396:, which I arrived at because the other user involved contacted me for the same reasons. I think responses like this will probably preclude any RFA goals. If you're going to tag an article, you should also be prepared to back it up with constructive rationale when asked. This is clearly an inexperienced user, and although he also has a clear COI, that doesn't mean we brush him off. He was being clear and inordinately polite, and you responded with stonewalling, aside from one rather unhelpful link.
206:
then take minimum 10 months to prepare from now and if you go before this anyone can oppose it thinking that your intentions are not right and due to inexperience. I m new here (3 days merely) but learned a lot about the encyclopedia. Take this as constructive advise and keep up your attitude. You'll be an admin one day but not in upcoming odd 6 months. Just need touch ups. Best.
205:
I'd love to see an vandal fighting admin like you. If you go again for an RfA after few months or some with this tempo, then the above reasons can be the main points to oppose your stand resulting a second failour. You are still learning though have finished 85% learning, if you are planning for RfA
55:
I had an RFA about one month ago and it failed. Miserably. I had some harsh feedback and for a short period afterwards, I was really upset. Since then, I have decided to take that criticism that was given to heart, and have done numerous things to improve my image and overall quality as an editor. I
300:
These were the number of reasons which I would show in his Rfa and probably many more would. Your intentions were noble and he is a good editor also, but not so good for adminship. Take my comments positively and this points which I stated also go for you to (you are still better then DBX). If you
192:
Lack of content creation- Though you have 36% edits there, I can say that they most of them would have been vandal removal work. It is good to see someone dedicating their 36% edits for anti-vandal but still as we all are here to improve the encyclopedia, we have to show some skills in articles
292:
The reasons for his rfa to fail can be low level of activity in admin related areas. Only 3-4 % edits in wikipedia space is also an reason. He never showed his good judgement skills in afds, or any voting process. He only fights vandalism and no other admin related work and such candidates are
200:
Wrong reverts- I saw that from your talk page. Not accepting the mistake promptly and giving an response in your favor was not the right thing to do. I m not saying that you should stand for what you believe but should also accept mistakes as it was. According to an admin, Worm that turned, an
112:
Yes, but not recently. I believe that I dealt with the disputes that I had in "A rough way, but not totally incivil" If I for some reason that I had a dispute in the future, I have been coached by my adoptee, (who's program I am now a graduate), on how to properly handle such an issue.
293:
rejected because of lack of experience or work in other areas (note: this can happen to you also). An recent example of it is rfa of Cable1992. He was only a vandal fighter, but failed. Another reason is that DBX has done nothing important in content creation (no GA, FA, FL or DYK).
288:
You are right about it that he will be handling his own RfA, but his RfA will fail due to number of reasons. There are many other things other then written in the Guide which is important to become an admin (I have seen many RfA which were unsuccessful and can compare those with
188:
Talk on talk pages- While I'd love to be communicating, remember we are here to built the encyclopedia and so 45% edits on talk pages is way too much as it will do no good unless you are asking for help or correcting someone. This is also a negative point resulting in a failed
56:
want to know how the rest of the community thinks I am doing, because I do intend to try again in a few months, and I want to make sure I am heading in the right direction, not only on the path to becoming an administrator, but as a quality editor in general.
245:
I wanted to refer to an comment by you on DBigXray's talk page. You asked him that can you nominate him. Well, I see no problem what so ever in that but won't it be too much too soon for you to do it or judge if the other person is qualified for adminship?
107:
Have you been in editing disputes or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
301:
also eliminate them from your weakness and start work in all this with keeping cool and avoiding conflicts, I don't see any problem in your 2nd Rfa. Take my comments positively, I can only suggest, but you can make it happen :)
227:
My main reasons for the high talk page count is for each vandalism revision, a warning is given. Not just because I am being chatty. That's really all I have to respond to about your review. Thanks!
353:. Also, note that generally speaking the recommended time between RFA applications is 6 months. Given that you've only been here for a short period, I suggest extending that to 10-12 months. -
270:
and I thought that DBigXray would make a good admin. I really don't see anything wrong about that as it would mainly be him handling his own RFA, and I would just be the nominator.
201:
success rate less then 99% and causing mistakes recently will easily cause failour of an RfA so your record was pretty good though it created a negative impression about you there.
84:
Antivandal work is what I mostly do and I have no one contribution that I value because my belief is that it is one's overall impact on the project that one truly should value.
267:
309:
254:
214:
151:
197:
vandal fighting. Because your top-edited article has only 7 edits and this can be a big reason to built a great oppose at an RfA.
50:
368:
Well, Thanks I guess... But I assure you that a good number of people pointed me in that direction in my last epic failure.
340:
160:
A thing that I loved about you is that the attitude of not-giving-up-easily. That is the greatest plus point about you.
44:
80:
What are your primary contributions to
Knowledge (XXG)? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
17:
294:
303:
248:
208:
145:
405:
346:
297:
but still editors want someone who has skills in that as we are here to develope the encyclopedia.
350:
393:
373:
358:
334:
275:
232:
118:
89:
61:
38:
399:
410:
381:
377:
362:
316:
283:
279:
261:
240:
236:
221:
126:
122:
97:
93:
69:
65:
369:
354:
330:
271:
228:
163:
I'll write you a short but meaningful review (3 positive signs and 3 negative):
114:
85:
57:
33:
345:
With regards to your RFA ambitions, I suggest that you take a closer look at
178:
Wikibehaviour- Kind, and helpful, also dedicated in whatever they do
295:
Having GA, FA, FL or DYK doesn't make anyone a better admin
175:
Vandal-fighting- Good, in fact really good Vandal fighter
8:
392:About my only experience with you is this:
7:
394:User talk:Hghyux#Black Grape Global
268:WP:Guide to requests for adminship
24:
1:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Editor review
426:
411:18:17, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
382:14:53, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
363:11:50, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
317:04:49, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
284:17:52, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
262:16:42, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
241:15:13, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
222:09:53, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
127:00:23, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
98:14:39, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
70:00:14, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
266:Well, I read read the
172:My fav- Not giving up
388:Comment by Equazcion
407:
417:
408:
404:
402:
312:
306:
257:
251:
217:
211:
154:
148:
54:
425:
424:
420:
419:
418:
416:
415:
414:
400:
398:
314:
310:
304:
259:
255:
249:
219:
215:
209:
156:
152:
146:
36:
31:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
423:
421:
385:
384:
378:talk to others
326:
325:
324:
323:
322:
321:
320:
319:
308:
305:TheSpecialUser
298:
290:
280:talk to others
253:
250:TheSpecialUser
237:talk to others
213:
210:TheSpecialUser
203:
202:
198:
190:
180:
179:
176:
173:
150:
147:TheSpecialUser
135:
133:
132:
131:
130:
123:talk to others
105:
103:
102:
101:
94:talk to others
66:talk to others
30:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
422:
413:
412:
409:
406:
403:
395:
390:
389:
383:
379:
375:
371:
367:
366:
365:
364:
360:
356:
352:
348:
344:
342:
339:
336:
332:
318:
315:
313:
311:Contributions
307:
299:
296:
291:
287:
286:
285:
281:
277:
273:
269:
265:
264:
263:
260:
258:
256:Contributions
252:
244:
243:
242:
238:
234:
230:
226:
225:
224:
223:
220:
218:
216:Contributions
212:
199:
196:
191:
187:
186:
185:
184:
177:
174:
171:
170:
169:
168:
164:
161:
158:
157:
155:
153:Contributions
149:
143:
139:
138:
129:
128:
124:
120:
116:
110:
109:
106:
104:
100:
99:
95:
91:
87:
82:
81:
79:
78:
77:
76:
72:
71:
67:
63:
59:
52:
49:
46:
43:
40:
35:
29:
26:
19:
397:
391:
387:
386:
337:
328:
327:
302:
247:
207:
204:
194:
182:
181:
166:
165:
162:
159:
144:
141:
140:
136:
134:
111:
83:
74:
73:
47:
41:
32:
27:
329:Review by:
374:talk to me
276:talk to me
233:talk to me
195:along with
142:Reviews by
119:talk to me
90:talk to me
62:talk to me
401:Equazcion
347:WP:NOTNOW
75:Questions
341:contribs
183:Concerns
137:Reviews
45:contribs
351:WP:GRFA
370:Hghyux
355:Cntras
331:Cntras
272:Hghyux
229:Hghyux
167:Skills
115:Hghyux
86:Hghyux
58:Hghyux
34:Hghyux
28:Hghyux
51:count
16:<
359:talk
349:and
335:talk
289:DBX)
189:RfA.
39:talk
380:)
376:)(
361:)
282:)
278:)(
239:)
235:)(
125:)
121:)(
96:)
92:)(
68:)
64:)(
372:(
357:(
343:)
338:·
333:(
274:(
231:(
117:(
88:(
60:(
53:)
48:·
42:·
37:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.