Jump to content

Wikiquote:Requests for adminship/Archives/2018

Add links
From Wikiquote
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. BD2412 T 21:57, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Koavf (talk · contributions)

[edit]

Vote ends: 2018-02-15

@UDScott: Can you please close this? Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:22, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Y Done, cheers! BD2412 T 22:00, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

[edit]
  • Support. Justin has been around this site for many years and has always fought against vandalism and other issues. I view him as a conscientious and dedicated member of our community and I believe we could benefit from having him as another admin (and we definitely need more admins as there are so few that remain active these days). ~ UDScott (talk) 22:11, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support. Justin is certainly a trusted user, though I have concerns about the sporadic activity. Noting the lack of active admins, this is a definite issue, unless his activity picks up after being granted adminship. hiàn 04:23, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment/Inquiry: I was at the start somewhat inclined to support this self-nomination, despite relatively sparse or sporadic activity in the past, as you seem generally inclined to be helpful. After reviewing some edits I was reminded of a few relatively minor reasons to refrain from doing so, which I yet remained inclined to overlook and let pass, because whatever strong disagreements I might have had with a few of your past assessments and assertions, I don’t currently consider them extreme enough to make any active objections, and remain slightly inclined to support the nomination. I yet believe some explication of your "ideas about how to radically improve the site" would probably be appropriate before the making any final decision upon the matter. ~ ♞☤☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 07:29, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Kalki: Fair. In short, I think the the first immediate change I would like to see is a shift toward a Structured Wikiquote. This will make it dramatically easier to share quotations between language projects, store durable citations, and give context to quotations. I've tried to experiment with this on test.d but haven't made any real headway. In a longer term, I think that it would benefit the community here to 1.) be the focus of more outreach since the community is smaller and the site is far less confusing than (e.g.) Wikipedia and 2.) to find some way of marketing or branding where we can pair quotations with images from c: to have on-demand user-generated gear (t-shirts or coffee mugs) with proceeds going to the WMF and specifically putting money toward the Wikiquote communities. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:39, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have very little interest or objection to any marketing projects which might be developed by anyone for the Wikimedia Foundation, but I actually have much less regard and some repugnance for the database concept being proposed. I would not object to it being developed as a separate option, but truly have no enthusiasm for the idea, and don’t believe it is all that easily workable or desirable. Such a project might be called a "QuoteBase" or something along those lines — but from my perspectives it isn't actually much of a wiki, and should certainly not replace the present project nor ursurp the Wikiquote name. If it is ever developed to any extent perhaps a designation such as "Wikimedia Quotebase" or something similar would be appropriate. Your apparent enthusiasm for such a format doesn’t preclude my support for your nomination as an admin here — but I certainly do not wish to see this project transformed into that one, nor entirely displaced by it. ~ ♞☤☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 08:21, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Kalki: Sure. Nor would an admin on en.wq have the authority or ability to unilaterally make any of those changes. In that respect, it's pretty harmless to give me advanced permissions. My only point in bringing it up above was simply that I've thought about the site, how it operates, and how it could operate. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:28, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I can support this admin nomination, and can even accept potential development of an experimental auxiliary project of such character as has been indicated above, despite having no actual enthusiasm for it. I am not likely to ever become very involved in such, if it ever is developed — but I will restate that I certainly have no wish to see the wiki project which Wikiquote has been transformed into or replaced by any such "database format" project, which I perceive to be in many ways far more problematic, and far less appealing overall. I would strongly oppose those sort of efforts. ~ ♞☤☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 10:11, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per UDScott (though I share the concerns raised by hiàn and Kalki). Good luck. ~ DanielTom (talk) 21:23, 1 June 2018 (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: Unsuccessful application. BD2412 T 13:32, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My reading of past adminship discussions leads me to conclude that Wikiquote employs approximately the same high standard for promotion as Wikipedia, which is around 75% support. Here, we have three votes in opposition and five in support, which is about 63% support (even with diminished weight given to Coyotedomino's opposition, based on his minimal prior participation in this project, support does not meet a convincing threshold). The comments in opposition, and some in support, lend to an impression that a future bid would succeed, once the applicant has more experience under his belt, and perhaps takes greater care to avoid the appearance of canvassing. I would suggest continuing to participate diligently for another six months or so, and then apply again. BD2412 T 13:32, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just A Regular New Yorker (talk · contributions)

[edit]

I would really like to be an administrator because I have been editing Wikiquote for approximately 8 months and at this point, I feel I have enough experience. There are protected articles that I wish to be able to edit, and I feel that many sysops do not respond timely to suggestions on talk pages. Additionally, I have plenty of ideas for improving the site. J.A.R.N.Y.|🗣 18:21, 1 June 2018 (UTC)(Edit - I would like to specify my statement as per Chetsford’s comment. Oftentimes, I am on Wikiquote at odd hours. During these periods I tend to encounter vandals that create multiple nonsense pages. Instead of being able to block them and roll back their edits, I have to tag the page for speedy deletion and report the vandal. The vandal sees this going on, and often tries to stop it. One even went as far as to blank my userpage. Additionally, I have encountered many protected pages that I want to edit. As explained above, the only way for me to do this now, is to contact a sysop, and ask, but by the time it gets done, (if ever) the edit may be distorted to not represent the original edit I wanted. I have no intention of abusing the privileges. I simply need the ability to do work without being constantly stopped, because I lack sysop privileges. J.A.R.N.Y.|🗣 11:34, 3 June 2018 (UTC))(Edit - To elaborate on "...I have plenty of ideas for improving the site.", I would like to share one idea. There was a request to create a Wikiquote app, similar to the Wikipedia app. I know people who entirely edit wikis using apps. Granted, Wikiquote will never garner the same viewership as Wikipedia simply because of the nature of the websites, but doing this will help bring this website into the public eye, and make it more user friendly. J.A.R.N.Y.|🗣️|📧 01:07, 4 June 2018 (UTC))[reply]

Vote ends: 18:21:00, 8 June 2018

Discussion

[edit]
Reply I do not have an extensive history of vandalism on Wikipedia. You can check my Wikipedia edits here. I have vandalized Wikipedia, as stated on my userpage, but it was fairly minor, and a vote regarding my subsequent block [1] unanimously decided to unblock me. Either way, that point is irrelevant, since this is Wikiquote, not Wikipedia. I was told by a user on the Village Pump that a block on Wikipedia will not affect a sysop nomination, but I should try to get unblocked (which I have). J.A.R.N.Y.|🗣 20:19, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I'm not sure you have enough experience, but I believe you are well intentioned and unlikely to misuse the admin tools. (Should you be elected, please use them carefully – mostly to fight obvious vandalism and the like.) Good luck. ~ DanielTom (talk) 21:06, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Weak Support The aforementioned vandalism on Wikipedia, on review, appears to be a single integrated incident from his youth (albeit a relatively recent youth) for which JARNY took full responsibility and has not repeated. His contributions to Wikiquote, over nearly 1500 edits, seem to be constructive. That said, his rationale for wanting admin tools is a little light, however, given the current paucity of WQ admins I would generally support extending them to him. Chetsford (talk) 00:27, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note - I've edited my comment to "Support" given the more detailed iteration JARNY offers about his need for admin tools. Chetsford (talk) 23:28, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Reply @Abramsky: I did not realize that this was considered inappropriate. My intent was not to request that you vote support, rather I simply wanted to notify you of the voting so that you may take part. However, I will stop doing this in the future. J.A.R.N.Y.|🗣️|📧 17:40, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I am sorry, but J.A.R.N.Y. is incorrect. The message on my talk page says unambiguously "Request for adminship Please share your support". I cannot accept as an administrator anyone who claims that this is not a request for support.--Abramsky (talk) 16:15, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Reply You are correct in that the post was poorly worded and perhaps not in good taste. In my defense, I asked BD2412 with a similar request, and he did not make any mention of him feeling that it was inappropriate to do so. His only response was, "I am also a 'crat here, so I will likely be closing the discussion. It would therefore be a conflict if I also proffered a substantive opinion". However, I understand what you are saying, and I respect your opinion which is why I have promised not to do it again. J.A.R.N.Y.|🗣️|📧 16:40, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This editor has made some worthy contributions, and certainly seems interested in being active here, but impetuousness and presumptuousness were two of the less admirable characteristics which I very strongly noted in some of the behavior of this editor, very early on. Though I believe that I probably have previously declined to be overtly critical of most of these actions and apparent attitudes, I certainly do not notice a clear decline in those two traits, though some manifestations may have become somewhat more circumspect. Every human being is unique in complex ways which defy any simplistic analysis, but there are behaviors of several past editors which to me seem much echoed in his, perhaps the closest match in many ways, to my current perceptions, being that of Zarbon (talk · contributions) — though thankfully this editor clearly does not seem so enamored of promoting quotes and ideas of Nazis or overt fascism as that editor often seemed to be. Forms of villain-worship was something so prominently an apparent characteristic of Zarbon's attitudes and mentality, and those he chose to promote, that I could not contemplate him ever having much chance of becoming an admin here. The impetuousness and presumptuousness which I continue to perceive in J.A.R.N.Y. is clearly in many ways less extreme and ridiculous, and more accommodating to many of the sensibilities of others, so I am not inclined to count him out quite so casually, as eventually maturing well enough to be worthy of adminship here. Certainly, at this point, he has actively gathered the interest and involvement of people willing to support him, more than those willing to be overtly decline such support, or expressly oppose his self-nomination, as I currently must do.
    I have been inclined to oppose this nomination from the start, but refrained from stating it to this point, as I contemplated what to indicate and not to indicate of my various objections, and permitting others to make their own observations. I hope my comments might perhaps persuade others to join in expressing their current reservations or objections, but in the coming week I probably won't have much time to extensively elaborate on many of my own. So it goes… ⨀∴☥☮♥∵ॐ …Blessings. ~ ♞☤☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 11:52, 7 June 2018 (UTC) + tweak[reply]
Reply Thank you for taking the time to write a detailed opinion. I understand where you are coming from, especially with regard to Risto hot sir and quote of the day. With regard to the latter, I even went as far as to make my own quote of the day page to 'beat you to it' in an act that was admittedly rash and poorly thought out. However, I feel that now that I have been made aware of the seriousness of my actions, now that I know that others care about how I handle certain scenarios, I will try to be more thought out in my editing. I would appreciate that if I do something that you feel is inappropriate, you reach out to me to let me know. I won't be insulted to get advice from a far more seasoned editor than I am. J.A.R.N.Y.|🗣️|📧 16:51, 7 June 2018 (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.

Request for interface admin: Koavf

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Requests_for_adminship/Archives/2018&oldid=2722322"