Commons:Administrators/Requests/Jameslwoodward (de-adminship)

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Withdrawn by user and so closed --Morning Sunshine (talk) 16:12, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jameslwoodward (De-adminship)

Vote

Jameslwoodward (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth)

Scheduled to end: 00:00, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

This user seems to misrepresent policy, as evidenced here, closes deletion requests without discussion, as evidenced here and also keeps very iffy logos that may actually be eligible for copyright, as evidenced here. As a result I would like to desysop this user. C3F2k (Questions, comments, complaints?) 13:38, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone please close this and courtesy blank it. C3F2k (Questions, comments, complaints?) 15:26, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

(Please vote with those templates: {{keep}} →  Keep or {{vd|remove}} →  remove.)

  1.  Speedy close - one of our best administrators. Discussion leading to some consensus in favor of removal is missing. Ices2Csharp (talk) 14:47, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2.  Keep I don't even have to think about this. Jim is extremely valuable for Commons. A very strong keep. Trijnsteltalk 14:49, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3.  Speedy close Although I do not like those speedy-xyz-demands I think this request is obviously nonsense. Jameslwoodward made no mistakes in those pasted "problems". --High Contrast (talk) 14:51, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  4.  Keep Very competent user. Absolutely no need to remove his administrator flag. --Stefan4 (talk) 14:56, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  5.  Keep Rzuwig► 15:00, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  6.  Speedy close So, you, C3F2k, have a few absolutely minor (after checking your "evidence") disagreements with an administrator and — instead of asking a third user for mediation — feel entitled to call for his desysop. Really a nice way to say thank you to a hard-working (43.000 admin actions so far[1]), unpaid volunteer doing the dirty work on Commons that gets one no barnstars or feature picture medals, but keeps it from getting shut-down by the WMF. Very sad. --Túrelio (talk) 15:09, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  7.  Keep, of course. Jameslwoodward is a very valuable admin who does a lot of good work. Conflicts (or disagreements) like these can and should be solved by communicating: as of now, there's hardly been any real discussion about James' decisions. I don't think his decisions were evidently wrong, and even if they would have been wrong, I still see no reason for his admin flag to be removed. Mathonius (talk) 15:10, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  8.  Keep per Túrelio. Jafeluv (talk) 15:21, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  9.  Keep Where, precisely, is the "prior discussion leading to some consensus for removal" (COM:DESYSOP)? This request appears to be reaction to disagreement over certain closures with no genuine attempt to address issues with the broader community before resorting to this drastic course of action. Utterly despicable behavior. That notwithstanding, Jameslwoodward is very competent admin. Эlcobbola talk 15:37, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators/Requests/Jameslwoodward_(de-adminship)&oldid=72694421"