Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/GSorby 4


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

GSorby
[ Voice your opinion on this candidate ] (talk page) Final (2/10/0); ended 17:09, 6 February 2012 (UTC) per WP:SNOW  Alpha_Quadrant    (talk)  17:09, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Nomination
– I would like to nominate myself as an Administrator because I have been on Wikipedia for two years now and I think that I could be even more helpful with the administrative tools, such as deleting old revisions of images and dealing with users that need help with Wikipedia. I would also like to add from a previous comment below from a user, I realise that I have tried quite a bit to become an administrator. This is not because I intend to abuse the tools and I am not desperate for them. I just think that I could help even more with them. GSorby – Ping   20:24, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

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: Around my area of work on Wikipedia, there is a lack of Administrators. The soap opera articles and other Actors and actress articles are often neglected. Things such as image files without a license and old revisions of images would be my area of work mainly. We get a lot of vandals on these articles too and I have to constantly pester other Administrators to look into issues with vandals that have, for example, received four warnings and continue to vandalise. As I've said in my last attempt to become and administrator, the administrator that works around my areas (User:AnemoneProjectors) has no internet access so is online very rarely. There is a lot of things that I could do that he does not have time for such as deleting inappropriate revisions on articles. The Coronation Street articles' images are a mess too. There are so many revisions of images that need to go and images are my speciality. There are also pages that I can protect that can take a while when taking it to requests for protection. When there are major happenings in the soaps, a lot of IP's add a lot of irrelevant information and it's almost impossible to keep reverting them so I could help in giving pages semi-protection for a short period. User:AnemoneProjectors used to do things like this but as I have said, he's only on for an hour every other day. I can also help new users and direct them to the correct help contents and I occasionally add welcome noticed on new users talk page.


 * 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A: I am pleased with most of my contributions, but my best contributions have to be resizing images and updating with the correct rationales and adding the appropriate banners on the talk pages. I have also moved a number of files to the correct filenames. This is another reason why I could become an Administrator. There are always redirects left behind by old image names and some users upload extremely large non free images. I've had one before that was above 2000 pixels and it wasn't deleted for months after requesting it. My other strong point is being a recent changes "patroller" and marking attack pages for deletion. My other contributions consist of promoting articles to GA, such as Yusef Khan and where there is unsourced material, I find sources and add them and if this is not possible, I will add the tag with the appropriate dating. I'm also on Wikipedia every day and am usually available from 9am till 11pm so I'm usually constantly active.


 * 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: I can't recall any major conflicts but I have had some issues with users where I may have gone too far. I have never used personal attacks, even when tempted to. I know that Wikipedia is a community that is supposed to be kept comfortable and friendly for all users. I have had some conflicts where I, as a user, may have intimidated a couple of users, but is usually unintentional. I may have come across as cocky and arrogant but I have been told about this last year and have kept my stress to myself. Any users that are abusive to myself, I will rightly tell them that abuse is not accepted on Wikipedia. When a user ignores warnings on their talk page and continues to give me abuse, I will usually report to an Administrator or most likely WP:AIV. I have been on Wikipedia since January 2010 and I haven't had any major abuse here.


 * Additional question from 28bytes
 * 4. An editor is blocked for a week for edit-warring on a football article. While they are blocked, they notice some obscene vandalism on Gerald Ford, and request on their talk page that someone fix it. After three hours, no one has fixed the vandalism or replied to their request, so they log in using their legimate alternate account and fix it themselves. You notice this; as an administrator, what, if anything, would you do?
 * A:I think that a one-time only warning can be left on the talk page of the legitimate alternate account warning the user that they cannot edit while they are blocked. They can resume editing once the block has expired on the account. If the user continues to make edits with the alternate account, the account will be blocked for a week.


 * Additional question from Rschen7754
 * 5. This is your fourth RFA in roughly 18 months. Your last RFA was in July. What has happened since then?
 * A: Since my last RfA, I have matured toward users on Wikipedia. I used to have arguments with users about small things but since then I keep my stress to myself as mentioned above and I talk to other users in a polite tone. I also have helped a lot of users since my last request for adminship. I also get a lot of users asking me for advice on about how to write articles and how to deal with abusive users. I have usually reported or warned the users myself and gave the users that asked for help instructions on how they can handle abusive users. The bottom section on my talk presently is a user asking my opinion.


 * Additional questions from Surturz
 * 6. Will you commit to a term limit, reconfirmation, or recall? If not, why not?
 * A:
 * 7. Have you participated in any off-wiki (e.g. email or IRC) communication in regards to this RfA?
 * A:
 * 8. Has there been any off-wiki canvassing for your RfA either by you or other editors?
 * A:


 * Additional questions from Jasper Deng
 * 9. How familiar are you with WP:AFD?
 * A:
 * 10. A user says "I dislike your libel against me." What do you do?
 * A:

General comments
RfAs for this user: 
 * Links for GSorby:
 * Edit summary usage for GSorby can be found here.

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

Discussion

 * Edit stats posted on the talk page. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 10:54, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Is the lack of a nomination statement deliberate? Usually even self noms put something there instead of leaving the default text. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:27, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) Moral Support Your heart is in the right place, but unfortunately you do not have the experience. Better luck next time! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 05:02, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) Moral Support Please continue to edit Wikipedia and take the feedback given in the opposes to heart. Who knows, you'll be an admin before you know it! -- Bryce  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 07:15, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Oppose
Long story short, this oppose is based on your narrow focus of editing; there is nothing wrong with that per se, but admin candidates need to have demonstrated experience elsewhere than in their primary area of interest. Diversify your work, and I'm sure you would make a good admin candidate. Best regards, CharlieEchoTango  ( contact ) 05:36, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Going through 2012 edits I actually see few AIV reports or notes to administrators. Most of your reverts are also not accompanied by notes to the other editors so they aren't instructive and not all removal of "irrelevant information" or restoring a redlink qualifies for rollback. Whilst you might be doing something useful with mop, I'm actually concerned you'd use stuff like semiprotection in your own area of interest which on the other hand seems rather limited. I'm also unhappy with this not even no-indexed although AnemoneProjectors told you how-to. --Tikiwont (talk) 23:44, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose with regret. I see only 90 edits to the Wikipedia namespace, and a significant portion of that is to your own RFAs. I would suggest participating more in the Wikipedia namespace (including issues that aren't related to you or your topic). --Rschen7754 23:49, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Going to add that seeking mentorship from a current admin might be helpful as well. --Rschen7754 07:23, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose The contributions are OK and edit count is sufficient.  This user has the Rollback, File Mover, and Reviewer rights.  On the hand, this is the fourth RfA in less than 2 years.  User seems a bit anxious to be an admin.  This potentially tells me that he wants the tools so bad that when he uses them, might abuse them.  Seeing those AIV reports does push me to oppose this RfA.  Do not believe that this was the doing of Tikiwont that pushed me to this.  The description of user is not convincing and does not explain why this user would like to be an admin.— cyberpower  ( Chat )( WP Edits: 514,981,810 ) 23:54, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose per above. I'll ask you about AfD and other things.Jasper Deng (talk) 04:26, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) I've reviewed a sizeable chunk of your contributions to get an overall picture, and I'm satisfied that you are a level-headed and clueful editor. However, and keeping in mind that you said you wanted to focus on a specific area of the wiki, and that this area may very well be in need of a sysop, I feel your experience so far has been too narrow. I see virtually no contributions to administrative areas of the wiki : no edit to the help desk (except to ask a question), no edits to the administrator noticeboards (besides a specific SPI case), only one report to AIV and little anti-vandalism experience, and very little CSD tagging or involvement with the deletion process as a whole. And then three small things (I wouldn't oppose over them, but they are important to mention) :
 * your marking of some edits as minor is not always accurate, here is one of many examples
 * you did not appear to know about tagging fair use old revisions as orphans
 * I'm a little puzzled by your very liberal use of the filemove tool; did File:Simonwicks88.jpg really need to be moved to File:Simon Wicks.jpg, File:Jamie mitchell11.jpg to File:Jamie Mitchell.jpg, etc?
 * 1) Oppose. Not yet.  I've not yet seen sufficient contributions, and as noted above by some sufficient contributions across a broad swathe, to lead me to support.  At the same time, I encourage the editor to keep at it, as in time I hope he may have sufficient experience.--Epeefleche (talk) 06:12, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose. As well as the above, poor understanding of WP:SOCK makes it hard to give the editor the Mop. Achowat (talk) 14:55, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose candidates creating "draft" vanity articles such as User:GSorby/George Sorby. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  15:28, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 4) Opppose. I suggest you (1) don't nominate yourself again, and (2) enjoy being an editor on wikipedia, its really the best job around here.--Milowent • hasspoken  15:56, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose. There's a lot of really good advice in this section, and I urge you to take it on board. The most critical point I can make is this - don't reapply for RFA. Not yet, anyway. Give it a year, edit some articles, and - perhaps most importantly - help out at AIV and AFD and elsewhere. Comment on debates, show that you know your policies and your precedents and whatnot. Then find a mentor and follow their lead. I think you've got it in you to be a good admin, but you need to show that you can handle the job. Participating in the wikipedia space is a really good first step. This is your fourth RFA, and that gives the appearance that you're in it to win it, so to speak. If you take a step back and edit normally, helping out in the project space, you'll have no trouble passing RFA 5. But you need to put that time in first. Good luck. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 16:37, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Neutral

 * Neutral The contributions are great and edit count is sufficient. This user has the Rollback, File Mover, and Reviewer rights.  On the hand, this is the fourth RfA in less than 2 years.  User seems a bit anxious to be an admin.  This potentially tells me that he wants the tools so bad that when he uses them, might abuse them.  A desription of himself wouldn't hurt either.  The desription provided doesn't convince me especially since you don't necessarily need three extra buttons to help users.— cyberpower  ( Chat )( WP Edits: 514,979,328 ) 23:38, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 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.