Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Geoffr

From 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.

Contents

[edit] Geoffr

Final (0/2/1); Ended 21:09, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I withdraw my nomination' Geoff Riley 21:02, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Geoffr (talk · contribs) - Hi, I am Geoff Riley, I've been around Wikipedia for many year, but only began editing at the end of 2005 when I saw some vandalism. Since then I made only occasional edits; but over the last few months I've been working at combating vandalism in earnest. Geoff Riley 20:05, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?
A: My intention is to work on monitoring the recent changes logs with particular regard to helping to clamp down on vandalism; I currently have around 100 pages in my watch list that I keep an eye on, but this list is constantly creeping up as I identify new violations.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I would say that my best contributions are those made towards the Route diagram template pages and the 3D modelling pages; on the other hand, the majority of edits have been in the combating of vandalism.
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: The only conflict that I have experienced was with a person who took exception at my reversing his vandalism and took it upon himself to start vandalising my user page. On this occasion he got bored and stopped, but as with all conflicts that I experience in day to day life I would have attempted to engage in a dialogue to resolve the situation.

[edit] General comments

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Geoffr before commenting.

[edit] Discussion

[edit] Support
[edit] Oppose
  1. I'm sorry, but you've only truly been active since October; before then, you had 98 edits in 21 months. You need to be active more consistently. I'd recommend withdrawing this RfA, as it is unlikely to pass. (I'd do it myself, but I as a rule don't close completely un-commented on RfAs, and I thought some advice would be better than just closing it). EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:51, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
  2. Oppose. User has less than 500 edits, gave less than stellar answers to the questions, and generally has not explained very well why he would even NEED the tools of adminship. If not withdrawn, I recommend closing this RfA per WP:SNOW. K. Scott Bailey 20:57, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Neutral
  1. There is nothing that leads me to believe he will abuse the tools, but his grammar is...bad, and the answers to the questions are weak. In question one he does not show any need for the tools. Sorry.--SJP:Happy Verterans Day! 20:50, 8 November 2007 (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.