Commons:Requests and votes/Kelly Martin

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This proposed RFA is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Kelly Martin

 Support = 23;  Oppose = 2  Neutral = 1 This vote meets the 75% requirement and therefore passes. User:Kelly Martin is now a sysop. Edit Count

I’m nominating Kelly for adminship. She has an extensive working knowledge of copyright law, and she has a long history of activity at Commons and the Wikimedia Foundation. I have no doubt she’ll use the admin tools wisely and responsibly and will be an asset to the Commons project. Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass demandez 19:39, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I accept the nomination, with the note that about the only thing I'd use adminship for is to deal with requests that come in through OTRS -- and maybe to delete this image, which I marked for deletion on June of 2006, and yet has never been deleted.... Kelly Martin 20:06, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

 Support as Nom. Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass demandez 20:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Support--Shanel 20:09, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Support per nominator. Excellent understanding of copyright will be a great help. Mak (talk) 20:19, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Support complete confidence in Kelly for her excellent work on en:, and sheer sympathy for some who likes Colbert, Canon cameras and telelenses. Rama 20:23, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Support Clear understanding of our needs on commons. Very helpful. --Gmaxwell 20:24, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Support — Kelly is definitely a good asset to Wikimedia Commons. --Cyde Weys 20:28, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Support knowledgeable -- Drini 21:09, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Support Although Kelly and I have been at great odds at times. I know from experience that this person is respectable, motivated, experienced, and ultimately a great asset to our commons community. --Cat out 21:14, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose / Fred Chess 23:26, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Neutral Kelly doesn't show a great interest in this position. --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 08:44, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not terribly interested in adminship in its own right. My main interest in Commons has always been contributing content, and I certainly don't need adminship for that. On the other hand, it gets tiresome when I drop into OTRS and find that every open Commons-related ticket requires administrative rights to resolve. I'm more than capable of resolving the tickets, except that doing so requires that I chase down a Commons admin and explain in gory detail what needs to be done. While I can certainly do this (and it's not really all that hard), it raises my costs of resolving a ticket to the point that I am more likely to just leave the ticket for someone else to resolve -- and that means it's basically a waste of my time to actively monitor the OTRS queues. Quite frankly, if declined here, it won't affect my overall participation in Commons, but it will mean that I will return to looking at OTRS only when someone else asks me for my opinion on some matter. Kelly Martin 12:17, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Support  Neutral Inclined to agree with pfctdayelise. I know too much interest in becoming an admin is not good (and often shows misunderstanding of the actual work!) but maybe this goes rather the other way --Herby talk thyme 08:55, 15 February 2007 (UTC). Given Kelly's comments and the fact there is a need I am happy to change my vote. I guess I have to say I would be sad if Kelly confined themselves to just one aspect of adminship --Herby talk thyme 17:19, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Support OTRS is backlogged to hell. If someone with Kelly's experience is offering to help our, we should be falling over ourselves to accept and give her all the tools she needs. Anything else is madness.--Doc glasgow 16:30, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Support Don't see any downside to her becoming an admin, while there certainly are upsides. Yonatanh 17:20, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Support after reading Kelly's comment I'm more than certain that she would be one of the "good" admins here. And everybody who has knowledge about (c)-laws should be very welcome. --Hedwig in Washington 19:06, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Support, but more Commons namespace edits would be better.--Jusjih 08:27, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Support HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 16:57, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Support -- The admin tools are unquestionable very helpful for OTRS work, and per Doc glasgow. Jkelly 20:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Support --Connel MacKenzie 23:25, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Support for OTRS work, and for anywhere else she might be willing to help-out in the future. Knowledgeable and experienced ×Meegs 20:55, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose 26 edits in the Commons name space is not enough. I guess Kelly will be a good admin, but an admin should have more activity on Commons. Kjetil_r 02:05, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Support Jaranda wat's sup 19:25, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Support : Oxam Hartog 22:46, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Support - Kelly's copyright knowledge is surely an addition for Commons. And if she needs tools to do the job, fine. -- Bryan (talk to me) 19:04, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Support - we need more sysops who really "get" copyright, yes. James F. (talk) 19:09, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Support. Even if the tools are only used for OTRS, that's still useful. --MichaelMaggs 17:25, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Support ~ Arjun 18:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Requests_and_votes/Kelly_Martin&oldid=33102511"