Commons:Administrators/Requests

Requests for adminship

watch

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Administrators/Archive.

Please read Commons:Administrators before voting here. Any logged in user may vote although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.

Gnom

Gnom (talk · contributions (views) · deleted user contributions · recent activity (talk · project · deletion requests) · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth)
Scheduled to end: 19:28, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello again – after narrowly missing the threshold in my last request for adminship in November 2023 (with 74% approval), I thought I could ask again, now that more than a year has passed and the community has had the opportunity to see some more activity from me in the areas where I would most like to be active as an admin, which is copyright-related deletion requests.

In January, some of you maybe read my blog post for Public Domain Day 2025, which discussed the tricky copyright situation around artworks by the two famous painters Frida Kahlo and Henri Matisse. Another recent project of mine that I am very excited about, albeit still in an early stage (and not admin-related), is the upload of over 2,000 recordings of organ music.

Seeing the many unsuccessful requests for Commons adminship over the last months, I must confess that I am publishing this request somewhat anxiously – but I sincerely think that I could be of help to the community with my experience as a copyright lawyer and long-time community member, and a few of the people who did not support my last request have already indicated that they would do so this time.

You can find more information about me on my user page as well as in my last request for adminship. Happy to also answer any questions you may have.

Votes

Support per nom and the answers in the previous nom. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 19:44, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Queen of Hearts (talk) 20:11, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Jeff G. We can use the help. --MB-one (talk) 20:45, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's hard to find a more trusted user for the things we do and need here. --Mirer (talk) 20:46, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I can not laugh about it anymore. -- Marcus Cyron (talk) 21:06, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  can you please explain? @Marcus Cyron modern_primat^ඞඞඞ^----TALK 21:45, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  
  @Marcus Cyron, it is inappropriate to express derision without offering an argument, and is a violation of the Universal Code of Conduct. Whatever your personal feelings or experience with Gnom, please stick to arguments relevant for his potential contribution as a Commons admin. Ijon (talk) 01:09, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - I don't find Marcus's comment here, nor his oppose in the previous request ("I learned the hard way that Gnom doesn't care about right and wrong when it fits the agenda.") particularly useful - it's not possible for other people to decide for themselves whether a concern is valid if Marcus doesn't actually share the specifics with the rest of us - but I also don't find you throwing the Universal Code of Conduct around particularly constructive either. It feels like a needless escalation. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:55, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
very weak support - man... you have low activity here. i just look over previous discussions about adminship. and since you are lawyer on copyright and you are old editor im ok. but please, do more work here. thank you for apply. modern_primat^ඞඞඞ^----TALK 21:45, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I supported last time and they would be a good admin due to experience. I also appreciate this user's work with WikiOrchestra. Abzeronow (talk) 23:02, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. I have no concerns about level of activity; every bit of work Gnom can do would be helpful and 100% good-faith. Ijon (talk) 01:04, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per QOH and Jeff G. I would appreciate an uptick in activity, but we shouldn't expect every admin to be doing 100+ actions a day. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 03:22, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose with regret. As in the last RfA, valuable work is shown in the application, but none of it is admin related, and it's not pointed out what the tools should be used for. The user with no doubt is an expert on copyright, but an expert is by far more useful giving advice and commenting on deletion requests than having the mop themselves and then not using it. --Krd 08:04, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I was one who opposed you last time out of the concern of a low edit count. But today I see it differently. Even if your edit count is low, those are good edits (at least in my experience). Don't really find a reason to oppose anymore.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 08:18, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support such a great and fitting candidate! --Rogi (talk) 08:23, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think I can keep my promise. --A1Cafel (talk) 09:49, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

On your Mastodon account linked from your userpage, looking at it I get the impression that not all photos are properly attributed? --A.Savin 04:40, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, you're probably right, I should be more consistent with the attributions on social media. I'll go fix that right now. As you can see here, I am able to do it in principle :-) Gnom (talk) 07:05, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]