Wikiquote talk:Administrators

template:DIRMARK T

• Please read commons:Template talk:DIRMARK.
• Please protect template:DIRMARK against moves and edits. Thanks in advance! best regards en:User:Gangleri | T 22:56, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Language skills of administrators

Based on s:Wikisource_talk:Administrators#Language_skills_of_administrators that I initiated there, I would like to suggest admins to voluntarily disclose their language skills. As we have so many translated quotes, knowing the language skills of administrators may make it easier to request translation verification and for inter-language coordinations. My dear fellow admins, how would you think of my idea?--Jusjih 02:30, 28 December 2007 (UTC) (admin here and on English Wikisource)

@Jusjih, I agree. It is very important for the community to know how well versed an admin is in the English language, and ALSO, in this global environment, what other languages the admin knows. Just my $.02 Ottawahitech (talk) 17:13, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Hamid Bin Ahmad Al-Rifaie

• Why did you delete the article ... We have repaired the article .. I have to add the sources .. I have also attached files for books PDF format ... I'm astonished by this act???? Is it deleted for deletion only??FALCON-MAN 08:26, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

  The article was deleted pursuant to Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Hamid Bin Ahmad Al-Rifaie, where the consensus was that the subject is not sufficiently notable. Proponents for keeping the article did not provide persuasive evidence that the works are widely quoted or noted in sources independent of the author's affiliates. ~ Ningauble 15:48, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

• The article was nominated for deletion for certain reasons listed there .... Defects have been repaired and the addition of sources for the article ... As well as the addition of books and files attached to PDF format ..... Question: What is the benefit of the vote if the article had been repaired!!! Voting was on the defects, and defects repaired?? So the vote has no value to him??? In other words: the vote was for some reason ... The reason ended ... So vote for him no value FALCON-MAN 16:05, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

nutshell

I have removed a newly added "nutshell" from this page (copied from Wikipedia), which read "Administrators are users trusted with access to certain tools. They are expected to observe a high standard of conduct, to use the tools fairly, and never to use them to gain advantage in a dispute."

I am not sure we need one, but I would not object if it accurately summarized the page. However, I think this language places an emphasis on behavioral issues present in the Wikipedia policy but not in the Wikiquote version. One may hope it never becomes necessary to add that particular emphasis here. ~ Ningauble 22:38, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Inertia

To ask, is this person an Administrator?72.184.129.252 06:51, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Help with stats

I would like to ask if there is a way I can compile stats of local Wikiquote contributions for different local languages for newly created Wikiquote articles and improved ones in the past 30 days especially getting the stats for women wikiquote.user:Shoodho

Changes proposed by Ottawahitech are substantial and deserve discussion

How the article began up until December 2023, and how it begins now, after my revert:

Administrators are Wikiquotians who have "sysop rights".↵Current English Wikiquote policy is to grant this access liberally to anyone who has been an active Wikiquote contributor for a while and is generally a known and trusted member of the community.↵"This should be no big deal," as Jimbo has said. "Sysop" and "administrator" are really misnomers, as they are just Wikiquote users who have had performance and security-based restrictions on a couple of features lifted because they seemed like trustworthy folks and asked nicely. Sysops are not imbued with any special authority, and are equal to everybody else in terms of editorial responsibility.

On December 10, 2023, Ottawahitech removed this established text and replaced it with the following:

An administrator is a user with specific tasks who is trusted by the community.

Being an administrator is not a title of merit or difference compared to other Wikipedians, but a service function for which a user voluntarily decides to take responsibility; in fact, an administrator does not have more rights than other users nor does he enjoy particular privileges; on the other hand his duties are very specific. To carry out his tasks he is provided with some additional features of the software.

The term of office is not pre-established and an administrator has the right to resign from their office. If serious problems arise, an administrator can be removed (see the relevant paragraph).

The original version was clear and clean, helpful to anyone interested in the duties of an admin and the road to becoming one. The changes removed specific and useful information, replacing it with a bunch of editorializing, which is not even accurate. In fact, an admin DOES have more rights than other users, e.g. the "mop," the "tools," whatever you want to call them, are wielded by admins and not by everybody. This is why, per BRD, I restored the original version. I hope others will comment on whether or not some new wording should have consensus. HouseOfChange (talk) 02:24, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

About Rauf Javad

I hope you will be generous enough to help us! — Nicat Kamal Arif Hikmət türk (talk). 18:50, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Please see the template I just posted to your talk page and familiarize yourself with our policies. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:43, 21 October 2024 (UTC)