Here you can make a request for adminship and other special user rights on English Wikiquote. See Wikiquote:Administrators for what this entails and for a list of current admins.
Current English Wikiquote policy is to grant administrator status to anyone who has been an active Wikiquote contributor for a while and is generally a known and trusted member of the community. Most users seem to agree that the more administrators there are the better.
Administrators should register a valid email address and allow other users to send them messages in preferences, or give an email address on their user page.
If you want to become an administrator, please use the box below, filling out all the required areas and replacing "USERNAME" with your user name. Any user can comment on your request -- they might express reservations (because, for example, they suspect you will abuse your new-found powers, or if you've joined very recently), but hopefully they will approve and say lovely things about you. If this is not your first RfA, put a 2 (or whatever number RfA it may be) after "USERNAME" in the box.
Once you have saved your RfA page, add it to the Nominations for adminship section. Adminship nominations must be posted for at least one week, to provide opportunity for comments and voting, before a bureaucrat will make the promotion if warranted.
Restricted access depends on the continued support of the community. This may be tested by a vote of confidence, in which a simple majority (50%+1) must support the user's continued access for it to be retained. (What access a discussion concerns should be explicitly noted in the discussion's introduction.) Any user may propose a vote of confidence, but at least three established users must support the need for one before it can be called.
In the case of a called proposal, the user may not use the restricted access for any non-trivial action at any time until the vote is closed. A bureaucrat will eventually archive the discussion and, if so decided, request removal of restricted access by a steward.
None currently
Nominations for adminship
Note: Nominations have to be accepted by the user in question. If you nominate a user, please also leave a message on their talk page and inform them about their listing on this page, and ask them to reply here if they accept the nomination. You may nominate yourself (in which case you have automatically accepted the nomination).
The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new topic on this or other appropriate talk page. No further edits should be made to this text.
The result was: Successful application. Consensus is clear; User:Ferien is now an admin. BD2412T 20:15, 2 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]
I'm Ferien. I've been active on Wikiquote on and off for about a year, as of making this statement. My changes are mostly anti-vandalism but if you look in my contributions, there are also a few minor contributions like category changes and external link fixes in there.
I'm mainly requesting to become an administrator because of the amount of vandalism I see here. I currently have rollback here through global rollback already, so I can quickly revert the vandalism when I see it. However, I have noticed there are a few edit warring vandals here and I don't think reverting vandals several times when they can't be stopped helps anyone. I notice when I'm around, a lot of the time there are no admins around at all and sometimes there is a long wait for a sysop to arrive, and stewards will take emergency actions. I think I may be helpful in this regard, I am available for a good chunk of the day and when awake, I am usually reachable within an hour whichever way you contact me (whether it be an on-wiki or off-wiki method). My timezone is UTC/UTC+1 depending on the time of year.
And in terms of admin experience, I am currently a simplewiki sysop where I have made a couple of thousand deletions and nearly a thousand blocks. I have noticed there are a couple of vandals who I have seen both on simplewiki and enwikiquote, which may help in decreasing disruption here.
I do not claim to have a lot of experience with areas like content creation here. I have around 800 edits but I am not expecting my activity to change any time soon – from September 2021 until now I have made around 40-120 edits per month. If you don't want me as an administrator here based on my little experience with content creation or with Wikiquote articles, I totally understand. Regardless of how this RfA turns out, I will still be around as part of my work in the SWMT.
Thank you for your time,
Ferien (talk) 18:00, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Candidate's acceptance: Not applicable, self-nomination. --Ferien (talk) 18:00, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Vote ends: 1 March 2022 18:00 (UTC)
Questions for the candidate
Is vandalism the most serious problem on Wikiquote (WQ) for the community? If so why do we not see any discussion of it on the wq:Village pump? Does WQ have any other urgent problems in need of a fix? If so, what are those problems?
If vandalism on WQ a problem why is adding more admins going to solve this "problem"? Is this an answer looking for a problem? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:42, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ottawahitech: Hello, thank you for the questions.
Vandalism can be quite a severe problem on some wikis, but I wouldn't say it is the most severe problem here because typically, it is reverted within minutes either by anti-vandals or the SWMT if there is no-one around. I think a bigger problem is edit warring vandals and LTAs (long-term abusers), because to stop them, admin tools are usually needed, undo/rollback alone can only do so much if your edit's going to get reverted again in a minute. The block and protect buttons can slow these editors' vandalism down, if not stop them for a short amount of time, hence more admins = higher chance of an admin being available = the vandalism would be slowed down or stopped, so more admins can definitely help with this. As to why no-one talks about the vandalism on the village pump, trolls should be denied recognition, talking about them on such a viewed page would be giving them the attention they want, which is also why I'm not giving examples of the vandalism or anything like that here. I can't think of any urgent problems on Wikiquote in need of a fix off the top of my head right now, so I think no. I hope I answered your question but if not, please let me know. Thanks. --Ferien (talk) 16:26, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion
Support
Support. I have seen the many times this user has helped to fight the waves of vandalism to which the site is subject on a regular basis. I believe that having another admin to formally help maintain our site would be a benefit and I support this request. ~ UDScott (talk) 18:56, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I've worked with Ferien for a while on other WMF projects, and he's been most helpful there -- and here. I think it would help having another admin on WQ, especially given the persistent disruption we've seen recently. Excellent candidate. Antandrus (talk) 19:04, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. We definitely need more vandal fighters here, and I know of no reason to oppose this nomination. I myself am presently extremely limited in the time I can expend here, and some of the long-term abusers of the past have recently increased their activities considerably. Most days lately I receive notices of multiple attempts that have been made to log in under my user name, and thankfully I remain quite confident that such attempts will continue to fail -- but unfortunately the recently most active of trolls and vandals do a great deal to disrupt normal activities here, and more reliable help in blocking and reverting their vandalism is certainly welcome. ~ ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 18:40, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support user can be trusted, has a clue, would be a net benefit to the project if they were an admin --DannyS712 (talk) 07:08, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support That our regular LTAs don't like you very much is enough for me. GMGtalk 17:10, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Normally I would just comment but there doesn't appear to be a comments section. Ferien, do you believe that anti-vandalism and the like is an exception to the notion of creating content? The inverse is also the case; such people generally have a high activity level, however in this case you acknowledge you are not that active, which is fine, I never thought that sysops were supposed to be editing every day, as long as they are being valuable and reasonably active (I've taken breaks of several months before). This seems like it is more of a case of global rollback (which you already have) or global sysop (which doesn't affect this wiki). Naleksuh (talk) 19:04, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Naleksuh, I think it is very reasonable that there are many people/wikis in general who believe content creation is important to admin tools. It shows experience with how the wiki works and what the main focus of the wiki is. The main purpose of Wikiquote is to store quotations from notable people that are sourced and as I said in my nomination statement, I have little to no experience with that kind of work. That being said, anti-vandalism is crucial in ensuring that people can still use this site and the admin tools themselves do not involve content creation. Even on a wiki where there is a large amount of people who feel content creation is needed from an admin, enwiki, there has been an effort to disconnect content creation and administrative work, as you may have seen from the recent disconnection of autopatrolled from their admin tools. The point I'm trying to make (if I haven't made it clear already) is: whilst most people feel experience with content creation is best for admin, and I completely understand if you feel it's necessary yourself, the admin tools themselves do not relate to content creation, therefore content content is not required for adminship in my opinion, so I nominated myself. Does that answer your question? --Ferien (talk) 19:22, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I think it may be important to note that there was a discussion about global sysops abilities here – I believe it occurred within the past year or so. There was a reasonable amount of support for enwikiquote to become a GS wiki but stewards declined to make it one because there was not a clear consensus to make it one. But if you look at a couple of the recent RfAs, some candidates didn't have content creation but wanted to help the wiki and they had experience in anti-vandalism here, and they gained support and became sysops. So it's this situation where there isn't quite the consensus to have global sysops on this wiki yet RfAs for people wanting to help with anti-vandalism etc. can end up succeeding. --Ferien (talk) 20:06, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ferien : You say that the purpose of WQ (Wikiquote) is "to store quotations from notable people that are sourced" but I don't understand who the notable people are in The Lego Movie, for example. There are many more such pages on WQ. Would you please explain?
Not just to store quotations from notable people but also in notable creations like the Lego Movie, yes. But maybe it's important to note that the people in the Lego Movie are likely notable as well. Maybe I should have just said Wikiquote is a quote compendium.
GS = global sysops. They typically make uncontroversial actions (like cleaning up vandalism) in GS wikis. Some wikis are automatically GS wikis because they have few to no active admins but others enable it because they would like the help. A discussion like that was started here and as I said, it got support but not enough consensus to have GSes here. --Ferien (talk) 21:24, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"Maybe I should have just said Wikiquote is a quote compendium." – You have used the word "maybe" twice while explaining the essence of Wikiquote. To make sure you understand the scope of the project, could you please summarise in own words what determines whether a quote can be listed here? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:03, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@1234qwer1234qwer4: Let's also consider that Wikipedia is for notable people, events and more generally, things, but I can also call it an encyclopedia (which is a lot simpler), so that's why I answered the way I did. It's not "maybe" this is what Wikiquote is, it is "maybe" this is what I should have put in my answer because it's clearer. I think you'd agree that "encyclopedia" is clearer than "pages for notable things", right?
Anyway, your question: as I have already said, I am not experienced on the content side of Wikiquote, and I do not claim to be, so I'm not going to be able to give a perfect answer to your question. I didn't volunteer to add to the content here, only to protect it from the rather persistent vandal attacks you have likely seen recently. That being said, there are a few factors I know as to whether a quote can be listed. You've got to consider whether the quote is particularly quotable or well-known and quotes should have sources to show they're real and well-known. The notability of the author and/or subject should also be considered. And a quote should not be too long, otherwise it's not a quote, it's just a copy of their work. Thanks, --Ferien (talk) 16:25, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please note that I have semi-protected this page due to interference from LTAs --DannyS712 (talk) 07:08, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new topic on this or other appropriate talk page. No further edits should be made to this text.
The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new topic on this or other appropriate talk page. No further edits should be made to this text.
The result was: Successful application. The allotted period has elapsed. Application successful. GMGtalk 12:24, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I request for adminship on English Wikiquote. Persistent vandalism on this wiki has made me to convince to believe this wiki needs more admins. So as a proverb "槐より始めよ" says, I nominate myself as my first nomination.
Probably it would be wiser for me and more informative for the community to postpone this request for a while to ensure that my current involvement will be continuous and that my understandings of this project are well renewed and updated: while I had been fairly active on this project for years, and entrusted some higher user permissions, including adminship, it was almost a decade ago. Not only my almost one-decade long absence, but also my 2015 regretfully short term coming back might be your concern, but on the latter I think I've recovered well so that I expect my current physical conditions enable me to keep active, even though it was as similar as in the level in my thirty's.
Thank you for taking your time and consideration, --Aphaia (talk) 08:24, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Vote ends: 4 September 2021 08:24 (UTC)
Support
Support. Although it has been some time, I can vouch for Aphaia's activities as an admin in the past. We continue to experience a high volume of vandalism, with few admins to combat it. Aphaia always showed concern for this project and I have no doubt that this would continue. I heartily support this self-nomination and would welcome its success. ~ UDScott (talk) 20:35, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Active here, and from my small amount of experience here, seems to be around when the other sysops aren't. And they also have past sysop experience, so can definitely be trusted with the tools. Thanks for volunteering, --Ferien (talk) 20:43, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
Comments
Regretfully, I cannot support. I don't know that it's unreasonable to expect more than nine days of current engagement. I'm not opposing and this should count as a neutral comment rather than a !vote. GMGtalk 21:22, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
GreenMeansGo, I've boldly added a comments section and added your comment here. I think your comment would be better placed here in a comments section than a support section, but please feel free to revert what I've done if you don't feel what I've done is appropriate. --Ferien (talk) 21:49, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new topic on this or other appropriate talk page. No further edits should be made to this text.
The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new topic on this or other appropriate talk page. No further edits should be made to this text.
The result was: Successful application. There is a clear consensus in support of this proposed grant of rights. BD2412T 16:21, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hey there! Though I'm not very publicly active here, I'd like to nominate Danny for sysop. I'm a steward, and, as such, need to deal with oversighting edits here. Normally when that is needed, Danny is the one to report. He's fairly active on IRC and crosswiki, while also being a global rollbacker. Considering this, I think him being a sysop would be really good to curb disruption here on the project. Best regards, —Thanks for the fish!talk•contribs 20:30, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Candidate's acceptance: Thank you for those kind words. I accept the nomination. If I become an admin, I intend to be active in countervandalism and speedy deletion, cleaning up pages that are inappropriate for this project (eg Special:Contributions/173.2.194.178) and blocking ltas while waiting for stewards to lock globally. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 20:32, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Vote ends: 4 July 2020 20:30 (UTC)
Support
Support Diligent worker, competent with the tools, would do well to assist here. Operator873 (talk) 20:44, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I have seen Danny around on many WMF wikis and he is always very helpful. On other projects, I would be inclined to say, "Wait six months and make constructive edits in the meantime" but this wiki is a small community and is pretty lax when it comes to user rights, etc. I'd be happy to work with him if he's willing to put in the time. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:42, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If approved, I'll be sure to reach out if I have any questions and well tread cautiously in admin areas outside of ltas and speedy deletion --DannyS712 (talk) 08:47, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - While I haven't had many direct interactions with this user, it does appear that he is well equipped and willing to help here (and we definitely need it). ~ UDScott (talk) 15:35, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new topic on this or other appropriate talk page. No further edits should be made to this text.
The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new topic on this or other appropriate talk page. No further edits should be made to this text.
The result was: Successful application. There is a clear consensus in support of this proposed grant of rights. BD2412T 01:38, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I am going to be bold, recognizing this community only has 4 active administrators, and nominate myself for administrator permissions to help the community grow.
Some of you may only know me by the nonstop vandal attacks that occur on my talk page, others may have seen my category work, anti-vandalism efforts, archiving of our discussion pages or the improvements I have made locally to templates or noticeboards. I have about 4,500 edits here and my favourite project so far is the upgrade of the requested entries page.
Outside of Wikiquote, I am an administrator on Wikimedia Commons where I specialize in copyright licensing and also have an anti-vandalism background as a global administrator across most Wikimedia projects. I have a technical background and am good with templates, MediaWiki pages, and scripting - my work as a global interface admin also brings me here occasionally to work on improving your wiki interface.
If successful in this request, I would improve response time on Wikiquote:Vandalism in progress where there are many unanswered requests and help out at Wikiquote:Votes for deletion where there is also an admin backlog. As a regular user, I plan to continue verifying quotes added by new users and continue with my category work.
Thank you for your consideration,
~riley(talk) 20:05, 8 April 2020 (UTC) Note: As an addition to my original request, I would like to additionally request interface admin rights locally on this project to avoid use of global interface administrator permissions. As stated below by GMG, we currently only have one interface admin. ~riley(talk) 21:04, 10 April 2020 (UTC) Vote ends: 15 April 2020 20:05 UTC[reply]
Support - I've worked with Riley quite a bit in the past. Obviously both of us are administrators on Commons. We need more active admins here, but specifically, we desperately need more active administrators who are tech savvy. No strike against our current cadre, but myself included, we are not all exactly the type of people you really want to go to if you need some troubleshooting on a complex template, much less the kinds of people who know the first thing about something as complex as edit filters or MediaWiki...stuff. As I speak, we have exactly one interface administrator on the entire project, and none of us who could request the right seem to have enough confidence in our competence to put it to good use. That's a pretty big problem, and it's a disservice to the project when I have to look up users like Riley on IRC to try to get them to explain to me how to do the simplest thing technology-wise to try to combat some of our most persistent and troublesome problems.
At the end of the day, Riley is committed, trustworthy, and competent with the toolkit across multiple projects. I wish we had a hundred more like him lining up to volunteer. GMGtalk 13:54, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I have faith that this user will be a great asset for this project and help combat vandalism and other issues. I also echo GreenMeansGo's concerns in that we lack many tech-savvy admins (I for one am certainly not). ~ UDScott (talk) 13:57, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support per the above. He is a competent and highly trusted user. We have also worked together in the past and I do believe that he would be of help to this project as an administrator. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 15:18, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support He will be an asset to the project as a whole. We worked in meta and I enjoy his collaborative style of work. They are also sound in judgement and willing to take hard decisions for the good of the project. All good traits of an admin. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 16:27, 10 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 topic on this or other appropriate talk page. No further edits should be made to this text.
Requests for checkuser
Wikiquote does not currently have local checkusers. Requests for checkuser actions can be made on the noticeboard and a steward can be notified if needed.
Note: Discussions in this section should last at least 14 days.
The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new topic on this or other appropriate talk page. No further edits should be made to this text.
The result was: Successful application. There is a clear consensus in support of this proposed grant of rights. BD2412T 22:04, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate all of the work from all our users and existing admins and crats. We're all volunteers, we all volunteer to the greatest extent of our available time, and many of us are active across multiple projects. But we seem to have issues closing things in a timely manner as a community. This includes RfAs. As seldom as they need closed, there are recent examples like this RfA that went on for five months before it was closed.
As far as I am aware, I have been among our most active admins since getting the bit, and I'm usually around on a daily basis in one form or another. I think it may be beneficial for our project to have another active crat. If I'm not the person for the job, and anyone else would like to volunteer, then I would happily withdraw this self-nom and support any other active admin instead. I would like to recruit more admins, and would love the opportunity for myself or anyone else to close many more RfAs as successful, because I think it benefits the value that we give to the public in building what we all build together. Thank you for your time and consideration. GMGtalk 17:35, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Vote ends: 07 December 2019
Support per this discussion, which makes it patently clear that this guy is the only one running tings around here, pace his ever-present-in-spirit colleagues. ——SerialNumber54129 17:56, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per (self) nom and Serial Number 54129 --DannyS712 (talk) 20:29, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Serial #54129. GMG is quite active, and in my opinion the most active (sorry to offend anyone) admin since getting the mop, and this seems appropriate. GMG has demonstrated time and again on various projects that he can be trusted with advanced permissions. I have no concerns that he will use these rights appropriately. I am concerned, though, of the lack of commentary on this request; this reflects on the activity of the current admin force. ~riley(talk) 02:04, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@BD2412, UDScott: The voting period of 14 days has been met (by five months) and there appears to be consensus to promote. Care to close? ~riley(talk) 21:30, 7 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 topic on this or other appropriate talk page. No further edits should be made to this text.
Requests for importing right
The import function allows editors to upload specially formatted text into Wikiquote, or to transwiki such material after it is exported from another Wikimedia project. Only a Meta steward can add or drop any user's importing right. After requests are approved here, they will be reported to m:Steward requests/Permissions.
None currently
Requests for interface administrator
None currently
Requests for Template editor
I would like Template editor user rights because I edit templates a lot and if given these rights could improve templates further. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 19:51, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ilovemydoodle: Do you have this right on other wikis? If so, how have you used it? What are examples of templates that you would modify with this right locally? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:28, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
