Wikivoyage:User rights nominations

From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search

If you believe a Wikivoyager – including yourself – should have administrative status or any other higher user right, then add that person's username to the nominations section below.

If nominated for administrator, the Wikivoyager should meet the guidelines for becoming an administrator. Generally speaking, they should:

  • Have been a contributor for at least a few months
  • Have an extensive knowledge of our policies
  • Have a history of article contribution, janitorial work, cleaning up articles, contributing to policy discussions, and combating vandalism/spam
  • Have a demonstrated ability to work with the community

Nominations must include a short statement outlining the nominee's eligibility in terms of these requirements.

When responding to a nomination, most people choose to express their opinion with a bolded word or phrase, most often Support or Not yet, followed by an explanation of the opinion. After 14 days, a bureaucrat will close the discussion and, if there is a consensus that the nominee would make a good administrator, grant the administrator flag using Special:UserRights.

Bureaucrats and Interface admins should also be nominated here.


ThunderingTyphoons! for bureaucrat

I know I said I was going to put this off for a while, but now that our only active bureaucrat is on the road, we really need another one. They have put their hand up for the job, are very knowledgeable about Wikivoyage policies + Wikimedia principles, and I really can't see a compelling argument it. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 00:47, 11 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Short statement

Thanks to SHB2000 for the nomination, which for confirmation I accept. We need at least one extra bureaucratic who's active and available at slightly different times to those in America, and while I probably wouldn't be my own first choice, I do think I'm competent and cautious enough for the job, and I care about Wikivoyage and its people.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 08:30, 11 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  1. As nominator. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 00:47, 11 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. TT! is an excellent choice for bureaucrat. Knowledgeable, conscientious, committed to the project. Ground Zero (talk) 01:57, 11 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. Using a numbered list is new for Wikivoyage.Anyway, he's a trusted user with a good temperament and has my full support and appreciation. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:51, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  4. TT is a good choice. AlasdairW (talk) 23:05, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
# I support the nomination. Wikivoyage needs an active bureaucrat, and User:ThunderingTyphoons! has the experience and attitude needed to be entrusted with bureaucrat responsibilities. — Ar​ticC​ynda
Struck AC sock vote. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 12:06, 11 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]




Question from SHB2000: Not an essential question, nor will your answer change my opinion, but I do have a question for you. Compared to other WMF projects, the English Wikivoyage tends to go overboard with revision deleting edits; when do you think revision deleting is essential? Additionally, how do you think this compares to with other projects in the Wikimedia world? --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 02:06, 11 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Ooh, a test. Revision deletion is essential when someone is being abusive or defamatory. It may be essential in cases of doxing or accidental revelation of information, depending on what's been revealed (this may also require the intervention of outside help, i.e. Oversighters). Revdels are also useful for deterring long-term vandals, especially when used in conjunction with WV:Deny recognition, which at this point I consider a success. I wouldn't class that as essential, but certainly recommended.
With respect, I'm not going to comment on other projects, because I'm not active enough on any outside of Wikivoyage to make a credible comparison. Suffice to say I don't agree that "Wikivoyage tends to go overboard" (i.e. uses it too much). Hope that answers your question.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 08:55, 11 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Great answer tt! That's what I was expecting, and AFAIK, in line with most other wikis do. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 09:26, 11 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See also