The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.

Final: (0/3/1). Withdrawn by candidate.

Geomapboy2 (talk · contribs) – After an unsuccessful attempt at adminship in 2006, I am requesting an adminship on the premises that more needs to be done to prevent vandalism and copyright violations on WP. Whenever vandalism is detected on a page on WP, the IP address of the user who committed the heinous act must be logged immediately and blacklisted. For first offense, the user must be blocked for 24 hours. If multiple vandalisms have been committed, the blacklisted IP address must be sent to a log where it should be determined whether or not the person in question meets the criteria for stricter penalties (three months blockage, prohibition of editing articles, etc.). If they meet the criteria, the user or IP address will immediately be red-flagged and prohibited from creating or editing articles on WP until their ban is up. If users continue to vandalize WP pages, the users should be given three ultimatums for ceasing their vandalism before they are banned from using WP again. As for copyright violations, all articles should be double-checked immediately after creation to make sure that they meet the guidelines. If they are suspected to be copywritten, the content of this article should be quarantined for at least thirty days before the page can be re-edited to meet neutrality guidelines. As an administrator, I will use all resources necessary to prevent people who would like to see Wikipedia as their personal billboard removed from using this site to hurt the public good! Brandon 08:32, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Brandon 08:50, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?

A: As an administrator, I intend to take part in every page that is subject to vandalism and copyright violations and determine to reach a consensus as to whether or not the possible violations are indeed authentic by verifying and re verifying all sources included on the pages of possible violations.

2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

A: Some of the best contributions I have made to WP were articles related to the Carolinas and the different aspects of society in the region because I have visited many of the cities that are in North and South Carolina and read interesting articles on these towns that I didn't even know.

3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future? So far, there have been no conflicts with other useres over the editing of articles on WP.

A: So far there have been no conflicts with users over the editing of pages on WP.

• Links for Geomapboy2: Geomapboy2 (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
• Edit summary usage for Geomapboy2 2 can be found here.

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Geomapboy2 before commenting.

• Stats added to talk page -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 09:27, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1. Oppose, your nomination statement is more of a suggestion for changing how we react to vandalism than a statement about yourself, if you intend to use the tools as you describe then you should achieve a consensus to do so first. Also you've barely edited recently, and you have few edits in the areas which potential admins should be familiar, most of your wikipedia space edits are to this and your previous nom--Jac16888^Talk 09:06, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
2. Oppose Sorry, very low recent activity. Your nomination statement has good intent behind it but administrators are expected to act according to current community consensus rather than build their own rules. Much of what you say you would like to do with the tools is possible with no need to be an administrator. I'd suggest you ramp up your activity, get involved in consensus building areas or other areas that interest you and come back after you have more experience in those areas. Camw (talk) 09:34, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
3. Oppose and I urge you to think about withdrawing this. You've made four edits this year- all right in this RFA. Adminship is a measure of trust- it's not that I don't trust you, it's that I have no evidence one way or the other to look at. If you want to fight vandalism, try WP:TW and in a little while WP:ROLLBACK. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 09:36, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1. Neutral I feel that this is going to be a SNOW or NOTNOW closure, so I'll pre-emptively avoid pile-on! Your only edits since 8th December 2009 are the 4 edits related to this RfA (there are no deleted contributions after 20 February 2009). You say you want to work on combatting vandalism, but there are no AIV edits, and going back in your contributions for the last year, I can see no instances where you have done anything to combat vandalism (ok, there are only 49 edits in that time, but none of those were anti-vandalism edits). I cannot support someone for adminship if they have not done *any* work in the last year in the area in which they claim they want to work. Hence, I am going to go neutral, per my RfA standards -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 09:27, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above adminship 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 talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.