Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Administrator/Lavallen

From Wikidata
< Wikidata:Requests for permissions | Administrator
Revision as of 20:39, 14 January 2014 by Jaba1977 (talk | contribs) (Undid revision 101959587 by Jaba1977 (talk))
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.
Closed as successful (21/0/1 | 100%) -- Bene* talk 16:22, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Flagged Vogone talk 16:24, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lavallen

Vote
RfP scheduled to end after 10 January 2014 16:22 (UTC)

To be honest: I do not always feel comfortable with the sysop-tools in a project where I do not agree with all policys. Therefor is my intension not to stay as a sysop here longer that I personally find a need for. But now with the arrival of my homewiki (Wikisource) I do find some need for it. Yes, I can merge and ask others for deletion, but those tools have given me headache since they were introduced. (They are not always compatible with my browser.) If you are worried about that I do not agree with the policys, I can tell you that I have had that problem since 2008 on WP, without any conflicts worth mention. I have to some extent, the ability to adapt to that situation. I have experience as sysop both on sv.wikipedia and sv.wikisource and running a sysop-bot on sv.wikipedia, but currently I'm free from such obligations. --Lavallen (talk) 16:22, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

  1.  Support --Stryn (talk) 16:34, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  2.  Support with the understanding that the use of the tools is ultimately governed by consensus. --Rschen7754 17:18, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  3.  Support very competent, helpful editor. Also we should have admins spread across all other projects and their languages. --Tobias1984 (talk) 21:59, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support - Absolutely. --Izno (talk) 22:12, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  5.  Oppose The answer to my question is concerning. I will change to support if the candidate agrees to conform to existing policies/guidelines when making admin actions or discuss actions that aren't within policy before performing them. --Jakob (talk) 22:24, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    How is disagreeing with policies concerning, especially since the candidate has stated his ability to adapt these in the nomination statement? I mean, everybody has something which he disagrees with, isn't that true? Vogone talk 02:22, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah. Isn't acting according to policy just...expected of a sysop? I don't necessarily agree with every policy in the book either, but we don't see people threatening to RfP/R me over it. TCN7JM 02:31, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jakob. I can act according to the policys even if I do not agree with them. (It happens all the time.) But it's more likly that I will not act at all when my opinion is perpendicular to the policys. I have in my past violated policys as sysop, but I haven't been condemned for it. An example: I deleted a page with my admin-bot on WP, which I wasn't supposed to do. The page contained the password of a trusted account. -- Lavallen (talk) 06:54, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
     Support Switching to support. Active user; now this issue has been cleared up. --Jakob (talk) 15:18, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  6.  Neutral Per Jakob. (Exclude his vote change ment.) --by Revi레비 at 02:12, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  7.  Support TCN7JM 02:31, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  8.  Support--GZWDer (talk) 04:19, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  9.  Support -- Why not? Wagino 20100516 (talk) 10:21, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  10.  Support--AmaryllisGardener (talk) 17:29, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  11.  Support. Emw (talk) 17:52, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  12.  Support Ajraddatz (Talk) 20:48, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  13.  Support Rzuwig► 21:49, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  14.  Support --DangSunM (talk) 01:16, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  15.  Support --Esquilo (talk) 10:50, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  16.  Support Matěj Suchánek (talk) 18:18, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  17.  Support Techman224Talk 22:07, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  18.  Support Lymantria (talk) 22:12, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  19.  Support --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:27, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  20.  Weak support StevenJ81 (talk) 13:02, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  21.  Support --Paperoastro (talk) 13:18, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  22.  Support--Debenben (talk) 21:52, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  •  Question Can you give an example of a WD policy you don't agree with? Thanks. --Jakob (talk) 16:35, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    "WD:N", "Inactivity for Sysops et al" and that we at all have policys and detailed guidlines in some cases. OS and CU naturally need some kind of policy, but the rest can be guided by Common sense and more or less well-documented practise. This project is to young to put chains on users who think they have found new better ways to do things here. -- Lavallen (talk) 19:01, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question Why did you formerly have a "block" link in your signature?--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:34, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Wikihumour. A reaction to the talk-link everybody have today. In RC and the Watchlist you see (talk|contrib) as a common user, but (talk|contrib|block) as a sysop. I here offered everybody, also common users, to see that blocklink in my signature. I had to remove the block-link when the talk-link was internationalized. I still offer everybody to see that link in svwp. -- Lavallen (talk) 09:02, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question What are your best contributions to Wikidata, and why?--Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:35, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • In my opinion, we do not want to get a habit of asking this question. It's one reason why RfAs at other projects are needlessly too difficult, in my opinion, and I don't want that repeated here. Adminship is no big deal. How is this relevant to whether he can be trusted or not?--Jasper Deng (talk) 02:37, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • We are some users on svwp who tries to do our best to describe Sweden in terms of administrative division, population, cultural heritage etc. It's difficult since it compared with other nations sometimes looks very alien. (We are almost always citizens of two (earlier three or four) municipalities and the organisation of the local administration is easiest to compare with People's Republic of China (Q148).) My job here this far, has been to transfer information about the history of local administration and urban areas from svwp and Statistics Sweden to Wikidata. We belive that somebody from Sweden can do it better than somebody from the outside. Not because we know the geography, but because we know this alien culture. -- Lavallen (talk) 09:02, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question Why do you think you need the sysop flags? What did you motivate to make this request? --Zerabat (talk) 00:14, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Requests_for_permissions/Administrator/Lavallen&oldid=101959904"