Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/GSorbyDesroid 2

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

FINAL: (1/9/2) Closed per WP:NOTNOW by Courcelles at 21:28, 28 December 2010 (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: Lately, I've been a recent changes patroller, requesting to delete unclear and articles that didn't fit in with Wikipedia's five pillars. Images are my main concern on Wikipedia. I've been discussing with the community about licensing and rationale. Most people's concern are the old revisions of images, and usually there are loads of unused images which are copyrighted which need to be deleted as per F5. I'd also help to delete candidates for speedy deletion. Also I also revert vandalism quite a lot. Having the ability to block vandals would be easier than having to wait for an admin to do it.

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

A: I am quite pleased with my work here at Wikipedia. Lately, I've been sorting out copyright statuses on images and adding rationales. People do ask me to do this. Such as on most EastEnders images, the rationale templates haven't been added, and there are around 250+ images relating to EastEnders and they don't have any rationale. I would like to get the rest of these done in about a month. On some articles, have cited a lot of sources that are needed and I have tagged some articles with noticed such as it needs to be expanded.

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 think of any major arguments that I've been involved in. Sometimes, I get annoyed when I tell people to stop doing something and yet they ignore me and continue to vandalise Wikipedia. I was involved in one reverting war. One where somebody kept adding an invalid field to an infobox and they kept reverting my reversion. I reminded the user on their talk page to stop, and they did. I would never be rude or attack other users. I would always be civil and never loose my temper with another user.

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

---

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

Can someone WP:NOTNOW this please per [1] - I think the candidate has had enough feedback. Pedro :  Chat  21:20, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1. Moral Support, you seem eager to help the project, and that is good. But, come back in 3-6 months with a few thousand more edits. Thanks, Tofutwitch11 ^(TALK) 19:33, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1. Per WP:NOTNOW I recommend you withdraw the RFA and try again in three to six months, just a little over 1000 edits. Secret ^account 19:17, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
2. Oppose, with moral support. Last RfA was only in September, and there's been nowhere near enough time or further experience to have satisfied all the issues from then. Enthusiasm is great, and your desire to assist further is admirable - but I'd say you need more like another year and a few thousand more edits than the well-meaning but misleading "3 to 6 months" that people often tend to suggest. Really, don't be so keen to get the admin bit - just concentrate on making Wikipedia better, and if it turns out you're suitable for admin, it will become clear in time. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:47, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
3. Unfortunately, I do not think you have neough experience yet. I will be happy to support later, when you have more, however. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 19:52, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
4. Plus points for almost 50% main space edits and for going to a great secondary school bias - I went there !!. Alas creating an article on your self (per your talk, admins can see the deleted content) at the start of the month and under 1,500 edits is simply not going to cut it. WP:NOTNOW is great reading, and please do not be discouraged. Pedro :  Chat  20:12, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
5. WP:NOTNOW. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 20:23, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
6. Per WP:NOTNOW. I admire you for running (I'm too scared), but you need more experience. Creating an article about yourself and performing this cut and paste move before the discussion ended, doesn't fill me with confidence. - JuneGloom Talk 20:31, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
7. Moving to oppose because of the cut-and-paste move of Ken Barlow (Coronation Street) mentioned above -- that's far too recent an error on basic licensing requirements. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:44, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
8. Sorry, simply not enough experience. But don't take it personally, please; I just went through a failed RfA. Keep up the good work! Guoguo12--Talk--  20:50, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
9. Per WP:NOTNOW.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:27, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1. I don't want to oppose, but I'm not seeing enough of the kinds of edits that will let me know how you'll handle the mop.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:25, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Moving to oppose.

1. Neutral With no activity in the Wikipedia namespace, apart from your RfAs and a namechange, I do not have enough evidence to support you, but do not feel the need to pile-on oppose, as you are enthusiastic and make good contributions. -- PhantomSteve.alt/talk\^{[alternative account of Phantomsteve]} 20:21, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
2. Neutral, with moral support - Please don't be offended at this RfA, which will probably be closed per WP:SNOW, but most candidates have significantly more Wikipedia experience. Anyways, congrats on your File contributions. Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:45, 28 December 2010 (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.