Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2022-04/User:Svartava for temporary admin

From Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to navigation Jump to search

User:Svartava for temporary admin[edit]

Nomination: I hereby propose myself as a local English Wiktionary Administrator for a time period of one month. As can be seen in my contributions page, I am quite active in patrolling recent changes for months now, and I believe I've been doing the job satisfactorily. I have got rollback rights on two other projects apart from here. Here's why I think the rights would be helpful:

  • For deleting vandal/nonsense pages as I see them, and not letting them linger around.
  • For blocking edit-warring vandals, who do not stop vandalising after simply being reverted.
  • Quickly hiding spam/promotion, attack, personal information, etc. from revisions.
  • Other tasks, such as dispatching RFD and RFV-failed entries, which sometimes even stay for days after being closed, and deleting obvious misspellings and errors or pages in CAT:D.
I've had to make requests to available admins for each of the above some time or the other, and I think it would be better if I could do them myself.

This is a bold self-nomination. If this vote goes on to pass and I perform well as a temporary sysop (along with being active), I will go ahead and re-request after my term expires; or else, should the community ever doubt any action I take, I will quit. If this vote doesn't pass, I will use the constructive feedback I get to better my editing.

Schedule:

Acceptance: Self-nomination

  • Languages: hi, en-4, sa-2, fr-1, inc-pra-1
  • Timezone: UTC+05:30

Support[edit]

Oppose[edit]

  1. Oppose, I like your boldness though. Allahverdi Verdizade (talk) 23:26, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose Equinox ◑ 00:06, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Since someone will inevitably ask why: I am fine with Svartava being whitelisted bc he clearly isn't a troll or vandal, but he constantly bothered me with requests to do certain things, as admin by proxy: can you delete this, can you update this... to the extent that I had to remove him as a contact on Discord (and then I got a barrage of re-add requests across the following day). Spammy. I don't see this as ideal admin behaviour. In old IRC chat days we used to say that one of the rules to become an "op" (operator, or admin) was not begging for it — and there was a reason for that. Equinox ◑ 02:32, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Equinox: If you look through the chat history, the admin actions I requested (blocking, deletion, protection, etc.) were clear-cut and legitimate cases, and I asked you only the times you were online so that you'd be able to do it quickly. As I have pointed out above, I admit I have made such requests and they have been done. Re: self-nomination — it's legitimate on all wikis, in some places quite common and in some others not so common. On some wikis, it's the most common/standard practice. But since they're not as common here, I proposed that I be an admin for one month, and then be judged on its basis. —Svārtava (t/u) • 03:13, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    They have done the same to me on discord and I cant even have a say in the matter XD FishandChipper (talk) 05:34, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    "I've had to make requests to available admins for each of the above some time or the other, and I think it would be better if I could do them myself." ┐(´ー｀)┌ —Fish bowl (talk) 09:31, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I knew someone would come out with that. If I write letters to the president every day telling him to pass policy, and he says "I keep getting these letters from etc." would you say: oh, well, the solution is clearly just to make this letter-writer president? No? So think for 10 seconds before posting. Equinox ◑ 09:55, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oppose You are a good editor, but you are very impulsive and that is a dangerous trait for an admin. I admire that you work very hard, and you indeed would make use of admin tools, but I'm afraid you are too eager to use them and might forget to keep your cool when the situation asks for it. I think you should wait a bit more and try to find that balance between being active and being reasonable. Thadh (talk) 14:43, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Thadh: Thanks for the comment. I do understand that my impulsiveness could be dangerous especially with regards to blocking, but all I can say is that with the tools I currently have, I have been responsible and reasonable with their use (point out if you think not!). That doesn't 100% guarantee the same if I get the admin tools too, and I'll definitely try to be just as careful, but after all this is a temporary request for trying me out only. —Svārtava (t/u) • 15:41, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Oppose — Fenakhay (حيطي · مساهماتي) 16:10, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Oppose — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 20:40, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Oppose. Ultimateria (talk) 23:07, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Oppose FishandChipper (talk) 01:36, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Oppose — [ זכריה קהת ] Zack. — 02:57, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Abstain[edit]

  1. Abstain Prahlad balaji (talk) 01:55, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decision[edit]

Retrieved from "https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2022-04/User:Svartava_for_temporary_admin&oldid=66579097"