Commons:Requests and votes/PeterSymonds

 Support = lots (ok, 35 to be more precise);  Oppose = 0;  Neutral = 0 - 100% Support. There is community consensus to grant adminship, so PeterSymonds is now a Commons administrator. Patrícia ^msg 23:36, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

PeterSymonds

Vote

Links for PeterSymonds: PeterSymonds (talk · contributions (views) · deleted user contributions · recent activity (talk · project · deletion requests) · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth)

Peter is a long-term wiki editor. He started out editing on the English Wikipedia, and later made a successful RfA. I'm now going to explain the difficult part. Peter, after a bit of time who was, and still is spot on when it comes to use the admin tools, had a serious lapse of judgement. He allowed a person getting access to his account, which resulted in Peter voluntarily resigned as an administrator. What he did, was really poor judgment from Peter himself, however as an administrator he was just benefiting the English Wikipedia. After the incident, he took a break, and came back with a clear mind. Of course, with proper sense and judgment. He was, and still is highly active and an accurate administrator on the en.wp. What made me realize that he would be a good asset here, and on en.wp was that I knew this was just a serious lapse of judgement. It would never repeat itself. In my view, he handled the incident pretty well, with serious grace and genuine interest earning back his trust and improvement on his side. Which he did, he was asked by Pedro to run again. He made his second attempt, too. Even some arbitrators thought it was justified getting Peter back as an administrator. Same as with me, they thought that this was just a one time incident.

Note: During the RfA, ArbCom were willing to resysop PeterSymonds without a RfA, but Peter chose not to. Instead, he took the chance on a RfA. That way he could get community elected again. Which he successfully managed to do.

• I will now be explaining how much of a good contributor he has been here.
• How we would benefit by electing Peter.
• Why we should.

He is really active with new pages, and recent changes reverting. Peter also regularly tag copyright violations, out of scope files, and comment in deletion requests. If you're a commons admin you can see the deleted contribs. I'm quite impressed over his hard work as it is. Peter never stops impressing me, he continues being active, and doing flickr reviewing.

Peter is a current English Wikipedia administrator. A simple English WP admin, and he voluntarily (noncontroversial) resigned as an simple.wikiquote admin (see diff on meta). Peter is certainly not a flag collector. He is, however a person that most editors do indeed like, and respect. Not to mention he has the trust too.

We're always in need of cross-wiki project admins, espescially active ones. Peter can help us in an area, were we are in sore need of help. That is, he can help out verify copyright licensing, etc via deleted contribs on commons/en.wp/simple.wp and verify that the file(s) that was/were moved is under a suitable license.

He has been registered since 6 December 2005 on en.wp. On Commons he registered 9 May 2007. I think that shows this person is really committed to this project, and other WMF projects. He is experienced with English, and he has a basic German language skills.

He is an asset to the WMF projects, but most importantly for the Commons community. Peter is a person that I've known for a long time. I really trust him, and I really respect him too! I think he has a sound judgement. Peter also give some wise opinions when you ask him, or when he comments. He will make an excellent addition here, in my opinion. I hope the community will understand the one time incident, and look at his positive contribs. --Kanonkas_(talk) 22:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Accepted with thanks. PeterSymonds (talk) 23:08, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Votes

•  Strong support as nom. --Kanonkas_(talk) 22:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Strong support Per nom. Synergy (talk) 23:16, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support has my full trust. Durova (talk) 23:17, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support & thanks for helping Finn Rindahl (talk) 23:26, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support--Coyau (talk) 23:29, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Everything is OK. --Pymouss Tchatcher - 23:37, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support - I've noticed him around. I find his editing very attractive. Will you have admin with me? -mattbuck (Talk) 23:59, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

  OK, sorry, that was too much. Support as a good contributor. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:59, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

•  Support Seems trusted. The more, the better. odder 00:02, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support I trust him. MBisanz ^talk 00:08, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Apparently he's excellent here too. Ceranthor 01:46, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support per Synergy (talk · contribs). Cirt (talk) 02:19, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --Foroa (talk) 07:12, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support I've looked twice at suggesting this user in the past week. Good call & thanks for helping (Commons in NOT en wp DG) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 09:27, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Just a note - I included this incident per. request by PeterSymonds. We discussed it, and came to the conclusion that it was better to explain the incident. It's important for disclosure purposes. Also, DG? Thanks, --Kanonkas_(talk) 10:21, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

"Incidents" generally aren't that interesting - en wp is mostly "incidents" to me :) DG - I prefer to conceal all language skills when possible so I'll not admit to Latin but that is Deo Gratis - thanks god - whoever or whatever you consider that being to be. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:26, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

•  Support Of course. — Aitias // discussion 14:36, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support--Motopark (talk) 14:57, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support —kallerna™ 15:54, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:32, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Dəstək i was thinking you are admin already , happy to have you on admin team --Mardetanha ^talk 17:31, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support — Jake Wartenberg 17:51, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support, he is doing a good job, ¡felicidades! --Dferg ^{(commons-meta)} 18:06, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support It is ok to make mistakes - just do not make the same mistake twice --MGA73 (talk) 18:14, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support - Excellent admin on en.wp and simple.wp. I don't see how it'll be any different here. Juliancolton (Talk) 21:38, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support - per nom. --Klemen Kocjančič (Pogovor - Quick response) 22:08, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support I've seen this users excellent edits on multiple projects and I am sure he would make a brilliant admin. Anonymous101 ^talk 10:21, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Excellent edits, know him and supported his last RFA on en.wp, support.--Giants27 ^T/C 20:32, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support - Rjd0060 (talk) 00:35, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Excellent user. NuclearWarfare (talk) 01:39, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support - but I still deserve to be made an admin here before Peter. I do far more work with moving images. The punk. Who does he think he is! :) Ottava Rima (talk) 01:45, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Naturally! — Rlevse • Talk • 02:07, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Bastique ^demandez 18:57, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
• The Idea that Microchip your name uses on IRC makes me a little bit worried, but you have my  Support Abigor talk 19:04, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Per Herby. ...but only if Kanonkas promises not to write such long rambling nomination statements going forward. (because you all know how terse mine tend to be! Not one wasted word...) ++Lar: t/c 19:43, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Excellent admin on wikipedia. Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 08:47, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support -- Avi (talk) 00:56, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support, --birdy geimfyglið _(:> )=| 10:47, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
•  Support — str4nd ⇌ 17:41, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Comments