Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ankitbhatt 2

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.

Ankitbhatt

Final (2/14/1); ended 01:13, 19 October 2011 (UTC) - per

talk) 01:13, 19 October 2011 (UTC) [reply
]

Nomination

Ankitbhatt (talk · contribs) – Hello everyone, and I am Ankitbhatt. This is actually my second nomination for a Request for Adminship. I believe that I have come a considerable way since my last nomination, and I feel that I should now improve my contributions to Wikipedia by several notches.

I am well-familiarized with the rigorous expectations that editors expect from an administrator undergoing nomination. A few editors pointed out in my last nomination that my edit experience was too insufficient to grant me admin rights. While I certainly haven't made a quantum leap in my edit numbers, I have made much progress in the quality of my edits. I used to be a frequent creator of new articles, but I have stopped them for the time being because they just don't have much scope for development. I now concentrate mainly on improving the quality of the article, regarding grammar, cohesion, presentation, length and the like. I have the tendency of getting completely immersed in an article if it really catches my fancy, and I sometimes don't leave that article for a few months. However, do not mistake this for selective obsession. While I may sometimes get obsessed, most of the time I am doing normal work in many articles. My current obsession is the film article Ra.One.

I am a considerably active editor in the Film and India projects of Wikipedia, and am always exploring for greater avenues for co-operation and experience. I have made the article 2003 Afro-Asian Games, which I brought to GA after a few months of work. Also, I have worked very extensively in the film articles My Name Is Khan and Ra.One. I have also done innumerable other edits in many other articles, all of which I cannot list here. I also focus more on discussions and counselling before editing than previously.

I am willing to accept that I am still learning a few areas of Wikipedia, but have made much progress regarding them. For one, I used to have much problem regarding photo copyrights and have a list of deleted photos to my discredit. however, with the help of some editor friends, I have been shown how to recognize a free photo when I see one. I have also made much progress regarding reliable sources, a matter for which I have recently been involved over large discussions. I try to keep the atmosphere positive, though I may sometimes crack under some extreme cases. i have a well-versed knowledge of Wikipedia policies, and am now working my way towards more anti-vandalism and article improvement.

My credentials may not be as impressive as other admin requests. I know that I have ways to go before I can be a truly excellent Wikipedia editor. Even in case I do not get admin rights, I will take this up as an opportunity to further learn and improve. I hope that everyone judges me according to my merits, but do not hesitate to point out any flaws you find. I will try my best to assuage your doubts. Regards AnkitBhattTalk to me!!LifEnjoy 17:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for the candidate

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: The main reason why I want to obtain Administrator rights is to get a faster and more active role in anti-vandalism, a major problem that has often wreaked major havoc over articles I have edited. This automatically leads me to the matter of protection. I do realize that giving protection is a weighted matter involving lot of thought, but I believe I can fulfill the roles of an administrator in all forms, including protection. Otherwise, my general aim is to help out more newcomers.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: By far my best contribution to Wikipedia is
Baichung Bhutia
.
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, but very rarely. Actually, I think only twice. And the problem was that I was extremely closely involved with the articles involved. A full blanking made me lose a little of my cool, but I have since then learnt that there are some things we cannot compromise on (and I am still learning :D). The other time was in the Ra.One article, and there again it was over a small matter. I may sound harsh and dramatic in these cases, but I was just trying my level best to get my opinion to the others. I did not mean any real harm. As I said, I have a lot to learn, especially in this aspect, but assuredly I will not blow up or cause any edit wars because I just do not see any point in them. I try my best to control my temper, and I have seen better results recently than before.
Additional question from Monty845
4. You see an IP editor blank a page on your watchlist with no edit summary, they have already been reverted and warned once for doing the same thing. Assuming the IP has no previous history, and keeps blanking the same page (ignoring any attempt to communicate), how many warnings should they get before being blocked, and when it is time to block, how long would you block them for?
A:
Additional question from MC10
5. When, if ever, would you block a user with no warnings?
A:
Additional question from Ebe123
6. What's your opinion on
WP:LTA
?
A:


General comments

RfAs for this user:

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

Discussion

  • Stats posted to talk page. —mc10 (t/c) 20:09, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • We have a discussion section, so why not use it. How about some helpful suggestions for how a content editor can gain experience that might lead them to adminship.
  1. I would recommend reading the dispute resolution noticeboards, to see the sort of problems people expect admin intervention for. Start to chip in after a while - see how you might help with a situation, and how you react if someone decides to attack you.
    Report those vandals. Check that your definition of vandalism is on track by reporting vandals to
    WP:AIV. If you don't come across any vandals in your watchlist, patrol recent changes now and again, to get a feel for it. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Support
  1. Support Good editor, passionate about improving Wikipedia. Scieberking (talk) 20:08, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Moral support. For an editor with ~4k edits and an GA under the belt, that's very good. However, I would like to see you to be more active both in editing and engaging with the community (e.g. conversation, policy making/suggestion). OhanaUnitedTalk page 21:35, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
  1. Sorry, but I do not see enough experience in the areas you express interest in working in, i.e.
    WP:RFPP. In fact, I do not see any edits to those pages. 28bytes (talk) 18:42, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  2. Oppose While I'm not worried about your relatively low edit count, I have a hard time supporting an RfA candidate who wishes to work with
    WP:AIV yet has not made a single report to that noticeboard. Your long service and consistent editing history is certainly a good thing, but your lack of experience is a broad range of areas is not. I suggest you take a more active role in administrative functions and then try again in six months. Best of luck. Trusilver 19:14, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  3. Oppose - Little or no experience in anti-vandalism areas, which is the candidate's stated area of interest. I have looked through your contributions and found one revert for vandalism and zero edits to
    confess 20:16, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  4. Oppose, with moral support. Heart's obviously in the right place, plus the Good Article is excellent. However, I cannot support any administrator candidate that doesn't have a single edit to any administrative project page to his name. No prejudice whatsoever against supporting once the candidate has gained the relevant experience. WilliamH (talk) 20:23, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Oppose: Per WilliamH (talk · contribs). Possible SNOW close. ~~Ebe123~~ (+) talk
    Contribs     • 20:30, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Regretfully. It looks like you've done great content work, but your experience other areas (specifically the one you intend to work in- anti vandalism) is just too light. The good news is that you don't need to be an administrator to get more involved in anti-vandal work! Patrol
    Huggle that will allow you to revert massive amounts of vandalism very easily. Best regards, Swarm 20:44, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Refactored but very minor: Fixed the recent changes link to special page. ~~Ebe123~~ (+) talk
    Contribs     • 21:34, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Regretful oppose. You do amazing content work, but I just don't see a need for the sysop tools here, or enough experience to judge how you'd use them. Ajraddatz (Talk) 21:38, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Oppose for now I'm going to oppose for now. Try to get some more experience with the
    (Talk) 21:49, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  9. Oppose – I have to unfortunately oppose due to a lack of experience within the areas of anti-vandalism (no edits to
    WP:AIV), where you plan to be working in. Come back in a few months with more experience, and I may support you next RfA. —mc10 (t/c) 22:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  10. Oppose per
    WP:NOTNOW, without prejudice. Editor needs more work on project pages; however, content work is admirable. Moogwrench (talk) 22:03, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  11. Oppose 28bytes gets the right points. Content work is a big +++, but you say you want to work in certain admin areas that you don't participate in, really. Sorry, HurricaneFan25 23:07, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Oppose
    Wikipedia:NOTNOW be active for just 1 year Mohamed Aden Ighe (talk) 23:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Just to point out, this user has been active for almost three years. Trusilver 23:49, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Oppose Concerns with limited experience in indicated areas of interest, breadth of exposure. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:22, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Oppose As answer to Q1. "More anti-vandalism" - there's not much to start with - 1 single automated edit - sorry, but you are too early. Do some anti-vandal -
    WP:AIV, then you might be in a better position to give such an answer.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 00:33, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Neutral
  1. Neutral The candidate's content work is very good. Ankitbatt only has about 4,000 edits over the course of 2 years, and has limited work in administrative areas. However quality is more important than quantity. As the candidate has one
    Good Article, and a potential for at least two more, I am hesitant to oppose on grounds of lack of experience. Content builders do gain significant policy knowledge through writing articles. Therefore I am currently neutral. Answers to optional questions may sway me one way or another. Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 22:06, 18 October 2011 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Ankitbhatt_2&oldid=1142577411"