Wikiquote:Requests for adminship

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.

Instructions

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.

For closed votes, see #Past discussions.

Current time is 18:36:09, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Votes of confidence

See WQ:VP#Vote of confidence

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. By clear consensus of the community, User:Lemonaka is now an admin. BD2412 T 13:02, 10 March 2023 (UTC).

Lemonaka (talk · contributions)

Dear all my friends and editors. I believe it's the time for me to write an RFA. I have worked for English Wikiquote for a while, mainly on anti-vandalism work, anti-spam and something like that. I have imported WD.js for anti-vandalism work, discussing the banner of the Wikiquote, helping with the new method to fight against LTA (1RR&blocking) and they finally cooled down. When they attacked again a lot recently, I believe it's the time for me to give the community my last effort.

I'm active here nearly all days, so I can rapidly deal with vandals and trolls. I'm happy to answer question to newcomers, check my contributions on English Wikipedia Teahouse and we will get that. In all words, I'm ready for the challenge.

Regards. Lemonaka (talk) 05:28, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Candidate's acceptance: self-nomination

Vote ends: 10 March 2023 05:28 (UTC)

---

Discussion

Support

• Support Very helpful user, has good judgement, and has already tinkered with tools to help admins. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:23, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
• Support -- absolutely. Helpful, friendly, smart. It's pretty clear to me we need more admins here. Thank you Lemonaka for volunteering. Antandrus (talk) 17:52, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
• Support Has a good amount of experience and has been helpful here. As Antandrus said, we do need more admins here and Lemonaka would definitely make a good one. Thanks! --Ferien (talk) 20:35, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
• Support. I believe this user has demonstrated a willingness to help and that is much appreciated. I have seen some of the arguments regarding a lack of experience, but I don't find it compelling enough to outweigh the positives I see. ~ UDScott (talk) 01:36, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
• Support — I agree with UDScott's assessments. ~ ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki ⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 00:42, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

• Undecided: I am torn on this one. It was an easy Oppose for me since my first negative interactions with Lemonaka whom I met just as they arrived at the English Wikiquote (ENWQ) in October 2022. But now that Antandrus for whom I have great respect and virtually owe my wiki-existence to, says that their intuition leads them to believe that Lemonaka will make a good admin… This same intuition, I guess, that allowed Antandrus, to open up to me, a nobody, when I first met them here at ENWQ during my second year here.

For those here who do not appreciate what a unique phenomenon it was for me, just try to imagine what it is like for someone who is shunned by almost everyone who knew them before they were wiki-disgraced and being attacked by total strangers at every wiki-corner, to suddenly have a respected ENWP admin show kindness to them, someone whom they just happened to wiki-meet by chance and knew nothing about. Antandrus’s willingness to listen to me was unfathomable. To have such a person not only listen to you, but really listen to you is heaven. They know you better than you know yourself and they bring out the best in you.

My own intuition told me when I first wiki-met Lemonaka that they were at enwq for the single purpose of heading for an RFA as soon as they could. I imagined them arriving here directly from one of those forums, off or on-wiki, where all the power-grabber-wannabees gather and exchange tips with others just like them. But as I say, I am now torn.. —This unsigned comment is by Ottawahitech (talk • contribs) .

Comments

• @Antandrus, @Koavf Please explain to a simpleton how you can support so enthusiastically a user who only joined enwq less than 6 month ago, with seemingly no other experience as an admin on any other wmf-project?

  Why are there no sections for questions/discussion such as the one for User:Ferien? Ottawahitech (talk) 20:13, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

  Ottawahitech, there was a general comments section where discussion could have taken place or questions asked. I've just added support, oppose and comments sections for this RfA. --Ferien (talk) 20:32, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

  Sorry @ferien, am I missing something? what "general comments section" are you referring to? Ottawahitech (talk) 16:07, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

  Because he's a very helpful user, has good judgement, and has already tinkered with tools to help admins. If being an admin on another project were a prerequisite to being an admin, then no one would ever be an admin. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:37, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

  Hi @Ottawahitech, thanks for your question. I believe if being a sysop on another project is a must to become an sysop, no one can become a sysop. This is a simple logic question. However, I'm familiar with sysop tools since I was a sysop on miraheze for a while. I'm also familiar with policies on wikiquote, hopefully these can prove my trustworthy. Lemonaka (talk) 08:55, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

  Ottawahitech - Instinct, intuition. I trust my own judgment, having been an enwiki admin for 18 years, and having run a large department in a high-tech firm for 20. Lemonaka has an abundance of good faith, wants to help, I've communicated with him off-wiki and everything just seems good to me. :) Antandrus (talk) 17:59, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

• User Lemonaka joined Wikipedia 4 months ago. With true respect to all that Lemonaka has done on this project, I would personally refrain from granting powers to such an user. - Emilija Knezevic (talk) 12:14, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

  Hi, thanks for your comments. Surely you have the right to cast your vote :) , here's my opinion I'd like to share.
  Sysop is not something called power, it's just some tools using to help the whole project. If I was granted such tools, I will use them to do anti-vandalism works, save time for other editors. Elsely, I'd still do such kind of work, just reporting them on wikiquote:VIP and tagging page for deletion, prod or speedy. If they had lagged a lot, I just emailed some sysops on this project. Granting or not will not change my purpose on this project, and I really don't want to take it as a reward or something for my previous work.
  TL;DR, I'm focusing on what I can do in future no matter granted or not. Lemonaka (talk) 14:04, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Ask Lemonaka questions here

• Why did you join ENWQ? Did anyone convince you it was a good idea? If so, why? Ottawahitech (talk) 19:55, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
  • @Ottawahitech Hi, I joined ENWQ for the following reasons.
    I'm in a place where I had to use open proxy for editing WMF projects, I'm familiar with English, so I first tried with English Wikipedia, but my proxy was blocked there. So, if you check my previous edit history, I mainly edited on meta-wiki and wiki-commons, where my proxy was not blocked. Then I came to English Wikiquote, I found there are lots of things I can do to help, so I'd like to stay here and give the community all my efforts.
    Lemonaka (talk) 20:19, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

    @Lemonaka: I followed your advice and checked your previous edit history, but what I see is different than the picture you paint here. Actually according to xtools analysis of your contributions you have made over 4000 thousand contributions to the English Wikipedia and only hundreds to the English Wikiquote. which makes me wonder why you did not apply for an admin position over there, or at Commons or at META instead of here? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:23, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

    @Ottawahitech Thanks for your questions, Wikimedia commons and meta wiki has a lot of sysops, they are, in some points, having enough hands for work. However, my experience on these projects can help us in English Wikiquote. Lemonaka (talk) 17:32, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

• How can we trust that you will stick around (many admins do not) and help achieve a better Information source for the public and a more friendly working environment for volunteers? Ottawahitech (talk) 19:55, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
  • I tried to be polite on answering all the questions, in Wikipedia, it's called to w:wp:civility. Yeah, I had to admit that no one, including me, will give others a smile all the time, but when I got frustrated, I tried to leave the place for others instead of having conflicts with others. Agree to disagree is useful for such situation.
    Lemonaka (talk) 20:19, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
• Do you believe it is possible to build better content here merely by reverting vandalism?—This unsigned comment is by Ottawahitech (talk • contribs) 19:55, 4 March 2023 (UTC).

• No, it is impossible to build better content here merely by anti-vandalism. I'd like to agree with you on this point. But please remember, anti-vandalism is a work must be done, no matter with or without sysop tools. Anti vandalism can keep the project clean, but if you can contribute some quotes with high quality, it is also welcomed. They are both ways of contributions. If you have a plan for developing this project, we can have a discussion further.

Lemonaka (talk) 20:19, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

• What are your views on:

1. Censorship?
2. The Information Warfare Community & their influence on WP & WQ?
3. POV pushing that masquerades as NPOV pushing?
4. Do you think editors should be allowed to post anonymously here?
5. Do you think that thought provoking, revolutionary ideas should be hidden (censored)?
6. Do you think people should be treated as innocent until or unless proven guilty?
7. What do you think the phrase "using fair words to cloak foul deeds" means?

184.4.82.218 18:49, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

@184.4.82.218 Although I'd like to answer all your questions, and I promised to the community to be kind and nice, after checking your contributions, I believe you are trolling across the projects. Especially User_talk:DeirgeDel made me really hesitate to answer any of these questions.
TL;DR, if you are sockpuppeting, please refrain from doing so. You may be evaded checking once or twice, but not for all the life. Lemonaka (talk) 17:12, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

@Lemonaka, I would like to hear the answers to the questions by 184.4.82.218, whom you have disparaged without offering proof. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:29, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

@Ottawahitech If you really cannot find why this is an obvious logout sock of a trolling user, then it will be more harmful for me to tell you why this is a sock. W:WP:BEANS applied. Lemonaka (talk) 23:07, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

• @Lemonaka: You say you are "familiar with sysop tools since I was a sysop on miraheze for a while":

Can you please tell us more about Miraheze: I see that the English Wikipedia does not consider it to be notable so has no article for it. My own attempt to add it to Simple Wikipedia in 2020 (just before I was blocked there) did not end up successfully. Only the Spanish Wikipedia has an article about Miraheze at: w:es:Miraheze. Is this Spanish article accurate in your opinion? Ottawahitech (talk) 00:00, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

@Ottawahitech One of the founders of Miraheze was globally banned by WMF Office, considering this, if you read w:Draft_Talk:Miraheze, you will know why English Wikipedia doesn't want to include such a topic.
Miraheze is a wiki-farm, though most contents are fan-crafts content, but I recommend you to step away from since your behaviours here are highly unlikely to get a good comment there. Most miraheze-wikis are highly self-government, which means you are highly likely to collect blocks and then be banned globally. Get ready for yourself if you want to dig deep.
For Spanish Wikipedia, I'm es-0, so obvious that I don't know it's opinion. I may google translated it, but I didn't see the neccesity.
P.S. Not to reproach you, but there's another thing that I strongly recommend you -- some of your questions can be solved by reading yourself, just using the search in Wiki for policies, discussions instead of asking every policies one by one to others. We all have busy RL problems to solve. Lemonaka (talk) 00:20, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

• Recuse:*Oppose: Reluctantly but precautionary on a W:WP:TOOSOON basis. Lemonaka has every sign of being a good admin. Indeed about a week ago I actually considered asking Lemonaka to stand but was concerned about them having some (hopefully temporary) health issues earlier per earlier in the year (see their talk page revisions) which would have made me very reluctant to ask them to take adminship which could become very stressfull and adverse to one's health. I was very tempted to support especially due to the massive load put on this Wiki through at least one sockmaster and the usual anon-ip suspects and what I personally, rightly or wrongly, feel was a collective failure of admins, local and global, to get topside of things quickly and decisively. (NB: I do appreciate each admin is a volunteer with RL considerations). I'm not too bothered about this (slightly naive given my consequential actions from it) but I'd consider myself hard-battered from deletion discussions on enWP. Lemonaka's been excellent in anti-vandalism work here and the tools would give them the ability to clear CSD's quickly which would be a benefit. However there is a downside with what I believe to be a low content/anti-vandal work ratio - which can sometimes be a problem. I also note what may be a hesitancy to become involved into VfD's. To be aboslutely clear I don't think Lemonaka has done anything wrong to cause me to vote oppose. If this was an enWP RFA I would (almost certainly) be voting oppose on a TOOSOON basis and while tempted otherwise in desperate situation that is how I choose to vote here. -- DeirgeDel ^t_a^c 10:45, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

After deep thought I have decided to withdraw my opposition and move to RECUSE. While I regard TOOSOON as important I am also aware Lemonaka is very likely to hit the ground running as an effecitve admin. The fact Lemonaka doesn't get my support vote does not diminish my moral support and and I very much admire the work they are doing and hopefully are likely to do on the English Wikiquote. -- DeirgeDel ^t_a^c 00:34, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

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. Consensus is clear; User:Saroj Uprety is now an admin. BD2412 T 19:18, 21 November 2022 (UTC).

Saroj Uprety (talk · contributions)

Hello everyone, I am Saroj Uprety. I'd like to request for administrator permission to help to fight against LTAs, spammers, vandalism.

I have read and understand the policies. Thank you for your time. --Saroj Uprety (talk) 17:59, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Candidate's acceptance: Self-nomination

Vote ends: 21 November 2022 17:59 (UTC)

---

• Support I am glad you decided to nominate yourself, as I've seen you on the vandalism patrol a lot and at times when other admins aren't available (my schedule is sheer nonsense). SU seems to be a competent user who has been here for two years and works in admin-adjacent work by reverting vandalism. Giving him the mop to do blocks and revdels as necessary would just make things more efficient. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:44, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
• Support definitely! Seems like you often need admin assistance when other admins aren't around. Thanks for volunteering, Ferien (talk) 18:47, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
• Support - agree with those above, appears to be a conscientious user who will help in the vandalism fight. ~ UDScott (talk) 19:23, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
• Support — I agree with the above statements. ~ ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki ⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 23:29, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
• Support; everything I have seen so far is good, and another hand would be helpful. Thank you Saroj for volunteering. Antandrus (talk) 04:28, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

@Koavf: As someone who tries (valiantly at times) to contribute content here, I often wonder why vandalism patrol contributions are valued so much more than content contributions? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 17:11, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

If I may, my response would be that both are of course valued, but one does not need to be an admin to provide content contributions, while being an admin does provide more tools with which to fight vandalism (which has always been and will likely always be a problem for the site). ~ UDScott (talk) 17:13, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

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. Consensus is clear; User:Ferien is now an admin. BD2412 T 20:15, 2 March 2022 (UTC).

Ferien (talk · contributions)

Nomination

Hello there,

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)

Candidate's acceptance: Not applicable, self-nomination. --Ferien (talk) 18:00, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

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)

@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)

Discussion

Support

1. 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)
2. 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)
3. 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)
4. 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)
5. Support That our regular LTAs don't like you very much is enough for me. GMG^talk 17:10, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
6. Let's do this! --Synoman Barris (talk) 10:23, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
7. Support. Don't see any issues; answer regarding Wikiquote:Quotability is sufficient. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:42, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Oppose

1. 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)

   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)

   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)

   @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?

   Also what does GS mean? Ottawahitech (talk) 21:15, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

   1. 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.
   2. 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)

   "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)

   @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)

2. Oppose. Too soon. Ottawahitech (talk) 21:48, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

General comments

Protected

Please note that I have semi-protected this page due to interference from LTAs --DannyS712 (talk) 07:08, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

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. GMG^talk 12:24, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Aphaia (talk · contributions)

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)

Vote ends: 4 September 2021 08:24 (UTC)

---

Support

1. 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)
2. 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)

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. GMG^talk 21:22, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

  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)

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. BD2412 T 16:21, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

DannyS712 (talk · contributions)

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)

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)

Vote ends: 4 July 2020 20:30 (UTC)

---

Support

1. Support Diligent worker, competent with the tools, would do well to assist here. Operator873 (talk) 20:44, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
2. 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)

   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)

3. 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)

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. BD2412 T 01:38, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

~riley (talk · contributions)

Hello,

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

---

• 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. GMG^talk 13:54, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

• 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)
• 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)
• 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)

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.

---

None currently

---

Requests for bureaucratship

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. BD2412 T 22:04, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

GreenMeansGo (talk · contributions)

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. GMG^talk 17:35, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

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)
• Support per (self) nom and Serial Number 54129 --DannyS712 (talk) 20:29, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
• 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)
• Strong support--Savonhelmi (talk) 11:04, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
• Support--Spinoziano (talk) 10:07, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

@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)

• Y Done BD2412 T 22:04, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

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 rollback

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.--Lemonaka (talk) 15:30, 4 March 2023 (UTC).

MathXplore

Hello, I would like to request rollbacker rights at here so I can help the project to counter vandalism or spamming. I already have rollbacker rights at simple English Wikipedia/Wiktionary so I'm sure I know how to use it. My reverts at this project can be seen at here, and a summary of my reverts at other Wikimedia projects can be seen at m:User:MathXplore#Reverts. Thank you. MathXplore (talk) 05:05, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

I think it's fine based on your edits here and elsewhere (and thanks for your edits here). If no one objects for two weeks, then please ping me here and I'll do it. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:19, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

• Support; the help would be appreciated and I believe this user would use the rights well. ~ UDScott (talk) 14:20, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Is it allowed to ask questions? If so, is there a certain format for asking (I have been criticized recently for the way I asked a question on VFD) Ottawahitech (talk) 14:51, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

It's fine to ask (on-topic, respectful, etc.) questions. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:53, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

I have three questions for the admins:

• How many Supports are required to succeed? (a range, I am not asking for an absolute number)
• Are supports without a rationale counted? (example: saying someone is trusted witHout offering details:by whom is the candidate trusted/why/etc.)
• why is this not advertised on VP/elsewhere so that not only "insiders" participate ?

Ottawahitech (talk) 15:27, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

We don't have a local rollback policy: Wikiquote:Rollbackers, so this is a matter of a judgement call. I don't think it's advertised anywhere else because of any particular reason. It's fine to post elsewhere, but for rollback in particular, that is a pretty low bar to cross. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:47, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

support, trusted user Lemonaka (talk) 14:56, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Y Done --Saroj Uprety (talk) 14:33, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

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 flag removal

This section is used for notification (and comment) only. To be effective, it should go to m:Steward requests/Permissions#Removal of access. Requests by the community will occur as #votes of confidence.

---

None currently

---

Past discussions

• 2003
• 2004
• 2005
• 2006
• 2007
• 2008
• 2009
• 2010
• 2011
• 2012
• 2013
• 2014
• 2015
• 2016
• 2018
• 2019