Wikibooks:Administrators/Status request archive

GrooveDog

Well, let's see. I started helping this project a few weeks ago when Pmlinediter mentioned it on IRC (heh, if this was RfA i'd be slaughtered for saying that word. ;)). I'd never worked on Wikibooks before, and as there's so much here to be written, it looked great. So I started contributing. I've written a few pages on topics such as card games, Cookbook, music, and intend to continue. I've got about 130 edits and contribute frequently, and would use the extra tools mostly for some page moving where a redirect is really not required (suppressredirect). Another admin to help fight the small amount of vandalism we receive would be helpful too, I monitor the rc feed on irc.wikimedia.org and can usually pick up vandalism edits as they are made. Thanks for your comments, GrooveDog (talk) 00:47, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

• Support Trusted, should do fine with the tools. Tempodivalse [talk] 01:41, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support Trusted here and on other projects, active contributor. MacMed^talk_stalk 18:24, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support - Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 12:25, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support - WTHN ! :) Yotcmdr (talk) 10:38, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
• Result: Clear consensus to promote. Congratulations, GrooveDog, you're now an admin. Pmlineditor ∞ 10:39, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

This discussion has finished. Please don't change it.

Tempodivalse

Hi, i'm requesting bureaucrat access at this wiki. The SEWB community has expanded considerably over the past few weeks, now with about 7-10 active users, and i think we've gotten to the size where we could do with some bureaucrats, instead of being dependent on the stewards at Meta for things like +sysoping and bot requests. I'm among the most active users here (i usually check the RC at least a few times a day), so I would likely be able to respond to any bureaucrat tasks in a timely manner. I have bureaucrat access at SEWQ and the English Wikinews, so i already am familiar with what bureaucrats do. :-) Regardless of this RfB's result, i'm here to stay. Thanks for your consideration, Tempodivalse [talk] 00:42, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

• Support - We need a bureaucrat. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 00:47, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support a local bureaucrat. If needed I can run for this right as well. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:48, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose I really hate to oppose anyone, especially someone who's helped so much with the WB namespace of this project so much. It's really not that I don't trust you, I truly do believe that you'd be a good judge of consensus and trust you and everything. It's really your lack of mainspace contribs. I don't intend to sound like a certain anger-filled page, it's just that in all seriousness, to save this project (it's up for being closed), we need contributions in the mainspace, new books/pages and the like. You just don't have those, you make spelling corrections and other gnomey things (that's extremely helpful, btw) but at the moment we need our active contributors to get into building our content rather then worrying about our project side. Meta can handle our requests for the moment, we have no active bots and everyone here has SUL so no one will really need renaming atm. A week or so of full, mainspace contributions and I'd have absolutely no problem supporting you. Just my two cents. GrooveDog (talk) 01:12, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose Well really per GrooveDog. Please contribute to the mainspace first. This vote might change if you do such work. Pmlineditor ∞ 08:12, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

  Okay. Groovedog brings up a good point that mainspace expansion, rather than admin-related maintenance, is needed to help save the wiki from closure. I'll try to create some new books, thanks for the suggestion. :-) Cheers Tempodivalse [talk] 13:28, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

  No hard feelings or anything. :) Just that atm we really don't need to be worrying about new sysops/bureaucrats, we need to worry about how long this project will last. We have 400 pages in the mainspace, and I just feel as if the people representing this wiki as leaders (bureaucrats) need to demonstrate that we are indeed trying to help. Thanks, GrooveDog (talk) 20:48, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose per GD. Razorflame (talk) 03:43, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Result: Not promoted. Sorry, but there is no consensus to promote. Pmlineditor ∞ 07:54, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

This discussion has finished. Please don't change it.

Maximillion Pegasus

Maximillion Pegasus is an active editor here, and i think he can be trusted with admin privs, being an admin at SEWT and SEWQ. As such, i'm nominating him for the position - and we can never have too many admins. :-) Tempodivalse [talk] 18:27, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Do you accept my nom? Tempodivalse [talk] 18:27, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

• I graciously accept. Thank you for your trust and consideration :) Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 18:29, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

• Support as nominator - providing Maximillion Pegasus accepts. Tempodivalse [talk] 18:27, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support - Sure, everyone else is doing it! :-P Tiptoety ^talk 18:58, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support Why not? Pmlineditor ∞ 10:20, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support - Trusted and active. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:45, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Result: Consensus has formed; Maximillion is now an admin. Pmlineditor ∞ 17:45, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

This discussion has finished. Please don't change it.

Juliancolton

Hi all, I'm requesting access to the sysop tools so I can help with various maintenance tasks, including blocking open proxies and simplifying MediaWiki pages. I'm somewhat active here, and I check in once or twice a day to look for unproductive edits. I'm an admin at multiple wikis, including the English Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons, so I do have quite a bit of experience with adminship. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:29, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

• Support - Sure. Tiptoety ^talk 00:30, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support Trusted, and reasonably active. Don't see why not. Tempodivalse [talk] 00:42, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support - Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 00:47, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support - Someone who has mainspace edits, trusted clearly. I was under the impression that Mediawiki interface message "translations" were done at betawiki:, however I may be mistaken. Just give him the tools already. :) GrooveDog (talk) 01:14, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• strongly Meh, no brainer. Definitely yes. Pmlineditor ∞ 08:12, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Result: Consensus has formed; JC is now an admin. Pmlineditor ∞ 15:44, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

This discussion has finished. Please don't change it.

Pmlinediter

Well, TDV said most of it for me. I'm sufficiently active in the mainspace (48% of my edits) and have been simplifying the MW interface. I'm a sysop on simplewp and a crat on simplequote, and I'd like to help out. Thank you, Pmlineditor ∞ 08:33, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

• Support Trusted. Tempodivalse [talk] 13:28, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support - Yes, we definitely need a local bureaucrat. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 18:24, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• NeutralFor the sole reason that imo at the "stage" our community is at we don't really need a bureaucrat. This is really the "other half" of my oppose to TDV, imo Meta can handle requests that crats do if we need them. We have the standard bot policy (automatic approval pretty much), no one needs to be renamed and sysops are few. I like that you've contributed more to the mainspace but at the same time we need more pages written then sysops promoted. As with TDV as well, I fully trust you to not abuse this tool but I can't support because honestly we don't need a crat right now. GrooveDog (talk) 03:31, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Just one thing, we currently have 4 RfXes. In the past 2-3 weeks, we've had 7 RfXes compared to about 1 previously, ie, the number has doubled. Being a crat does not create problems in article writing. If we have RfXes, then if a crat closes it, it will be easier than going to meta - making a request etc. etc. I like keeping things local. Pmlineditor ∞ 10:08, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Well done on answering the hidden question. :) Change to Support. GrooveDog (talk) 12:57, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

• Support Trusted, and evidently knows how to use the tools. MacMed^talk_stalk 21:06, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support whynot Jamesofur (talk) 08:54, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

This discussion has finished. Please don't change it.

Tiptoety

Hello friends. I am requesting +sysop here. I am an administrator at the English Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons, Simple Wikiquote, am a member of the foundations OTRS team, and have rollback rights on a number of other simple projects. I am requesting the tools primarily to assist with responding to cross-wiki vandalism, along with blocking open proxies. Thank you for your consideration, Tiptoety ^talk 02:35, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

• Support - Trusted user, could definitely help with maintenance. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:43, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support Tempodivalse 02:50, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support This is the second time I !voted for you in a week :P. Pmlineditor ∞ 05:24, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

  Just one question: If you want to be an admin here, then why do you [] this project to be []? Pmlineditor ∞ 13:13, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

  Because it lacks use, active editors, and active administrators (something I am trying to change). That said, the project is still here and as such, I might as well try and improve it, protect it from vandalism, and who knows maybe editing here will change my mind. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 18:12, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

• Support - Sure, why not. Maximillion Pegasus 17:32, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose; Sixteen edits and sixteen hours of edits is, by far, not enough to even think about adminship. —MC8 (b · t) 20:16, Sunday October 4 2009 (UTC)

  Oh, and I granted rollback. —MC8 (b · t) 20:18, Sunday October 4 2009 (UTC)

  First, thank you for roll back. Second, as I stated, the main purpose for this request would be to assist in responding to cross-wiki vandalism/attacks and blocking open proxies (which I do quite regularly , ). I do not feel either of those require a certain number of edits to be able to do. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 20:21, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose per MC8's reasons. Griffinofwales 02:23, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
• support per my own reasons... my reason? I guess I trust you. Huib talk 16:03, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
• Comment The other two have had their flag granted at meta, but since consensus is not yet clear on this request, I believe it should stay open a little while longer. Maximillion Pegasus 15:56, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose Not active enough and not enough editing activity here. Razorflame 00:51, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
• Yes Wants to protect the project, trusted on 5 other wikis or whatever as an administrator, confident he'll be alright. GrooveDog 20:12, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support SUL 21:35, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
• Consensus seems pretty clear now. I think Tiptoety can be promoted at this point. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:34, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

  Noted on meta. GrooveDog (talk) 00:03, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

  Promoted by steward Mardetanha. Pmlineditor ∞ 07:49, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

This discussion has finished. Please don't change it.

Pmlinediter

Hi, I'm Pmlinediter and I'd like to request sysop here. I'm a sysop at SEWP and SEWQ and have got experience with the bit. I'm fairly experienced here to and would like to assist the other sysops. Also, on a side note, I wonder WHY 2 others requested sysop exactly when I was going to :P Pmlineditor ∞ 05:17, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

• Support - Another trusted user. As for your last question, great minds think alike. ;-) Tiptoety ^talk 05:19, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support Trusted user. Tempodivalse 13:45, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support Trusted user. Maximillion Pegasus 17:32, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support. —MC8 (b · t) 20:17, Sunday October 4 2009 (UTC)
• Support per above. Griffinofwales 02:24, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support –Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:32, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Flag granted at meta. Maximillion Pegasus 15:54, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

This discussion has finished. Please don't change it.

Tempodivalse

Hallo, i'm requesting administrator status here. Although there's no current pressing need for extra sysops, there have been several times in the past when either I or another user have needed administrator attention, but could not get a response from either of the two semi-active sysops for a long time. I check in here at least a few times a day, and could easily react to vandalism and other admin tasks that the other sysops might miss. I'm a bureaucrat at en.wikinews and simple.wikiquote, and an admin at several other wikis, so i can probably be trusted not to abuse the bits. :-) Thanks for your time, Tempodivalse 02:50, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

• Support, but could you create a local userpage? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:51, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

  I redirected it for now, maybe i'll create a proper page later. Tempodivalse 02:51, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

• Support - Trusted user, I am sure they will use the extra flag appropriately. Tiptoety ^talk 02:52, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support Trusted. Pmlineditor ∞ 05:30, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support The more admins, the better. Maximillion Pegasus 17:32, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support, active. —MC8 (b · t) 20:17, Sunday October 4 2009 (UTC)
• Support per above. Griffinofwales 02:24, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Flag granted at meta. Maximillion Pegasus 15:54, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

This discussion has finished. Please don't change it.

Juliancolton

I'm not by any means the most active editor here, and I don't plan on becoming one. However, I would like access to the rollback tool to use during the occasional vandalism attacks. I have prior experience with adminship on three WMF projects. If rollback is ever locally enabled (doubtful), I'd likely resign adminship. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 05:22, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

• Support - changed in support.I support this rollback request xD. Abigor 10:22, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

• I never said I wanted to block new "users". I said we should block automatically-created malbots. Moreover, I don't intend to do any blocking here; I simply want rollback. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:07, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

• Please support Here Abigor 17:24, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

• Done, thanks. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:26, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

I just gave you rollback rights :-) Are still running for admin? Abigor 17:50, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! In that case, I withdraw this request. Cheers. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:52, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

This discussion has finished. Please don't change it.