Wikidata:Requests for permissions/RfA/2020

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closed as successful --Lymantria (talk) 20:40, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Peel[edit]

Vote

RfP scheduled to end after 7 February 2020 20:21 (UTC)

I'm requesting admin access primarily so that I can view deleted items that were created by Pi bot, or were previously used by the Wikidata infobox on Commons, to better understand what went wrong. I would also be active at Wikidata:Requests for deletions, and would keep an eye out for requests for undeletion.

As background, I've been a Wikimedian since 2005, and I've been editing here since 2016. I'm coming up to 240,000 edits globally, and around 90,000 edits here, plus 3.9m edits globally and 1.9m edits here via Pi bot. I currently have admin access on both enwp and commons. My main focus is on content creation and correction, and cross-wiki editing, I am not so active with anti-vandalism or issuing blocks.

Thanks for your consideration. Mike Peel (talk) 20:21, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Votes[edit]

  1. Joalpe (talk) 22:40, 31 January 2020 (UTC). Of course; one of our most well-known and active Wikidatans! --addendum:  Support --Joalpe (talk) 02:41, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Joalpe: I suppose that this is a support vote? Minorax (talk) 02:40, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  2.  Support sysop on 2 large projects and has substantial amount of edits here. Minorax (talk) 02:41, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  3.  Support per Minorax. --Wolverène (talk) 08:32, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  4.  Support Trusted user who will use correctly the sysop tools. Pamputt (talk) 11:45, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  5.  Support --Epìdosis 12:34, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  6.  Support Jianhui67 talk★contribs 14:17, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  7.  Support --Esteban16 (talk) 14:55, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  8.  Strong support - Absolutely.--DarwIn (talk) 15:11, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  9.  Support as experienced admin on multiple projects and as there is significant activity at Wikidata. --AFBorchert (talk) 18:34, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  10.  Support --BRP ever 23:26, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  11.  Support This guy has his head in the stars all the time, but it can be interesting. —Eihel (talk) 03:37, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  12.  Support, what a good idea. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 10:40, 2 February 2020 (UTC).[reply]
  13.  Support --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 10:58, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  14.  Support--Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 15:18, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  15.  Support Trusted enough, clear answer in the question, so surely! --Kostas20142 (talk) 22:15, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  16.  Support --Jklamo (talk) 02:21, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  17.  Support --- Jura 06:51, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  18.  Strong support. Mike created one of the earliest Wikidata-powered infoboxes (en:Template:Infobox telescope) and is a leader in the effort to improve links between Commons and Wikidata. I have full confidence that he will be a good Wikidata administrator. Deryck Chan (talk) 11:34, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  19.  Support. Only 6[1] patrols on this project is kind of sad. We need all the help we can get to prevent vandalism. I hope that Mike will get more involved in this if he got the extra tools. For Mikes contributions towards the project I have nothing to complain about, great job 👍 - Premeditated (talk) 12:25, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello @Premeditated:, I am not the defense of the candidate, but I don't want others to amalgamate. You are making a slight confusion, it seems to me. Does your link refer to the number under the Patrol label (under the Actions heading)? Note that these are the "Patrol log". Each time the [Mark as patrolled] link is clicked, a new entry is noted in this log. For example, this diff is a patrol made by the candidate for spamming, but it doesn't appear in the "Patrol log". XTools! will not help you from this point of view. Cordially. —Eihel (talk) 16:07, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello, thank you for the comment. Marking pages as patrolled is a big part of anti-vandalism. By reviewing pages you are helping fellow community member to split the work between all of us. The candidate has also never made any rollbacks on this project;[2] which can be used to revert obvious vandalism. Maybe he has used the "undo" tool instead. The candidate also points out in the introduction: "... I am not so active with anti-vandalism or issuing blocks". Im just saying that it would have been favourable. I have no hard feelings for the candidate, and I find him to be a valuable community member to further expand and improve this project. - Premeditated (talk) 17:58, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    There will be more rb when he is Administrator with the rollback right (no mw-rollback without an associated right), QED. mw-undo tag is more telling. —Eihel (talk) 18:44, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Premeditated, Eihel: I revert vandalism when I see it, mostly using the 'undo' and 'restore' links, but I don't tend to go looking for it. I'll start using the page patrol link more often when I see it around, though, I wasn't sure how useful that was before. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:16, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  20.  Support But I also hope he will find time to help with vandalism too. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:58, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  21.  Support trusted user, already sysop on two projects (COM and en.wp, so he knows the tool and the rules attached), no known problem and I've seem him interact kindly and efficiently with other users; it's an obvious  Support from me. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 16:28, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  22.  Support.-- Hakan·IST 16:57, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  23.  Support Great Wikidatan Ederporto (talk) 17:36, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  24.  Support -- Simon Cobb (User:Sic19 ; talk page) 18:07, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  25.  Support, I often come across his work and he's a very active and competent contributor with a love for Wikidata. -- Donald Trung/徵國單  (討論 🀄) (方孔錢 💴) 18:58, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  26.  Support, Mike's work has been tremendously helpful to me. - PKM (talk) 20:41, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  27.  Support I wonder why he isn't an admin yet! -Theklan (talk) 20:43, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  28.  Support Ainali (talk) 21:36, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  29.  Support ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 22:02, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  30.  Support per Esteban (as I too had a similar concern). Mahir256 (talk) 22:11, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  31.  Support -- Ben Skála (talk) 06:20, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  32.  Support -Geraki (talk) 06:45, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  33.  Support. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 07:08, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  34.  Support Mike is a trustworthy person and his adminship here would clearly be a plus for the project. —Tom Morris (talk) 16:47, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  35.  Support --Alaa :)..! 19:36, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  36.  Support Rzuwig► 20:14, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  37.  Support --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 07:44, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  38.  Support Trusted user who knows when and when not to use tools; does not create controversy; admirable traits for an admin.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:12, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  39.  Support more hands at WD:RFD are much needed. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 13:24, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  40.  Support. Thank you for applying and helping around RfD! Bencemac (talk) 10:06, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

  • You are an experienced user, so I think there wouldn't be any concerns if you're granted the flag, but for me, your "main" motivation to be an administrator is to check what went wrong with your bot, but you say you would do other tasks as well. Note that I don't find that bad, in fact, as Wikidata is kind of a technical proyect, fixing issues is useful. But let's suppose that you become an admin and you're done with your bot issue. Do you think you would still have motiviation, or would want to continue serving as an admin? Thanks in advance, Esteban16 (talk) 03:17, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Esteban16: Yes, mostly around deletion/undeletion, and I expect to pick up other tasks over time (this is what tends to happen with my editing pattern over the years). Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 10:38, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your reply. I will support you. Esteban16 (talk) 14:55, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closed as unsuccessful --Ymblanter (talk) 21:08, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomen ad hoc[edit]

Vote

RfP scheduled to end after 15 February 2020 14:44 (UTC)

Hi,

an active user on Wikidata for now several years (where I tot up around 250.000 contribs), I've focused on basic tasks such as creating items (and merging duplicates), adding statements and descriptions and bringing references; I also enjoy participating on property proposals. I became a regular reader of the project chat and now try to keep an eye on the community's issues, expectations projects; hence I would like to involve myself a bit more, and be more helpful. I would use the sysop tools mainly to delete/undelete RfDed items, and fight vandalism by SPing targeted items and blocking vandals (IMHO, one more sysop out the current 55 ones wouldn't be too much to protect our 76.000.000 items...); of course I would also make a relevant use of other tools for the occasion. Thank you all, Nomen ad hoc (talk) 14:44, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Votes[edit]

  1.  Support Trusted user, I've seen many times in discussions and in my watchlist --Epìdosis 18:15, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support, the user is a trusted one. --Wolverène (talk) 23:28, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  3.  Support. That's a nice move. Thierry Caro (talk) 04:41, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  4.  Support.-- Hakan·IST 05:23, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  5.  Support. Trusted user. Ayack (talk) 16:31, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  6.  Oppose. The candidate has made a lot of contributions to Wikidata, but from the French Wikipedia block log:
    • Candidate's account was compromised in 2016
    • Candidate was blocked in 2017 for edit warring
    • Candidate was blocked in 2018 for making personal attacks
    Add on the fact that the candidate has just come back from a wiki-break, I would want to see another year of careful and less antagonistic participation in Wikimedia projects before endorsing him as an administrator. Deryck Chan (talk) 17:14, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  7.  Oppose per Deryck. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 17:16, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  8.  Oppose Deryck and discussion, sorry --Frettie (talk) 17:44, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  9.  Neutral I feel like I have had good interactions with Nomen ad hoc here recently, but I do have a vague memory of some drama from a couple of years back. I think I would support more strongly if you try again in a year or two. ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:06, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  10.  Oppose per Deryck. Mahir256 (talk) 20:48, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  11.  Oppose Rzuwig► 20:29, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  12.  Oppose per above. --Rschen7754 05:12, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

  • According to your talk page, you're on Wikibreak. Why request adminship if you're on a break? What languages do you understand? Can you please update user:Nomen ad hoc? Multichill (talk) 15:58, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Done! I forgot that (I'm indeed no more on break), so thank you for pointing it. Best, Nomen ad hoc (talk) 16:06, 8 February 2020 (UTC).[reply]
  • You have received a one week block for a privacy violation a couple of years ago. My impression is that this block is related to a latent long-term conflict that is still not really resolved, and some of your activity in this case looks concerning to me. How do you think about this case? Could you stay away from the other editor, both in editor and potential admin role? —MisterSynergy (talk) 23:42, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi. I regret this behaviour, have paid for that, and am now extremely careful of BLP policy. I consider this conflict as resolved, as the other party no more tried to interact with me. And of course, as a potential sysop, I would never ever be judge and jury. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 09:31, 14 February 2020 (UTC).[reply]
    • The user has also been blocked multiple times on French Wikipedia for "attaques personnelles ou insultes" (english: personal attacks or insults). Not mention this in your introduction, makes it look like you trying to hide it. - Premeditated (talk) 20:24, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi. Why does it make . I'm not trying to hide anything; it's just unrelated with Wikidata as said below. But to elaborate a bit: I was young and impulsive, but I've matured and focused on constructive and friendly interactions on the projects; regarding the specific case of WP, I also got some distance from WP, hence I also would like to involve more myself on WD community activity. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 09:31, 14 February 2020 (UTC).[reply]
    @Deryck Chan: FYI. Also, I wasn't on wikibreak before opening this request; I just forgot to update my talkpage. As said, I got involved carefully in Wikidata from several months. Best, Nomen ad hoc (talk) 09:35, 14 February 2020 (UTC).[reply]
  •  Comment <name> is one of the more active and productive French language contributors to Wikidata. I'm not really aware of the frwiki business mentioned above and I don't think he was on a wikibreak recently. @ChristianKl, Frettie: where do you get this from? Sounds a bit like import from drama elsewhere. --- Jura 17:53, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree with Jura on this one. Ayack (talk) 18:24, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    For me it's a combination of the provided data by Deryck and MisterSynergy along with a more fuzzy intuitive sense that comes up when I read the name based on past interactions. I haven't spent the time to review his participation. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 19:06, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for your comments, Ayack and Jura. I also agree with you. I regret Christian's mind and don't really what motivates this feeling. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 09:31, 14 February 2020 (UTC).[reply]

@Rzuwig: could you consider some elaboration? Just voting oppose doesn't help me to bring a response. Best, Nomen ad hoc (talk) 09:35, 14 February 2020 (UTC).[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closed as successful--Ymblanter (talk) 18:13, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DannyS712[edit]

Vote

RfP scheduled to end after 25 February 2020 14:49 (UTC)

I'm very pleased to present DannyS712 to the community for consideration as an administrator. DannyS712 has been active since April 2019 and made 150k+ edits in that time. I have noticed that Danny is doing good work in the counter-vandalism related areas, where admin tools can help them. Other than that they also seems to active at WD:RFD, at which more hands are very much needed. Danny is also engaged in property proposals and is a property creator since August 2019.

According to their meta userpage they are multilingual (en-N, he-2, es-2, zh-2) and already sysop at English Wikiversity and Mediawiki, so can be trusted with sysop toolset here. In addition Danny is highly experienced, trustworthy, responsible, and knows when to act and when to stop and ask for input.

I hope the community shares the same impressions as me. Thank you.‐‐1997kB (talk) 14:49, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for those kind words. I accept the nomination. --DannyS712 (talk) 14:50, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Votes[edit]

  1.  Support as nom. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 15:21, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  2.  Support --Kostas20142 (talk) 17:48, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  3.  Support Sure. Thanks for your work on Wikidata! ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:27, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  4. hum…   super-over-the-top-strong support —Eihel (talk) 20:13, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  5.  Support --Epìdosis 20:40, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  6.  Support per nom.--BRP ever 23:27, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  7.  Support —MisterSynergy (talk) 07:46, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  8.  Support --Minorax (talk) 07:50, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  9.  Support --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 08:43, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  10.  Support.-- Hakan·IST 09:27, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  11.  Support. Trustworthy, prolific editor. Deryck Chan (talk) 13:00, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  12.  Support --SixTwoEight (talk) 22:18, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  13.  Support -Premeditated (talk) 12:42, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  14.  Support -- Ajraddatz (talk) 14:43, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  15.  Support Jianhui67 talk★contribs 15:47, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  16.  Support --Fralambert (talk) 01:53, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  17.  Support --Alaa :)..! 13:31, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  18.  Support --Jklamo (talk) 18:32, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  19.  Support Mike Peel (talk) 20:45, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  20.  Support trusted, helpful, and experienced. Sincerely, Masum Reza☎ 01:54, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  21.  Support. Just one thing: could you please use Babel here too? Bencemac (talk) 09:26, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Hmmm... I thought I have already supported you, well I'm doing it now.:) --Wolverène (talk) 18:37, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  23.  Support. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 19:06, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  24.  Support --Nw520 (talk) 19:27, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  25.  Support. --Yair rand (talk) 20:45, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  26.  Support --Benoît (discussion) 12:58, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  27.  Support Sure, I hope your good contribution. --Sotiale (talk) 15:06, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closed as successful--Ymblanter (talk) 06:22, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fralambert[edit]

Vote

RfP scheduled to end after 29 February 2020 01:52 (UTC)

Hi, I am an active contributor since February 2013 and I have more that 570,000 contributions on Wikidata. I am also a property creator since August 2013. During this time I work mostly on the heritage buildings of Canada and United States. I am also an admin on frwiki since 2015 (my RfA).

The reason I want to be an administrator is mostly to help on the French Wikimedia Community Discord when they have an alert. I am also planning to check regularly the requests for deletions page.

Thanks for your consideration. --Fralambert (talk) 01:52, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Votes[edit]

  1.  Support --Thibaut (talk) 10:50, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  2.  Support Trusted user. Good job as sysop on frwiki as far as I know. Pamputt (talk) 10:55, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  3.  Support — Koreller (talk) 11:05, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  4.  Support Trusted user --GrandCelinien (talk) 11:14, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  5.  Support Super! --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 11:22, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  6.  Support —MisterSynergy (talk) 12:07, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  7.  Support --Minorax (talk) 12:25, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  8.  Support — Envlh (talk) 12:36, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  9.  Support I know him as an efficient user and sysop on frwiki. It will be the same of Wikidata. --Arcyon37 (talk) 12:39, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  10.  Support --Alaa :)..! 13:33, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  11.  Support ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 14:33, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  12.  Support --Kostas20142 (talk) 15:18, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  13.  Support Jianhui67 talk★contribs 15:21, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  14.  Support -- Ajraddatz (talk) 16:35, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  15.  Support --DannyS712 (talk) 18:57, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  16.  Support Mike Peel (talk) 20:46, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  17.  Leaning support —Eihel (talk) 20:48, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  18.  Support --BRP ever 23:58, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  19.  Support Sincerely, Masum Reza☎ 01:58, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  20.  Neutral as I'm finding it unclear from the response to Eihel's query below whether Fralambert would do more than just work with deletions and French-speaking community matters (see, for example, how Mike Peel noted in his RfA in response to Esteban's query that he was open to picking up new tasks beyond just the ones mentioned). Mahir256 (talk) 06:39, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  21.  Neutral I respect your great work for Wikidata and Wikipedia but I've never seen you before. Or I can't remember. In particular, I can't remember your activity in the page of request for deletions - you're just planning to be active there. I have no exact opinion. --Wolverène (talk) 18:46, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  22.  Support.-- Hakan·IST 15:42, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  23.  Support obviously, and it especially important to have admins on other channel like Discord. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 16:36, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  24.  Support I am only editing Wikidata for the last few months, but I have already seen Fralambert here and there. Good luck! Nadzik (talk) 18:15, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  25.  Support Ayack (talk) 20:34, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  26.  Support tireless contributor to Wikidata. If he isn't known to English speaking/writing contributors, it's probably because he posts to the French project chat or is busy adding content. --- Jura 08:53, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  27.  Support --Benoît (discussion) 12:58, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  28.  Support --Epìdosis 14:41, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  29.  Weak support. From the questions, I think Fralambert will make a good Wikidata admin for the French-speaking community, but I should remind him (and everyone else who participates in off-wiki discussions about Wikimedia sites) that off-wiki discussions should never override on-wiki decision making. Deryck Chan (talk) 11:20, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

  • Wikidata needs administrators, but your argument puzzles me. Are you talking about [3]? If so, this channel cannot be used as a single criterion of an application as administrator. Your number of contributions indicates to me to write beforehand here before issuing an opinion. I need more "substance". —Eihel (talk) 19:45, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I was talking about this Discord Channel. I don't think I will be really active un the Administrator noticeboard, since I am not really active on this point on frwiki. On frwiki I use most my admin right for Speedy delete, renaming and masking some copyright violations, so I don't thing this will be to much difference here. --Fralambert (talk) 20:09, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closed as successful --Ymblanter (talk) 22:41, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kostas20142 2[edit]

Vote

RfP scheduled to end after 7 March 2020 22:29 (UTC)

Hello, I am Kostas20142. I am a native Greek and near-native Engish.

My main activities in Wikidata are improving already-existing items, anti-vandalism, WD:RFD. I have also been using petscan and lately quickstatements to create items for elwiki/enwiki articles with no item and to add missing statements.

I am also an ACC interface user on enwiki, temporary sysop on elwikiquote, and generally involved in crosswiki counter-vandalism.

Should this request be successful, I intend to use the permissions to delete spam items/items not meeting the notability policy, handle WD:RFD and WD:AN requests, counter-vandalism purposes and perform revdel when needed - being able to do these is the reason I am filing this request.

Disclosure: You can find my previous, unsuccessful request here. I have 3 alternative accounts; Kostantinos20142 (doppelganger), Kostas20142 (alt) (for insecure connection; never needed to use so far) and Kostas20142-Bot (for semi-automated edits in elwikiquote).

I have read carefully and understood the relevant policies. Thanks for your consideration!--Kostas20142 (talk) 22:29, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Votes[edit]

  1.  Support More experienced after two years more. And still good with so good for me. Pamputt (talk) 23:36, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  2.  Support - user has worked on concerns brought on last RFA.--BRP ever 02:23, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  3.  Support --Fralambert (talk) 04:37, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  4.  Neutral —Eihel (talk) 06:32, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  5.  Neutral per Eihel: although I was sure two years back—and am sure now—that you'd work well with the tools, to borrow from and somewhat alter Rschen7754's response to ~riley's candidacy for stewardship this year, "[i]nactivity among admins is likely to be a problem and I can't justify potentially adding to it. Would reconsider after some period (maybe not a year, but some otherwise long-term period) of sustained activity." Mahir256 (talk) 07:06, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  6.  Support --Wolverène (talk) 13:28, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  7.  Support Obvious room for improvement for previous activity, but as demonstrated, that is only improving. Your clearly competent and through my interactions onwiki and on IRC, I trust your judgement and ability to use the tools. ~riley (talk) 23:23, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  8.  Support I know Kostas since my clerking days over en:WP:CHUS. They are competent, trusted and always willing to help, plus they are active on AN and RFD (areas that need more admin help), so I'm in support of this request. Regarding those activity concerns I think that everybody have that period when real life issue gets more important. Good luck! ‐‐1997kB (talk) 10:13, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  9.  Support Trusted user with good experience --Alaa :)..! 11:29, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  10.  Support --Epìdosis 19:31, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  11.  Support He's more active than many admins, including myself. I'm not convinced that inactivity is a serious issue. That's why we have an inactivity policy, and every little bit of help... helps. Thanks for volunteering; RFD contributions look good. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 09:32, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  12.  Support —MisterSynergy (talk) 17:55, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  13.  Support. I opposed Kostas's previous request for adminship, but he has made enough contributions since then, both in contributions to items and contributions to discussions on the Wikidata wiki, to be a good admin candidate. Deryck Chan (talk) 18:00, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  14.  Support --باسم (talk) 20:32, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  15.  Support Jianhui67 talk★contribs 13:54, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  16.  Support --Minorax (talk) 10:55, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  17.  Neutral per Eihel & Mahir256. - Premeditated (talk) 13:10, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

  • I looked at your Wikiscan and there are only 2 peaks of contributions with a 14 month hole until December 2019. Knowing that in 6 months of inactivity, you lose the broom. You write that you are fighting vandalism. Intrigued, I looked at your history: 6 Properties approached in 21 months and this diff. —Eihel (talk) 06:32, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Withdrawn--Ymblanter (talk) 19:07, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Csisc[edit]

Vote

RfP scheduled to end after 4 May 2020 16:10 (UTC)

Request withdrawn

I am Houcemeddine Turki from Tunisia. I have been working since 2015 on adding new types of scientific information to Wikidata including epidemiological data, cultural heritage data, and Arabic Sociolinguistics data. I have made over 33000 edits. I look forward to letting more useful data about my main fields of interest available in Wikidata. When this data is included, I need to keep it clean and updated. --Csisc (talk) 16:10, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: What I need to do is to be able to edit Wikidata properties and add useful property constraints. If there is another function that allows me to do this, please move my application to it. --Csisc (talk) 12:11, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Votes[edit]

  1.  Oppose based on your low activity in most months. ---MisterSynergy (talk) 17:13, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    MisterSynergy: It is not easy to find information about the fields I am working on. What I do is to prepare specialized information mostly offline and then add them to Wikidata. If you can see my detailed information, you can understand what I say. --Csisc (talk) 12:09, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  2.  Oppose based on lack of stated or apparent need and inexperience (what do you want to use the sysop tools for? Could you please point to some anti-vandalism experience?).--Jasper Deng (talk) 18:46, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Jasper Deng: What I do concerning anti-vandalism is to create methods for ontology validation of Wikidata using SPARQL. What I need to do to fight vandalism is to add statements to Wikidata properties and use them as property constraints. My current status does not allow this task. If there is another function that can allow me to edit properties, Please move me to it. --Csisc (talk) 12:09, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, while that is a noble cause, it is not the direct reverting and reporting of vandalism I wanted to see. You don't need adminship or any other special rights to edit all but fully-protected properties (i.e. the vast majority). --Jasper Deng (talk) 17:48, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Jasper Deng: That is excellent. So, I withdraw my request. Just a question. I ask if I can use QuickStatements to edit Wikidata properties without any special rights. --Csisc (talk) 20:58, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  3.  Oppose per MisterSynergy and Jasper. Mahir256 (talk) 19:20, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Mahir256: See above. --Csisc (talk) 12:09, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

@Kostas20142: Someone has done that. Thank you. --Csisc (talk) 14:15, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

(non-bureaucrat close) Early closure - creating this RfA was the user's first edit to wikidata; obviously not going to pass, no need to keep open.  Not done - no chance that the user would be promoted. --DannyS712 (talk) 16:07, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Zacharycook543[edit]

Vote

RfP scheduled to end after 24 May 2020 12:48 (UTC)

Blurb... (I would like to request adminship) Zacharycook543 (talk) 12:48, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Votes[edit]

  1. ...

Comments[edit]

  • Speedy close. New account, first edit here, similar requests on other wikis. You should not request extra tools on this project until you have more experience with the ones your account has currently. Have a look around first and try your hand at editing. --Green Giant (talk) 14:16, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

(non-bureaucrat close) Early closure - creating this RfA was the user's second edit to wikidata; obviously not going to pass, no need to keep open.  Not done - no chance that the user would be promoted. -- Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 13:28, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mirchindia[edit]

Vote

RfP scheduled to end after 29 May 2020 05:24 (UTC)

Blurb... (a short statement why you (or this person) should be an admin...) Your signature's timestamp for a self-nom is when the candidacy starts. For non-self-noms, the candidate should "accept" with a short statement and sign it... that timestamp is when the candidacy starts... Once this is done please transclude your candidacy on the relevant request for permissions page. --Mirchindia (talk) 05:24, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Votes[edit]

  1. ...

Comments[edit]

  • Speedy close. New account, second edit here, similar requests on other wikis. You should not request extra tools on this project until you have more experience with the ones your account has currently. Have a look around first and try your hand at editing. -- Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 13:28, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closed as unsuccessful. Lymantria (talk) 06:00, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dan Koehl 2[edit]

Vote

RfP scheduled to end after 3 June 2020 05:55 (UTC)

I was admin from 19 September 2018, after a successful self nomination until 4 July 2019, when my admin rights were removed (See message by @Rschen7754:) due to inactivity per WD:A, when I was very busy working IRL. I have been very active again on various projects since December, and was granted Rollbacker on Wikidata, so I could use Huggle again, being busy the last week protecting Wikidata, but I see a need of being able to stop Vandals faster, and help in other ways. I would be active with anti-vandalism and issuing blocks, like in the past, and also be active at Wikidata:Requests for deletions. Id be happy to increase fighting against vandalism on Wikidata in my native language Swedish, as well as Norwegian, Danish, German and English. I currently have admin access on Wikispecies since 2004, and have experience of adminship from other projects.

Thanks for your consideration.. --Dan Koehl (talk) 05:55, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Votes[edit]

  1.  Support - some problems on another project, but previously an admin here and an admin/crat/cu on specieswiki, so can be trusted with the access. Welcome back. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 14:11, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  2.  Support per Ajraddatz --Kostas20142 (talk) 14:17, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  3.  Support Ultimately (also from my impressions of svwiki) I think the block says more about svwiki than Dan Koehl. --Rschen7754 18:09, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
     Oppose Hate to do this, but canvassing is an automatic oppose for me. --Rschen7754 00:34, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  4.  Support —MisterSynergy (talk) 19:37, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  5.  Support --Epìdosis 14:41, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  6.  Support Wikidata needs more admins.--Jasper Deng (talk) 21:27, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  7.  Support Sure. Mahir256 (talk) 15:16, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Thank you for helping. --Sotiale (talk) 15:18, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  9.  Support. Ivanhercaz (Talk) 23:23, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  10.  Support. —Hasley 14:32, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  11.  Support ‐‐1997kB (talk) 15:58, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  12.  Support Thank you for willing to help again. Esteban16 (talk) 21:57, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  13.  Support no concerns. ミラP 23:41, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  14.  Support --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 13:11, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  15.  Support --Minorax (talk) 15:18, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  16.  Oppose Have demonstrated such behaviour I cannot support adminship on any Wikimedia project. Ainali (talk) 21:06, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  17.  Support Jianhui67 talk★contribs 05:13, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  18.  Oppose per the in my opinion very valid concerns raised here and in the previous nomination. Abbe98 (talk) 06:52, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  19.  Oppose Due to the toxic behaviour on Swedish Wikipedia. Kilobytes of accusations and irrelelvant retorical questions of NPOV. I really hope this will not spread to Wikidata. I am an admin on Swedish Wikipedia and hence part of the cabal, and I can understand if credentials from other projects is not relevant.-LittleGun (talk) 08:24, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
     Oppose --Lwordish (talk) 17:19, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Not eligible as this is the user's first edit here. --Rschen7754 18:35, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  20.  Oppose --Anhn (talk) 17:42, 1 June 2020 (UTC) The discussion before the 2-week block can be found here. Unfortunately in Swedish, but a "clash point" was the seemingly neutral article sv:Koldioxid (Carbon Dioxide) where Koehl made several edits arguing against AGW in a very POV:ish manner referring to cherry-picked non-scientific or non-official sources. When these edits were removed he accused user Adville of POV and even made a formal accusation on svwp KAW (C/Komments on Administration of Wikipedia) which got no support by any kind. These POV accusations where after that reiterated at numerous other places in a divergent and off-topic manner.[reply]
  21.  Oppose --Yger (talk) 18:24, 1 June 2020 (UTC) See comment from LittleGun and Anhn[reply]
  22.  Support -- Nehaoua (talk) 22:38, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  23.  Oppose --Adville (talk) 22:47, 1 June 2020 (UTC), see bellow[reply]
  24.  Oppose - Premeditated (talk) 11:02, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  25.  Support -RLJ (talk) 12:45, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  26.  Support - Orchi (talk) 14:04, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  27.  Leaning support I'm not trying to convince, but: 1)admin/bubu/CU on another wiki 2)it's not a right on svwiki 3)nothing to blame on wd (at least not that I remember) 4)admin former here. Well, it's simple, but for the reluctant, rights can be removed. —Eihel (talk) 14:37, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  28.  Support --Pasleim (talk) 15:22, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  29.  Support I will support this nomination. I note the issues from the Swedish WP raised by others from that project. I am not aware of them myself. However, I have seen Dan's work on Wikispecies and here on Wikidata and it has always been well done. We all get caught up in unfortunate incidents from time to time they should not necessarily become a permanent stain particularly when balanced against other contributions elsewhere. As stated above if the issue repeats the rights can always be removed. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) talk 16:17, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  30.  Wait leaning  Oppose almost inactive on Wikidata (around 7k edits including 5k in 2018). That and the concern about sv.wp, the timing is not right. This user is revoker and is already doing a lot a counter-vandalism with these rights, does he really need the admin rights right now? I would prefer to wait a bit that things settle down (the discussion below clearly shows that things are still ongoing). Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 16:22, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  31.  Oppose--Gotogo (talk) 18:01, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  32.  Support Due to the outstanding work of Dan on Wikispecies.--Hector Bottai (talk) 19:00, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

There may be different views on that, my view is Im not satisfied with how admins work, and how they respect and protect NPOV on sv.wikipedia, where I am the oldest contributor, was the first admin, and feel responsible about its development, see history of en:Swedish_Wikipedia. I was blocked after I brought the subject of an admin aubusing the Wikipedia Policy and NPOV rules (diff before they removed this) , after this they close that page forany edits by me, and later blocked me for two weeks. A sad story, I can only say it doesnt affect my work on Wikidata, and ~I have no history of problems with users on other wikis, except for this small group of people and admins on svwiki, who have a history of blocking me, and trying to make me look like someone who try to do bad, while im always asking for everyone to follow Policy and rules, abd respect the five pillars, and not abuse "konsensus" as a way to work around the rules. The people who blocked me, gave other official reasons, like I should have broken the rules for en:Wikipedia:Etiquette. Dan Koehl (talk) 08:02, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As an admin on svwiki I can confirm that the views on this are different. The "other official reasons" are overwhelming in this case and there where serious talk about a permanent block. Ainali (talk) 21:04, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And the block was unanimous, whereof exactly half recommended permanent block. And NPOV part was not mentioned during the discussion, neither in the summary of block reasons.Yger (talk) 18:45, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Jasper Deng: Abbe98 and me are friends off wiki and talk to each other several times every week. We even just got off camera doing this Wikidata show together. I am also friends with LittleGun, and we do a podcast together about Wikipedia so we also talk regurarly about things happening both on Swedish Wikipedia and international. So that this have come up in conversations this week was unavoidable since the whole incident has been the biggest discussion on the Swedish Wikipedia this year. However, no links have been posted on svwiki as far as I know. Ainali (talk) 20:47, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Correction: the link here was of course in the Wikidata weekly summary #418 that got posted widely by WMDE staff this afternoon. Ainali (talk) 20:54, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Jasper Deng:, I have not seen a message on Swedish Wikipedia, I'm in fact much more active here on Wikidata. The recent incidents on Swedish Wikipedia hasn't however passed me by and my post here is only as a concerned Wikidata user. Abbe98 (talk) 20:56, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have so far made 572 edits on WikiData - of course I am a newbie, but anyhow I have reached to make my first report about WD-vandalism, and I am aware of where to find the admin election which is just one mouse click away from the community portal. So far I have not engaged in admin-elections, mostly the candidates have been unknown to me, but this time the candidate was very well known to me and I simply had to participate. / Anhn (talk) 21:19, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, now there is a link, posted some 10 hours ago [5]. /NH (talk) 19:39, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was pinged to this discussion by Anhn (talk • contribs • logs), however I think it would have been fair if Dan himself had pinged me when writing and linking to pages about me. I have dona almost 2800 edits on WD, but are not very active. So, although Dan did start a KAW, mentioned by him and Anhn, about me he himself writes on his user page "Likväl ger jag dig respekt, att du för en sansad diskussion med mig i sakfrågan, istället för att masshysteriskt tävla i hat mot min person..." (Anyhow, I give you respect, that you do discuss in a good manner about the subject, instead of a mass hysteric competition in hate aganist my person...". This means he knows I am trying to be neutral and for the best of the wiki-comunities. I know he has done a lot of good contributions here and on svwp and enwp (and other projects too). However, when things are not going his way or someone dares to oppose what he says (like in the above mentioned discussion, which gave me my first blockage ever) he seems to try to scare the opponent instead of showing relevant sources. That is not a good thing to do as an admin. He was not blocked because of the POV he did (explained by Anhn) but his way of discussing. Last time, the one year block, was done after he called an admin on svwp "mentally ill" both on svwp and on facebook. That was totally out of our policies on svwp, and with the new policy from Wikimedia that would giva a blockage on every wiki I know of. I am also concerned about the POV Anhn mentions, and that he might do the same kind of pov here on wikidata, which will affect som many more wikipedias than only the Swedish, and then have more "power" as an admin if someone tells him he is wrong. therefor I am strongly opposing this user as an admin. Adville (talk) 22:47, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

this RfP is not linked anywhere on svwiki.Yger (talk) 05:27, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Im sorry this conflict is infecting Wikidata, on aplace where it doesnt belong, its of course not my wish. I prefer not to comment personal accusations against me, except for when theres factual errors, above was stated "where Koehl made several edits arguing against AGW in a very POV:ish manner referring to cherry-picked non-scientific or non-official sources." which is not true, what I contributed was not my own opinion of course, but I submitted a sourced opinion from sv:Gösta Walin, one of Swedens best known climate experts, and professor in Oceanograpgy, and the admin Advile removed 1, and removed 2 sourced edits, based on his private opinion that the professor is not an expert, although he has been interviewed in climate related issues since over 40 years, and is still on Wikidata referred to as climate expert. The admin Adville also moved the page about Gösta Walin, from having header climate researchers for 13 years!to oceanograph. Being accused of cherry picking, etc, I can only defend myself with the Policy and rules for Wikipedia, which clearly says admins should not act like this, thats why I asked for an investigation, but instead I got blocked, and [I brought the subject of an admin aubusing the Wikipedia Policy and NPOV rules (diff before they removed this) my request was removed]. Dan Koehl (talk) 08:01, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
See also my request on Meta for investigation after I was blocked ONE YEAR in 2017, without a single diff to prove my "crime", only an admin fabricated "consensus" that I had broken rules. The en:Swedish Wikipedia is becoming a forked project, where Policy and rules are not followed, and a group of admins have hijacked the entire process of justice. Even Swedish burocrat user:Ternarius, refer to the present as a modern witch-hunt (modern häxprocess). Dan Koehl (talk) 08:16, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding "mentally ill" you have deleted all diffs, what I actually did, was exactly citing what the admin has written on his user page, when I questioned if its really OK for a person who wasnt even admin for a year, to block en:Swedish Wikipedia longest time user. For this I was blocked a year.Dan Koehl (talk) 08:20, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In our discussion this year we were very careful not to mention or bring upp this incident. And feedback with diffs were given~back then. Yger (talk) 08:24, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
DK:s use of sources in "Koldioxid" has been discussed here and here, but obviously this has not convinced DK.
Any user may happen to make edits that have various problems, but these edits have been discussed in length and the problem is that the discussion never stops, but continues here. / Anhn (talk) 08:37, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Admins breaking the rules of rollbacking, when removing my request of following NPOV in a climate related project, or removing my sourced edit, motivated only by his personal opinion (is an admins personalopinion a stronger argument on svwiki, than a sourced, verified edit?), is not very convincing. Wikipedia is not about convince anyone, its about follow the NPOV and in articles supplying different opinions, in controversial issues. I am convinced that Swedish Wikipedia is becoming a fork, where admins bias articles according to their political view, and block users who try to keep NPOV. This is a against the Wikipedia Policy. Dan Koehl (talk) 08:46, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I want to to make it clear, that I have not brought any discussions here, as was claimed by @Anhn:. I have just reapplied for adminship, and I have truthfully answered @Rschen7754:, question above, thats all. But I guess I have the right to defend myself against different kind of very personal accusations? Dan Koehl (talk) 10:06, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is good that the problems we have had on svwp is shown here, because what happens here will affect svwp and other projects too. About my reverting Gösta Wallin and what he said: as you see here did delete two sources Dan used. Skeptical science and klimatsans. both are bloggs... that is not good sources in sinetific articles. klimatsans is a political sceptical page. I Also moved Göstas page to what is his main reason for having an article: He is a professor. That he has a private interest in climate is not the reason he got an article, I guess. I also told Dan that he is fine to use as a source, if Dan could find a peer-reviewd article about the subject. Instead he adrgued he had to use this kind of articles. Here I see a danger on wikidata: Will he use this kind of articles as sources here?

And about Ygers rollback of Dan: That happened when he posted that text on several pages, spreading the discussion everywhere. That is not the correct way of doing it, it more looked like a way to get diffs to be able to use for example here (if someone swollowed the bate and reverted him). He succeeded with that and was able to show "svwp dös everything to hunt him". That is not true. Now I hope to not write any more here. Adville (talk) 12:02, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can not find one single example or diff, mentioned above, on how I should have abused my admin rights, or as user, have acted with a bias on Wikidata. Would it be too much to ask, to give some examples as to what negative impact my Adminship on Wikidata has been in the past? Or, at least one single example? Dan Koehl (talk) 12:19, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am horrified of how Dan Koehl is portraying Yger and Adville. I guess I haven't been active enough on this Wiki-project to cast a vote, but I want to state that I think Dan Koehl would be inappropriate as an administrator. Based on my experience, I would never be able to trust the user with using the tools accordingly. The user has an aggressive style of conducting discussion, where consensus is cast aside for conflict and confrontation, and doing so with a strong inclination for a bullying/mastering attitude. Dnm (talk) 18:08, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I can only repeat: Even Swedish Burocrat User:Ternarius, refer to the present as a modern witch-hunt (modern häxprocess). And after I wrote that above, the Crat was challenged by one of the users above, but confirmed here. I wish my Swedish fellow users would give the en:Swedish Wikipedia a better reputation than exposing how its working over there. BTW, since this application is destroyed, and has become a a modern witch-hunt, if anyone is interested WHY I was blocked in 2017, it was because I marked files which lacked a factbox with this template, so I could submit factbox later (which I did), something I had done (and many other users) for several years before... Its a normal template corresponding to sv:Faktamall saknas which is presently used on thousand of pages by users who, for some reason hasnt been blocked for this. So reading the text "using the tools accordingly, when admins on the Swedish wiki are using their very personal interpretation of how to use the tools "accordingly", like when sv wikis longest serving user asked for an investigation of eventual admin abuse on the proper place, this request (which Ahn above refer to as which got no support by any kind) was removed (how can a removed request get support?), and I got blocked, by another admin, who was directly involved in the articles that I argue are POV and APOV, Dan Koehl (talk) 19:03, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This appeal for authority (being the first, and therefore longest, user on svwiki - used already 3 times only on this page) giving him exclusive rights on how to interpret the policies, is a repeating pattern from svwiki, and why I am afraid giving him more powers. If he do get the rights we need to keep an extra eye for him deleting items, claims or sources related to the United Nations (Q1065) or Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Q171183) which he claims to both be spreading propaganda (or for that matter in any other way hindering Wikidatians from adding verifiable information to the project). Ainali (talk) 19:37, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The "request for investigation of eventual admin abuse" can be found here at WP:KAW (now archived). Duplicated entries at other places have been removed. It can be clearly seen in the final conclusion part that the claims that Adville should have acted "POV-ish" got no support by any kind. The discussion was initiated 2020-05-16. Last edit was 2020-05-20, and the thread was archived by a robot 2020-05-27. The page WP:KAW got 4 940 views during these 5 days which can be compared with e.g. 2 062 views for the preceding 15 days. This shows that the WP:KAW-request has been well exposed to a large audience. The WP:KAW-request was _NOT_ removed, but duplicated postings at other places were removed. Here I have told DK _not_ to duplicate discussions which creates fatigue and confusion among other wikipedians. / Anhn (talk) 20:32, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dan Koehl recently announced this nomination on Wikispecies where he accuses users from Swedish Wikipedia of a "solicited attack". Abbe98 (talk) 20:45, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes he did and it did concern me this may be construed as canvassing, and I have commented there that I found it a little strange that suddenly people from the SW WP are attempting to vote here who do not have voting rights here, it has been mentioned here and their that there may be some canvasing going on, I leave it to admins here to make that decision. However, I did try to be clear that I was basing my support vote only on what I have seen at Wikispecies and Wikidata. I acknowledged the reports from SW WP noting I was previously unaware of them. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) talk 20:57, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Faendalimas:, They communicate with IRC, and will send another one with a no-vote, in order to secure lass than 75% votes for yes. See also the previous successful nomination Dan Koehl (talk) 00:22, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusion[edit]

This RfP has been disturbed by canvassing as well as importing issues from sister projects. This is not an example on how RfP's here should be done. Having said that, with 9 oppose votes plus 1 "wait leaning to oppose" vote out of 32 votes, we cannot conclude different from this RfP being unsuccessful. Lymantria (talk) 06:00, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

(non-bureaucrat close) Early closure - creating this RfA was the user's first edit to wikidata; obviously not going to pass, no need to keep open.  Not done - no chance that the user would be promoted. -- Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 15:07, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gabriela Villareal[edit]

Vote

RfP scheduled to end after 10 June 2020 10:37 (UTC)

Blurb... (a short statement why you (or this person) should be an admin...) Your signature's timestamp for a self-nom is when the candidacy starts. For non-self-noms, the candidate should "accept" with a short statement and sign it... that timestamp is when the candidacy starts... Once this is done please transclude your candidacy on the relevant request for permissions page. --Gabriela Villareal (talk) 10:37, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Votes[edit]

  1. ...

Comments[edit]

  • Speedy close. New account, first edit here also blocked on eswiki. You should not request extra tools on this project until you have more experience with the ones your account has currently. Have a look around first and try your hand at editing. -- Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 15:07, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closed as successful. --Lymantria (talk) 05:14, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Stanglavine[edit]

Vote

RfP scheduled to end after 19 June 2020 04:05 (UTC)

Dears, I was a sysop for a while, but I resigned due to lack of availability. During the time I worked (in the last update), I was the 5th sysop with the most admin actions (among 58). As (for a few days) more than six months have passed since my last action, I need to open a new RfP. I am slowly returning to the projects, and if it is of interest to the community, I would like to act as a sysop again. My focus will continue to be routine maintenance tasks (block, protect and delete), counter-vandalism and counter-spam. Sorry for having to open a new request, and thanks for consideration. I stay open for questions. Regards, Rafael (stanglavine) msg 04:05, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Previous request: Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Administrator/Stanglavine.

Votes[edit]

  1.  Support It would be great to have you back! Mahir256 (talk) 04:41, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  2.  Support Did an important job prevously. Pamputt (talk) 05:34, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  3.  Support --Minorax (talk) 06:29, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  4.  Support Obviously can be trusted, used the tools, etc. --DannyS712 (talk) 07:30, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  5.  Support Good luck. --Wolverène (talk) 08:05, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  6.  Support ---MisterSynergy (talk) 09:52, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  7.  Support --Epìdosis 10:01, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  8.  Support 94rain (talk) 10:17, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  9.  Support ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 11:23, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  10.  Support -- Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 13:08, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  11.  Support Esteban16 (talk) 13:52, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  12.  Support Welcome back! ‐‐1997kB (talk) 14:25, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  13.  Support Sure, welcome back. --Sotiale (talk) 14:26, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  14.  Support Sure. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:20, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  15.  Support I can support you for global sysop, so I can for sure support you as a sysop on Wikidata. Cheers! Nadzik (talk) 10:11, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  16.  Support welcome back.-BRP ever 10:38, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  17.  Support - Premeditated (talk) 11:40, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  18.  Support --Alaa :)..! 15:38, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  19.  Support -- Ajraddatz (talk) 04:46, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  20.  Support --mirinano (talk) 17:13, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  21.  Support. Bencemac (talk) 18:12, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  22.  Support. —Hasley 02:51, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  23.  Support--باسم (talk) 14:27, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  24.  Weak support only very few actions recently so far, but welcome back! Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 16:23, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  25.  Support Old sysops that resigned due to lack of time are welcome back. Mbch331 (talk) 17:10, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  26.  Support @Esteban16: If anything, this case shows that it may be necessary to relax the inactivity requirements further (perhaps extend to something like 7 actions in a year).--Jasper Deng (talk) 20:37, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  27.  Support ミラP 19:36, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  28.  Support - Simon Cobb (User:Sic19 ; talk page) 19:13, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

  • ...
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closed as successful - Lymantria (talk) 05:56, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki13 2[edit]

Vote

RfP scheduled to end after 5 August 2020 22:36 (UTC)

Wiki13 is a former admin that now has more time to contribute to the project. After seeing so many of their requests at WD:RfD I asked if they were interested in getting the mop back again and they agreed. They are trusted as an administrator on nlwiki, and as a global rollbacker, and have made over a million edits here. See Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Administrator/Wiki13 for their first RfA in 2012, which was successful. --DannyS712 (talk) 22:40, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I accept the nomination. Kind regards, Wiki13 (talk) 22:42, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Votes[edit]

  1.  Strong support as nominator --DannyS712 (talk) 22:44, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  2.  Support, a trusted person. --Wolverène (talk) 04:25, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support Stryn (talk) 06:09, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  4.  Strong support I'm happy to welcome them back to the admin team. We really need more active admins these days.--Jasper Deng (talk) 06:12, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  5.  Strong support —Eihel (talk) 06:29, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  6.  Support, thanks for volunteering! Bencemac (talk) 06:40, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  7.  Support, uiteraard en veel succes! FakirNL (talk) 07:50, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  8.  Support - Premeditated (talk) 09:45, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  9.  Support --Epìdosis 14:51, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  10.  Support Seems fine to me. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:30, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  11.  Support --Rschen7754 18:04, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  12.  Support MisterSynergy (talk) 18:59, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  13.  Support  Hazard SJ  03:21, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  14.  Support --Jklamo (talk) 09:02, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  15.  Support per nom. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 09:11, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  16.  Support I look forward to your enthusiastic activities :p --Sotiale (talk) 11:12, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  17.  Support. —Hasley 13:53, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  18.  Support --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 13:53, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  19.  Support Mike Peel (talk) 21:44, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  20.  Support --Fralambert (talk) 00:34, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  21.  Support --Minorax (talk) 15:26, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  22.  Support thanks for volunteering! Rafael (stanglavine) msg 18:21, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  23.  Support Esteban16 (talk) 18:26, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  24.  Support ミラP 22:54, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  25.  Strong support Experienced user. Bingobro (Chat) 06:21, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  26.  Support trusted --Alaa :)..! 15:39, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  27.  Weak support, this user came back only 2 months ago which is a bit short but other than this detail, I see no reason not to support this request. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 15:44, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  28.  Support -Killarnee (C•T•U) 18:13, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  29.  Weak support, user has just came back from the inactivity, but they are trusted on other project. I've seen their cross-wiki anti-vandalism work, they can be a real help to the project. Good luck! Cheers! Nadzik (talk) 18:33, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  30.  Support--باسم (talk) 19:20, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  31.  Support Competent user--PATH SLOPU 09:14, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  32.  Support · LGTM. -- CptViraj (talk) 04:13, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  33.  Support -- Wagino 20100516 (talk) 16:40, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  34.  Support -- Ajraddatz (talk) 21:01, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closed as successful -Lymantria (talk) 07:01, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hazard-SJ 3[edit]

Vote

RfP scheduled to end after 12 August 2020 07:00 (UTC)

Hi everyone! A former administrator, I was originally elected in early 2013 (initial RfA and subsequent confirmation) and served up until 2018 (at which time my availability was limited and sporadic). Now that I have more time to contribute, I'm interested in helping in that capacity again if there is support for me to do so. That would also allow me to help with things like the deletion request backlogs, rather than adding to it as I've been doing over the past few weeks, among other things. --Hazard-SJ (talk) 07:00, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Votes[edit]

  1.  Support --Rschen7754 07:27, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  2.  Support ---MisterSynergy (talk) 07:30, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  3.  Support —Eihel (talk) 09:11, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  4.  Support Welcome back. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 09:51, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  5.  Support competent user.--PATH SLOPU 10:12, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  6.  Strong support Mahir256 (talk) 12:04, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  7.  Support. —Hasley 13:10, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  8.  Support Welcome- back. --Sotiale (talk) 13:24, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  9.  Support -- Wagino 20100516 (talk) 16:40, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  10.  Support --Epìdosis 17:49, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  11.  Support, the user has relatively small number of edits, but this is a known and trusted person who's doing helpful work. --Wolverène (talk) 18:05, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  12.  Support Welcome back! ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:24, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  13.  Support .-- Hakan·IST 20:46, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  14.  Support -- Ajraddatz (talk) 21:01, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  15.  Support Wiki13 (talk) 23:08, 5 August 2020 (UTC) No problem for me. HazardSJ has been administrator here before, when Wikidata was basically in it's infancy. Also haven't seen anything that would me give doubt.[reply]
  16.  Support. Bencemac (talk) 07:17, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  17.  Strong support We need you back, especially as your bot performs essential tasks.--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:30, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  18.  Support --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 08:54, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  19.  Support LGTM --DannyS712 (talk) 09:41, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  20.  Support Mbch331 (talk) 17:49, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  21.  Support --Alaa :)..! 21:17, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  22.  Support welcome back Deryck Chan (talk) 16:21, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  23.  Support ‐‐1997kB (talk) 01:50, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  24.  Support please stay. ミラP 04:00, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  25.  Support -- Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 06:35, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  26.  Support -- Nehaoua (talk) 16:26, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  27.  Support. Simon Cobb (User:Sic19 ; talk page) 20:55, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  28.  Support Stay for longer this time! Cheers! Nadzik (talk) 09:19, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  29.  Support--باسم (talk) 11:33, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  30.  Support per above. Rafael (stanglavine) msg 16:41, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closed as successful (9-1-3 > 90% support). -Lymantria (talk) 10:54, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gnoeee[edit]

Vote

RfP scheduled to end after 12 August 2020 10:27 (UTC)

Hi greetings, I would like to nominate User:Gnoeee for adminship in Wikidata. Active user in Wikidata and have 97000+ edits. Already have property creator and rollback permission here. Trusted user. Active member of Wikimedians of Kerala. On and off-wiki contributor and working for the propagation of Wikimedia. Participated in training programs like WAT, bootcamp, etc. Thank you.--PATH SLOPU 10:27, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the nomination @Path slopu:. I accept the nomination.-❙❚❚❙❙ JinOy ❚❙❚❙❙ ✉ 17:03, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Votes[edit]

  1.  Neutral, I agree that the user is a trusted and experienced one, but I've never seen him at Wikidata before. --Wolverène (talk) 18:02, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  2.  Initial support  Split support and oppose I want new sysops, but a ditch separates a desire from an aptitude. I am usually more permissive. Wikiscan tells me that he has a contribution in Sawtooth. Effectively, over 2 and a half years, it is present for 1 year and 3 months. 97% of its contributions are made on articles. He participated only less than 1% in discussions. This is an important part of sysop's job. If we meet Gnoeee in Wikidata namespace, it is in projects and in some proposed properties. I give my opinion like that, because besides that, he is a formidable editor, who does a monstrous job. When he's around he does over 200 edits a day on average. And there is the rub: if Gnoeee spent a tiny fraction of his time on the administrative side, he would be great. If he demonstrates just 1 month of the "dark side" of administration, I vote Super-Over-The-Top-Strong support. Sorry. —Eihel (talk) 19:35, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  3.  Strong support as nominator.--PATH SLOPU 03:10, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  4.  Support ---MisterSynergy (talk) 06:58, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  5.  Weak oppose Content contribution is nice, but according to [6] and your lack of requests at RfD you have hardly any anti-vandalism work. As Wikidata vandalism is subtly different from vandalism on other projects, I think you need a few months of experience in anti-abuse work first. As much as we need more admins, I'm not fully comfortable with granting you access at this time but would support you in a few months if you do more anti-vandalism work in the meantime.--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:40, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  6.  Support. We currently have zero Dravidian language native speaker admins, so this candidate is very welcome. I understand the concerns that this editor has participated in very few discussions on Wikidata, but the contributions are good and I trust the nominator's judgement (or rather, Kerala Wikimedians'). Deryck Chan (talk) 16:27, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  7.  Support I think he can do well if admin tools are being provided to him. Adithyak1997 (talk) 16:53, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  8.  Support --Rschen7754 18:03, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  9.  Support -- Experienced user.-- Akhiljaxxn (talk) 02:45, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  10.  Support -- Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 06:38, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  11.  Neutral or really weak oppose, per Jasper Deng. I belive that we need more admins, but I think it is not yet time for you. Cheers! Nadzik (talk) 09:18, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  12.  Support -- Experienced user and bringing significant contribution to the Indian Wikidata items. --Akbarali (talk) 03:51, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  13.  Neutral per Jasper Deng --DannyS712 (talk) 07:56, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

  • I have never seen you anywhere here, although your activity level over the past two years looks fine. What have you done so far here, and how do you plan to use the admin tools in case you are receiving admin rights? —MisterSynergy (talk) 17:44, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@MisterSynergy: Ya.. I have just started contributing to Wikidata from the beginning of 2018 and still loving to learn from the open data Multilingual project. I have started Wikidata journey by translating labels to my native language, Malayalam. I have participation in property proposals and recently involved in creating Properties. In Wikidata my contributions till now are mainly on Projects and sub projects related to Wikidata:WikiProject India and Wikidata:WikiProject Kerala, the project I have started. There are so many duplicate items and i have involved in merging those duplicate items which is connected mainly with Malayalam Wikipedia and involved in deletion requests that's needs to be deleted. Since Wikidata is a multilingual project, at present there is no admins with knowledge in Malayalam language. Basically that's why I have accepted this nomination although I didn't have any sysop experience in any Wikis. But i can surely work on against vandalism and to prevent bad edits in my native languages and help in WD:RfD process.-❙❚❚❙❙ JinOy ❚❙❚❙❙ ✉ 20:02, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Convincing argument, need admin. —Eihel (talk) 15:07, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Rschen7754: Done-❙❚❚❙❙ GnOeee ❚❙❚❙❙ ✉ 04:46, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Jasper Deng, thanks for calling me. It is a permitted form of voting, if it remains as it is until the 12th, it is neutral (the text is quite explicit like that), but by these 6 full days, I can position myself otherwise. Cordially. —Eihel (talk) 07:43, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That said, you fully express what I think of a sysop candidate. —Eihel (talk) 07:48, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Finally, my opinion doesn't change much in the final result, even if I had voted against. —Eihel (talk) 09:40, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closed as successful-Lymantria (talk) 06:04, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wagino 20100516 2[edit]

Vote

RfP scheduled to end after 13 August 2020 05:25 (UTC)

Hello! I was an administrator at Wikidata from November 13, 2012 to August 1, 2018. But the busyness in the real world and the very slow internet access at my location worked so that the contribution in all Wikimedia projects has significantly declined in recent years. But in mid-2020 I can be active again and I hope on getting administrator access rights again.

This is the request of administrator rights at the started of this project, then this is confirmation of administrator status.

Thank you so much for your support. -- Wagino 20100516 (talk) 05:25, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Votes[edit]

  1.  Support Admittedly, Wagino's admin work has not been completely spotless, but it's been satisfactory and I think we really would benefit from additional admins. Most importantly, they communicate well, so I like the idea of restoring their adminship.--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:35, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  2.  Support --Epìdosis 08:52, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  3.  Support --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 08:55, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  4.  Support LGTM --DannyS712 (talk) 09:42, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  5.  Support. —Hasley 12:47, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  6.  Support.-- Hakan·IST 13:36, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  7.  Initial support Roughly the same observation as the previous candidate: need for admin, even if he returned recently and the administrative involvement is insufficient. —Eihel (talk) 15:14, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  8.  Support Mbch331 (talk) 17:52, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  9.  Support —MisterSynergy (talk) 18:06, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  10.  Support ‐‐1997kB (talk) 01:49, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  11.  Support Experienced user.--PATH SLOPU 05:46, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  12.  Support --Rschen7754 18:03, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  13.  Support ミラP 04:01, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  14.  Support -- Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 06:37, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  15.  Support Texaner (talk) 16:37, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  16.  Oppose most recent contributions lack P31 and many violate WD:N. Maybe it's better to take some time to get up to speed and request adminship afterwards. --- Jura 20:25, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  17.  Weak support trusted user. I trust that your actions will be positive to this project. Cheers! Nadzik (talk) 09:20, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  18.  Support --Alaa :)..! 14:02, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  19.  Oppose - per Jura & Eihel - Premeditated (talk) 17:11, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

@Jura1: I've read it, but I don't fully understand all the provisions. I hope you can remind me if there is a contribution that isn't appropriate because it has been more than 2 years I rarely followed of developments and regulations on Wikidata. Of course there are many provisions, improvements and developments in this project and next time I will learn to understand and implement it to my work here. Wagino 20100516 (talk) 10:12, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As an admin, you should be able to check your last 500 or so contributions, see if you create anything that doesn't meet WD:N. If there are one or the other you aren't sure, don't hesitate to ask. --- Jura 10:48, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Jura1: All right! Next time I'll add P31 to all items that I've made recently, reviewing my future contributions related WD:N and others guidelines. Wagino 20100516 (talk) 13:39, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be mass creating items that don't meet point #1.2 --- Jura 16:21, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Jura1: My work is'nt finished right now. All the items about the template that I made recently are the link from en.wp which I just created templates there. In the future I'll also make it at ru.wp and of course these items will have at least 2 sitelinks. It's difficult for me because I don't speak Russian, but I'm trying it. That was my initial concept when creating recently items. I'm sorry if I made a mistake. Wagino 20100516 (talk) 05:20, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
WD:N doesn't work that way. You can't create items because they will have sitelinks one day (some are from April). --- Jura 05:26, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Epìdosis, Matěj Suchánek, DannyS712, Mbch33, MisterSynergy: @1997kB: as you handle deletions more regularly and you supported the candidate, you might want to comment on this. --- Jura 06:03, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

More than 75% support if counting yes/no, closed as successful--Ymblanter (talk) 19:55, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fuzheado[edit]

Vote

RfP scheduled to end after 8 October 2020 18:33 (UTC)

Re-applying for the admin bit since I was just short in the last 6 month window of activity and removed. I was previously supported 28-0 in 2018 and plan to continue cleanup of items and addressing vandalism. I'm an admin on English Wikipedia and do lots of Wikidata training for cultural institutions and Wikimedia affiliates. Thanks! -- Fuzheado (talk) 18:33, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Votes[edit]

  1.  Support Sure, if you could check on the deletion requests once in a while that would probably keep you active enough :) ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:07, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Lol, noted! :) -- Fuzheado (talk) 10:29, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  2.  Support Gamaliel (talk) 19:21, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  3.  Support more sysop activity… —Eihel (talk) 22:44, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  4.  Support. Hasley 22:50, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  5.  Support Pamputt (talk) 05:43, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  6.  Support -- Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 06:21, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  7.  Support - Premeditated (talk) 11:48, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  8. At this stage, I cannot support a candidate that has lost adminship just a moment before the new RfA. — regards, Revi 12:56, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello -revi Hello May I ask you a question: Any contributor who has lost a technical right cannot immediately request the return of this right by a new application? —Eihel (talk) 01:16, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  9.  Oppose Their answer below does not convince me they will really return to activity, given that our requirements aren't at all that stringent and it is everyone's responsibility to know them.--Jasper Deng (talk) 16:03, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  10.  Neutral with Arthur's suggestion and Jasper's skepticism. Mahir256 (talk) 16:06, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  11.  Support --Epìdosis 17:27, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  12.  Support An easy choice for me to re-affirm Fuzheado as admin. It's okay to have inactivity removal rules, but clearly Fuzheado's case of editing a lot without using admin buttons in the last few months is one that the rule is designed to let the community reaffirm, not remove for cause! Admins often perform admin duties by reviewing cases and deciding not to use admin buttons. Deryck Chan (talk) 17:39, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  13.  Support great explanation by Deryck Chan, user is an active editor even if not active as much as an admin in the last few months --DannyS712 (talk) 19:00, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  14.  Support not concerned with inactivity, if they still want to help out then that is good enough for me. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 21:16, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  15.  Neutral; you've shown little commitment to this role in the past two years —MisterSynergy (talk) 21:53, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  16.  Neutral, per MisterSynergy. The fact that you have been fairly active all this time but you barely used your admin tools is worrying. Tools are to be used. Esteban16 (talk) 01:24, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  17.  Support ミラP 02:05, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  18.  Support Mike Peel (talk) 09:32, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  19.  Support ChristianSW (talk) 16:35, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  20.  Support Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:39, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  21.  Support Of course, why not? I am confident that they'll use their admin buttons wisely. A little inactivity is nothing to worry about; I'm sure that they'll do better this time; we're used to the COVID pandemic and there's really nothing to worry about. --Prahlad (tell me all about it / private venue) (Please {{ping}} me) 17:27, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  22.  Support - PKM (talk) 20:44, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  23.  Support --Denny (talk) 23:16, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  24.  Support NMaia (talk) 00:17, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  25.  Neutral per Esteban16. --Minorax (talk) 05:59, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  26.  Support -- Yaakoub45 (talk) 07:53, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  27.  Support --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 09:18, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  28.  Support Acceptable to me. --Wolverène (talk) 11:19, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  29.  Oppose Isn't convinced that there is actual need of tools. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 16:21, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  30.  Support Jianhui67 talk★contribs 01:50, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  31.  Weak oppose. I am not sure that Fuzheado qualifies as an "active user". According to others above, he has just lost his permissions, he should show a bit more activity before gettin the tools again. Cheers! Nadzik (talk) 17:47, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closed as successful --Lymantria (talk) 07:58, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MsynABot[edit]

Vote

RfP scheduled to end after 19 October 2020 07:31 (UTC)

I would like to run an admin-bot to implement the outcome of the RfC “semi-protection to prevent vandalism on most used Items”. Based on it and the current Wikidata:Page protection policy, items that are being used on 500 or more Wikimedia pages should be indefinitely semi-protected, and this protection should be lifted once the usage number falls below this threshold. As of October 2020, around ~26.000 pages require an indefinite semi-protection under that scheme, but only ~3000 of them are currently protected. There is a weekly increase of around 200 items which fulfill the criteria for this sort of protection. I thus think that both the initial implementation of missing semi-protections as well as a weekly update should be done by an admin-bot. Details about the bot functionality can be found at Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/MsynABot (still open).

Technical note: while this request for adminship ideally results in admin rights for the bot account, I consider it valid for the described bot task only. In case I ever get into the situation to run another admin-bot task with User:MsynABot, I will ask for permission on both WD:RFP/BOT and WD:RFP/A again even if the bot account already has admin rights. —MisterSynergy (talk) 07:31, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Votes[edit]

  1.  Support! --Epìdosis 16:51, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  2.  Support implementing the RfC is great. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 16:54, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  3.  Support We need to implement the RfC. --Jklamo (talk) 17:15, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  4.  Support since MisterSynergy is trustworthy in general. Mahir256 (talk) 17:35, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  5.  Support Mbch331 (talk) 17:55, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  6.  Support. Hasley 19:57, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  7.  Support -- Simon Cobb (User:Sic19 ; talk page) 20:14, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  8.  Support -- Wagino 20100516 (talk) 01:13, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  9.  Support. Might be an additional help for admins. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 13:14, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  10.  Support. Very impressed by current implementation, at least good enough for bot testing and initial deployment. I've made comments for further changes on Wikidata:Requests_for_permissions/Bot/MsynABot. Deryck Chan (talk) 17:17, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  11.  Support –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 09:23, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  12.  Support --Alaa :)..! 11:13, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  13.  Support --abián 15:42, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  14.  Support -❙❚❚❙❙ GnOeee ❚❙❚❙❙ ✉ 12:01, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  15.  Support --Yaakoub45 (talk) 12:05, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  16.  Support Granting sysop when the bot will only protect items is maybe an overkill but our policies and configuration currently allow no other possibility. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 12:33, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  17.  Support. Bencemac (talk) 06:36, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  18.  Support to implement the RfC. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 15:16, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  19.  Support, sure. Cheers! Nadzik (talk) 21:12, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  20.  Support no concerns with this RFA's motive. ミラP 22:58, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

  • ...
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closed as successful--Ymblanter (talk) 20:05, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Hasley[edit]

Vote

RfP scheduled to end after 2 November 2020 17:23 (UTC)

I'm excited to present Hasley to the community as a candidate for adminship. Hasley, formerly known as Vercelas, is a regular at WD:RFD, where more help is always useful. With just over 5000 edits here on Wikidata, they have demonstrated an understanding of the relevant policies and are also active in counter-vandalism. Outside of Wikidata, Hasley has experience using the administrator tools, as an administrator on mediawiki.org, metawiki, and enwikiversity, as well as a global sysop. I believe they can be trusted with the administrative toolkit, and that granting them access to the tools would benefit the project as well. I hope the rest of the community agrees. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 17:23, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am pleased to accept this nomination. Hasley 19:19, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Votes[edit]

  1.  Support as nom --DannyS712 (talk) 17:23, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Simply  Strong support —Eihel (talk) 18:02, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  3.  Support I've pinged Hasley a lot on other wikis for cleaning up spam connected to Wikidata, so this would be a nice bonus. Mahir256 (talk) 18:37, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  4.  Support -- Ajraddatz (talk) 19:15, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  5.  Support -- Valdemar2018 (talk) 19:37, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  6.  Support MisterSynergy (talk) 19:49, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  7.  Support -- Yaakoub45 (talk) 02:33, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  8.  Support, a well-known user and trusted user. --Wolverène (talk) 04:40, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  9.  Support --Epìdosis 07:13, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  10.  Support --Rzuwig► 08:00, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  11.  Support, yes please! Bencemac (talk) 08:02, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  12.  Support ‐‐1997kB (talk) 11:15, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  13.  Support ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 12:00, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  14.  Support -- Good candidate. Wagino 20100516 (talk) 12:14, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  15.  Support, sure. Cheers! Nadzik (talk) 13:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  16.  Support Thank you for helping. --Sotiale (talk) 15:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  17.  Support a staple at RFD, global sysop with local admin rights on three WMF sites, no concerns. ミラP 16:53, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  18.  Support --Esteban16 (talk) 01:29, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  19.  Support Jianhui67 talk★contribs 10:22, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  20.  Support--Kiran Gopi (talk) 04:16, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  21.  Support --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 16:21, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  22.  Support absolutely. --IWI (talk) 14:45, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  23.  Support -❙❚❚❙❙ GnOeee ❚❙❚❙❙ ✉ 17:07, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  24.  Support --Alaa :)..! 17:22, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  25.  Strong support Hasley is a very helpful user who is always cheerful, polite, kind, and everything else you can think of. I often find him reporting spam and other nonsense at RfD. I'm happy to support him because I know he will do well. Best of luck, --Prahlad (tell me all about it / private venue) (Please {{ping}} me) 18:24, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closed as successful --Lymantria (talk) 17:54, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Urbanec[edit]

Vote

RfP scheduled to end after 7 January 2021 17:21 (UTC)

I'm excited to present Martin Urbanec to the community as a candidate for adminship. Martin Urbanec, formerly known as Urbanecm, is a regular at WD:RFD, where more help is always useful. With over 50,000 edits here on Wikidata, they have demonstrated an understanding of the relevant policies and are active in counter-vandalism. Outside of Wikidata, Martin Urbanec has experience using the administrator tools, as an administrator on mediawiki.org, meta, and cswiki (where they are also a checkuser and bureaucrat). They are also trusted globally as a steward. I believe they can be trusted with the administrative toolkit, and that granting them access to the tools would benefit the project as well. I hope the rest of the community agrees. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 17:21, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind words, DannyS712. I accept the nomination. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 17:39, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Votes[edit]

  1.  Support as nominator --DannyS712 (talk) 17:23, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  2.  Support --FriedrickMILBarbarossa (talk) 17:48, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  3.  Support --LuchoCR (talk) 17:53, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  4.  Support seems trustworthy and we need more admins BrokenSegue (talk) 18:01, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  5.  Support MisterSynergy (talk) 18:20, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  6.  Support · I don't see any issues. -- CptViraj (talk) 18:25, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  7.  Oppose given the recent request of deleting contributions of a user that added data about Japanese Museums without contacting the user in question, make me concerned that making Martin an admin would lead to well-meaning new users getting banned instead of welcomed into Wikidata. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive/2020/12#198.14.240.72 would be another example of the last month where Martin requested a block and we decided against blocking. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 18:38, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Ad the museums, I admit that was a bordeline case, and I would leave similar cases to other administrators, if I'm going to be elected. For the second link you mention, as far as I can see, the items were actually deleted, and as you can see from my wording in the AN post, I wasn't sure on the block. Just as with the previous case, I wouldn't carry out borderline blocks, and I would consult them with other administrators. Thanks for your vote, --Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:11, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  8.  Oppose problematic use of rights previously granted (bot account). --- Jura 18:47, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    can you expand on what the problem was? BrokenSegue (talk) 19:11, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @BrokenSegue: I assume it's the same issue as raised in Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/UrbanecmBot 2 previously --Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:27, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Essentially the user requested a privileged account for a specific purpose and then used it for another (unapproved) purpose. Here they seek even more advanced privileges. --- Jura 19:40, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  9.  Support --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 11:10, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  10.  Support --Benoît (discussion) 11:50, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  11.  Support Trusted user --Jan Myšák (talk) 13:22, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  12.  Support. Hasley+ 13:57, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support Martin Urbanec is very competent. --MF-W 17:50, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  14.  Support Seems like a fine addition to our admin group. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:58, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  15.  Support --Minorax (talk) 23:00, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  16.  Support --janbery (talk) 01:14, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  17.  Support --Yaakoub45 (talk) 02:00, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  18.  Support Trusted user. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 03:24, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support of course. Stryn (talk) 09:01, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  20.  Support. For me he is a trusted user. --Wolverène (talk) 14:48, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  21.  Support --Alaa :)..! 21:32, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  22.  Support I think Martin is a trusted user that has hundreds of undo/rollback edits and over a thousand deleted edits. I understand ChristianKl's concern a little bit, but I hope Martin will be more careful about subjects which he isn't sure. Uncitoyen (talk) 22:05, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  23.  Weak oppose After reading through some of the recent global edits and the concerns that have been voiced here, I wouldn't feel comfortable supporting this request. In addition I generally hold the opinion that concentrating permissions of multiple projects on a few users is not beneficial for the movement. This user is already steward, as well as sysop, bureaucrat and CU on czwiki. While I see that there's a need for more admins in Wikidata, I'd prefer users that have less global permissions to become an admin. -- Dr.üsenfieber (talk) 02:08, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  24.  Support LGTM ミラP@Miraclepine 06:42, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  25.  Support experienced user --Ameisenigel (talk) 08:50, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  26.  Weak support, a bit worried due to user having advanced permissions on multiples wikis, but he is experienced and we do need more sysops. Nadzik (talk) 13:01, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  27.  Support -- Wagino 20100516 (talk) 14:44, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  28.  Support--باسم (talk) 21:07, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  29.  Support Valdemar2018 (talk) 13:35, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  30.  Support --Rzuwig► 15:27, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  31.  Support Mike Peel (talk) 16:29, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  32.  Support Ebe123 (talk | contributions) 16:30, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  33.  Support Although having quite powerful rights already, Wikidata needs experienced and enthusiastic admins like Martin --YjM | dc 16:52, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  34.  Support Ammarpad (talk) 16:58, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  35.  Support - Trusted user and always ready to help. --Kiran Gopi (talk) 18:15, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  36.  Support--Frettie (talk) 18:35, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  37.  Support. Simon Cobb (User:Sic19 ; talk page) 19:03, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  38.  Support. No concerns. --Wiki13 (talk) 15:35, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

  • ...
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Requests_for_permissions/RfA/2020&oldid=1396959589"