Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Administrator

Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Administrator

To request adminship for yourself or another user, please input the relevant name into the box below. If there has been a past request, successful or unsuccessful, please follow add a number − "Example 2" for a second request, "Example 3" for a third, and so on. Be sure to transclude the request on this page.

Old requests go to the archive. If you want to request administrator help, please post at Administrators' noticeboard.

Requirements for adminship

To be promoted, the following requirements must be met:

• Nominations remain open for at least a full week.
• To pass, the user needs:
  • at least 8 support votes
  • at least 75% of support or higher in pro/con voting
• Only registered users with minimum 100 local non-automated edits can vote. The edits must be acquired before the voting started. Unregistered users can leave comments in the comments section.

Translate this header box!

Amitie 10g

Vote

RfP scheduled to end after 17 September 2026 21:56 (UTC)

• Amitie 10g (talk • contribs • new items • new lexemes • SUL • Block log • User rights log • User rights • xtools)

Hi, I am Amitie 10g, and my primary activity has been on the Spanish Wikipedia. In the later years, I'm regular on Wikidata, contributing to properties and discussions. I'm already a property creator (althrough my activity is low, but I'll help with that I promise) and translation administrator. I would like to have the admin buttons to help with the deletion backlog, as well as other activities that require admin buttons. --Amitie 10g (talk) 21:56, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Votes

1.  Support: I do not see any barriers. --Wolverène (talk) 08:57, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

   (additional comment) Seems like I did not pay attention to certain circumstances mentioned in the discussion below. The blocks are normally not okay to me, even more so indefinite ones. But I will not withdraw my support anyway, it is good that the candidate provides feedback regarding those embarrassing facts, and they are still ready to help the community. I still regard the user's contributions as predominantly positive. --Wolverène (talk) 08:25, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

2. I seem to keep crossing swords with them over what seem to be ideas that don't fit in with the WD ethos. I think more time is needed for them to understand how things are done here, so  Oppose at this time. Vicarage (talk) 19:13, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

   Maybe in the future I may have more chances of success. Thanks for raising that. Amitie 10g (talk) 15:33, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

3.  Oppose For now per Vicarage ANTORLGOY (talk) 11:24, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• Hi, Amitie 10g, I would like you to reflect on the following: You have been indefinitely blocked with talk page access removed at Commons. The rationale given there is "Intimidation/harassment". Earlier you have been blocked at eswiki for 3 months with rationale "actitud disruptiva" (disruptive attitude). Both blocks are pretty old, althoug the Commons TPA removal is from July 2025. I think the Wikidata community deserves comments from your side on this. --Lymantria (talk) 09:33, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

  At the Spanish Wikipedia, I have been sanctioned for disruptive attitude due to the unilateral removal of maintenance templates (where the Bibliotecarios and I have different concerns about the legitimacy of retiring maintenance templates, which has been broadly discussed). The other block resulted from a heated exchange with a user who has since been indefinitely blocked due to disruptive behaviour and sockpuppetry.

  At Commons, the indefinite block resulted from disagreements with an admin, which I believe the admin treated as harassment, and the administrators subsequently decided to impose an indefinite block on me. The block was imposed almost 10 years ago by a user who is now globally banned.

  Despite those missteps, I still contribute constructively to the Wikimedia projects, and I believe I'll be helpful at Wikidata.

  Thanks for bringing that up, for transparency. Amitie 10g (talk) 11:45, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

  @Amitie 10g: If you believe the Commons block is unfair, you should raise the issue to m:U4C (with Taivo as another party). GZWDer (talk) 12:47, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

  (Personally, I consider Taivo's handling of Commons appeal is suboptimal.) GZWDer (talk) 13:35, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Chrisahn

Vote

RfP scheduled to end after 17 September 2026 22:51 (UTC)

• Chrisahn (talk • contribs • new items • new lexemes • SUL • Block log • User rights log • User rights • xtools)

I'd like to be able to block obvious vandals. Sometimes, there are LTA accounts like ~2026-48934-38 who make a large number of nonsense edits in a short time, and it often takes a long time until such accounts are blocked. It looks like there are not enough admins around to take care of such stuff. I'm not very active on Wikidata, mostly fighting vandalism, sometimes fixing other stuff. If I become an admin, I'll block obvious vandals, but before performing any other admin actions, I'll ask more experienced admins. I don't want to break anything. :-) In case it matters, I'm more active on enwiki (20k edits, 20 years). Chrisahn (talk) 22:51, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

If there's another way to let me block TAs that would be fine as well. I don't really want full admin rights, I just want to stop vandals like the one mentioned above: 240 nonsense edits in 80 minutes, still not blocked 12 hours later because of the long backlog at WD:AN. I'd like to help reduce that backlog a bit. If there are no fine-grained permissions like that and I get full admin rights, I will use them sparingly, as described above. — Chrisahn (talk) 07:52, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

@Mahir256: Reasonable point regarding my activity at WD:RFD and WD:AN, but I have to admit that's not going to change in the foreseeable future, even if I become an admin. I'd just like to block vandals and/or protect pages and (slightly) reduce the huge backlog at WD:AN. If there's a way to let me do that without full admin rights, that would be fine as well. — Chrisahn (talk) 08:00, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

More precisely: Maybe I will get more involved with these things if I'm an admin. I don't know, and I don't want to promise anything. — Chrisahn (talk) 10:19, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Votes

1.  Weak oppose only for lack of recent sustained activity on places like WD:RFD and WD:AN; will happily support once that activity happens. Mahir256 (talk) 00:07, 11 September 2026 (UTC)
2.  Support, as the admin corps is slowly getting short-handed. But I would still expect more activity from candidates. --Wolverène (talk) 08:48, 11 September 2026 (UTC)
3.  Support, longterm contributor, good at counter-vandalism, but more activity on item creation is desirable I guess. --Amitie 10g (talk) 19:05, 11 September 2026 (UTC)
4.  Support MisterSynergy (talk) 19:41, 13 September 2026 (UTC)
5.  Support They do decent counter-vandalism work here as evidenced by their numerous reverts in their edit history. I think this is sufficient to request adminship. Given how shorthanded the admins are getting and how rampant vandalism/LTAs have become, I think they can play a part in blocking vandals and LTAs, hopefully reducing the time reports on AN get dealt with. Jianhui67 ^T★C 06:16, 14 September 2026 (UTC)
6.  Support per Jianhui67. --Epìdosis 10:59, 14 September 2026 (UTC)
7.  Support PieWriter (talk) 23:48, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• ...