Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Sjorford

Sjorford
final (6/6/0) ending 18:17 19 March 2005 (UTC)

I've been editing since January 2004, and quite a few of my edits are maintenance type tasks such as new pages/recent changes patrol. I'd like to be able to help out with speedy deletions and clearing backlogs as well. sjorford →•← 18:17, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm slightly shellshocked how a bit of letting off steam has me marked down as some kind of potential renegade, but I guess if people don't trust me, they don't trust me. sjorford →•← 08:31, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) I've been impressed with his edits and commitment to janitorial tasks. Carbonite 18:20, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Has been here over a year, and has nearly 4500 edits.  As I've often come across this user having fixed typos and redirects (sometimes beating me to it while googling for particular typos, curses!), and never engaged in an edit war, I'd judge his self-description as a gnome is fairly apt.  Alai 18:47, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Support. Wile E. Heresiarch 15:59, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Support. What personal attacks? Few isolated angry comments are not enough reason to oppose. My impression so far is that his good contributions outweight the few questionable ones by wide margin. jni 09:08, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) lots of good work. i'm not terribly worried about two pretty minor incidents of crankiness.  but i do worry about losing the contributions a hard-working editor like this could make as sysadmin.  Michael Ward 06:44, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) utcursch | talk 08:24, Mar 17, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose Neutral
 * 1) A cursory look at his contributions indicates insults and personal attacks, including this (for which he was warned and later apologized) and this (which he was nice enough to point out was an insult). CryptoDerk 18:30, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Attitude problem. -- R yan!  |  Talk  00:05, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Could you please show some diffs demonstrating his bad behaviour or explain why you feel that way? jni 09:08, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) Cryptoderk's links show me this user has an attitude problem. I don't want to risk the next 'angry comment' being followed by an illicit block. Therefore oppose (for now at least). Jordi·✆ 09:38, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) There are rarely instances where such anger (again looking at Cryptoderk's links) or insults are needed. Take some time to calm down and try again later. BrokenSegue 23:50, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Crypto's links leave me wondering if you'd be able to effectively handle a dispute calmly when you have admin tools at your disposal. Mo0 [ talk ] 07:48, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Take the proverbial chill pill. Andre ( talk ) 02:54, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC)

Comments

Questions for the candidate

A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:
 * 1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? (Please read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.)
 * A. Particularly, helping with the backlogs on WP:VFD, WP:CP and the like, and monitoring speedy deletions, although I'm likely to do a bit of everything, as is my wont.
 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * A. I suppose the sum total of my football contributions, although my favourite areas for contribution change every day :)
 * 3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and will deal with it in the future?
 * A. I've had the odd conflict, but mostly over fairly minor things - Largest cities of the European Union by population and List of heavyweight boxing champions are a couple that spring to mind. I usually resort to a three-step programme: (1) use the talk page; (2) stop monitoring it on my watch list every 5 minutes; (3) go and do something in the Real World until I get my sense of proportion back.