final (55/0/0) ending 13:52 31 December 2005 (UTC)
Thorpe (
talk·contribs) – Thorpe is a very responsible and kind person who has been at Wikipedia for almost a year. For those with editcountitis, he has around 4500 edits, well spread across namespaces
[1]. He is a very active member of
Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer and video games, always participating in the longer, more labourious tasks such as correcting small factual errors and finding suitable external links to make articles that little bit better. He contributes well to starting articles which is always good, and has uploaded many useful images to the project. He often finds and tags images that are eligible for deletion, as shown by his 500 or so deleted edits, so the deletion tool would certainly aid his efforts
[2]. I think that he would use the tools carefully and responsibly, and is highly unlikely to abuse them, so I see no reason not to give this user his well-deserved mop.
FireFox13:52, 24 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Support. Seems fine; has been interacting well with the community. But a note that, as the
3RR page says, it does not apply to clear vandalism when you aren't an admin.
jnothmantalk15:01, 24 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Mild Support I only have a few minor concerns as per the views expressed in
his first nomination. However they seem to be quite trivial regarding the time since his last nomination and this candidates positive contributions so far. --
Chazz8818:12, 28 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Support - I, too, haven't really crossed paths with Thorpe, but it looks like he's a good editor...he won't abuse the admin tools, IMHO. --
ViolinGirl♪15:18, 31 December 2005 (UTC)reply
#Support. Working in the computer and video game section of WP for months, I noticed that Thorpe is quite a responsible and dedicated editor there. I have confidence he will put his admin powers to positive and productive use if his is given an adminship. ╫ 25ring-a-ding 16:59, 31 December 2005 (UTC) ╫ Vote came in after RfA was closed.
FireFox17:32, 31 December 2005 (UTC)reply
I was involved in the dispute at
TV.com as well, and the nature of the situation made it unclear whether it was truly vandalism or a dispute about whether material was POV and encyclopedic - and so it was my interpretation (and I believe I stated in an edit summary) that the 3RR applied to my actions. It wasn't really "clear vandalism." Not that this is really here nor there. (
ESkog)(
Talk)09:04, 25 December 2005 (UTC)reply
A. Vandalism is a daily problem here. Although I can revert pages using the "History" tab I think having a quick and easy to use tool would be great to me since I can quickly revert vandalism. I notice that sometimes a certain IP or user comes to the same article to vandalise it. Take,
TV.com not too long ago - I could only revert it twice because of the
3 revert rule so I had to go get assistance. If I had been an administrator I could of blocked that user from making edits for a short amount of time.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. Well, I have created a number of new articles. I mainly create ones about computer and video games. I am most pleased with WWE SmackDown! vs. RAW 2006 since that has since grown to an in-depth article. I know I didn't put much information in it at first but you'll see I have regularly contributed to it and cleared the vandalism off it. Other contributions I am pleased with are my image uploads. Companies are now recognised when people go to view those articles because I have put their logos in. I also upload other images such as game covers, DVD covers and sometimes posters. Associating these with the appropiate article makes them much more recognisable.
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 how will you deal with it in the future?
A. I have come across quite a few conflicts. People who deliberately are trying to wind you up are the people which try and make Wikipedia a bad place. I don't let them get to me. When I first joined Wikipedia I was rather annoyed when people were vandalising. Now I often go to their talk page and tell them not to vandalise. Sometimes they react back in a friendly manner and say they were only testing. Sure, new people are welcome here so I can cope with that. Sometimes you do get bad reactions but I don't let this ruin my Wikipedia experience.
The above 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 article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.
final (55/0/0) ending 13:52 31 December 2005 (UTC)
Thorpe (
talk·contribs) – Thorpe is a very responsible and kind person who has been at Wikipedia for almost a year. For those with editcountitis, he has around 4500 edits, well spread across namespaces
[1]. He is a very active member of
Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer and video games, always participating in the longer, more labourious tasks such as correcting small factual errors and finding suitable external links to make articles that little bit better. He contributes well to starting articles which is always good, and has uploaded many useful images to the project. He often finds and tags images that are eligible for deletion, as shown by his 500 or so deleted edits, so the deletion tool would certainly aid his efforts
[2]. I think that he would use the tools carefully and responsibly, and is highly unlikely to abuse them, so I see no reason not to give this user his well-deserved mop.
FireFox13:52, 24 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Support. Seems fine; has been interacting well with the community. But a note that, as the
3RR page says, it does not apply to clear vandalism when you aren't an admin.
jnothmantalk15:01, 24 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Mild Support I only have a few minor concerns as per the views expressed in
his first nomination. However they seem to be quite trivial regarding the time since his last nomination and this candidates positive contributions so far. --
Chazz8818:12, 28 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Support - I, too, haven't really crossed paths with Thorpe, but it looks like he's a good editor...he won't abuse the admin tools, IMHO. --
ViolinGirl♪15:18, 31 December 2005 (UTC)reply
#Support. Working in the computer and video game section of WP for months, I noticed that Thorpe is quite a responsible and dedicated editor there. I have confidence he will put his admin powers to positive and productive use if his is given an adminship. ╫ 25ring-a-ding 16:59, 31 December 2005 (UTC) ╫ Vote came in after RfA was closed.
FireFox17:32, 31 December 2005 (UTC)reply
I was involved in the dispute at
TV.com as well, and the nature of the situation made it unclear whether it was truly vandalism or a dispute about whether material was POV and encyclopedic - and so it was my interpretation (and I believe I stated in an edit summary) that the 3RR applied to my actions. It wasn't really "clear vandalism." Not that this is really here nor there. (
ESkog)(
Talk)09:04, 25 December 2005 (UTC)reply
A. Vandalism is a daily problem here. Although I can revert pages using the "History" tab I think having a quick and easy to use tool would be great to me since I can quickly revert vandalism. I notice that sometimes a certain IP or user comes to the same article to vandalise it. Take,
TV.com not too long ago - I could only revert it twice because of the
3 revert rule so I had to go get assistance. If I had been an administrator I could of blocked that user from making edits for a short amount of time.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. Well, I have created a number of new articles. I mainly create ones about computer and video games. I am most pleased with WWE SmackDown! vs. RAW 2006 since that has since grown to an in-depth article. I know I didn't put much information in it at first but you'll see I have regularly contributed to it and cleared the vandalism off it. Other contributions I am pleased with are my image uploads. Companies are now recognised when people go to view those articles because I have put their logos in. I also upload other images such as game covers, DVD covers and sometimes posters. Associating these with the appropiate article makes them much more recognisable.
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 how will you deal with it in the future?
A. I have come across quite a few conflicts. People who deliberately are trying to wind you up are the people which try and make Wikipedia a bad place. I don't let them get to me. When I first joined Wikipedia I was rather annoyed when people were vandalising. Now I often go to their talk page and tell them not to vandalise. Sometimes they react back in a friendly manner and say they were only testing. Sure, new people are welcome here so I can cope with that. Sometimes you do get bad reactions but I don't let this ruin my Wikipedia experience.
The above 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 article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.