Wikiquote:Requests for adminship/Archives/2019

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. There is a clear absence of support for this nomination at this time. BD2412 T 15:26, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WikiLubber (talk · contributions)

In light of numerous unresolved acts of vandalism (among them, a Toy Story sockpuppet vandal who submits nonsense quotes repeatedly and rubs it in my face, even after a month of protecting my talk page, and refuses to take responsibility for its actions), I humbly request adminship here on Wikiquote. I have been at this site for about 10 years and feel as if I have enough experience and am ready for this opportunity. WikiLubber (talk) 01:29, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate's acceptance: Self-nomination

Vote ends: 2018-11-28

Support A long-time and competent editor. However, I recommend that he activates the e-mail facility on his account.--Abramsky (talk) 10:02, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply How?
  - Go to preferences and add email Miszatomic (talk) 18:47, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. While working to fight vandalism is an admirable practice, the long-standing and continued lack of civility on the part of this user precludes me from ever supporting becoming an admin. Despite many repeated warnings over the years, this behavior has not changed (and the warnings themselves are often blanked without addressing the issue). I do not feel that belittling others and making snap judgments befits an admin. IMHO, this negative behavior unfortunately outshines the otherwise good work. ~ UDScott (talk) 13:13, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply I agree that I had a history of mistakes (the biggest of which were way too long ago), but one IP's repeated blatant vandalism in Toy Story 2 and my talk page simply cannot be overlooked. There was nothing else I could do to get my point across. And someone has to take action against these vandals. WikiLubber (talk) 14:50, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The recent exchange with another user regarding the Ferris Bueller's Day Off page provides a current example of poor behavior that again precludes me from supporting this nomination. ~ UDScott (talk) 02:46, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reply Regardless, there is far poorer behavior on the Toy Story articles that must be stopped. Minor edit wars can wait. WikiLubber (talk) 15:49, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure "I'm bad but that other person is worse" is the best argument for making you an admin. Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 16:41, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What you forced me into was not vandalism. Just an edit war that pretty much any admin can get into. WikiLubber (talk) 01:39, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Most of the edits only focus on films and no other Wikiquote articles such as Wikiquote cleanup where there are articles needing cleanup People cleanup, Film cleanup. There are other areas of Wikiquote the user could focus on. Miszatomic (talk) 19:25, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly Oppose WikiLubber is probably sockpuppeting on edits made through a number of years, in addition to his vandalism. See [1] 2606:5580:30C:7F9E:C970:645E:B158:9CA4 23:38, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly refute That was on Wikipedia, not on Wikiquote, where I never sockpuppeted (purposely). And for your information, I had my name changed from WikiLubber to DawgDeputy on Wikipedia years ago, but for some reason, they never changed it here. Furthermore, those investigations were closed (in most of which, I was exonerated (particularly the earliest ones)). Nevertheless, false accusations should not count in these votes. WikiLubber (talk) 01:36, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. While I find no fault with his good faith, he has recently evidenced what amounts to edit-warring on Ferris Bueller's Day Off and, in discussions regarding that article, cited "rules" that he seems to make up out of thin air and reflect little more than his personal preferences. Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 21:11, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wondering whether there is some other solution to his problems with a vandal? Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 21:11, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reply That edit war you started then is meaningless, for there are bigger issues to deal with. Furthermore, UDScott already addressed what you stated. WikiLubber (talk) 00:26, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Further reply There is no other solution. No matter what report I send to other admins, the same vandalism continues, and not just on film pages, but user talk pages, as two other admins and I found out the hard way. I am trying to make sure vandals are stopped permanently. WikiLubber (talk) 01:45, 3 January 2019 (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 nomination. The candidate is hereby promoted to adminship. BD2412 T 15:29, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GreenMeansGo (talk · contributions)

BD2412 suggested I stand a few weeks ago. If it's welcome then I'm around to help. I first started contributing here in 2015 when I created No Gun Ri Massacre. I've been mulling around categories for a little while, and trying to make things consistent. I've got some experience in cross-wiki vandalism and even my own troll or two who like to remind me on various seldom watched projects how terrible I am. I figure if I can just help out with overt vandalism and spam pages then I'm still helping. I fairly regularly hang out on recent changes and revert vandalism or nominate obvious spam pages for deletion. I'm also a contributor to the English Wikipedia and Commons, and to a lesser extent Wikidata. GMG ^talk 00:11, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate's acceptance: Self-nomination

Vote ends: 04 February 2019

Support - I'm behind GreenMeansGo 100%. WikiLubber (talk) 00:35, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support as good practice 👍 ——SerialNumber54129 07:27, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very high global edit count for user this young. Has collected enough lesser hats in other projects to be trusted with the big one, although their first rollbacker right application in English Wikipedia [2] was rejected only two and half years ago on grounds of insufficient experience with counter-vandalism, but that area has improved greatly since then (and lesser hats in other projects are not a precondition for adminship here). No red flags detected in background check. jni (talk) 08:09, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support as an experienced user who can be trusted. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 12:05, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support as very active and helpful editor.--Risto hot sir (talk) 23:26, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This editor seems conscientious and trustworthy, and I am not aware of any reason to object to the adminship. ~ ♞☤☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 23:52, 30 January 2019 (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: Consensus for removal of rights.. I will notify the stewards. BD2412 T 02:27, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Abramsky (talk · contributions)

As of 07 March 2019 Abramsky has been globally locked by WMF Office action as a globally banned user. Details on exactly why don't appear to be forthcoming but given that it was done as an OA, with basically no explanation, I presume there are privacy issues involved.

Regardless, it is a bit of housekeeping on our end to remove the only advanced user right the account has on any project. So with the necessary quorum of three users in the thread at WQ:AN, I'm opening this discussion. GMG ^talk 14:47, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vote ends: 18 March 2019

Remove as proposer. GMG ^talk 14:47, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Remove as copperfastening an OA. ——SerialNumber54129 14:55, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
They’re a sock of an already globally banned user; nothing to do with privacy afaict. Remove. Vermont (talk) 13:52, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Remove as a globally banned user. (WMF only lists them once, without naming all the sockpuppets when they sneak back in and even repeatedly weasel their way into admin positions.) ~ Ningauble (talk) 14:58, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy remove He can't do any of the things an admin can or should do. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:31, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As much common sense as it may make to summarily removed advanced permissions from an account which is apparently a sock of a globally banned user, I don't believe there is anything currently in local or global policy allowing for this. At any rate, with he account locked, the permissions can't be used anyway, and this is more of a housekeeping task than anything else. GMG ^talk 19:00, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Remove, based on the ban. ~ UDScott (talk) 18:32, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note that the flags were removed by WMF later after the lock. The user is no longer an administrator since 12 March 2019. MarcoAurelio (talk) 19:11, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Five days later, like an afterthought. ~ Ningauble (talk) 00:47, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes, it's quite unfortunate that they a) didn't notify a project that one of their admins had been locked as an office action, b) didn't immediately remove advanced rights, and c) didn't notify us when they eventually did. At the very least, this has run it's required length, and can probably be closed. GMG ^talk 01:14, 20 March 2019 (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.