Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Administrator/WT20 2
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.
- Closed as unsuccessful--Ymblanter (talk) 19:49, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WT20 2[edit]
RfP scheduled to end after 22 February 2024 17:46 (UTC)
- WT20 (talk • contribs • new items • new lexemes • SUL • Block log • User rights log • User rights • xtools)
Hi.This is my 2nd apply I'm active on Wikidata.I am applying for sysop permission on Wikidata. I want to do more to help fight vandalism on Wikidata. I request to delete, protect and block by myself admin rights that I identify and need in my daily work here. I already did requests at WD:RFD and WD:AN and I know the policies of this tools.Thank you.WT20 (talk) 17:46, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Votes[edit]
- Support Probably still a bit early, but I do not have real concerns --Ameisenigel (talk) 13:22, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Neutral I think I will have to second the cheerful echidna here, probably a little early still. I think I would give a supporting vote once I feel you're a tad more familiar with how things work on Wikidata. I hear doing patrolling is the fastest way to become an admin, but other experience is certainly relevant. E.g. if you help out creating properties I would vote in favor. Infrastruktur (talk) 16:54, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @InfrastrukturMy patrol 705, Also I have good experience with mediawiki because I am a freelancer mediawiki developer, also I am aware of all wikidata rules. WT20 (talk) 17:06, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose His level of false positive in WD:RfD is too high. I'm actually skeptic this is user make the difference between a new user and a spammer. I like just warn him 5 days ago for this behaviour after he submited 13 taxons in RFD. (User talk:WT20#Taxons). Also his request in Wikidata:Requests for checkuser/Case/Vcldead two weeks ago create a whole mess as he block a study whole group. Far too early. --Fralambert (talk) 13:49, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The taxons were all empty with no data so I requested to delete them.After that as well I said on his talk page then there was a resolution through a discussion.And to the second check user I request that since their behavior and contribution was the same, it is a misunderstanding caused by the check user.Also, those users do not mention their competition in Wikidata.Although it was a check user opinion I can't say anything about it.All in all I have contributed here based on the situation.Thank you. WT20 (talk) 15:08, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose this user is probably of goodwill but he confuses quality and quantity (which leads to errors as Fralambert clearly demonstrated above). My advise would be to Wait, slow down a bit and make better edits before reapplying again (the last request for adminship was less than 2 months ago, not much has change since and rather on the bad side :/). Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 16:12, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Why not? To be better at wikidata. keep up the spirit to contribute constructively. Thank you for helping us. Murbaut (talk) 19:15, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per canvassing. Personal communication on Telegram, not asked for a vote, but the nomination page was sent without introducing oneself. Doǵu (talk) 20:08, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Doǵu what? I'm not WT20 (talk) 20:22, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Happened on the unofficial Wikipedia Discord server in the Wikidata channel as well. Hey man im josh (talk) 21:14, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per VIGNERON (only). Mahir256 (talk) 01:34, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose --WikiBayer (talk) 07:52, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Neutral For now, per my comment below. I haven't really seen the context behind the "canvassing", I'm usually not really a fan of that, but, it's not the biggest reason for my vote. Now, if this does not succeed I have nothing against granting rollback. EPIC (talk) 09:34, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Neutral --Rzuwig► 12:12, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose too many concerns per above, and the canvassing is the nail in the coffin. Queen of Hearts (talk) 19:35, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Neutral, I'm not sure about this one. There are concerns, but I believe this editor is trying to behave in good faith. I think WT20 should Wait, demonstrate improved conduct, and then re-file. —Tomodachi94 (talk) 19:52, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Neutral – I believe that WT20 wants to contribute to the project in good faith, and am not too concerned about the lack of crosswiki activity that EPIC mentions. I feel, though, that they should slow down a bit and focus on quality rather than quantity. I picked a RFD archive at random and landed on February 12; in addition to the taxons mentioned by Fralambert, there were two other items (I Am Morbid (Q124423652) and Bernard Binetruy (Q124423505)) tagged as lacking notability that were kept as notable. I think they should focus in obtaining other rights, such as rollback, first. –FlyingAce✈hello 22:29, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per VIGNERON --Emu (talk) 08:16, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose Multichill (talk) 20:28, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose Has been flooding WD:RfD. Some of the requests are false positives, and some are made very soon after the item's creation. I would not trust this user with the power to delete items.--DrGavinR (talk) 20:23, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comments[edit]
- Tell me about how you handled the situation at User_talk:SamuelAG1234567 BrokenSegue (talk) 19:16, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @BrokenSegueThanks sorry for the late reply as this user is creating empty data so first I will give general notice with Template:Uw-empty on his talk page.Then if he ignores the general warning message then explain to him again and that I will advise him to know the wikidata rules and policies.After that, if he continues to contribute to creating empty data, I will temporarily block him to prevent destructiveness. WT20 (talk) 04:20, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm confused. That isn't what you did though? BrokenSegue (talk) 04:48, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @BrokenSegue I have described what I as an administrator can do if a user creates empty data and keeps it running in the future WT20 (talk) 04:52, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @BrokenSegue"I'm sorry I see on the global account, he is a new user, I give the notice for the user talk, and I forgot to give guide template from wikidata template.WT20 (talk) 06:42, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @BrokenSegue I have described what I as an administrator can do if a user creates empty data and keeps it running in the future WT20 (talk) 04:52, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm confused. That isn't what you did though? BrokenSegue (talk) 04:48, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @BrokenSegueThanks sorry for the late reply as this user is creating empty data so first I will give general notice with Template:Uw-empty on his talk page.Then if he ignores the general warning message then explain to him again and that I will advise him to know the wikidata rules and policies.After that, if he continues to contribute to creating empty data, I will temporarily block him to prevent destructiveness. WT20 (talk) 04:20, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I won't vote just yet, because I don't know what to vote, but I will list some good/less good stuff.
- Plus for being active, frequent reports on RfD (it gives me more work to do, so I'm thankful for that) and overall good work.
- Minus for sometimes a bit too quick on RfD or sometimes reporting too many items at once. It clogs up our backlog, which is already really large (we have went from 40 to 150+ reports in just a month). Therefore, sometimes consider making bulk deletion requests. And, like last time, it would be good to see some activity outside of Wikidata. That in itself is of course by itself not a reason to oppose, but considering that Wikidata is a database for all of Wikimedia wikis, a little more than one SUL edit outside of Wikidata would be good.
- I don't know how to weigh in on this though and will wait a bit. EPIC (talk) 17:02, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Just a note that this discussion was linked on the unofficial Wikipedia Discord by someone with WT20 as their name. Hey man im josh (talk) 21:13, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @WT20 would you mind confirming if this was you that sent the messages in the discord? --DannyS712 (talk) 17:14, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm only say that, I have a question
- @WT20 would you mind confirming if this was you that sent the messages in the discord? --DannyS712 (talk) 17:14, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Two days done.I have made admin request but no one is giving any feedback my question is is no one aware
Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Administrator/WT20 2 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_permissions/Administrator/WT20_2 WT20 (talk) 17:27, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't know what you're trying to say which is concerning because your user page says you are fluent in english. BrokenSegue (talk) 20:19, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @BrokenSegue: WT20 is quoting what was written in the Discord channel. - Premeditated (talk) 14:15, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]