Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Administrator/Saehrimnir
From Wikidata
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
- Done, clear consensus (21/0/0). Vogone talk 17:18, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the early closure. My computer clock was somehow set wrongly, so that I closed this RFA accidentally 1 hour in advance. Regards, Vogone talk 17:28, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Done, clear consensus (21/0/0). Vogone talk 17:18, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Saehrimnir[edit]
Vote
RfP scheduled to end at 27 April 2013 18:18 (UTC)
- Saehrimnir (talk • contribs • new items • new lexemes • SUL • Block log • User rights log • User rights • xtools)
Hi I am an aktiv user in de wikipedia and I am trying to sort out interwiki conflicts between disambiguation pages which usually involves emptying some items. Since the descriptions remain the new merged item can't be filled with the right descriptions until the old empty item is deleted, therefore it would help if I could do it myself. --Saehrimnir (talk) 18:18, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Votes[edit]
- Support --Iste (D) 20:02, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, ok Lukas²³ talk in German Contribs 20:30, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support --Rschen7754 09:12, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Seems like a good candidate. Ajraddatz (Talk) 17:12, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Regards, — Moe Epsilon 20:44, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support John F. Lewis (talk) 23:39, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Courcelles (talk) 03:52, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Ljubinka (discussion) 09:55, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support — ΛΧΣ21 18:53, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Rzuwig► 21:18, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Techman224Talk 22:53, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support --DangSunM (talk) 16:45, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support -- Cheers, Riley 18:44, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, do not expect problems.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:48, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support --Daniel749 (talk) 12:46, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support --Alan Lorenzo (talk) 13:34, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support IW 17:14, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak support -- Probably wont do anything crazy, but a bit more RFD work would make things look even better....Jakob Megaphone, Telescope 12:40, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support – My question was answered satisfactory, and Saehrimnir seems to have a good understanding of the project and make good contributions, so I see no reason to oppose. Byrial (talk) 15:20, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support -- Wagino 20100516 (talk) 02:39, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support - Jayadevp13 06:49, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments[edit]
- Question: Hi, when I look at your last 500 contributions, I count 247 times you removed sitelinks from items, but only 105 times you added one. How you do explain the difference - shouldn't all removed links be added somewhere else? Byrial (talk) 11:59, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Answer: As said my main field of work are the disambiguation Sites and as can be seen at the task force they work a bit different from other pages. It was decided that it does not make sense to link between different translations of an word because those represent only one of the ambiguous meanings but between the same spelling. To the Links I removed without replacing them somewhere no disambiguation page with the same spelling does exists es far as can be told without searching all 284 wikipedias. So the links would have to be placed in a newly created item on themself which does not make any difference from having no item because they are not real things with properties. And in the long run a bot will create the item which is much more effective because it takes quiet some clicks to create an item, add the Link and add the label and description for no apparent benefit.--Saehrimnir (talk) 13:50, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]