Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Gwib

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful permissions request. Please do not modify it.

Gwib

Ended on January 2, 2008 - 12 suppport/2 oppose - 86% support

Gwib has been, when he can edit, a very helpful, constructive, friendly, and professional editor here on Simple English Wikipedia. He has a very likeable personality and has helped revert vandalism in the past. Even though he has an erratic editing schedule, I still think that when he can edit, he will be able to further help this site even more so than he has been doing in the past. This user is definitely one of the better editors here on this site, and given the administration tools, I think he will not abuse them or use them for his own personal gain. He has been an active user on here for a long time, and throughout this long time, I believe, has helped this site out more than many of the other editors here on this site. Razorflame (contributions) Talk 22:30, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate's acceptance:

I accept, duh. Gwib^-(talk)- 12:29, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support

Moderate support, Gwib has been an excellent user and a helpful contributor to the simplewiki. While I find no flaws against his RfA based on the Criteria for adminship, he has been widely absent for the past two months and stated that he may be gone after his christmas break from school is over. Administrators should be [especially] always active around during the simplewiki. While little one or two week wikibreaks may be okay, wikibreaks ranging for over 3 or 4 months wouldn't do much good. --§ Snake311 _{(T + C)} 10:26, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
--vector ^_^ (talk) 17:01, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Experience is more important to me .....--Comet styles 17:57, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Like what Cometstyles said. - Huji ^reply 19:25, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Gwib's contribs show he has done a very intelligent job of cleaning up whatever articles of all descriptions fall into the cleanup bin, plus much more. With that much experience, it "should be no big deal" to sysop him. Blockinblox - talk 22:08, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Gwib has the experience and taking a wikibreak at exams time confirms he has responsibility. --Bärl iner 22:12, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Even if he only does one admin action a month, that's still helping the wiki. If he becomes more active, great. If not, then so what?--Werdan7^{T @} 05:01, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support It shouldn't really matter how often someone is able to edit on here, so long as those edits that he does are beneficial to this site. Therefore, since you have been a great contributor to this site, I support you too. (This vote was put in so that people know I actually support this user.) Razorflame (contributions) Talk 22:18, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cometstyles. ☆ Lights (talk) 20:30, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support The user edits a wide range of topics, clearing up after other users. He is helpful and sympathetic, and I would fully trust him as an admin. Ben.(Talk).(Changes) 23:18, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cometstyles. Oysterguitarist 00:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Not that it'll make much difference :) Archer7 - talk 00:18, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

"Get them if you need them". I just do not see that need here. Gwib over the last three months has 10 deleted articles (articles tagged for QD). Of those, 6 were encopypastes which would eventually get cleared. There was also a seventh, a copy/paste over an article (Desperate Housewives) which certainly should not have been deleted as all it needed was reverted back to its pre-copy/paste state. {no need for the delete tab}. Over that same period, he has issued about 30 warnings to users. Of those, only 2 were about a test2 level (both were 3s). {little to no need for blocking}. Much of this is partially due to the fact that he hasn't been here for much of the past three months and couldn't get up the number of times the extra tabs would be needed. This in itself is a problem as if he is very time restricted, serving as an admin is really of little to no help to the wiki. If it were just about trust, this would be an issue, but it is about trust, need, and usefulness and half of those (need and 1/2 useful) are missing. -- Creol(talk) 11:09, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Per Creol. Jet Lover ^Bam! 22:52, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Creol is right. I've read his comments and I think I'll just back out. Whilst I (in all modesty) am a good editor here, he's right in saying that I probably wouldn't use the tools to their full potential. What do other people think though?
Gwib^-(talk)- 12:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As I've stated above, it wouldn't matter how long someone is gone for if he comes back afterwords. I think that this should be postponed until after you get back on a regular basis. Razorflame (contributions) Talk 18:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno... many users have different opinions; I may support your RfA while others may not. Although I cannot tell what other users might support/oppose you, the only thing I can state is my opinion (see above). --§ Snake311 _{(T + C)} 16:59, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll say this: I know I might not use the tools to their full advantage. But when I use them I'll use them efficiently and quickly. I also plan on editing here maybe not hugely, but regularly, even if that means only 200 - 400 edits a month. But I will try to edit regularly.

Gwib^-(talk)- 17:14, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And I'd say: Adminship is a matter of trust. I trust you, so I support your RfA. On the other hand, if at some point you felt you don't need the admin tools any more or can't use them efficiently, you can ask them to be taken back (like what I did a while ago on Fa WP). - Huji ^reply 19:27, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then it's decided. I'll keep my rfa valid and if I pass (touch wood!) and feel that my admin tools aren't being used enough I'll request for them to be taken away.
Thanks for your comments everybody!
Gwib^-(talk)- 21:49, 26 December 2007 (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.