't think we should be making all of them admins. Thanks for your interest, though. Go Phightins! 02:44, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2. Oppose Not ready. Maybe in a year or so, if the correct steps are followed. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 02:46, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
3. Oppose You clearly have good intentions here, however your low edit count in the admin areas you expressed interest in is a little concerning. Come back in a year with more experience and I'll support. -- LuK3 (Talk) 03:39, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

   As far as I know, there isn't a great deal I can do around those parts without adminship; I tag articles for speedy deletion when I see one that is worthy, I make protected edit requests when I want something that is protected to be edited, and I try to resolve copyright problems I see without the administrator intervention implied by report at WP:CP. I'm curious as to what more I'm expected to do.  — TORTOISEWRATH 03:49, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

4. Oppose. Too inexperienced. Salih (talk) 04:06, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
5. Oppose: Gain some experience and reapply in at least one to one and a half years. A few hundred edits isn't really enough. All I see is a bunch of snow. Command and Conquer Expert! ^{speak to me...}_{review me...} 04:14, 7 March 2013 (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.