Wikivoyage:User rights nominations/Archives

From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search

These are archived discussions of Project:User rights nominations. See that page for current and recent discussions.


User:(WT-en) Evan

Co-founder of Wikivoyage, has root access on wikivoyage.org so would probably mess around with the database if he wasn't given admin status. Did the first drafts of all the policy and guidelines as well as the help pages. -- (WT-en) Evan 08:56, 4 Aug 2003 (PDT)

  • Granted self admin status without nomination procedure in egregious abuse of authority. -- (WT-en) Evan 08:56, 4 Aug 2003 (PDT)

User:(WT-en) Maj

Co-founder of Wikivoyage. Has sudo access on wikivoyage.org, and if we didn't give her access she'd probably scrub the harddrive. Has significant experience as a travel writer and use of other Web travel sites. -- (WT-en) Evan 08:56, 4 Aug 2003 (PDT)

  • Granted admin status without nomination procedure in abominable nepotistic frenzy. -- (WT-en) Evan 08:56, 4 Aug 2003 (PDT)

User:(WT-en) Joakim Ziegler

Worked on several collaborative and community projects, including the FIX BBS (one of the oldest functional BBSes in Europe), the GNOME project, and other free software. Contributor to Wikipedia, list of contributions at http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joakim_Ziegler , likes Wikis a lot, dedicated to free content, strong opinions on quality (this might be seen as a bad thing). Trying to show that I'm worth my salt in the Mexico City article. Programmer (Python, also PHP, C, and a few others) with an interest in large-scale web-fronted data storage systems, willing to and interested in doing code work too with time. --(WT-en) JZ 20:58, 7 Aug 2003 (-0500)

  • Joakim: You have impeccable credentials and I think you'd be a valuable addition. I think one question I have is how well you understand the Project:goals and non-goals and the Project:policies and guidelines, and how much you agree with them. What are we missing? What needs to be changed? I'm not looking for ideological goose-stepping, but I would like to know that you share in general our overall vision for Wikivoyage. -- (WT-en) Evan 09:42, 11 Aug 2003 (PDT)
    • Let's see. I generally don't have any big disagreements with the policies as they are now. If anything, they might be a little too easy to agree with, that is, not quite strict/specific enough, but that's probably expected to grow with the community, and I think that that's an appropriate process. I think that also a lot of policies and so on can be made after the fact; when a number of pages of a certain type exists, it'll be easy to see what works and what doesn't, and to set that doewn as policy/guidelines. I agree very much with the goals and non-goals, (and the slippery slopes), this is a project whose principal danger might be to lose focus and have people writing about everything. I can't really say that I see things that are missing quite yet, because I think the project is so young that it's hard to see where people will want to go (and where it's desirable to prevent them from going). I have a relatively laidback idea of how things should be done, in general. Things work themselves out, especially on wikis. Hm. I wonder if this answer is specific enough, let me know if it isn't, and I'll give it another try. --(WT-en) JZ
      • No, that sounds like the right idea to me. Thanks for answering a kind of leading question. -- (WT-en) Evan 21:02, 11 Aug 2003 (PDT)
  • Oh, one other thing: the current administrators do most of their collaboration using LRC protocol. We're a little worried that with your location in Mexico your participation would be heavily lagged. Any comment? -- (WT-en) Evan 14:19, 12 Aug 2003 (PDT)
    • I appreciate that concern, I know how convenient that can be. I'm a very compulsive user of both mail and other online comms, but of course that is still lagged compared to LRC. I can't really do much to alleviate the concern, really, other than say that you'll run into this problem sooner or later, LRC doesn't really scale too well. So it's more a question of if you want to deal with it now or later, I think. Projects like Wikipedia have mailing lists to complement the talk pages and so on, for working out more general discussions, that might be a good idea for Wikivoyage too... (My mailer is a lot more convenient to discuss in than a wiki, sad but true, still). -- (WT-en) JZ 08:48, 12 Aug 2003 (CST)
      • It was mostly a joke, and quite a bad joke at that. But you've reminded me about doing a mailing list, and I'll set one up tonight. Look for info on Wikivoyage news in the not-so-distant future. -- (WT-en) Evan 19:30, 12 Aug 2003 (PDT)
  • I endorse Joakim Ziegler as a Wikivoyage admin. -- (WT-en) Evan 19:35, 12 Aug 2003 (PDT)
  • Ditto-- though, if you are interested in LRC we could arrange for you to have a rotation on dishes & dinner (just kidding... we seem to do that a lot you'll notice).(WT-en) Majnoona
  • IT IS SO. -- (WT-en) Evan 05:57, 14 Aug 2003 (PDT)

User:(WT-en) Karen Johnson

Karen's a Wikipedian who's been working on Wikivoyage for a while now. She's done a lot of good work on Australia and travel destinations there and around the world. Question for Karen that's the same as for JZ: how well do you think you understand our goals and non-goals? What about the policies and guidelines? Is there anything you disagree with strongly? Anything you think we're missing? -- (WT-en) Evan 06:11, 14 Aug 2003 (PDT)

  • Firstly, thanks for considering me for nomination. I think the travelwiki is a great idea and I'm glad to be working on it. You've thought about what you want it to be and I pretty much agree with it. What we're aiming for is a comprehensive but not exhaustive guide, focusing on information which is NOT necessarily found in other places and which will be useful to people planning visits, or actually in the areas they are reading about - insider information if possible. True? What we DON'T want is an advertising catalogue. (WT-en) KJ 17:49, 14 Aug 2003 (PDT)
  • Please register my vote for Karen, even though it has no status(WT-en) Tiles 00:31, 15 Aug 2003 (PDT)
  • So, I'm not really sure what to do here. (WT-en) Maj and I were on extended vacation for two weeks after Karen's nomination, and somehow I forgot to give my thumbs up. I think everyone did. But it's been more than 7 days, and I think this nomination must be closed. I'm going to start a new one, because that's bogus. -- (WT-en) Evan 17:46, 4 Sep 2003 (PDT)

(WT-en) Karen Johnson second nomination

I'm nominating her for all the reasons listed above, as well as for the fact that her nomination lapsed by accident rather than from lack of interest. -- (WT-en) Evan 17:47, 4 Sep 2003 (PDT)

  • I endorse KJ as a Wikivoyage admin. -- (WT-en) Evan 17:48, 4 Sep 2003 (PDT)
  • No problem whatsoever with Karen becoming an admin. (WT-en) D.D. 23:05, 8 Sep 2003 (PDT)
  • Thank you! I was feeling all hurt and rejected... not! I know it's hard to get anything much done in the way of admin when there's such a small user base. But I'm pleased to see that it's growing by the day! Which suggests that the word is gradually spreading, and soon more admins will be needed to keep up with the chaos that new users inevitably cause while they're learning the ropes (hint hint) If you appoint me I promise not to abuse my powers and to do my best to help out as needed. (WT-en) KJ 19:39, 4 Sep 2003 (PDT)
    • Yeah, well, we obviously need admins for when Maj and I are out goofin' off in the desert. -- (WT-en) Evan 07:17, 9 Sep 2003 (PDT)
  • Sorry I didn't get back to this! I thought you were already Admin. I endores you!(WT-en) Majnoona
    • and I think that's a full quota. Yay! Thank you guys... :) (WT-en) KJ
      • ...and the db has been updated. Karen, you're now an admin. Finally! -- (WT-en) Evan 08:27, 13 Sep 2003 (PDT)

User:(WT-en) Dhum Dhum

Dhum Dhum has been a user for months, and has been working hard on articles of all types. He gives insightful comments to most articles, encourages other users, and seems to "get" what we're trying to do. He is also a frequent contributor. DD, what do you think about becoming an Admin? -- (WT-en) Evan 09:19, 6 Nov 2003 (PST)

  • I hearby give my "ditto". (WT-en) Majnoona
    • What an honour - thank you very much for the nomination! I believe the admin package contains 6 months paid travel per year, doesn't it? ;-) No, seriously, I do like Wikivoyage and what it stands for a lot and I want it to become a travel authority on the web. For travellers. By travellers. If you guys are convinced that I can help Wikivoyage as an admin, then I'll gladly accept. Now we'll just have to see if the rest of you agree ;-) (WT-en) D.D. 09:44, 6 Nov 2003 (PST)
  • OK, I give my endorsement, too. Now we have to wait seven days to see if Karen or Joakim are going to show up with the secret evidence that proves you shouldn't be an admin. By the way, if any non-admins want to throw in their endorsement, feel free. It's a nice time to give DD some well-deserved praise. -- (WT-en) Evan 09:57, 6 Nov 2003 (PST)
  • Sure, I'll throw in my endorsement! Dhum Dhum does indeed make substantial and positive contributions around here. My only question to all of you doing great work, is: how do you find the time to keep up? There's a lot more editting going on now (which is a good thing, of course ...) (WT-en) CL 23:06, 6 Nov 2003 (PST)
  • Endorsed, good candidate. (WT-en) Joakim 17:01, 6 Nov 2003 (CST)
  • OK, well, it's done. Welcome to the club, DD! -- (WT-en) Evan 10:12, 14 Nov 2003 (PST)
    • Thanks for the welcome! Is there an oath I should take, saying "I do solemnly swear..." or something? Anyways, let's build this thing called "Wikivoyage" into something travellers can't do without! (WT-en) DhDh 12:57, 14 Nov 2003 (PST)

User:(WT-en) PierreAbbat

Pierre's only been on Wikivoyage about a month, but he's made very significant contributions to the phrasebooks and has been very involved in policy and style and guidelines and stuff. I think he'd be a good administrator. A couple of questions for Pierre: do you understand and agree with our goals and non-goals? Do you think doing admin work would be interesting for you? --(WT-en) Evan 21:52, 10 Jan 2004 (EST)

  • I agree with the above. Pierre's contributions and comments show a lot of common sense and insight. He'd be an asset for Wikivoyage as an admin. I endorse his nomination. (WT-en) DhDh 08:18, 11 Jan 2004 (EST)
  • I accept the nomination. I understand and agree, and have been an admin on Wikipedia, so I know what to do. -(WT-en) phma 09:10, 11 Jan 2004 (EST)

User:(WT-en) Mark

Mark's been doing a great job on the Switzerland pages and has kept a good eye on other stuff (removing graffiti, etc). He's also been talking about some good points and welcoming new users. The usual questions for Mark: do you understand and agree with our goals and non-goals? Do you think doing admin work would be interesting for you? (WT-en) Majnoona

  • I appreciate the vote of confidence, and I do agree with the goals and non-goals. If made admin I can't promise how much work I'll actually do, but I'll sure try not to mess anything up. ;) -- (WT-en) Mark 05:27, 15 Jan 2004 (EST)
  • I endorse Mark for admin status. --(WT-en) Evan 11:32, 19 Jan 2004 (EST)
  • I also endorse Mark's nomination. (WT-en) DhDh 03:48, 21 Jan 2004 (EST)
  • It is done. --(WT-en) Evan 15:49, 25 Jan 2004 (EST)

User:(WT-en) PierreAbbat

phma's nomination lapsed due to a parliamentary hiccup. (Notice this is the second time this has happened.)

  • I endorse phma for admin status. --(WT-en) Evan 11:32, 19 Jan 2004 (EST)
  • I accept as before, but I will need the endorsement of two other admins. -(WT-en) phma 17:01, 19 Jan 2004 (EST)
    • I think the "other" means "other than the person being nominated". I think all the people on this list were seconded by only two administrators, not necessarily the one who nominated them. --(WT-en) Evan 18:54, 19 Jan 2004 (EST)
  • I endorse Pierre's nomination too (2nd time). (WT-en) DhDh 03:48, 21 Jan 2004 (EST)
  • IT IS DONE. --(WT-en) Evan 17:09, 28 Jan 2004 (EST)

User:(WT-en) Huttite

Huttite has been contributing for Wikivoyage since mid-February. That's a short period, but s/he has done an awful lot of work: writing, but also the dirty work of placing stub messages, disambiguating, redirecting, etc. I think Huttite understands what Wikivoyage is all about, so I'm nominating him for admin status. Huttite: (1) do you agree with Wikivoyage's philosophy and (2) would you be interested in being an admin? (WT-en) Dhum Dhum Akubra 11:00, 24 Mar 2004 (EST)

  • I support Huttite for admin. I was going to nominate him, but you beat me to it. -(WT-en) phma 12:08, 24 Mar 2004 (EST)
  • So, I agree with DD about H's great work, and I also think it would be valuable to have an admin in that time zone. B-) But I do have reservations. This is going to sound churlish, but here's my take: Huttite spent a lot of time and energy bolding the first mention of a page's subject in the page. We don't have that as a style guideline -- it's a holdover from Wikipedia. (He was also fixing some link problems in the DB at the time, too, so this is somewhat mitigated). I'm not against this (although I think if we're going to do it we should have a manual of style entry), but I am wary of the idea that we should do everything that Wikipedia does, just because Wikipedia does it. I'm especially cautious about that with admin privileges, since admins are so much more aggressive about protecting, deleting, banning and blocking on WP than here. So, I'm going to reserve my support until Huttite answers here. --(WT-en) Evan 14:46, 24 Mar 2004 (EST)
    • While I appreciate the nomination, I would prefer not to be an administrator, with its added responsibility, at present. I also feel I do not have the time and commitment. I would prefer to continue doing what I am doing within the abilities of a simple user, and contribute where and when I can. The bible verse 1 Timothy 3v6 comes to mind, (which says of overseers: He must not be a recent convert....). I feel that I currently may not have the cultural appreciation of what Wikivoyage is about, only a technical appreciation. Thanks for the votes and support for my contributions but I personally remain unconvinced that an administrator role is my current calling. Respectfully, I feel I must decline your kind offer at this time. -- (WT-en) Huttite 05:46, 25 Mar 2004 (EST)

User:(WT-en) Cjensen

Colin has been a Wikivoyager for about 8 or 9 months. In that time, he's started or edited hundreds of articles. He has participated in some of our most vociferous policy and style debates, and he's always kept a level head and made rational suggestions based on what's best for the traveller and for the project. He's friendly to new users and often welcomes them. He's also on the West Coast of North America, which gets us some more spread over time zones. I think Colin would make an excellent administrator. --(WT-en) Evan 17:04, 9 Nov 2004 (EST)

  • I am willing to serve and watch over things from my time zone, and sweep the occasional vfd. -- (WT-en) Colin 21:59, 9 Nov 2004 (EST)
  • Yes! Colin is a great candidate for saddling with the delete chores. ;) Actually I thought Colin was already an admin. -- (WT-en) Mark 01:13, 10 Nov 2004 (EST)
  • Got my vote... we could use some more level heads ;-)
  • IT IS DONE. --(WT-en) Evan 23:14, 18 Nov 2004 (EST)

User:(WT-en) Jpatokal

Jpatokal has been a Wikivoyager for about 6 months. In that time, he's done an amazing job expanding our coverage of East Asia, doing dozens of articles almost singlehandedly. He's also beautified the guide with amazing photographs. He participates in policy and guidelines discussions and shows a good appreciation of the ins and outs of Wikivoyage rules. We often don't see eye-to-eye -- probably one of the reasons I appreciate hearing his opinion. He's helpful to new users and is technically skilled. He's also in either Asia or Europe (I think!), which would (again) get better admin-to-timezone coverage. I think he'd make a great Wikivoyage administrator and I hereby nominate him. --(WT-en) Evan 17:04, 9 Nov 2004 (EST)

  • I'm usually in Asia or Europe, I think, but mostly Asia. =) But yes, Wikivoyage has already become my #1 stop on the web, so I might as well accept the glamorous job of cleaning Wikivoyage's clogged toilets and and do my part to ensure Wikivoyage World Domination. (WT-en) Jpatokal 21:10, 9 Nov 2004 (EST)
  • Agreed. Thanks for all the great work up until now, and welcome to the club of those with extra buttons/links which must never be used. -- (WT-en) Mark 01:13, 10 Nov 2004 (EST)
  • IT IS DONE. --(WT-en) Evan 23:14, 18 Nov 2004 (EST)
  • Ditto. I'm really looking forward to using the Singapore guide in December!(WT-en) Majnoona 11:08, 10 Nov 2004 (EST)

User:(WT-en) Nzpcmad

Nzpcmad has been a Wikivoyager for about 7 months. This user (I'm gonna try to work around the fact that I don't know his/her gender, here!) has gone above and beyond the call of duty in improving the overall quality of our guide and its prose. Many contributions to Australasia and especially New Zealand are due to this person. Participation in policy and guidelines discussion is high, and shows impressive understanding of the issues. Located (I think) in New Zealand, which would make for good timezone coverage. Would make a really, really good administrator, for which I hereby nominate, uh, Nzpcmad. B-) --(WT-en) Evan 17:04, 9 Nov 2004 (EST)

  • Agreed. Good admin choice. -- (WT-en) Mark 01:13, 10 Nov 2004 (EST)
  • Ditto. (WT-en) Majnoona 11:08, 10 Nov 2004 (EST)
  • So, I haven't admin'ed this user, since they haven't responded. I'm not sure what to do in this situation. --(WT-en) Evan 23:14, 18 Nov 2004 (EST)

User:(WT-en) Wrh2

Not only has made tremendous contributions but also cleans up after spammers a lot and could really benefit from a revert button.

  • Support. Has done and continues to do amazing work. (WT-en) Jpatokal 10:45, 13 Jun 2005 (EDT)
  • Support. -- (WT-en) Colin 11:28, 13 Jun 2005 (EDT)
  • Has been on the site since... February? Is that right? I'd like to hear a little more about him. Ryan, do you understand what this job entails? Are you familiar with our goals, policies and guidelines, and manual of style? What about the deletion and protection policy, and our general "hands off" administrative approach? --(WT-en) Evan 12:04, 13 Jun 2005 (EDT)
  • Ah, the "revert spam" button... if I can help out a bit more around here I'd be glad to do it, although I do tend to disappear for a month or two occasionally (traveling or working) -- if that's an issue then I'm probably not a good candidate. As to (WT-en) Evan's concerns, from what I've seen each admin sort of defines his/her own role. (WT-en) Cjensen enforces the external link policy with a thoroughness that borders on scariness, (WT-en) Jpatokal logs in nightly to edit at least fifty articles & engage in discussion of all open issues while ensuring that the DOM is updated at exacly midnight GMT on the first of each month, and the rest of you guys make sure to welcome new users and refine the policies so that they fit what is needed to keep things humming along smoothly ;) And yes, I've read the MOS and each of the indexed policies, and have engaged in several policy discussions. I can't claim to know all them intimately (for a while I assumed the real spelling policy was just to write an article and wait for (WT-en) Nzpcmad to fix things) but I think if I could claim that it would be time to get away from the computer and get out more ;) -- (WT-en) Wrh2 00:08, 14 Jun 2005 (EDT)
    • Ah, but I think that's the thing Evan was getting at. All of the things you mention are normal user functions. Admins have access to a couple of other things, like deletion, the quick revert, and blocking a user or a page. We take things like blocking users very seriously, and in fact we don't do it except as an absolutely last recourse (I've never seen a case bad enough). Also there's only one page which is locked: the license. We are strongly resistant to locking pages. Another thing to note is that admins are not required to agree with the Mos, those are just guidelines and are always up for discussion; but we do ask that you read and agree with the Project:Goals and non-goals. This is the stuff we'd like for you to understand before you get the admin bit flipped. -- (WT-en) Mark 00:25, 14 Jun 2005 (EDT)
      • I probably should have addressed each of Evan's points specifically, but yes, I understand that admins have several buttons that "they should really never use". The idea that blocking an IP is a failure of the Wiki is something I get, and that protecting a page is something that should be done only in the face of something like an edit war or an automated attack. Evan's satire of handling problem users is a favorite bookmark of mine. In terms of goals, one of the reasons that I contribute here is because I would like to see a "a free, complete, up-to-date and reliable world-wide travel guide." That said, if people aren't comfortable then by all means don't make me an admin -- I'm happy to help out, I very much appreciate that Jpatokal nominated me, but I'm also happy to continue on without the extra buttons in my toolbar. -- (WT-en) Wrh2 00:45, 14 Jun 2005 (EDT)
  • Support. Great answers, thanks for responding. --(WT-en) Evan 08:32, 14 Jun 2005 (EDT)
    • Oppose. Doesn't seem to understand the importance of consensus in decision-making. Sorry, doesn't work for me. --(WT-en) Evan 11:48, 26 Jun 2005 (EDT)
      • Say what? What exactly are you referring to? (WT-en) Jpatokal 12:02, 26 Jun 2005 (EDT)
        • Project:Big city article template. Lots of chatter about the majority. --(WT-en) Evan 12:30, 26 Jun 2005 (EDT)
          • In that case I'd rather decline the admin nomination. While I very much disagree with Evan's opinion here, I'm really uncomfortable with the idea of being in any way a controversial choice. -- (WT-en) Wrh2 14:22, 26 Jun 2005 (EDT)
      • 1. Thank you for your input; Unfortunately, the seven-day period for discussion is already closed. As the person responsible for flipping admin bits, it is particularly incumbent on you not to utilize (unwittingly or not) your own procrastination as a means of putting an admin into some sort of parole period. (We lack a clear policy for stuff like what to do when a user has not indicated a willingness to serve; we lack a clear policy for stuff like what and when to do a renomination of a failed nomination; but we do have a clear policy regarding when the nomination has been passed).
      • 2. Additionally, I can't help but be stunned that you would consider Ryan's thoughts about current policy as a criterion for adminship. That only people here who wholly support current policy are the two founders who setup both initial policy and rules whereby anyone (themselves included) could raise an objection to a policy change and that solitary objection is, by rule, sufficient to bar the change. The only valid question here is will Ryan implement existing policy even when he disagrees with it.
      • 3. The admin bit is a broom, not a sword. Is there really some question in your mind regarding whether or not Ryan will try to change policy through admin bit powers? To flip-flop on an issue like this ought only occur in the presence of some severe concerns, not mere worries that could be cleared up by asking an additional question or two.
      • 4. Lastly I would like to note that my web browser can only find uses of the term "majority" in reference to people written by Evan and Colin Angus in the aforementioned article, not Ryan. Ryan did refer to popularity, but it appeared to me to be a "trying to gather a consensus" kind of use, not a "thou shalt abide by the popular idea." He also expressed his own willingness to subsume one of his own preferences in favor of one popular idea, which demonstrates to me that he clearly was not using the term as a hammer to use against other people, but rather as a way to clarify something that is somewhat popular and seeing if folks (including himself) could compromise to the currently popular opinion. It looks like consensus building to me. -- (WT-en) Colin 17:04, 26 Jun 2005 (EDT)
        • Hear ye, hear ye. I agree fully with everything Colin said. (WT-en) Jpatokal 21:25, 26 Jun 2005 (EDT)
        • Colin: I agree with you that the objection period is passed, and I've dropped my opposition (neither support nor oppose). I've flipped Ryan's admin bit. Welcome to the team, Ryan. --(WT-en) Evan 11:37, 27 Jun 2005 (EDT)
  • Yes! Support. I'm very satisfied with these responses. -- (WT-en) Mark 14:49, 14 Jun 2005 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) Paul Richter

Has also been a longtime contributor who cleans up vandalism.

  • Support, also as an admin on the upcoming Japanese Wikivoyage. (WT-en) Jpatokal 10:45, 13 Jun 2005 (EDT)
  • Support. -- (WT-en) Colin 11:28, 13 Jun 2005 (EDT)
  • Support. Paul's been a longtime contributor and I feel pretty confident that he's aware of how we operate. --(WT-en) Evan 12:04, 13 Jun 2005 (EDT)
  • Support -- (WT-en) Mark 13:06, 13 Jun 2005 (EDT)
  • Willing. Thanks! -- (WT-en) Paul Richter 22:25, 14 Jun 2005 (EDT)
  • Done. Welcome, Paul. --(WT-en) Evan 11:37, 27 Jun 2005 (EDT)

(WT-en) Huttite's second nomination

has been a longtime contributor who does a lot of the janitorial work around here. He was nominated before but at that time he was new and he wasn't sure of wikivoyage culture and there were some concerns. Now that we all have much more experience with Huttitie's work, all remaining uncertainty has been clarified. Also, he recently complained that VFDs were not being swept, so this could fix that. :-)

  • Support. -- (WT-en) Colin 11:28, 13 Jun 2005 (EDT)
  • Support, but... could we hold off on doing admin re-nominations until we've checked with the nominee that they're ready to take on the job? --(WT-en) Evan 12:04, 13 Jun 2005 (EDT)
  • Support, if (WT-en) Huttite decides that he wants the responsibility that is. -- (WT-en) Mark 13:06, 13 Jun 2005 (EDT)
  • Yes, I am willing to take on the responsibility as an administrator. I have given this careful consideration, hence the delay in responding. -- (WT-en) Huttite 02:03, 26 Jun 2005 (EDT)
  • Done (finally!). Welcome, Huttite. --(WT-en) Evan 11:37, 27 Jun 2005 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) Pjamescowie

Paul has been a contributor to Wikivoyage almost since the beginning. He's done tons of work on our coverage of the Middle East, and has greatly expanded our range w/r/t archaeological sites. He's participated in a number of policy discussions, and is also helpful and civil with new users. I think he'd be an excellent administrator. He's expressed his willingness to take the job on his talk page, but maybe he'd like to say a few words here, too. --(WT-en) Evan 20:11, 1 Jul 2005 (EDT)

  • Supported - In fact I was surprised to discover (WT-en) Paul James Cowie was not an administrator already! I always enjoy reading his articles and know I do not need to improve them, because I can't. -- (WT-en) Huttite 04:01, 3 Jul 2005 (EDT)
  • Support - pretty much what (WT-en) Huttite said... We need for Paul to be an admin. -- (WT-en) Mark 04:10, 3 Jul 2005 (EDT)
    • By the way, I'd like to add special KUDOs to my support for PJC because of his really great approch to discussion with other wikivoyagers both experienced and not. We really should take him as a role model for his great civility and respect. -- (WT-en) Mark 11:47, 3 Jul 2005 (EDT)
  • Support - also surprised to learn that he wasn't an admin already. -- (WT-en) Wrh2 05:57, 3 Jul 2005 (EDT)
  • Support. Me too. (WT-en) Jpatokal 06:23, 3 Jul 2005 (EDT)
  • Support --(WT-en) elgaard 09:25, 3 Jul 2005 (EDT)
  • Support -- (WT-en) Paul Richter 21:06, 3 Jul 2005 (EDT)
  • Support -(WT-en) phma 09:08, 5 Jul 2005 (EDT)
  • Support --(WT-en) Quirk 10:34, 5 Jul 2005 (EDT)
    • Excellent! It is done. Welcome, Paul! --(WT-en) Evan 13:19, 24 Jul 2005 (EDT)
    • Thanks, guys, for your support and kind words. Looking forward to continue working with you! (WT-en) Paul James Cowie 17:37, 24 Jul 2005 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) Elgaard

Niels has been a prolific Wikivoyage contributor for more than a year. He is active in discussions of Wikivoyage policy and style guidelines, and is helpful to new users in answering questions or providing feedback. He's done some very interesting technical hacks for different content formats. He's also a really decent guy. I think he'd make a fine administrator. Niels, any comment? --(WT-en) Evan 11:00, 1 Nov 2005 (EST)

User:(WT-en) Ilkirk

Although he's been a Wikivoyager for only a few months, he's made a lot of contributions, both deep (Chattanooga) and broad. He is engaged in policy and style discussions, and active in handling unwanted edits. Good admin material. --(WT-en) Evan 12:35, 1 Nov 2005 (EST)

User:(WT-en) Xltel

Has managed to plunge forward making a huge number of contributions both new content and needed edits. He's got a great feel for the manual of style and site guidelines. I think he'll be a great addition to the admin ranks (WT-en) Majnoona 20:18, 10 Feb 2006 (EST)

  • Support. -- (WT-en) Colin 20:27, 10 Feb 2006 (EST)
  • Thanks!. I would be honored and very happy to be an Admin. Thank you for the nomination. (but someone will still need to fix my spell'n and my hillbilly grammar. :) -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 20:45, 10 Feb 2006 (EST)
  • Support. -- (WT-en) Ryan 21:12, 10 Feb 2006 (EST)
  • Support. Tom's been great concentrating both on his own area of knowledge as well as general fixups for the entire site. He'd be a good new admin. --(WT-en) Evan 22:26, 10 Feb 2006 (EST)
  • Support. (WT-en) Jpatokal 02:36, 12 Feb 2006 (EST)
  • Support. (WT-en) Mark 04:36, 12 Feb 2006 (EST)
    • It seems that there's been no opposition, and it's been more than 14 days, so I've flipped the bits to make Tom an admin. Tom, let me know if you have any troubles, and be careful with the tabs at the top of the page! Thanks for taking on this job. --(WT-en) Evan 13:47, 2 March 2006 (EST)

User:(WT-en) Ravikiran r

Has been an asset to Wikivoyage since first showing up here, reverting spam, making massive contributions to India articles, helping to get the Project:Collaboration of the week started, etc, etc. In addition, it would be great to have an administrator from India, thus filling in a geographic gap in our administrator distribution.

  • Nominated by (WT-en) Ryan 16:56, 23 February 2006 (EST)
  • Support. -- (WT-en) Colin 20:00, 23 February 2006 (EST)
  • Absolute support. --(WT-en) Evan 20:52, 23 February 2006 (EST)
  • Support. (WT-en) Jpatokal 02:05, 24 February 2006 (EST)
  • Support. While we're at it, I'd like to add a word of appreciation for Ravikiran's excellent Wiki-maners, and especially for his helpful and gentle treatment of new users. -- (WT-en) Mark 16:51, 8 March 2006 (EST)
  • Support. -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 16:27, 8 March 2006 (EST)
  • Support. (WT-en) Paul James Cowie 14:49, 9 March 2006 (EST)
    • 14 Days have passed... time to switch the bits on User:(WT-en) Ravikiran r and welcome to admin land! -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 11:30, 11 March 2006 (EST)
      • It's done. It'll take a few minutes for the cache to clear, but after that, Ravikiran r, you should be able to use the "special" tabs on pages. Thanks for accepting this job. --(WT-en) Evan 15:07, 12 March 2006 (EST)
    • And I can see those extra buttons. Thank you for your confidence folks. I hope to make myself useful around here. --(WT-en) Ravikiran 17:14, 12 March 2006 (EST)

User:(WT-en) Jonboy

Has been a clean up monster! And is a huge asset to Wikivoyage. Involved with policy, adding content, welcoming new Wikivoyageers and getting new people involved with Wikivoyage. I think it is time to make him an Administrator. I have not asked, but I hope he will accept.

User:(WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill

  • User:(WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill. Bill has been a Wikivoyager for about 8-9 months, and in that time he's made thousands of edits. He thinks hard about our goals and about how best to meet them, which I like a lot. I also like that he's done so much good work on New Mexico destinations, so he really has an insider's perspective on the challenges of making good guides. Bill, would you be interested in doing this job? --(WT-en) Evan 10:02, 4 May 2006 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) TVerBeek

  • User:(WT-en) TVerBeek. Todd has been around for five months (and 1 day!) and in that time he's done a great amount of work building guides from scratch, reverting vandalism, commenting on policy and just generally being super-involved across the board. I think he would be a great addition to our "janitorial staff". So how about it Todd? (WT-en) Majnoona 14:57, 6 May 2006 (EDT)
    • Support. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 14:58, 6 May 2006 (EDT)
    • Support. -- (WT-en) Colin 15:38, 6 May 2006 (EDT)
    • Support. I should also point out that he's done a great job generalizing the Project:Article status tools. --(WT-en) Evan 15:52, 6 May 2006 (EDT)
    • Support. He has also been great on the maps! Great pick for Administrator. - (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 19:11, 6 May 2006 (EDT)
    • Support. Insightful and prolific. (WT-en) SHC 21:55, 6 May 2006 (EDT)
    • Me too. (WT-en) Jpatokal 00:08, 7 May 2006 (EDT)
    • Strong Support — (WT-en) Ravikiran 02:56, 7 May 2006 (EDT)
    • My only hestitation about accepting this would be the fact that I tend to get very busy with offline matters for extended periods of time. Otherwise, I'd be happy to help out. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 17:37, 7 May 2006 (EDT)
      • There's no particular time requirement, except that you login once every three months. --(WT-en) Evan 20:24, 7 May 2006 (EDT)
        • And you're on the clock... now! B-) Thanks for taking on this job, Todd. --(WT-en) Evan 23:06, 20 May 2006 (EDT)


User:(WT-en) DanielC

User:(WT-en) Sapphire

  • User:(WT-en) Sapphire. I think it is time for this nomination. Andrew has been very active on Wikivoyage with contributions, photo, cleanup work, welcoming and assisting new Wikivoyageers. He would make a great Administrator.
    • Support. -- With much enthusiasm! -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 13:27, 1 June 2006 (EDT)
    • Support. Yes, a great idea. Thanks for nominating him. --(WT-en) Evan 14:39, 1 June 2006 (EDT)
    • I understand we never block IPs, or proctect pages, and that there is a revert button that admins use, I imagine there is a deletion button too, but what else is there? Does this come with an instruction book? Should I accept and see wonderful new buttons on my screen and have no idea what they are for who do I ask about the buttons' functions? - (WT-en) Andrew Haggard (Sapphire) 04:09, 2 June 2006 (EDT)
    • Strong Support His level of enthusiasm is amazing. — (WT-en) Ravikiran 04:36, 2 June 2006 (EDT)
    • Support. This new guy has appreciated his being there. Besides, I can see the pattern I noticed long ago with Little League volunteers: the swirling vortex of goodness tugs at Andrew, grasping with stronger and stronger force. Run, Andrew, RUN! — (WT-en) OldPine 06:18, 2 June 2006 (EDT)
    • Support. Andrew is already pretty-much-single-handedly building the VFD infrastructure for Shared as we speak, and at some point in the process he'll presumedly need Admin privs. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 12:57, 2 June 2006 (EDT)
    • Support. -- (WT-en) Ryan 14:22, 2 June 2006 (EDT)
    • Support. Incidentally, we've had a string of excellent additions to admin in the past few months. Good to see the ranks expanded as the project grows. -- (WT-en) SHC 12:58, 3 June 2006 (EDT)
    • As I was making appetizers this evening I realized something that the admin privileges could be useful in helping to clean up, improve, and build Wikivoyage. I was hesitant in accepting the nomination, because I like trolling (in the good way) and finding something to work on. I was particularly worried because I thought that accepting would mean I would be unable to do some of the things I like to do (I.e. trolling and contributing extensively to articles like the European rail article), however, I now see that the privileges would actually help me improve the work that I currently do. Additionally, TVerBeek's mention of probably needing the admin privs so I can further my work on Shared is another benefit I see with having the privs and the enlightenment that comes with learning what all those "the jolly CANDY-like button[s]" do. It seems to me I'm constantly learning something new on Wikivoyage like the Non-compliant distrubtion page. I'm a bit worried about causing havoc, but Tom, reassured me that every new admin is anxious about that at first. To get to the point - I'll bite the bait. Thanks for the nomination. - (WT-en) Andrew Haggard (Sapphire) 00:10, 3 June 2006 (EDT)
    • Support the enthusuiasm ethusiast. -- (WT-en) Colin 16:11, 5 June 2006 (EDT)
    • Support. (WT-en) Jan 09:38, 6 June 2006 (EDT)
    • And it's done! Thanks for taking on this additional responsibility, Andrew. New tabs should show up on every page, and you'll see the "rollback" link for diffs. Please ask if you have any questions. --(WT-en) Evan 21:38, 15 June 2006 (EDT)

  • Evan: Now listen Cadet, I've got a job for you. See this button? (Sapphire tries to press the button, Evan slaps his hand away). Don't touch it! It's the Wikivoyage administrator button, you fool!
  • Sapphire: So what'll happen?
  • Evan: That's just it. We don't know. Maaaaaaaaybe some bad, maaaaaaaaaybe something good. I guess we'll never know. Because you're going to guard it. You won't touch it will you? Heh heh. heh.
  • Announcer: Oh how long can trust Cadet Sapphire hold out. How can he possibly resist the diabolical urge to push button that could erase his very existence? Will his tortured mind give into its uncontrollable desires? Can he withstand the temptation to push the button that even now beckons him ever closer? Will he succumb to the maddening urge to administer Wikivoyage with the mere push of a single button? The beautiful SHINY button. The jolly CANDY-like button. WILL he hold out folks? CAN he hold out?!
(WT-en) Jpatokal 04:45, 2 June 2006 (EDT) (with apologies to [10])

(WT-en) Tsandell

Tim has been active here since January 2006 and has made a lot of good contributions. He's shown an understanding of how Wikivoyage works, has worked well with other users, is enthusiastic about the project, and can be trusted to wisely use the buttons-that-shouldn't-be-used™.

---

(WT-en) Hypatia

Mary had been a contributor since July 2004. In this time she has alternated between tremendous contributions to Wikivoyage and lulls that I assume are caused by real life. She's been a constructive and level-headed contributor to many of the policy discussions that have gone around, as well as improving articles like Scuba diving and articles about her own region. She has worked well with others, clearly understands the whole wiki thing, and takes others opinions well [11]. I think she would be a great addition to the list of people with buttons-that-shouldn't-be-used™.

  • Nominated by (WT-en) Colin 18:58, 23 August 2006 (EDT)
  • I accept the nomination with one note: the lulls will continue (they're mainly caused by Failure To Travel, alas). (WT-en) Hypatia 19:07, 23 August 2006 (EDT)
  • Support. She seems to have the enthusiasm and moderate temperament that admins need. Whether she can resist the siren-like lure of the buttons remains to be seen =) -- (WT-en) Ryan 19:11, 23 August 2006 (EDT)
  • Support. Does her nomination count as affirmative action since shes from Australia? -- (WT-en) Andrew Haggard (Sapphire) 19:29, 23 August 2006 (EDT)
  • Support. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 20:18, 23 August 2006 (EDT)
  • Strong support. Mary's been a big part of Wikivoyage for a while, and if she's willing to do the admin job I'd be really happy if she would. --(WT-en) Evan 02:34, 25 August 2006 (EDT)
  • Support! (WT-en) Maj 06:34, 25 August 2006 (EDT)
  • Support. — (WT-en) Ravikiran 06:58, 25 August 2006 (EDT)
  • Support. I thought she was an administrator already. -- (WT-en) DanielC 08:00, 25 August 2006 (EDT)
    • That happens to me a lot, too, with good longtime users! --(WT-en) Evan 00:50, 26 August 2006 (EDT)
    • If I count right, it's been 14.5 days since this nomination, so I've made Hypatia an admin. Thanks for taking this job on, Mary! --(WT-en) Evan 12:44, 8 September 2006 (EDT)

[UPDATE] For reference, this admin account was renamed to Puzzlement and later renamed again to User:Querent. -- Ryan • (talk) • 07:00, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(WT-en) OldPine

David has been extremely active in Wikivoyage for the past several months adding content, images and a whole lot of clean up. He could sure make use of the revert button. Wikivoyage is growing and we need good people like David as Administrators and he has a very good understanding of the goals, policy and style of Wikivoyage.

  • Nominated by: It gives me great pleasure to make this nomination. -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 08:00, 16 September 2006 (EDT)
  • I support this nomination, but will he accept? -- (WT-en) Sapphire 12:31, 16 September 2006 (EDT)
  • Strong support. David has been a great participant. I hope he will accept. --(WT-en) Evan 19:50, 16 September 2006 (EDT)
  • Decline. Thanks, guys. The recognition is important to me and comes at a good time when I'm kinda ticked off that I did all that work thinking that I had near perfect MoS and didn't. There probably couldn't be a better bunch of guys anywhere to join with -- and I'm tempted for just that reason. On the other hand, it's about the content for me and not policing the fricken grafitti morons, voting on stuff or (usually) arguing about policy. (WT-en) OldPine 21:57, 16 September 2006 (EDT)(signed late)
David, I respect your decision... I would hope you would reconsider. It is not all about recognition, nor voting and arguing. It really is about the content. You do a great job of adding content and editing and getting stuff in line with the MoS. All of your efforts have always been appreciated. I really think the main thing an administrator does is set example for others more then anything else. You do that! And I think that we “all” thank you for that. So, you really are an Administrator, whether you have the extra buttons or not. -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 21:33, 16 September 2006 (EDT)
Oh sure, dangle the mysterious extra buttons in front of me! That's not fair! (WT-en) OldPine 21:57, 16 September 2006 (EDT)

(WT-en) Pashley

Sandy has proved to be one of our great contributors. He has a great understanding of the goals, policy, and consensus. More importantly he provides great content on many numerous Wikivoyage destinations, most notably our Far East destinations. Please see Hajj as an example of the great work he does.

  • Nominated by: -- (WT-en) Sapphire 16:48, 1 October 2006 (EDT)
  • Support. -- (WT-en) Colin 16:51, 1 October 2006 (EDT)
  • Support. --(WT-en) Evan 17:15, 2 October 2006 (EDT)
  • Support. -- (WT-en) Ryan 17:24, 2 October 2006 (EDT)
  • Thanks. What does being an admin involve? I believe you get a magic button that reverts things. Are there other toys? What are the roles and responsibilities? (WT-en) Pashley 22:09, 2 October 2006 (EDT)
    Seems like the only additional responsibilty is clicking "rollback" every once in a great while. Not much of a change than what you normally do. -- User:(WT-en) Sapphire
    Some of the other cool toys are delete, restore, and editing the MediaWiki templates. However, for the most part we shouldn't use any of the other cool toys unless consensus permits. -- User:(WT-en) Sapphire
    • Mostly there are a bunch of shiny buttons that we must not touch. The most frequently used button is 'rollback', which should only be used for multiple undos so that you can undo a bunch of undesirable contributions -- but you're still expected to manually revert at least one to add a text explaination so the user can understand why it's being done. The second most frequently used button is "delete" which is mostly used to process vfds that are done. The other special powers are pretty much never used in practice -- but see the admin page for what they are. So in summary, being an admin mostly means we think you understand how the wiki works, how consensus works, and we trust you. -- (WT-en) Colin 22:51, 2 October 2006 (EDT)
  • Support. Take a look at Project:Administrators to find out more about joining the janitorial staff ;-) (WT-en) Maj 22:41, 2 October 2006 (EDT)
  • Support -- in fact I'd kinda assumed Pashley was one already! The Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere division of the Wikivoyage World Domination Organization can always use more janitors. (WT-en) Jpatokal 23:04, 2 October 2006 (EDT)
  • Accept. (WT-en) Pashley 03:51, 5 October 2006 (EDT)


(WT-en) WindHorse

He or she has made a lot of contributions. Also, I have more than once noticed WindHorse checking Recent Changes and doing cleanup work. For example, I recently put in an incorrect airport code for Guangzhou and WindHorse promptly corrected it. Methinks this is exactly the sort of person who should be given a magic button to revert vandalism.

We seem to have user pages for both WindHorse and Windhorse. Same person? Should one of the two be deleted? Anyway, I mean the one with capital "H".

Hey, Pashley, I know Guangzhou quite well (even remember the old airport), so the incorrect airport code caught my eye immediately. I really appreciate your nomination, but you know, I'm quite happy just to plod along as I am - doing things quietly with short bursts of energy and enthusiasm. And, anyway, I think you guys probably have enough admin by now. So, I will let the nomination go this time, but thanks anyway. I do appreciate the trust placed in me. By the way, the WindHorse without the capitals is mine (I forgot about that), so it can be deleted. (WT-en) WindHorse 11:31, 10 October 2006 (EDT)

  • Just a note to mention that I have long admired WindHorse's edits — and it seems he has visited virtually every place in the world! — (WT-en) Ravikiran 14:37, 11 October 2006 (EDT)
  • Support. Knowledgeable and helpful. -- (WT-en) P.K.Niyogi 20:58, 23 October 2006 (EDT)

(WT-en) Rmx

Ricardo has been a high-quality contributor to Wikivoyage en: for over a year, and has done an excellent job with our coverage of Brazil. He has also launched and managed Portuguese Wikivoyage, which recently passed 1000 articles. He is intelligent, bi- (tri-?) lingual, engaged in discussions of policy and guidelines, helpful to new users, and attentive to en: as well as pt: and es:. Having him as an admin on en: would help build links between different language communities on WT, and would also give some useful tools to a great en: user. --(WT-en) Evan 20:50, 11 December 2006 (EST)

Evan, thank you very much for the nice things you wrote about me and thanks to everyone else for your support. At first I felt like I'd decline the nomination but then I thought: well, I'm always sticking around anyways, so why not? I'd be glad to help with the admin tasks too and it's good to know that my efforts on stregthening the links between language versions are being appreciated here. (WT-en) Ricardo (Rmx) 07:17, 15 December 2006 (EST)
With unanimous strong support, and with a plan not to have any tasks waiting to be done for Christmas Day, I've broken all the rules and set his admin bit about 16 hours early. Thanks for taking on this job, Ricardo, and please let me know if there's anything I can do to help. --(WT-en) Evan 11:33, 24 December 2006 (EST)

(WT-en) Cacahuate

This person has been participating actively (and I mean actively) on Wikivoyage for the last 3 months. They have worked hard on improving the quality of the guides for many destinations, participated in policy and guidelines discussions showing a strong understanding of current policy. Helps new users, is friendly, improves stubs, reverts bad edits with aplomb. We would be lucky if this person is willing to take on the additional responsibility of adminhood. --(WT-en) Evan 01:16, 6 January 2007 (EST)

  • Strong support. I'm particularly amazed that somebody can work this hard on Wikivoyage while backpacking in Bangladesh! (WT-en) Jpatokal 01:31, 6 January 2007 (EST)
  • Strong support. Since he's crazy enough to travel around Afghanistan, he should fit right in. -- (WT-en) Andrew H. (Sapphire) 01:32, 6 January 2007 (EST)
  • Strong support. He is very helpful and a really enthusiastic contributor. — (WT-en) Ravikiran 02:22, 6 January 2007 (EST)
  • Accept - thank you guys, and I'll do my best to help out where I can... I think this is a great project, hopefully this is the last trip I take where I have to heavily invest in bulky LP books... free (and up to date) information kinda rules... (WT-en) Cacahuate 10:43, 11 January 2007 (EST)
Cool, thanks again for the supports! I now see my new pretty buttons, and even did my first "rollback" (pretty sure that Iraq of all places does indeed need a stay safe section!). Anyhoo, changed my prefs to "mark my edits as patrolled", and will tread lightly with the new abilities. (WT-en) ::: Cacahuate 12:02, 21 January 2007 (EST)

(WT-en) NJR_ZA

Per the the peer pressure (User talk:(WT-en) NJR ZA) NJR_ZA has decided he'd be willing to become an admin so I hereby nominate him for the rank of sysop. NJR_ZA has been with us for a couple months, now, and likes to fight vandals, and it'd be nice if he had a few extra buttons that would save him two clicks when doing reverts. Also, it'd be nice if we didn't have to go behind him and "patrol" his edits, since they're generally excellent edits. -- (WT-en) Sapphire 00:31, 11 February 2007 (EST)

I accept the nomination and am willing to perform admin duties -- (WT-en) NJR_ZA 02:48, 11 February 2007 (EST)
  • Very Strong Support We all have already voted on this in the NJR ZA Talk page. Will make an excellent Admin. Your edits are ones that we all should use as an example and we appreciate your work and efforts. Thank you for accepting and helping with some of the cleanup and helping the community to grow. -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 06:48, 11 February 2007 (EST)
  • Support! This guy is a legend on the SA pages, he's pretty much single handedly written a couple of them over the last few months - he's definitely committed to Wikivoyage and will make a great admin. -- (WT-en) Tim 08:43, 11 February 2007 (EST)
  • Strong support. I think he'll make a good admin. --(WT-en) Evan 09:46, 11 February 2007 (EST)
  • Support. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 12:53, 11 February 2007 (EST)
  • Support. -- (WT-en) Colin 13:42, 11 February 2007 (EST)
  • Support. As an aside, with the recent addition of User:(WT-en) Rmx, this nomination should give us an admin from every non-icebound continent. -- (WT-en) Ryan 14:19, 11 February 2007 (EST)
  • Support. (Now if we can just get Mumble or Lovelace online...) - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 20:47, 11 February 2007 (EST)
  • Strong Support - agree with all above, super pleasant, great edits, and good all around!! (WT-en) - Cacahuate 21:52, 11 February 2007 (EST)
  • Strong support!. I had forgotten to vote earlier. — (WT-en) Ravikiran 06:02, 16 February 2007 (EST)
  • Strong support. And thanks for helping us with the maps on de: ! --(WT-en) Flip666 08:25, 16 February 2007 (EST)
  • It is done. Thanks very much to Nick for taking on this new task, as well as thanks for everything else he's done. --(WT-en) Evan 09:54, 26 February 2007 (EST)


Classic case of false advertising ... these here buttons ain't shiny at all. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) NJR ZA (talkcontribs)

It depends on where the computer is located (i.e. under direct sunlight) and if you redefine the word "shiny". -- (WT-en) Sapphire(Talk) • 16:23, 26 February 2007 (EST)

(WT-en) Episteme

In my opinion this is by far one of the most amazing users because of the tremendously amazing amount of interwiki work he/she(?) does. It'd be nice not to have to patrol his/her edits since they're all awesome and that's one of reasons why I wanted to nominate Episteme. Even though we may get a "trusted user" feature, which would effectively solve that I want to give Episteme a revert button too since he/she comes across vandalism that the rest of us overlooks and will revert it. I could go on and on, but if you want more reasons to give Episteme the extra powers see:

-- (WT-en) Sapphire 20:42, 20 February 2007 (EST)

Strong support. Episteme is an essential link in keeping our interwiki network together. They are also an admin on ja:. --(WT-en) Evan 20:52, 20 February 2007 (EST)
Strong support - Thought they already were an admin here, always superb (WT-en) - Cacahuate 21:34, 20 February 2007 (EST)
Support for all the reasons above. --(WT-en) Jonboy 21:45, 20 February 2007 (EST)
Support. Although we really should get InterWikiBot back up and running again instead... (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:00, 20 February 2007 (EST)
Support Yes... for sure. -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 22:39, 20 February 2007 (EST)
Support. -- (WT-en) Ryan 22:42, 20 February 2007 (EST)
Support. -- (WT-en) Colin 23:26, 20 February 2007 (EST)
Support -- (WT-en) Tim 06:24, 21 February 2007 (EST)
Support, provided they're willing and hoping the new status won't slow down their great collaborations. (WT-en) Ricardo (Rmx) 15:31, 27 February 2007 (EST)
Support -- (WT-en) NJR_ZA 05:45, 28 February 2007 (EST)
Accept. I highly appreciate your nomination and support. --(WT-en) Episteme 11:10, 4 March 2007 (EST)
Support(WT-en) Ravikiran 11:35, 4 March 2007 (EST)

(WT-en) MiddleEastern

Well nobody seems to have nominated themselves recently, and, although I haven't been here long - I think I have a lot to offer this project, I hate to be self-indulgent, but really I just wanted to see how much credibility I've gained.. hehe. I certainly would make good use of the extra tools in monitoring articles, and cleanup of vandalism is something I want to become much more involved in. I will understand if my own nomination is politely dismissed, but, curiosity prevailed :-), see my contributions! here --(WT-en) MiddleEastern 17:31, 3 March 2007 (EST)

  • Object. User has only made 51 edits in the article namespace, has been fairly combative, and has not yet demonstrated an understanding of Consensus. While admin powers are a broom and not a sword, it is unclear at this time whether or not he can be trusted with the broom. Give it more time. -- (WT-en) Colin 18:43, 3 March 2007 (EST)
  • Object. I'm not convinced that the user is ready for the extra rights. This comment stands out as not fully understanding the idea or collaborating, especially when the IP made only one edit and said nothing about Europeans. See Special:Contributions/204.181.36.164. The user didn't make any really offending or untrue statements. He didn't even mention Hezbollah, as the nominee kind of charges. I, personally, don't agree with many things and I'll bitch and moan, but I try not to let my prejudices tell someone off, unless it's a vandal/troll and I'm at my breaking point.

I'm going to be honest about this too, but I'm somewhat worried that you'd be so anxious to jump the gun, with less than 200 edits to date, and nominate yourself to become an administrator. Sure, in theory, someone could do this, but it's only a theory. I agree with Cjensen that you need to wait longer... -- (WT-en) Sapphire(Talk) • 23:09, 3 March 2007 (EST)

  • Not yet. It takes a little while to get the hang of how wikis work, and as others have pointed out a lot of patience and understanding is needed. I like the fact that you can provide an alternative view to many of us whose views are shaped by what Western governments and media outlets report, but at the same time I think most of us work hard to put politics aside, and I'd like to see more of an effort to do so on your part as well. If you'd like to be an admin stick around and do your best to make the guide as useful for travelers as possible, and eventually you'll see your name on this page again. -- (WT-en) Ryan 01:03, 4 March 2007 (EST)
  • Object. I only looked at a couple of edits, but what I have seen looks more politically motivated than travel related. --(WT-en) NJR_ZA 04:28, 4 March 2007 (EST)
  • Object per Nick. I think that adminship should not be a big deal and I have no problems with people who have strong opinions. But the minimum I expect from admins is that they should be interested in a travel guide. Your goal here seems to be to correct, what in your view are misconceptions about the political situation in the middle-east. That is not incompatible with our goal, but is not part of our primary goal. — (WT-en) Ravikiran 11:30, 4 March 2007 (EST)
  • Comment - Thanks for all your comments, they will serve as excellent pointers, if anyone has any more advice, please let me know --(WT-en) MiddleEastern 16:33, 5 March 2007 (EST)

(WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage

I've been around quite a while now...And I am really sorry about the Kathgodam image issue....(WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage( Talk )( (WT-en) Travel ) • 06:20, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

  • Oppose. Youthful enthusiasm, yes, a sincere desire to improve Wikivoyage, yes, but a thorough understanding of what this is all about and the responsibility to wield awesome janitorial powers — no. You're already an admin on Hindi, so please shepherd that for a while and then try again. (WT-en) Jpatokal 09:26, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
  • Comment — I basically concur and suggest a two month pause before a re-application; we do need enthusiastic hard workers that can build consensus and produce a quality result.
    ...(WT-en) Gaimhreadhan (kiwiexile at DMOZ) 12:03, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
  • Support — I realise that those incidents of misrepresentation would have been inexcusable if it weren't by a overenthusiastic 13 yo. (The Kathgodam incident wasn't the first one. He had earlier plastered the Pune article with images from Thane and Jaipur and captioned them rather imaginatively.) But his conduct since then has been almost exemplary. (Well, there were a couple of incidents related to pointless bickering, but he stopped once I called on him to stop the childishness.) He has worked hard to improve the guides, understood policies, and has started the Hindi Wikivoyage almost singlehandedly. In my mind, there is no doubt that Upamanyu deserves to be an admin. — (WT-en) Ravikiran 10:16, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
  • Comment - Oops, talking about the Pune article, I think I copied the history bit from wp, I didn't know about the GDFL/CCSA stuff. I'll delete it right away. (WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage( Talk )( (WT-en) Travel ) • 11:25, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
Nope. I was talking of the case where you took an image from the Thane article, put it in Pune and claimed that it was the NH3 to Pune, and you took an image from a fort in Jaipur and claimed that it was Shaniwarvada in Pune. That was ridiculously stupid of you. I reverted it and left a comment on the talk page, and you did it again with the Kathgodam stuff. I know that you've learnt your lessons and won't do it again, but please don't hide it, and accept that after this it will take some time before you gain the confidence of others. — (WT-en) Ravikiran 12:39, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
  • Oppose. We're only 2 months removed from the Kathgodam nonsense. I promise not to bring this up 6 months from now, but I think this user needs more time to regain our (my?) trust. --(WT-en) Jonboy 11:49, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
  • Oppose. I'd like some more time first, and Hindi wikivoyage should be plenty to keep your plate full. Keep up the good work. -- (WT-en) Colin 12:06, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. He works hard and in general does a competent job. (WT-en) WindHorse 12:14, 22 March 2007 (EDT) Upamanyu, I fully agree with Ravi's later comments. You are young and made some dumb mistakes, but as Ravi advises, the way to make amends is not to hide your foolishness, but to admit what you did and clear up the mess. Then, I suggest that you just keep plodding away and doing a good job, and slowly you will regain the confidence and trust of others. Anyway, don't be disappointed, because you've learned something useful from the experience, right?
  • Oppose - you're a great contributer, but I don't think you're quite experienced enough yet, as the photo incidents showed. Give it a couple of months - prove to us you're up to the job of adminning on here by keeping up the good edits and the adminning on Hindi, and I'll support your nomination then! Keep it up! -- (WT-en) Tim 15:28, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
  • Comment for all of you - Righto guys, I respect all your opinions and think all of you are right. But I hope none of you re trying to oppose my admin-ship on Hindi, should I resign out there as well? (WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage( Talk )( (WT-en) Travel ) • 00:35, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
Please don't resign on Hindi! If you're even half as enthusiastic on hi: as you are on en: then you are doing a fantastic job, so please don't resign! However, there is a difference between adminning on the largest language wikivoyage and on one of the smaller language versions. On en: you need more than enthusiasm, you need to be trustworthy, dependable and experienced. As I said above, keep up the effort and edits and we will be convinced in time! -- (WT-en) Tim 14:26, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
  • Comments and questions only.
  1. Upmanyu, you mention that you didn't know about GNU FDL/CC-by-SA 1.0. When did you realize there were differences and can you tell us what the biggest differences in the licenses are?
  2. What can you offer the project? For most nominations the reason that most easily pass is because the nominee has usually displayed some kind of strength that the project needs. Of course, there are some cases where some amazing contributors are overlooked when it comes to adminship.
  3. In the past I've given simple support for nominations, but I also do some background checking and in the case of one nomination (not on en:) I practically hounded the nominee for a description of his views on certain aspects, even though I was the one who nominated him. What are your views on Wikivoyage, Wikipedia, the wiki concept, etc.?
  4. I've essentially forgiven the incident where you lied about the license and authorship of the image, however, I didn't know about the Pune incident. Everyone essentially wants to know - will you lie again?
  5. As for your adminship on hi: no one on en: can revoke that, unless they bring it up on hi:. I would encourage you not to resign, because working on a foreign wiki can provide a lot of experience that you won't learn here. The reason for that is because en: is pretty solid with community policies and processes, but you get to learn new ideas and ways when you're helping to found a brand new wiki.
  6. You've got three admins opposing with two people supporting your nomination (including one admin). According to the standards set you need at least one more admin to support the nomination, but even then with so many other admins opposing your nomination is unlikely to pass. So my question then is - If the nomination fails what will you do?

Thanks for your responses in advance. -- (WT-en) Sapphire(Talk) • 01:01, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

The Pune incident

I realised that most people know not of the Pune incident I referred to above. So an explanation is in order, because on the face of it it is much more bizarre than the Kathgodam incident, but once you think of it, Upamanyu comes out looking somewhat better.

The incident I refer to can be seen in these diffs [12]. In them, among other changes, most good and some misplaced, he added the following images

  • Image:Entering Thane.JPG — claiming that it was "Pune in the distance, as seen from NH 3" (It is actually the toll gate to Thane. The photo is taken by me. )
  • Image:Image029.jpg — claiming that it was "Domestic Terminal, Lohegaon Airport" (It is actually Mumbai airport and linked from there. )
  • Image:Indian Train.jpg —"Snacks off the platform, Pune City Stn" (There is no evidence that it is so, someone else had uploaded the image with the generic description that it is from the window of an Indian train.)
  • Image:IndianDress.jpg — "Inside the Shanivar Waada". (The photo was actually contributed by Yann and he had captioned it "Indian dress of Rajasthan" back when it was on the India page. )
  • Image:Idli vada sambar and chutney.JPG — "Breakfast, Fergusson College Rd. Enjoy the hot and piping street food." (The image I uploaded did not contain any location information.)

These image additions will look bizarre, because if the intent was to deceive the effort was supremely pointless. All one had to do was click on those images to find out that they were not, in fact what they were captioned as. Upamanyu is not dumb, quite the contrary, so I find myself unable to believe that he was unaware of the concept of clicking on an image. My best explanation is that he was taking artistic license too far, and he was at that time unable to distinguish between the ethics of using stock images and an image of a particular place. For example, if the "Do" section of Tamil Nadu lists "enjoy a Bharata Natyam dance performance" and I upload a photo of a Bharata Natyam dancer I had clicked in Mumbai and caption it "A Bharata Natyam dancer", it would be within the bounds of ethics. If I let my imagination run wild and say "A Bharata Natyam performance in Thiruvalluvar sabha, Chennai", then I am breaching ethics. If a professional photographer did it, it would be a firing offense. But at Upamanyu's age, I think that the problem was with a simple lack of knowledge of the ethics involved. This indicates immaturity rather than dishonesty.

Also, I mentioned above that Kathgodam occurred after Pune. In one sense it is true, but I checked the history and he had uploaded the image a month before the Pune incident. Later, he was questioned and lied about taking the photo himself, most probably because he felt cornered.

Of course, all of this is extremely immature behaviour and those of you who feel that Upamanyu needs some more time before you are convinced that he has grown probably have a point. But if you think that he was dishonest and you need more time before you trust him, then I just want to point out that his problems with honesty had more to do with immaturity than with any other failing of character. — (WT-en) Ravikiran 08:08, 24 March 2007 (EDT)

Hey Ravi, thanks for taking the time to explain the situation in such detail, and I fully agree with your conclusions that immaturity rather deceit were behind those incidences. I reiterate my support for Upamanyu's admin application. (WT-en) WindHorse 08:24, 24 March 2007 (EDT)
  • Future support - looks like this won't pass through this time, but as others have said, keep up the good work, you've been really helpful lately and I'm looking forward to what you get going with the Hindi version. And if you have time, keep helping us here on English too! – (WT-en) cacahuate talk 02:51, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) Hypatia resignation

[Procedural note: Project:Administrators gives no way to resign, that's why I'm asking here!]

I'd like to resign my Admin status before it is taken from me by force :) I just don't feel that I'm a regular enough editor these days, since I only edit when I travel, and only travel once a year or so (WT-en) Hypatia 07:42, 24 April 2007 (EDT) Withdrawn, see below

Good point, should this be requested on this page, or on a Beaurocrat's talk page? – (WT-en) cacahuate talk 19:47, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
If you'd like to resign then I think you should be allowed to do so, but if your sole reason for resigning is due to the existing admin guidelines then I'd rather see you stay. I think the original guidelines about how active an admin should be were put in place to allow a way to plug a potential security hole for someone who has become completely inactive. Since you edit occasionally I think it is fine for you to keep your shiny buttons, and others may feel the same given the support you received during the admin nomination. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:50, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
Agree with Ryan, the only stipulation for keeping the buttons is that you log in once every 3 months, which you seem to have no problem doing – (WT-en) cacahuate talk 21:37, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
Me three. It's great to have you as even an occasional admin, but if you're sure you want out, it can be done. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 21:58, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
Strong oppose on the ground that it will set a wrong signal to future administrators. The requirement for an administrative role is that she understands policies and that she has a level head on her shoulders. As long as you have those, it does not matter how much or how little you contribute. Any contributions are welcome as long as they are positive contributions. If we accept your resignation without a fight, it will deter future administrator nominees who will think that they may not be able to commit sufficient time. Of course, we can't stop you from resigning, but I strongly urge you to reconsider. — (WT-en) Ravikiran 23:35, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
  • I'm in general agreement with the above. I don't have anywhere near as much time to do admin work here as I used to, but as long as I find time periodically to do so, I figure I'll retain that "job". I'd be happy for you to stay on, on the same terms. But if you're intent on resigning... well, if you stay away for three months, that would give "cause", and your admin status would be terminated as a security precaution. But if you can't stay away that long... :) - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 00:37, 25 April 2007 (EDT)
Oppose, for reasons already mentioned. Mary, you're an important asset to this site and I'd greatly regret losing you as an admin. You seem to be able to meet the once-every-3-months requirement, and you seem to still be interested in the project, and as far as I'm concerned that's good enough. --(WT-en) Evan 09:02, 25 April 2007 (EDT)
Withdrawn nomination. As long as Wikivoyage is happy with me retaining admin privileges while remaining a user who becomes active only in the middle of occasional travel (and meets the 3 month minimum! (WT-en) Hypatia 22:13, 27 April 2007 (EDT)), I'm happy to do so. I'm more used to projects where people whose level of activity is drastically dropping are required/encouraged to pull out in fairness to the project. Perhaps there should be a document aimed at us overly conscientious volunteers :) (WT-en) Hypatia 22:10, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) Fastestdogever

Stacy is a fairly new user, but right from the start dove straight into the policies, guidelines and goals, in which she now seems well versed. She makes lots of edits, seems to do a fair amount of patrolling which would help diminish the red exclamation marks, and is a helpful and collaborative editor. And I think she's added WP, isin's and official websites for nearly half this entire site. Anyway, I'd support(WT-en) cacahuate talk 19:16, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

  • Support. I need more Ohioans for the takeover and she'll do. Today it will be Wikivoyage. Tomorrow it'll be the office of Brown County Auditor, then the world! {Insert evil laughter}. So Stacy, think you can handle all of that? -- (WT-en) Sapphire(Talk) • 01:18, 25 April 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. Provided she wants to be nominated, of course. She hasn't been around very long, but she's been great about working with people in a friendly way to correct mistakes and come to decisions. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 01:22, 25 April 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. She is very active on shared:, too! --(WT-en) Flip666 writeme! • 04:48, 25 April 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. (WT-en) Pashley 07:02, 25 April 2007 (EDT)
  • Strong support. FDE has been a great contributor and would make an great admin. I have a rule of thumb that I don't nominate anyone until after 3 months on the site, but FDE is about to pass this mark, so fantastic. As an aside, I may have missed something, but it might be good to do a gender check before using the feminine pronoun. "Stacy" is also a male name, after all. Cacahuate, can you notify the nominee of the nomination, please? --(WT-en) Evan 09:07, 25 April 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. Definitely admin material. Level headed, excellent updates and not scared of doing general maintenance work. -- (WT-en) NJR ZA 09:20, 25 April 2007 (EDT)
  • Accept. Sure I will. I think this is a great project that still has so much potential. I can't even remember how I stumbled across WT, but I'm glad I did. BTW - I'm a chick, but my dad didn't want me to be when he named me after this Stacy. -- (WT-en) Fastestdogever 10:24, 25 April 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. Thank you for accepting. -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 23:25, 27 April 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. Late to the party, but just wanted to chime in. (And Stacy, he could have named you "Walter"!). (WT-en) Maj 23:36, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) Flickety

He or she is fairly new but seems to have experience on other wikis and is doing lots of good cleanup work, spelling fixes, etc. I'm tired of having Flickety fix some page I'm watching so I have to go click on it to mark the edit "patrolled"; let's just make him or her an admin and save me the trouble :-) (WT-en) Pashley 23:51, 12 May 2007 (EDT)

  • Oppose. Great user -- but people sometimes come and do some great work for a few weeks and leave (and we love them for the time they do give us). I prefer to wait a few months to see by demonstration whether or not the user really wants to work on this project on an ongoing basis, or if they tire of us. This user has only been here two weeks, so let's give it some more time first. -- (WT-en) Colin 00:34, 13 May 2007 (EDT)
  • Oppose - I just don't think that this user has done enough edit yet. Give it a while longer --(WT-en) NJR_ZA 01:18, 13 May 2007 (EDT)
  • In the Future - Flickerty is staring off to make a great Administrator in the future. Additional time (a least three months total) and some more involvement with policy discussions and I see an excellent Administrator in the making. Hang in there and before you know it there will be another nomination. -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 07:23, 14 May 2007 (EDT)
  • Future Support. Still not around long enough. Bring this back up at the end of July & Flickety will have my support. -- (WT-en) Fastestdogever 11:31, 14 May 2007 (EDT)
  • Not yet. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 11:41, 14 May 2007 (EDT)
  • Decline - Thanks for your support here. I would be honoured to have this opportunity but I can understand that most of you feel that I am too new. I do appreciate being considered, however. Please consider me next time around (although I will be on a long travel vacation then...). If you wish to see my work elsewhere, I am an administrator on wikiHow. Thanks. P.S. I only just found this because I have been at Rococo all weekend. PPS & should have added decline but I was so stoked by the wiki-love. :) Anyway, I would like to have a go another time when I've done some more here. THANKS! -- (WT-en) Flickety 15:50, 20 May 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. I met Flickety in person at RoCoCo; she's extremely personable, knowledgeable about wiki, and enthusiastic about creating great content and working with others. I hope that when/if she is re-nominated she accepts the job -- it would be great to have someone who's an admin on wikiHow be an admin here, too. --(WT-en) Evan 22:38, 4 June 2007 (EDT)
Yep, stick around, glad to have you as a new and enthusiastic contributor! And a long travel vacation will, I'm sure, only add to the quality of your edits! Take lots of notes, please – (WT-en) cacahuate talk 12:52, 21 May 2007 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald

Another relatively new one that is doing good work, e.g. reorganising the Russia regions, and would probably make good use of admin privileges. He's shown an understanding of policy and consensus in some discussions, too. (WT-en) Pashley 23:51, 12 May 2007 (EDT)

  • Support. Peter has been here three months. While I prefer more time than that, Peter has participated in some tough discussions in a productive manner in addition to his work on content organization. -- (WT-en) Colin 00:34, 13 May 2007 (EDT)
  • Support - Hard to belive he has only been here three months. He has done a huge amount of very good work, understands teamwork and contributes not only to articles, but also to the discussions that keeps to improve Wikivoyage. --(WT-en) NJR_ZA 01:21, 13 May 2007 (EDT)
  • Support - I almost nominated him in the last round, but decided to wait until he'd hit 500 edits (which he's now done). He's enthusiastic about the project, works well with the rest of us, and has my support. – (WT-en) cacahuate talk 05:38, 13 May 2007 (EDT)
  • Support - Peter has been doing some really good work and has made good contributions to policy discussions. -- (WT-en) DanielC 14:10, 13 May 2007 (EDT)
  • Accept - Thank you for your kind words. If I do become an administrator, I plan to mostly continue the type of work that I have been doing: maps, geographical hierarchy organization, throwing around my 2¢, and eventually getting Georgia (country) up to star status. But with the extra admin privileges (rollback and patrolled edits), I would also contribute more to the recent changes patrol. I should also mention that I may be absent for about a week after tonight—I'm leaving early tomorrow morning for Guanacaste and don't know whether I'll have wireless! --(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald Talk 16:59, 13 May 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. Hopefully we can welcome you to the shiny button club soon. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 23:39, 13 May 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. --(WT-en) Jonboy 06:41, 14 May 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. Will make a good Administrator. Thank you for accepting. -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 07:23, 14 May 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. Is great at copyediting & working towards consensus. -- (WT-en) Fastestdogever 11:31, 14 May 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. Good choice. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 11:41, 14 May 2007 (EDT)
  • Support, and it is now time for the button to be flipped. — (WT-en) Ravikiran 08:52, 31 May 2007 (EDT)
  • Support, and the button will be flipped in a few seconds. --(WT-en) Evan 10:10, 4 June 2007 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) Gorilla Jones

Has been doing a great job on many, many articles related to Japan, South-East Asia and more since last October. Follows the MoS to a tee and does anti-spam/vandalism housekeeping regularly. (WT-en) Jpatokal 23:06, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

Sweet. I'm going for the world record of being gassed there. So far I've got three-and-a-half gassings. -- 71.72.212.152 18:55, 12 June 2007 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) Texugo

Brian has been collaborating since July 2006 and has become one of the most helpful and indispensable users to the project as a whole. He is currently an admin on es:, pt:, and ro: (despite not speaking Romanian, but wanted to help out where he could). He's also been active in helping out on de:. He seems to understand the wiki process and our policies and has participated in cross-lingual discussions including the "WikiTours" discussion. I think it'd be wise of us to give him a few extra powers to help keep things nice and clean on en:. -- (WT-en) Sapphire(Talk) • 11:27, 12 June 2007 (EDT)

  • Support – Andrew said it well – (WT-en) cacahuate talk 11:42, 12 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. -- (WT-en) Colin 12:24, 12 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. I don't see why en: should be different from our other language versions. B-) --(WT-en) Evan 12:35, 12 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. Even if he is a collaborator like Sapphire alleges, since this way we can keep a closer eye on him. (WT-en) Jpatokal 12:55, 12 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. He's not an administrator?! --(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald Talk 14:55, 12 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Accept - Glad to help! (WT-en) Texugo 19:14, 12 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. - (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 19:29, 12 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. — (WT-en) Ravikiran 00:53, 14 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 14:37, 14 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. -- Bryan is very committed to the project and does a terrific job at patrolling edits on pt: (and other versions as well), I'm sure we'd benefit from his profile here too. --(WT-en) Ricardo (Rmx) 18:10, 14 June 2007 (EDT)


User:(WT-en) Sapphire

I would like to nominate myself to become a bureaucrat on the English Wikivoyage. I've been fulfilling the job for the past couple of months and there's really no difference in the job description of an administrator and bureaucrat, except two extra buttons.

Feel free to ask me questions regarding the nomination (kinda like a Senate confirmation). -- (WT-en) Sapphire(Talk) • 17:29, 14 August 2007 (EDT)

Strong support. Andrew is already a bureaucrat at de: and I think on some other language versions, too. He has always shown his great interest in Wikivoyage, not only by editing articles, but especially by participation in many discussions. I think he will be a great manager of the community! --(WT-en) Flip666 writeme! • 18:45, 14 August 2007 (EDT)
Strong support. Andrew is consistent in his thoughtfull approach both as a contributor and an admin. He's the perfect candidate for bureaucrat. -- (WT-en) Mark 01:01, 15 August 2007 (EDT)
Strong support. (WT-en) Jpatokal 02:57, 15 August 2007 (EDT)
Support -- (WT-en) Colin 03:03, 15 August 2007 (EDT)
Support -- (WT-en) NJR_ZA 03:08, 15 August 2007 (EDT)
Support Andrew is one of the most committed people in our community here, and he knows just about everything there is to know about Wikivoyage. -- (WT-en) Tim (writeme!) 05:36, 15 August 2007 (EDT)
Support. Easiest decision I've made since whether or not to have some ice cream last night. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 10:05, 15 August 2007 (EDT)
Support. Sounds good to me. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:19, 15 August 2007 (EDT)
Support. --(WT-en) Ricardo (Rmx) 22:00, 15 August 2007 (EDT)
  • Strong support. – (WT-en) cacahuate talk 14:39, 18 August 2007 (EDT)
  • Support My, my, my.... from cheerleader to honcho. Look out world! Luv ya, man. (WT-en) OldPine 16:41, 18 August 2007 (EDT)
  • Support, but: How many people with Bureaucrat privileges should we have/do we need? I certainly have no problem with either Andrew or Jani having this privilege, but the more people have higher-powered access, the more chances there are for something to go wrong somewhere because of a compromise. I'd appreciate an explanation of why this is being done. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 17:43, 18 August 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. --(WT-en) Evan 16:01, 20 August 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 10:39, 21 August 2007 (EDT)
  • Support -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 10:44, 21 August 2007 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) Jpatokal

I would like to nominate our ever-productive contributor in order to reduce his article productivity so that he stops making the rest of us look bad. Sure, flipping admin bits might not stop him much, but it's a start. Also he is fluent in shiny-buttonese, rarely presses them wrong as an admin, and is often around the site. Would be a nice to have an additional crat to flip bits when Sapphire is travelling and Evan is off working on that Extra thingie. -- (WT-en) Colin 03:03, 15 August 2007 (EDT)

Accept. Becoming an anonymous, faceless, unpaid bureaucrat in vast, impersonal machinery, with power over life and death bot bits and usernames, has been a lifelong dream. (WT-en) Jpatokal 03:18, 15 August 2007 (EDT)
  • Strong support. Jani is an excellent admin, knows just about everything imaginable, and is, as Colin noted, around the site often enough to respond to requests in a timely manner. Plus, I owe him lunch and hopefully he'll settle for my support. ;) -- (WT-en) Sapphire(Talk) • 03:35, 15 August 2007 (EDT)
  • Strong support Jani has been extrordinally important to this project. -- (WT-en) Mark 03:54, 15 August 2007 (EDT)
  • Support - excellent admin, committed contributer -- (WT-en) Tim (writeme!) 05:38, 15 August 2007 (EDT)
  • Support - it's a no brainer, Jani is the right person for the job. --(WT-en) NJR_ZA 05:55, 15 August 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. --(WT-en) Flip666 writeme! • 07:44, 15 August 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. Yet another page to be ruthlessly published by the Wikivoyage Press empire. Get ready for The Compleat Wikivoyage Bureaucrat Nominations, 2003-2007 to take its place on the bestseller list alongside The Compleat Wikivoyage Administrator Nominations, 2003-2007 and Being a Discourse on the Ruinous Character of Modern and Cosmopolitan Section Headings. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 10:05, 15 August 2007 (EDT)
  • NO!!!!!Support. The Jani is growing in power exponentially, and soon we will be unable to control it... -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:19, 15 August 2007 (EDT)
Support. --(WT-en) Ricardo (Rmx) 22:00, 15 August 2007 (EDT)
Have these two nominations been processed? (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 16:16, 14 September 2007 (EDT)
Yes, see Special:Listusers/Bureaucrat. --(WT-en) Evan 16:41, 14 September 2007 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) OldPine

Per the drug and peer induced, but vague acceptance of Colin's, Ryan's, and my past suggestions and requests, I hereby declare (WT-en) David/OldPine a nominee for administrator. He has been one of my favorite users – soldiering on and smacking us on the head when we get obsessed over trivial matters (such as vfds). This will likely be the easiest nomination since Evan voted himself an administrator/bureaucrat/developer some years ago. I'm really excited about this nomination because OldPine understands just about everything about Wikivoyage, collaboration, and consensus. Plus, when he has goofed he is normally the one to go back and correct the mistake(s). What a guy. Support, as if that wasn't already clear. -- 15:33, 18 September 2007 (EDT)

  • Strong support, but let's make sure he wants the job first. --(WT-en) Evan 15:36, 18 September 2007 (EDT)
Andrew says I'll get paid as much as the rest of you guys (cept you, Evan); Colin says I won't have to work nights, so sign me up. If you'll have me, I mean (I throw Groucho Marx and his cautions to the wind). (WT-en) OldPine 15:51, 18 September 2007 (EDT)
  • Stronger support. Very glad that you have accepted! --(WT-en) Peter Talk 15:52, 18 September 2007 (EDT)
  • Strongerer support. -- (WT-en) Colin 16:16, 18 September 2007 (EDT)
Very nice. Showing true wisdom: that one can not truly appreciate the light without the darkness. (WT-en) OldPine 19:22, 18 September 2007 (EDT)
  • Support, of whatever description, and agreed: finally! -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 19:17, 18 September 2007 (EDT)
  • Some port! or, um.. something. (WT-en) Texugo 19:42, 18 September 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. Absolutely! (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 22:35, 18 September 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. In honor of Old Pine joining the shiny button club I shall compose an epic haiku in his honor: OldPine is great, Give him shiny buttons, Um... I don't know how to write haikus. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 23:33, 18 September 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. (WT-en) Jpatokal 07:44, 19 September 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. He's doing a great job as a normal user on fr:, and I'm sure he'll do even better here with shiny buttons and without the language barrier... ;) (WT-en) WTDuck2 16:26, 19 September 2007 (EDT)
Hahaha! "Yankee-pigeon-french" comes to Wikivoyage fr:. I won't be seeking admin rights over there! (WT-en) OldPine 16:57, 19 September 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. --(WT-en) Jonboy 17:51, 19 September 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. He has been a big help to me. I hope he supplies some good fall photo's of New England (please). (WT-en) 2old 09:52, 20 September 2007 (EDT)
An excellent request. I shall try. Thanks, 2old, I appreciate those words. I feared you'd never forgive all the initial nitpicking I gave you. ;) (WT-en) OldPine 11:07, 20 September 2007 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage

I realize I haven't contributed for three months (school work is really getting hectic) but I'd still like to nominate myself... :) (WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage( Talk )( (WT-en) Travel ) • 07:19, 14 September 2007 (EDT)

I won't be able to log in regularly for another month. (WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage( Talk )( (WT-en) Travel ) •

  • Question. Given that you are not currently contributing to en wikivoyage actively, why do you want to be an admin? -- (WT-en) Colin 11:39, 14 September 2007 (EDT)

I will be contributing actively after a month's time. If you look into my contributions, you'll find that I was quite active a few months back. I'm kind of taking a wikibreak for a few months. (WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage( Talk )( (WT-en) Travel ) • 12:32, 14 September 2007 (EDT)

I'm glad you have priorities in life and are taking a wikibreak. Enjoy it, and we look forward to your future contributions. Could we deal with this issue a few months after you return? I don't see a rush if you're on break, and waiting a few more months after your return will give newer folk time to work with you. -- (WT-en) Colin 15:22, 14 September 2007 (EDT)
I agree - delay consideration until nominees are ready to begin performing the duties. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 16:16, 14 September 2007 (EDT)
  • Postpone. You've made some great contributions, but let's wait until you're contributing regularly again. Also, a gentle suggestion: instead of nominating yourself, wait until someone else nominates you; a self-nomination calls attention to the individual, while an admin nomination should instead be about the individual's contributions to Wikivoyage. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 23:53, 18 September 2007 (EDT)
  • Oppose. Just want to have one clear "oppose" in here. --(WT-en) Jonboy 17:53, 19 September 2007 (EDT)
I respect your decision, but could you let me know if there are any other reasons... Thanks. (WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage( Talk )( (WT-en) Travel ) • 07:49, 20 September 2007 (EDT)
Basically, it doesn't make any sense to me to nominate as an admin someone in the middle of a wikibreak. Come back, resume contributions, and we'll see. Or, you might find the break worthwhile, in which case enjoy real life. --(WT-en) Jonboy 08:30, 20 September 2007 (EDT)
As you guys say... (WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage( Talk )( (WT-en) Travel ) •
Postpone Upanmanyuwikivoyage is one of my favorite personalities here. I hope he continues to participate after his wikibreak. He is a great contributor. If he is able to participate and it does not take from his studies, I will fully support him. I hope he considers Ohio State to continue his studies. We need bright young people like him. (WT-en) 2old 10:14, 20 September 2007 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) PerryPlanet

He's been doing great stuff around here for almost a year now including helping to turn Albuquerque into a star, and I had to double-check just to make sure that he wasn't already an admin. Has been good about working with others, understands the policies, and meets all of the other pre-requisites for being an admin, so let's get him in the shiny button club. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:16, 14 October 2007 (EDT)

  • Support. Definitely someone who can and would help. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 12:29, 14 October 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. John has definitely got my vote. He does excellent work around here --(WT-en) NJR_ZA 12:46, 14 October 2007 (EDT)
  • Support! Thought he was an admin already. Has a cool handle, too. Wait, that's not a good reason. Um.. what Ryan said. -- (WT-en) OldPine 13:31, 14 October 2007 (EDT)
    • Actually, because this trivium has been rattling around the back of my head ever since John started here, I'm not sure his handle is necessarily a message we want to convey ... but no matter, I still support him. :-) -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 11:39, 16 October 2007 (EDT)
      • *falls off chair laughing* My dirty secret revealed! And just as I was running for office! Are you a member of the anti-insect media, Bill? Trying to corrupt my plans to promote roach motels on the Sleep sections of Wikivoyage pages? :P (WT-en) PerryPlanet 18:12, 16 October 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. Nice guy, knows what he's doing, and writes good articles. Good job on the detective work Bill, glad someone's doing the background checks around here – (WT-en) cacahuate talk 03:21, 17 October 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. Policy-versed, smart, and polite; couldn't ask for more. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 19:08, 18 October 2007 (EDT)
  • Support. Good news! Glad he's willing to do it. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 19:18, 18 October 2007 (EDT)
  • indication of willingness. As an Administrator for Wikivoyage, I promise to uphold the laws of the Wiki and help make this website the most up-to-date travel guide in the world. I promise to uphold the truth for the sake of travelers everywhere. I vow to protect all those who are weak, and...Eh, well you get the idea. I promise to do a good job. :) (WT-en) PerryPlanet 00:37, 30 October 2007 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) Wandering

I just discovered that Wandering is not yet an admin. He's been around about six months or so plugging away at articles [13], starting new articles [14], helping out misguided contributions [15], fixing mere vandalism [16], and contributing to policy discussions with an understanding of how things are done around here [17] [18]. A fine contributor and I think we should let him janitoradmin to his heart's content.

User:(WT-en) 2old

Mike has been a regular contributor for nearly a year and has made loads of valuable contributions to our destination guides and to important policy discussions. He's also very familiar by now with our policies. Now, I don't know if we are supposed to make administrator nomination decisions based on who we'd most like to have a beer with, but what can I say, I'd most like to have a beer with Mike, so he's got my Support. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 06:28, 23 January 2008 (EST)

Support. And second in line for that beer. --(WT-en) OldPine 07:16, 23 January 2008 (EST)
Support. Again, I could have sworn User:(WT-en) 2old was an administrator. Shows how little I know. --(WT-en) Wandering 08:43, 23 January 2008 (EST)
Thanks, but I must decline. My abilities with Wikivoyage are marginal at best and I would be a example of the Peter Principle (reaching ones level of incompetence), if I were to accept. I appreciate my role as a contibutor and think that is where I am best suited. However, I do appreciate the thought and will buy each of you a beer if the opportunity ever arises. Thanks. (WT-en) 2old 09:25, 23 January 2008 (EST)

User:(WT-en) Morph

It might be easy to mistake Morph for a bot, if his prolific edits were not done with a thorough understanding of how we format our destination guides and were they not accompanied by summaries with a sense of humor. He's been here over three months now, has morphed countless articles towards a standard of general respectability, and shows no signs of stopping. I think he'll make good use of the extra buttons, so I add my Support. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 06:28, 23 January 2008 (EST)

Support. Tirelessly goes where no man has gone before! --(WT-en) Wandering 08:43, 23 January 2008 (EST)
Support. For me, Morph is the man!!! (Umm, at least I think so, maybe Morph is the woman, but that sounds way wrong.) Anyway, one of my many weak points is spellling and I appreciate the idea that eventually he will visit and correct my errors. Thanks Morph, I appreciate the help. (WT-en) 2old 09:31, 23 January 2008 (EST)
Decline Dudes! (or babes, as 2old points out, though that does sound wrong). Thanks for the kindnesses and recognition. However I do not administrate and am only interested in orthography and format. It is, as you have seen, a full time janitorial avocation without end. --(WT-en) Morph 15:31, 23 January 2008 (EST)

User:(WT-en) DenisYurkin

Denis has been a regular contributor for nearly 2 and a half years here and has made countless valuable contributions to our site in terms of content organization, policy discussion, advising new contributors, and regular old content. Denis is also active on other versions of Wikivoyage where he has been of irreplaceable help in devising accurate translations of Wikivoyage jargon for the Russian Wikivoyage, as he is intimately familiar with Wikivoyage policies, practices, and idiosyncracies. And above all, his wiki-etiquette and patience are second-to-none. I think he's been overlooked for too long, so I lend my Support. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 06:28, 23 January 2008 (EST)

Support. -- (WT-en) OldPine 07:16, 23 January 2008 (EST)
Support. I thought (WT-en) DenisYurkin was an administrator! Careful in thought, takes a long term view and has done a lot for Spain. --(WT-en) Wandering 08:43, 23 January 2008 (EST)
Support. I have read many of his contributions, and he does a fine job. (WT-en) 2old 09:27, 23 January 2008 (EST)
Accept if.... If Evan asked me "how well you understand the Project:goals and non-goals and the Project:policies and guidelines, and how much you agree with them?", I would say "Oops, it's difficult to say". I challenge the policies too frequently, and I am not sure we always do the right thing here.
Seriously, I can't promise that I can spend any significant time on patrolling edits; and I only watch changes in the pages I edited (I use WatchList, not RecentEdits). For that limited subset of pages, however, I do already patrol edits in the periods when I have something to contribute. A tool simplifying reverts would help. However, I am not planning to use any other admin tools in the foreseeable future.
So if it's a matter of new rights, I accept the nomination. But if it's also about responsibilities to do something, especially on a regular basis--pitifully, I have to decline.
Anyway, thanks for consideration. --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 07:38, 26 January 2008 (EST)
  • Support. We often don't share the same opinions on policy, etc, but I think your understanding of them is fine, and your challenging of them can be a good thing... and I like that you are willing to listen to others and find a compromise, and sometimes willing to shut up if you're outvoted :) I also like that you think outside of the box and are always looking for ways to improve the site as a whole. You aren't expected to do anything more than you already are doing if you become an admin, but you may find the tools occasionally useful. – (WT-en) cacahuate talk 21:04, 26 January 2008 (EST)
  • Support. Good quality contributions in both the main and wikivoyage namespaces. Denis' concern about policies and guideline challenges is unnecessary. As far as I can see it was always done in a friendly manner based on well thought out reasoning and he was always willing to accept consensus. Having someone challenge policies and guidelines in that fashion is a good thing, it keeps wikivoyage from stagnating. --(WT-en) Nick 14:23, 27 January 2008 (EST)
  • Support. Regarding Denis' concerns, admins aren't expected to do any more (or any less) work than anyone else, and there isn't any expectation that you're going to do anything differently. "Admin" basically just means that the community feels you can be trusted with a few extra buttons, and I think you fit that description. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 16:15, 27 January 2008 (EST)
  • Accept than. (Or am I supposed to say anything more in this thread?) --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 08:02, 29 February 2008 (EST)

User:(WT-en) LtPowers

I'd like to nominate User:(WT-en) LtPowers, provided he accepts. He does a lot of administrative work already, so I figure he could use the extra functions. He's demonstrated plenty familiarity with our policies (It's always heart-warming when people actually read them!), and has been here for 3+ months, an experienced wiki contributor, done some stellar work and recently surpassed 300 edits. I know we tend to like 500+ edits, but I still think it's clear he's here for the long haul. In my experience, he's polite and very open to compromise. Lastly, he's most active on my pettest of pet projects on :en, content organization/region articles ;) So support. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 16:07, 16 August 2008 (EDT)

  • Support. Happy to have him around :) – (WT-en) cacahuate talk 16:57, 16 August 2008 (EDT)
  • Support -- (WT-en) Colin 22:48, 16 August 2008 (EDT)
  • Support. An officer and a gentleman. Works hard and smart besides. Besides, we should all have pets. --(WT-en) OldPine 19:18, 17 August 2008 (EDT)
  • Accept; if you all trust me enough, then I can accept a little responsibility. =) (WT-en) LtPowers 19:41, 17 August 2008 (EDT)
  • Support -- Does some excellent work. --(WT-en) Nick 01:36, 18 August 2008 (EDT)
  • Support - If Mr. Pine, Mr. Peter and Mr. Jensen all vouch for the guy then he must be all good. I haven't been following things around here as closely as I used to, but I've seen the Lt. in a lot of discussions making some good comments, so bring him aboard. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 01:47, 18 August 2008 (EDT)
  • Support. Me too! Extra brownie points for drawing and caring about maps. (WT-en) Jpatokal 07:50, 18 August 2008 (EDT)
  • Support. Really dedicated member, plus I like the way he writes. (WT-en) PerryPlanet 12:16, 18 August 2008 (EDT)
  • Support. Glad to have you! (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 01:46, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) Sertmann

He beefs up articles, gets janitorial, plays well with others, and most importantly has, in fact, drawn a map or two. Sertmann, please also let us know if you will accept.

  • Support -- (WT-en) Colin 20:48, 21 October 2008 (EDT)
  • Support. We're seriously short on admins, and the scut-work burden is increasing. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 21:17, 21 October 2008 (EDT)
  • Support. He's a great contributor, has been around for a long while, is doing fantastic work on Copenhagen, and would make good use of the buttons. I was getting around to nominating him too ;) --(WT-en) Peter Talk 21:30, 21 October 2008 (EDT)
  • Accept As I said in the Pub, I would like to chip in and share some of the seemingly increasing burden of spam attacks after the server move, and do my part to relieve the stress and avoid any further exodus. And while I do think I have a good grasp of the policies and tone of this place, there are most certainly a few black holes here and there, and I can't say I'm 100% familiar with the mediawiki software yet either. Also in the long run, I do want to mostly work with contributing to my two projects (which is the whole reason i joined up) and not ending up using almost 90% of my time on janitorial work, as it seems many admins do these days - a figure of 20% would make me feel more comfortable. If people still think I'd make a good admin - I accept. (WT-en) Sertmann 00:04, 22 October 2008 (EDT)
No worries, there really aren't any responsibilities that come along with administrative status—it's basically just a fact that we trust you with a few additional functions, like the ability to one-click revert changes and to delete and protect pages. You might want to check the Project:Administrator handbook for a comprehensive idea of what rules and functions apply to sysops. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 12:48, 22 October 2008 (EDT)
  • Support. As Peter says, your work on the site doesn't need to change, you just get a couple extra functions. It's better that you don't change your editing habits significantly, good editors are hard to come by, the mop's an addition to your pen, not a replacement :) – (WT-en) cacahuate talk 17:34, 22 October 2008 (EDT)
  • Support -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 19:17, 27 October 2008 (EDT)
  • Support. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 00:10, 28 October 2008 (EDT)
  • Support - (WT-en) Texugo 00:14, 28 October 2008 (EDT)
  • Support. He's a great person and he is good help and very kind and is doing awesome with Denmark. Keep smiling, (WT-en) Edmontonenthusiast 00:37, 28 October 2008 (EDT)
  • Support Seen a lot of good work from Sertmann so would have no objection to giving admin. (WT-en) Nrms 04:22, 11 November 2008 (EST)



User:(WT-en) Inas

I have been an active member of wikivoyage for two years. I've got a track record of thousands of edits [19] updating travel information on nearly every continent, and trying my best to bring order to articles closer to home. More recently I've been quite handy with the mop and bucket as well, and I'm happy to continue to help out for a while. --(WT-en) Inas 21:57, 3 November 2008 (EST)

  • Support -- (WT-en) Colin 00:27, 4 November 2008 (EST)
  • Support -- (WT-en) Texugo 00:37, 4 November 2008 (EST)
  • Support, you are a fantastic contributer INAS! Also, you did a fantastic thing fixing up the OOceanic hieracrhy. Keep smiling, (WT-en) ee talk 22:58, 14 November 2008 (EST).
I'd love to have Ian as an administrator, but there is one small thing troubling my mind. It's a basic wiki rule not to delete others' comments on talk pages unless they are abusive/vandalism. There are several deleted comments[20] at User talk:(WT-en) Inas—I'm not sure why they were removed—that I would like to see restored first. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 23:16, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Done --(WT-en) Inas 03:58, 15 November 2008 (EST)

User:(WT-en) Shaund

This guy is so awesome, he's friendly, helpful, does a fine job with Western Canada, and has drawn some very great district overview maps. Not to mention, he's uploaded high quality images. All in all, a great member. Shaund, will you accept?

  • Support - you are an awesome person Shaund! Keep smiling, (WT-en) ee talk 23:14, 14 November 2008 (EST).
Thanks guys, I accept as long as you don't mind that I probably won't be very active on policy discussions. I'm happy to implement/enforce them, but I don't have a whole lot of free time so I'd rather do stuff (edits, patrolling, maps) than talk about it. Cheers (WT-en) Shaund 01:33, 20 November 2008 (EST)

User:(WT-en) AHeneen

You really look like a good contributor. He is bilingual and has done some nice travelling. He is friendly and has worked well. I don't think there's been any probs with him!

  • Object. AHeneen is a great contributor and we're really lucky to have him here. But he has only been very active since October, has less than 500 edits, does not regularly patrol, and has not participated in policy discussions. This nomination is very premature. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 13:33, 3 December 2008 (EST)
Yah, I have to agree that I don't deserve this. I am still getting used to all the policies. Maybe in the future, but not now. (WT-en) AHeneen 17:13, 3 December 2008 (EST)
EE, I thought you were laying low for a while and focusing on writing articles? Premature admin noms are embarrassing to deal with, and you risk offending great contributors – (WT-en) cacahuate talk 19:05, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Yeah, as stated above, this is very unfortunate. While I do not support yet, please please don't be offended by a premature nomination not going through - We value your work here, continue your great work, and let's discuss this thoroughly when you get some more experience, and the rest of us have some more work to judge from. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 23:14, 3 December 2008 (EST)

User:(WT-en) Dguillaime

Aside from being a great contributor to our guides, Dguillaime been active in fighting vandalism and bad faith edits for quite some time, has been a patient and thoughtful participant in discussions with other users, and appears to know the site policies and manual of style quite well. The extra buttons would be in good hands here. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 01:16, 29 April 2009 (EDT)

  • Support: Noticed a good number of janatorial edits here this morning and see no reason to object. (WT-en) Nrms 01:22, 29 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Support. Yep. --(WT-en) Inas 02:15, 29 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Support. He's already one of our most active and experienced janitors, and there have been several times when I really wished he had the buttons already. His contributions to discussions have been fewer than I would generally like to see before a nomination, but when he has commented, he has demonstrated himself to be policy-fluent, knowledgeable, creative, and polite. I think he'd make a great admin. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 02:28, 29 April 2009 (EDT)
    • I'm surprised and flattered. I'd be happy to pick up a few new buttons in the hopes that they still won't need too much use. – (WT-en) Dguillaime 20:21, 29 April 2009 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) Jc8136

Jan has been wikivoyageling for over two years now and has racked up close to 1000 edits spanning the globe, participating in policy discussion as well. Given the speed at which he nominates spam for deletion, it's time to give him shiny buttons and a mop! (WT-en) Jpatokal 08:14, 9 October 2009 (EDT)

  • Support. Until I actually looked at the list of Administrators, I thought Jan already had that office. Since I became active here Jan has been consistently helpful and clearly has a fine grasp of the Wikivoyage ethos.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 08:52, 9 October 2009 (EDT)
  • Support. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 17:44, 9 October 2009 (EDT)
  • Support. He certainly knows his way around, and we would all benefit from his having the extra janitorial tools. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 19:04, 9 October 2009 (EDT)
  • Support. Jan clearly knows what the deal is and how things should work, certainly well enough to be trusted with a few extra buttons. (WT-en) LtPowers 16:40, 10 October 2009 (EDT)
  • Support -- (WT-en) Colin 18:32, 10 October 2009 (EDT)
  • Thank you for your trust. I would be glad to do the janitorial work and look forward to participate further in the community. (WT-en) jan 16:36, 11 October 2009 (EDT)
  • Support. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 16:38, 11 October 2009 (EDT)
  • Support - But people need to stop with these cryptic numerical user names, it's so confusing who's who! other than that the edits seem sound, and the work done good, so I'd by happy with the extra hand when mopping the floor --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 16:47, 11 October 2009 (EDT)
Stefan, the "cryptic numerical" user name is my post/zip code that 2006 in a freezing cold internet cafe in Kuala Lumpur came to my mind when i generated my user account. (WT-en) jan 10:45, 12 October 2009 (EDT)
Oh, and here I thought you were born on March 6, 1981. =) (WT-en) LtPowers 13:28, 12 October 2009 (EDT)
Rereading that it could probably have used a smiley, but oh well --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 15:35, 12 October 2009 (EDT)

(WT-en) Sabino434

Sabino434 is an excellent contributor, who understands the collaborative processes, versed in Wikivoyage policies, and has been contributing since mid-2006. Although his niche is languages and he has greatly improved many of the phrasebooks, I think we should give him sysop status so he can help with some of the janitorial work. -- (WT-en) Sapphire(Talk) • 14:23, 5 November 2009 (EST)

Fantastic work on the phrasebooks. Can't say I've noticed him around the corridors with a mop, though.. --(WT-en) inas 14:58, 5 November 2009 (EST)
It's true that you seem him rarely venture outside the realms of the phrasebooks, but I seem him doing serious mopping up of the phrasebooks. Also, in a recent email, he expressed concern about taking care of some vandalism, which someone else took care, which is why I think he should be given the extra buttons. -- (WT-en) Sapphire(Talk) • 15:30, 5 November 2009 (EST)
  • Not yet. He does absolutely fantastic work, and I cannot stress enough how great it is to benefit from his hard work on Wikivoyage. But the main things we look for in nominees are a track record active participation in policy discussions, conflict resolution, janitorial work, clearly demonstrated understanding of our policies and conventions, and how they are formed. Fernando, as excellent as his work may be, has not yet established this track record, so I consider this nomination regrettably premature. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 19:24, 5 November 2009 (EST)
  • Not yet. It's frustrating that premature nominations such as this might result in a contributor feeling that his participation isn't appreciated — as far as I can tell, Sabino434 has done nothing but good work. However, his participation has indeed been limited exclusively to phrasebooks, which are a fairly small portion of the site, and he has never participated in a policy discussion; also, it's hardly necessary to have admin status to participate in janitorial work (everybody gets the 'undo' button) — plenty of non-admins help out that way — and his collaborative work has been limited at best. I have nothing but encouragement for what he's done so far, but this nomination simply hasn't taken the criteria for being an administrator into account. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 19:25, 5 November 2009 (EST)
  • Not yet. Agree with Gorilla and Peter. However, Sabino434, I would like to hear your thoughts also: are you even interested in becoming an administrator? The extra buttons would not really help at all with phrasebook work. (WT-en) Jpatokal 00:00, 6 November 2009 (EST)
  • Don't Support Judging by the message posted on his/her Talk Page, this user would not (and doesn't wish to) utilize any of the Administrator privileges, which is fine, because as others have stated, the work s/he is doing on the phrasebooks is great! If the user had a change of heart about his/her talk page statement and worked more elsewhere, of course, I could be convinced to change my mind. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 00:36, 6 November 2009 (EST)
  • Why? - While they may be an excellent contributor, that does not necessarily make for a good wiki administrator. I see no evidence that Sabino434 even has a need for administrator rights. An administrator needs to interact with other users, collaborate with them on work, foster a sense of community and be prepared to do maintenance work, like nominating pages for deletion, welcoming and challenging users, asking questions, identifying problems with article and fixing them, contributing to policy discussions, reporting bugs, etc. I see none of that. Although Sabino434 has been a registered user since 2006, most of this user's edits are since December 2008. There are no edits to article talk pages, and only one edit to a user talk page other than their own. Also there are few edits to any pages other than those related to phrasebooks. That means there is insufficient evidence for me to judge if Sabino434 would make a good administrator. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that Sabino434 cannot be an administrator - they might be an excellent one - all I am saying is that there is insufficient evidence for me to make a judgement. In some respects, Administrator Rights are unwiki, so the users that possess those rights should be ones who are able to be trusted with those rights and be willing to be held accountable for exercising those rights responsibly and with discretion. At this time I cannot be certain that granting Sabino434 would be beneficial. - (WT-en) Huttite 06:13, 6 November 2009 (EST)
  • Don't know - I'd like to hear what Fernando himself has to say on the subject. Is there some reason that he needs the admin bit that he's mentioned Andrew out-of-band? -- (WT-en) Mark 11:31, 7 November 2009 (EST)

User:(WT-en) Burmesedays

A quick perusal of this user's contributions should show why he(?) would benefit from a few additional buttons - he does a massive amount of recent changes patrolling, has almost single-handedly converted Bali from a convoluted mass of touty-listings into a great guide, is now making maps, and has made some insightful contributions to policy discussions. If he doesn't deserve the extra buttons then a few of us who already have them probably don't either :) -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 23:37, 29 November 2009 (EST)

  • Support unequivocally. I've been complementing nominating Burmesedays myself for a while, but you beat me to it. Great work being done and I'm confident the buttons will be put to good use. And besides it's always good to have further time zone coverage among admins. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 00:00, 30 November 2009 (EST)
  • Support. Got a solid understanding of the way things do work, and a positive attitude to the way things should work. Writes great guides too. --(WT-en) inas 01:06, 30 November 2009 (EST)
  • Support. -- (WT-en) Colin Jensen 03:56, 30 November 2009 (EST)
  • Support (WT-en) Pashley 08:12, 30 November 2009 (EST)
  • Support He does an excellent job in plunging forward the Bali article and is a good contributor for the community. Was fun to work from the first minute. (WT-en) jan 08:31, 30 November 2009 (EST)
  • I am still writing my acceptance speech...... or is that presumptious? :) :) More seriously, thank you all very much and I would of course be honored to accept should there be no objections. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 08:58, 30 November 2009 (EST)
  • Strong support. Great patroller, mapmaker, writer, interlocutor, etc., and a good friendly addition to the janitorial staff! --(WT-en) Peter Talk 10:59, 30 November 2009 (EST)
  • Support(WT-en) cacahuate talk 12:52, 30 November 2009 (EST)
  • Support. (WT-en) Peter (Southwood) Talk 14:49, 30 November 2009 (EST)
  • Support. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 18:50, 30 November 2009 (EST)
  • Support. An easy decision. - (WT-en) Dguillaime 19:09, 30 November 2009 (EST)
  • Better late than never (how'd I miss this?), so support and the bit is now toggled. (WT-en) Jpatokal 07:20, 15 December 2009 (EST)

Mr. man

Hello! I requesting adminship. Require that post because I know that I charge, is already admin on 2 projects. Thank you. (WT-en) Mr. man 07:54, 2 February 2010 (EST)

I'm afraid you haven't been here long enough to understand our policies. For example, Template:Coord, which you created, is a copyright violation taken straight from Wikipedia:Template:Coord. You may be an administrator on two other projects, but we have our own standards. (WT-en) LtPowers 09:24, 2 February 2010 (EST)
I can get used to these standards, learn fast. Can I become a manager on the project size. I did that format because I thought that should put the details, but I promise that I will not copy on en.wp. (WT-en) Mistertalk 10:02, 2 February 2010 (EST)
  • Oppose --(WT-en) Jonboy 11:01, 2 February 2010 (EST)
  • Oppose, of course. User had been a member of Wikivoyage for 59 minutes before nominating himself for adminstrator privileges. Has no grasp of what the site is about nor its policies and procedures. Indeed it would be impossible for anyone to fulfil those criteria after enjoying some 59 minutes of membership. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 11:07, 2 February 2010 (EST)
  • Oppose, reminds me of a certain user on Korean Wikivoyage, hmmmm. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 11:15, 2 February 2010 (EST)
I understand distrust sir, but I know what to do a sysop. I experienced I can handle a project. Is one problem of my name, because this name is must known, and there en.wp this name but I assure you that come from Korea. (WT-en) Mistertalk 11:19, 2 February 2010 (EST)
In any case - You don't qualify under any of the "requirements" for adminship, in particular you lack "a track record of at least a few months" and even then your English is barely comprehensible I'm afraid, which is a real issue when doing janitorial work. Please stop wasting everyone's time and withdraw you nomination. There are candidates way more qualified than you are. Practice your English, do some solid work in your home region, and participate in area's where you are able to comprehend what's going on - and then come back in a years time. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 11:33, 2 February 2010 (EST)

OK...--(WT-en) Mistertalk 11:36, 2 February 2010 (EST)

User:(WT-en) Globe-trotter

Globe-trotter has been here for a good two years, and has been busy all across the Wikivoyage globe, creating dozens of maps, making useful contributions to various discussions, organizing content, working on the CotM, and creating a fine star article for good measure. He(?) is a pleasure to work with, interacting well with regulars and new users alike, and I believe he has clearly demonstrated a high level of proficiency with our site's arcane rules. He does an awful lot of organizational and clean-up work for which I think the extra buttons would be handy! --(WT-en) Peter Talk 19:29, 8 March 2010 (EST)

  • Support. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 19:29, 8 March 2010 (EST)
  • Support. --(WT-en) Texugo 19:32, 8 March 2010 (EST)
  • Strong support. He has a good grasp of the way things work around here and is an excellent communicator. And... why do we always assume (I am sure correctly) he eh? :). --(WT-en) Burmesedays 21:26, 8 March 2010 (EST)
  • Support -- (WT-en) Colin Jensen 23:15, 8 March 2010 (EST)
  • Support - I thought g-t was already an admin! Strong support here. (WT-en) PerryPlanet Talk 23:19, 8 March 2010 (EST)
  • Support. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 01:01, 9 March 2010 (EST)
  • Wow I'm honored! Of course I accept the nomination for admin, I'm glad with the big support in my favor. Oh, and yes, it's true that I am a he ^^ :) --(WT-en) globe-trotter 09:47, 9 March 2010 (EST)
  • Support - I thought you were already an admin as well! :) (WT-en) Nrms 09:56, 9 March 2010 (EST)
  • Support. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 10:40, 9 March 2010 (EST)
  • Support (WT-en) jan 11:43, 23 March 2010 (EDT)
  • Support, and the shiny red buttons are now granted. (WT-en) Jpatokal 07:04, 28 March 2010 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) ClausHansen

During the 9 months I have been hanging around here, and probably longer, Claus has been one of the most active Wikivoyage users.

  • He is one of the small handful of us who tirelessly patrol edits on a daily basis
  • He has done a great deal of organisational work for various China articles, for London, and I am sure elsewhere
  • He has recently started making Wikivoyage maps
  • He is is a polite, friendly and well-informed communicator
  • He has demonstrated a good grasp of the way things work around here, and is not shy to ask when he is not sure

All-in-all I struggle to think of anyone who would make better use of the extra buttons. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 05:04, 30 March 2010 (EDT)

  • Support Good understanding of policies, regular patroller and plus for the community. (WT-en) jan 05:21, 30 March 2010 (EDT)
  • Support Good user with good contributions. (WT-en) Mister(talk|contribs) 11:11, 30 March 2010 (EDT)
  • Strong Support Provided he wants the extra buttons, of course. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 16:01, 30 March 2010 (EDT)
  • Support. I can't think of a better way to put it than the way (WT-en) Burmesedays did. --(WT-en) inas 18:39, 30 March 2010 (EDT)
  • Support(WT-en) cacahuate talk 02:08, 31 March 2010 (EDT)
  • Support - (WT-en) Texugo 02:49, 31 March 2010 (EDT)
  • Support. I was about to nominate him ;) --(WT-en) Peter Talk 20:22, 31 March 2010 (EDT)
  • Support, always nice to have more skilled hands for the routine cleanup. - (WT-en) D. Guillaime 21:47, 31 March 2010 (EDT)
  • Support, great contributor to Wikivoyage. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 04:54, 1 April 2010 (EDT)
  • Accept, thank you for trusting me the more powerful tools, I will strive to use them wisely, --(WT-en) ClausHansen 05:42, 1 April 2010 (EDT)
  • Support. Always impressed when I come across his work. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 18:27, 1 April 2010 (EDT)
  • Support, and switch toggled. (WT-en) Jpatokal 07:04, 28 March 2010 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) Wrh2 (for Bureaucrat)

We could use another (or rather, an active) bureaucrat. IMO, the only qualification needed for this position beyond those of sysop is that the person is around often and/or easy to contact when the odd name change or status switch is needed. Many of our admins fit this bill, but Ryan has done so for a longer period of time ;) As an added bonus, this might give him extra reason to spend more time here, and any increase in his activity on-site is unequivocally a good thing for Wikivoyage! --(WT-en) Peter Talk 21:08, 19 April 2010 (EDT)

  • Support. Consistent, level-headed and fair, perfect bureaucrat material – (WT-en) cacahuate talk 21:38, 19 April 2010 (EDT)
  • Ironically a nomination based partly on the fact that I'm "around often and/or easy to contact" came up while I was at the bottom of the Grand Canyon for a weekend, but I'm happy to help out with extra button flipping as needed. Additionally, the kind words are very much appreciated. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 00:01, 20 April 2010 (EDT)
Further justification, I say. You were easy to contact even when at the bottom of the Grand Canyon. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 00:04, 20 April 2010 (EDT)
Watch out for falling rocks. We don't want you bumped on the head and then claiming to forget you accepted the nomination. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 00:19, 20 April 2010 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) Vidimian

I've considered nominating Vidimian several times over the years, but wasn't sure if he was terribly interested in using the buttons! But in the past several months he's been hard at work on patrolling and cleaning up (in addition to all sorts of other very useful tasks), so I think he would now find them useful. His wiki-etiquette, understanding of policies, and track record overall are excellent, so I'm happy to follow through on Mr. Yurkin's suggestion and hope Vidimian is interested! --(WT-en) Peter Talk 19:37, 11 May 2010 (EDT)

  • Support (assuming he wants the buttons). Excellent communicator with a good grasp of the way things work around here.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 02:28, 12 May 2010 (EDT)
  • Support obviously :) --(WT-en) globe-trotter 19:03, 18 May 2010 (EDT)
  • Support, but can we get a yea or a nay from the man himself? (WT-en) Jpatokal 20:40, 18 May 2010 (EDT)
  • Thanks for the nomination, trust, and support. I prudently use the buttons I already have, but I guess having an extra few would not harm. So, accept, given there is no opposition. – (WT-en) Vidimian 15:59, 21 May 2010 (EDT)
  • Support Great work on Turkish articles and kind person in communication. (WT-en) jan 07:24, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

Nomination complete. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 16:41, 25 May 2010 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald

Since it would be good to have at least two active bureaucrats I'd like to nominate Mr. Fitzgerald to the post. For the twos of people unfamiliar with him, he has been instrumental in the very successful Project:Mapmaking Expedition, defined a good number of the regional hierarchies on the site, published a few books, and pushed numerous articles to star status. In addition, since (WT-en) Evan left Peter has been as close to a benevolent dictator as we've had, so giving him the red rubber stamp of bureaucrat-ism seems only fitting. I'd have nominated him sooner, but I wanted to get to be the one to update his account permissions so I selfishly waited until my own nomination finished :) -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 16:55, 19 May 2010 (EDT)

Thanks for the kind words. I'm willing to accept this, but only with the very explicit caveat that I think it comes with zero additional "authority" or "respect" or what have you. That being clear, I would be happy to add redundancy to switch flipping and name changing. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 17:05, 19 May 2010 (EDT)
With (WT-en) Jani moving on to other pursuits we really do need another bureaucrat, so redundancy is definitely a primary motivation here, although if it's any reassurance I'll do my utmost to respect you less if the nomination succeeds :) -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 17:44, 19 May 2010 (EDT)
  • Strong support, I could not think of a better candidate :) --(WT-en) globe-trotter 17:52, 19 May 2010 (EDT)
  • Strong support; although you already have more of my respect than any other person here, Peter. (WT-en) PerryPlanet Talk 18:02, 19 May 2010 (EDT)
  • Who? I've never heard of him, but if you guys trust him, then I guess he has my support too – (WT-en) cacahuate talk 18:12, 19 May 2010 (EDT)
  • Disrespectfully Support. --(WT-en) inas 20:40, 19 May 2010 (EDT)
  • Support The right person for the super powers ;-) (WT-en) jan 03:14, 20 May 2010 (EDT)

Nomination complete. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 14:53, 2 June 2010 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) Cardboardbird

Excellent work in getting Kununurra to star status, and valuable contributions to many other articles. Patrols regularly, detouting etc, with a demonstrated good knowledge of our policies in this area. Could surely be trusted with the extra buttons, and I'm confident could be a great help with mop in hand. --(WT-en) inas 21:05, 5 December 2010 (EST)

  • Support • • • (WT-en) Peter (Southwood) Talk 13:37, 6 December 2010 (EST)
  • Support. Doing a great job as one of the most regular patrollers lately. – (WT-en) Vidimian 18:42, 7 December 2010 (EST)
  • Support. What Vidimian said - has been doing a lot of good work lately. (WT-en) PerryPlanet Talk 17:53, 8 December 2010 (EST)
  • Support! --(WT-en) Peter Talk 18:44, 10 December 2010 (EST)
  • Support. I recognized the user name but didn't know the contribution history. Browsing Special:Contributions/Cardboardbird shows a lot of good edits with solid reasoning provided, so definite support from me provided this user wants the extra shiny buttons. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 18:49, 10 December 2010 (EST)
  • Support! - (WT-en) Texugo 00:21, 11 December 2010 (EST)
Thanks everyone for the nomination and your support. I enjoy contributing to WT and I think I would be able to make good use of some extra tools. - (WT-en) Cardboardbird 23:22, 12 December 2010 (EST)

Nomination complete. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 11:37, 5 January 2011 (EST)

User:(WT-en) Ikan Kekek

Has been contributing here since June 2009, and does a good of patrolling on a regular basis. Knows the site's policies and cites them when patiently working with new users, and would make a good addition to the shiny buttons club. Has already indicated a willingness to accept the new role. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 10:58, 1 April 2011 (EDT)

  • No problem with me. May be the first Administrator with a red link to user page. Discussion page suggests uncontroversial contributions, and User contributions indicate good work. So Support from me. • • • (WT-en) Peter (Southwood) Talk 11:22, 2 April 2011 (EDT)
  • Count a Support vote from me as well. (WT-en) PerryPlanet Talk 21:14, 2 April 2011 (EDT)
  • Support Good knowledge of policies and sensible editing. Please add something on the user page. It would highly increase the credibility. (WT-en) jan 12:47, 5 April 2011 (EDT)
  • Support but again, please add something to the user page. (WT-en) texugo 01:30, 12 April 2011 (EDT)
  • Support Understands the policies and is very good at explaining them to contributors. Seems like s/he would make good use of the extra buttons. - (WT-en) Cardboardbird 08:51, 12 April 2011 (EDT)
  • Support One of the most active patrolers as of late, and never seen him/her miss a beat yet - besides the janitorial room badly needs some new blood. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 21:50, 12 April 2011 (EDT)
  • Support - useful contributions, but more importantly careful contributions, and has always been willing to talk it over when uncertain. I'll give him a pass on the user page! :) – (WT-en) D. Guillaime 00:08, 14 April 2011 (EDT)

Nomination complete. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 16:48, 15 April 2011 (EDT)

User:Jc8136 (renomination)

Peter was so kind to put trust in me and offered me the janitor job here as well. I'm happy to continue my work here as well in an egregious overestimation ask for reaffirmation of my granted sysop status. Jc8136 (talk) 13:12, 14 September 2012 (CEST)

  • Support - Contributed a huge amount to the old site and discussions of the new one. JamesA >talk 14:21, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support Jan as one of the long-standing WT admins. Atsirlin (talk) 14:53, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support Tsandell (talk) 15:49, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Comment — Let's hold off on any re-nominations until we finish the discussion on the talk page. Personally, I think this will only clog up the archives and make the records more confusing. --Peter Talk 16:27, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support. --Globe-trotter (talk) 23:57, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support Didn't realize that you weren't a sysop already! — Ravikiran r (talk) 07:03, 17 September 2012 (CEST)
    Jan is a sysop, but was just renominating herself on the new site. JamesA >talk 15:02, 18 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support. (WV-en) Gorilla Jones (talk) 06:18, 18 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support -Shaund (talk) 07:18, 18 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk):

Renomination suspended due to agreement on Wikivoyage_talk:Administrator_nominations#Reconfirmation_of_sysop_stati. Jc8136 (talk) 09:06, 19 September 2012 (CEST)

User:LtPowers (for bureaucrat)

Pardon the self-nomination, but I wanted to make this semi-official. With Ryan (Wrh2) tied up with legal issues and Peter going "busy and mostly offline" for the next few weeks, I feel we need at least one active bureaucrat (or bureacraut) on hand. I'm willing to step up and take on these bit-flipping duties, even if it's only on an interim basis. What say ye? LtPowers (talk) 04:25, 12 September 2012 (CEST)

  • Support of course. Ravikiran r (talk) 06:19, 12 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support - We'll definitely need some bureacrauts around for the transition. I'd also support it as a permanent role, not just as an interim. JamesA >talk 06:22, 12 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Aye --Inas (talk) 06:40, 12 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support and, of course, this role should be permanent. Atsirlin (talk) 07:19, 12 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support Thanks for offering the permanent help.Jc8136 (talk) 09:16, 12 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support - I support, thanks for stepping up. Xltel (talk) 12:50, 12 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support sumone10154(talk) 14:41, 12 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support. Even when I get back, I leave in the next week to go buzz polar bears in a helicopter on Hudson Bay. I'll be pretty unavailable for two months. --Peter Talk 01:44, 13 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support. -Shaund (talk) 07:57, 13 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support Tsandell (talk) 15:45, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support. -- Ryan • (talk) • 17:03, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support. --Globe-trotter (talk) 23:57, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support. (WV-en) Gorilla Jones (talk) 06:18, 18 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 11:35, 18 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support. Vidimian (talk) 23:11, 20 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support. A deserved promotion (demotion, according to Evan) for the Lieutenant. --W. Franke-mailtalk 19:46, 4 October 2012 (CEST)

Nomination completed. Jc8136 (talk) 14:57, 5 October 2012 (CEST)

User:Pbsouthwood

I have already promoted Peter to sysop status in a clear abuse of bureacraut rights, and he offers the apt name for this as "battlefield promotion." He and Atsirlin below are in the process of an immense janitorial effort in which they are using the extra tools to good effect, and they both understand our policies intimately (in fact, Peter has himself taken the lead in cataloging and organizing all of our policy pages at present). --Peter Talk 21:20, 13 September 2012 (CEST) Just as a reminder, it's not necessary to do a separate nomination on Shared, as admins on language versions automatically get sysop status there (unlike sauerkrauts). --Peter Talk 21:20, 13 September 2012 (CEST)

Only the iBobblehead is a bureacraut. Ordinary humans have to settle for bureaucrat. I will try not to let the power go to my head and invade Poland, but I will also be away from early October through mid December, and might not have much internet access as I will be living and working on a boat. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 11:48, 18 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support, especially now that I can add and remove his bit at will if he steps out of line.  ;) LtPowers (talk) 01:09, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
Gee, just when I support your nomination to Bureaucrat! Beware the corruption of absolute power. :) • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 11:48, 18 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support so much work already done and i can't wait to see what he is up next for! Jc8136 (talk) 13:05, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support the colleague and coworker. Atsirlin (talk) 13:32, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support - has proven himself trustworthy and putting in a lot of effort lately. JamesA >talk 14:21, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support Tsandell (talk) 15:49, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support. -- Ryan • (talk) • 17:03, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support sumone10154(talk) 21:38, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support. --Globe-trotter (talk) 23:57, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • SupportRavikiran r (talk) 07:02, 17 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support. (WV-en) Gorilla Jones (talk) 06:18, 18 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support -Shaund (talk) 07:18, 18 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support. That was already way overdue. Vidimian (talk) 23:11, 20 September 2012 (CEST)

Nomination completed. Jc8136 (talk) 14:57, 5 October 2012 (CEST)

User:Atsirlin

Absolutely everything I just wrote about Pbsouthwood applies verbatim to Alexander, plus he already has experience as an admin on :ru. I can't imagine a reason not to give him sysop status, and have already done so... Please rubber stamp, community? --Peter Talk 21:20, 13 September 2012 (CEST)

  • Support; absolutely yeoman's work with the maps. Fabulosity. LtPowers (talk) 01:09, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support Alex does a super job in cleaning and that's alone the reason to put the longterm trust in him! Jc8136 (talk) 13:07, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support - Has made a lot of useful maintenance contributions; both in the long-term, and very recently! JamesA >talk 14:21, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support - Alex seems to do lots of good cleaning right about the same time that I do the same, so it will good to have someone else to hold the fort during that shift! Tsandell (talk) 15:48, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support. -- Ryan • (talk) • 17:03, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support sumone10154(talk) 21:38, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support. --Globe-trotter (talk) 23:57, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support. Alex likes writing guides in en more than in ru. :-) He will be good interface for communications and coordination en and ru versions. Digr (talk) 07:20, 15 September 2012 (CEST)
  • 'SupportRavikiran r (talk) 07:02, 17 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support. (WV-en) Gorilla Jones (talk) 06:18, 18 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support -Shaund (talk) 07:18, 18 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 11:52, 18 September 2012 (CEST)

Nomination completed. Jc8136 (talk) 14:57, 5 October 2012 (CEST)

User:Hansm (sysop und bureaucrat)

I would not use this privileges to intervene into daily wiki live, but sometimes, I will need them to do some technical work or tests. I have granted bureaucrat privileges to myself during the installation process of the wiki, but I would like to be re-confirmed by the community. -- Hansm (talk) 15:48, 14 September 2012 (CEST)

  • Support Thank you for our new home! Jc8136 (talk) 16:20, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support, naturally. --Peter Talk 16:27, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support. Your help was immense, and your devotion to this project is beyond any doubts. Atsirlin (talk) 16:37, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support. Thanks for the amazing work in helping to migrate and setup everything! -- Ryan • (talk) • 17:03, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support sumone10154(talk) 21:38, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support. --Globe-trotter (talk) 23:57, 14 September 2012 (CEST)
  • SupportRavikiran r (talk) 07:04, 17 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support. (WV-en) Gorilla Jones (talk) 06:18, 18 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support -Shaund (talk) 07:18, 18 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support - Definitely worthy of the tools after all the hard work! JamesA >talk 07:44, 18 September 2012 (CEST)
  • Support • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 11:56, 18 September 2012 (CEST)

Nomination completed. Jc8136 (talk) 14:57, 5 October 2012 (CEST)

User:Thehelpfulone (for temporary admin)

Thehelpfulone is a very helpful user, who has served the Wikipedia and especially Meta-Wiki's community for many years. He has been active on the proposed Sister Projects Committee and is an observer of the Language committee. He serves as one of Meta-Wiki's admins (in fact, the most active one if I'm not mistaken) and bureaucrats and is thoroughly dedicated to our Wikimedia's projects thru his activity on Meta. I would recommend that the English Wikivoyage community elect him as a temporary admin to help with the transition process, as he is a very dedicated wikimedians who's clueful about the more obscure parts of the mediawiki interface from the various intricacies of the Mediawiki namespace to the centralnotice features and I can wholly agree with Eloquence's words and hope both that he accepts this nomination and that the English Wikivoyage community elects him. Snowolf How can I help? 23:22, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your nomination Snowolf, I gracefully accept and hope to be able to share my knowledge and help out where I can, both during this transition process and in the future. Just to give the community here a bit more of my background, I've been around on the English Wikipedia since November 2007, and an administrator there since November 2008. I'm also an OTRS agent, which is essentially "Customer Service for Wikipedia/Wikimedia" and run a bot, Thehelpfulbot on the English Wikipedia which does a bunch of helpful tasks, some of which may also be useful here both as regular maintenance once and the one-off "a bot would make this so much easier" tasks. :-) Thehelpfulone 23:35, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:25, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for temporary admin (and, honestly, I don't see why we need this voting procedure for temporary admin status). Permanent admins would be a different story. --Atsirlin (talk) 07:01, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    The bureaucrat I have contacted told me that he wanted a community procedure for even temporary admins. Snowolf How can I help? 07:48, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    As we bureaucrats are just "soulless functionaries", we can only implement community consensus. In extraordinary circumstances, we can bend the rules, I suppose, but in this case I'm only going to do so to waive the 14-day requirement for discussion. I'd also appreciate some community input on how long this temporary administratorship ought to last. LtPowers (talk) 14:43, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    In my opinion, "temporary" means until the end of the beta period. --Atsirlin (talk) 15:01, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support/Comment - There is no doubt that Thehelpfulone will be a great help to our burgeoning project. However, I hope he is able to have a thorough read of our important policies and have some understanding of what differs between here and Wikipedia. Already there's been an example of how different our policies regarding template creation are. Don't worry, I got caught out by that as well! JamesA >talk 07:51, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi James, thanks for your support and comments. I certainly will be reading the policies, I believe I saw a page yesterday that explained the differences between Wikipedia policy and Wikivoyage policy, I'll find that again and be sure to read it - that will definitely provide some useful information! Thehelpfulone 12:32, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Great! There's no doubt that you'll use the tools wisely and efficiently. That page might have been WIkivoyage:Welcome, Wikipedians. ;) JamesA >talk 11:38, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support/Comment - I think "temporary" should last however long it takes to cleanup the transition. At least until the end of the beta period and longer if needed (do we think everything will be cleaned up before the beta ends?). -Shaund (talk) 18:36, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Since there don't seem to be any objections, and since there is a valid reason for giving this user admin rights during the cleanup process, I've updated the admin bits. -- Ryan • (talk) • 18:51, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • I was going to wait at least 24 hours, and maybe 48, for objections. At any rate, can we agree that if any substantive objections are raised, that the bit will be removed pending further discussion? LtPowers (talk) 22:01, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Snowolf (self-nomination for temporary admin)

Hi, I'm Snowolf and I'd like to request temporary sysop rights to assist with the transition process. I currently serve the global Wikimedia community as one of its Wikimedia stewards and the English Wikipedia as one of its admins (for almost 5 years now) and oversighters. I've generally focused my activities on counter-vandalism and bot-related issues, serving on the English Wikipedia's Bot Approval Group among other things. Some of you might have already seen me around here wikignoming or might have seen my bot, my main interest here is bringing up to date the documentation side of things to reflect the updates coming with the move to Wikimedia and clean up a bit of these red links, one clear example of where the tools would be helpful is when my bot runs into protected pages where substitution are needed. Snowolf How can I help? 21:33, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. -Shaund (talk) 21:44, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support and thank you for your help! --Atsirlin (talk) 22:16, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. What Atsirlin said! Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:25, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - The fact you're a WM steward means we can most certainly trust you to use the tools well! JamesA >talk 11:39, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Promoted, on a temporary and provisional basis. If any substantive objections are raised, the status may be revoked. LtPowers (talk) 23:43, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ikan Kekek (self-nomination for admin)

Hi, everyone. I was an admin on Wikitravel and Wikivoyage. Most of what I did there was patrolling. I would like to once again be able to help out that way, for example by deleting the spam articles that are starting to crop up here. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:18, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. Your help with patrolling was invaluable, and I wonder why your admin rights were not automatically transferred to Wikivoyage. --Atsirlin (talk) 11:27, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I have to support the person who first welcomed me to this great place! I thought we were working on a process where former WT admins could request administrator privileges and be provided them without a repeated RfA process. JamesA >talk 11:41, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, the user was an admin on the old English Wikivoyage and merely had issues transfering his account but has since confirmed his identity. As his old account still retains the sysop flag on this very wiki, I do not think a full nomination procedure should be necessary to merely transfer the flag between two account demonstrably owned by the same person. Snowolf How can I help? 12:21, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Promoted. Ikan Kekek's accounts are verified as matching; see here. LtPowers (talk) 12:38, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Yann (nomination for admin)

Existing longtime admin on fr: (contributions: en, fr, en.wp, fr.wp) - not sure when he was nominated on fr: but deletion logs indicate he had the tools there as far back as 2010. As there are no huge policy or structural differences between the two Canadian-language Wikivoyage projects, if he's done well there he should do fine here. K7L (talk) 22:13, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:03, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not yet. Only a handful of edits between 2004 and last month, mostly interwiki links and Docent tagging. If he sticks around for a while and encounters a need for the admin tools, we can re-evaluate in a few months. LtPowers (talk) 23:41, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks to K7L for the nomination. I have already checked more 1,000 images moved from WikiVoyage to Commons. I hope it counts. Yann (talk) 20:23, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Has done a significant amount for work on the Commons image transfer and +63,000 contributions to Commons overall (thanks, I'm no good at it), not many edits on the site, but should be an Administrator and willing to help. - Xltel (talk) 20:39, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not yet. Obviously, Yann has been of huge help with the migration. But the admin tools aren't considered a reward (they're generally considered a demotion from editor to janitor). They are rather given out to users who have demonstrated both that a) they are very familiar with all our policies, and that b) they would make good use of the janitorial tools (i.e., they have been doing a lot of patrolling over a sustained period). Since Yann hasn't been active here in a long time, he might need more time to familiarize himself with all the policy developments that happened during the interim period, and he has not fulfilled criterion b. --Peter Talk 16:46, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Sumone10154 (self-nom for admin)

Hello, I would like to nominate myself for adminship. I have been on Wikitravel/Wikivoyage for almost 2 years, making over 2000 contributions (WT and WV combined). I would like to help with the cleanup and patrolling here, and I think the tools would be very helpful. I am also an admin on fr and shared, helping with the cleanup there, and it would be great if I could do the same here on the English Wikivoyage :) sumone10154(talk) 00:29, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. You've done a great job. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:18, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Done fantastic work and would definitely help with the cleanup. JamesA >talk 12:50, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. If you want to do some mop-work, we welcome the help. LtPowers (talk) 15:43, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: an asset to the community and a knowledgeable coder -- Alice 08:42, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Support. Definitely. --Peter Talk 17:28, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. -Shaundd (talk) 19:02, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. -- Massive number of edits and assistance, very strong support (thanks for all the work) - Xltel (talk) 19:16, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. --Globe-trotter (talk) 20:06, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 06:36, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. A great helper. Another WTS gnome aka This, that and the other (talk) 10:28, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Checkusers: User:Peterfitzgerald and User:Inas

I think it might be useful to have local checkusers in the upcoming week for the launch, in part out of concern that a few known parties hostile to our project launch might harass new contributors and generally be disruptive, using multiple accounts and ips to circumvent blocks already in place. Using local checkusers rather than filing requests on Meta for individual cases will be a lot more efficient, and allows us to keep from fanning flames across wikis ;)

I'm nominating myself and Ian for the role, as we need two per Meta:CheckUser policy#Access to CheckUser, and so that we can keep an eye on each other! I am familiar with the Meta:Privacy policy and will respect it to the letter, using this tool only to investigate significant disruption, and never using it to reveal private information about users per policy: don't reveal a user's "IP, whereabouts, or other information sufficient to identify them, unless they have already revealed this information themselves on the project." I'll let Inas affirm the same in a statement accepting the nomination.

I affirm the same. I am familiar with the appropriate policies and will adhere to them. --Inas (talk) 10:44, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Both of us have been admins with the project for about 5 years, I'm also a bureaucrat, yada, yada. Checkuser investigations will hopefully be rare here, since we don't block people for using multiple accounts unless they are being used to circumvent blocks.

We'll need at least 25 statements of support to satisfy the requirements for local checkuser privileges, so let's see if we have that many people working here! --Peter Talk 07:45, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

Note that it could be only zero or two checkusers. One checkuser on a wiki is impossible.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:07, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Right, which is why I initially had only one nomination--for the two of us. I've restored that version. --Peter Talk 09:09, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm reading something slightly different at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/CheckUser_policy#Access_to_CheckUser
There must be at least two users with CheckUser status - not a maximum of two!
So I still think that it is less than best practice to have a "joint ticket". In the unlikely event that both of you don't individually get the 25 supports, then it should be technically possible to propose additional candidate(s)... -- Alice 10:01, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
I might consider nominating myself as checkuser on sv:, but there is no rush. Let's sort it out here first. Riggwelter (talk) 12:28, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Meta considers all projects individually, so that elected checkusers on en.wv will not have any access to sv.wv.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:49, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, I meant it can not be one (meaning that if accidentally one is not elected, additional elections are needed).--Ymblanter (talk) 12:47, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I do not think that it is appropriate for the voting to take place jointly for two candidates. Rather, there should be two nominations. Snowolf How can I help? 12:53, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I should clarify that perhaps. I am not sure that I it is fair and acceptable method that two candidate be voted on thru the same procedure. Rather, each of them should be voted on separately, regardless of the fact that there need to be two elected checkusers for the permissions to be granted. The user right is held by one user and is not joint, so should the voting be. Snowolf How can I help? 12:58, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If anyone really has a problem with this, they can specify whom they support when recording their opinion. I predict no one will. LtPowers (talk) 14:21, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Alice and Snowolf, Nominations should be for one person, The checkuser rules require two checkusers as a non-zero minimum, so at least two nominations are necessary. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 11:55, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Having more than two is possible & may be a good idea to give better coverage, so I'll nominate more, both people who have been around for some time and were admins on the other site. Pashley (talk) 14:37, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like 2 is sufficient for the size of our site at present, but either of these below could be backup noms in case one of the above fails? – cacahuate talk 17:04, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Pashley, how can you vote for all four candidates at once? --Saqib (talk) 17:33, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The requirement was to sucker at least two candidates into becoming checkuser. I don't think we're limited to exactly two if there are more who would be suitable. K7L (talk) 17:52, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
At the same time, it's my understanding that the WMF wants to limit checkuser access as much as possible, so I don't know if more nominations make sense right now, given that we're not Wikipedia-sized and probably won't need the tool all that much. The folks nominated below are certainly qualified, though (although LtPowers has stated that he's not interested). --Peter Talk 19:23, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Although the foundation has the ultimate jurisdiction, it appears that local communities are usually given the responsibility of limiting access, especially those with an arbitration committee.--Jasper Deng (talk) 20:02, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Most often, if a user is vandalising or disrupting a wiki, there's no point in running checkuser as whatever they're doing will either get or not get a ban/block on its own (de)merits. The tool therefore gets used rarely. Sockpuppet investigations are needed if socks are used to manipulate voting processes, but is that common here? K7L (talk) 19:39, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, spambots have to be CU'ed so that global blocks can be applied, same goes for a number of crosswiki LTAs. Snowolf How can I help? 20:00, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is not something you should be nominating people for without asking first, given the stringent requirements laid out by the WMF. Please rescind the nominations. LtPowers (talk) 19:41, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, LtPowers has the right to reject his nomination even in view of community support.--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:59, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There is no need for the nomination to be rescinded, you can merely reject yours, and the other user has already rejected his, I believe. Snowolf How can I help? 20:34, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment honestly I'd start voting for setting up checkusers if they are really needed. Having local checkusers means all the checks must be made by them (while not in case of emergency ofc), so en.voy will lose the benefits from having them carried out by stewards (who currently are ~40) without taking any apparent advantage. For these reasons I suggest waiting for approval of related policies (e.g. one about sockpuppets') and for emerging of a true need for local CUs, which currently lacks (I didn't see any request for en.voy here). --Vituzzu (talk) 21:05, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The reasons for having local checkusers are very particular to this launch. For reasons more clear to the people who have been most involved in the process, I think it will be best to avoid posting a lot of requests on Meta. If anyone would like a bit more background, please send me an email and I'll explain in further detail. I'm honestly not sure we'll need to have local checkusers after a few weeks have gone by. --Peter Talk 19:12, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Feel free to send me an email at the address you can find here: I'm deeply interested since I'm completely missing your point. To me the common path is a need arises → a solution is applied and if you think it won't be necessary in the future then it definitely fits the definition on what is supposed to be carried out by stewies! --Vituzzu (talk) 00:10, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • To me it seems that you might not know what you are getting into - having local checkusers means that stewards can no longer do checkusers on the English Wikivoyage in most cases. Neither of you are on IRC, which means that it will be difficult for stewards to contact you when they need checkusers run. Also, from what I've heard, the CheckUser tool has a bit of a learning curve. (I would suggest to both of the checkuser candidates that you join IRC - especially the #wikivoyage and #wikimedia-stewards channels - to stay aware of what's going on in regards to cross-wiki issues, and be able to help the users that are in the wikivoyage channel as none of the WV regulars come in there, and the rest of us don't know anything about the site.) You will also need to be subscribed to checkuser-l, and you will have an account on the CheckUser wiki, should the stewards grant the permissions. --Rschen7754 00:36, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm contactable pretty much immediately on the wikivoyage-l, and I'm active there, as well as by email through the wiki. I don't believe the requirement for global stewards to require checkuser on wikivoyage will drive a requirement to be on IRC. --Inas (talk) 00:43, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Although it's not required, being on IRC is optimal because discussions can occur real-time; email is quite slower.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:50, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
CheckUser information cannot be given out onwiki, or on wikivoyage-l, or with anyone that is not a CU on another project or a steward. IRC is helpful because you can flag someone down and then have a private conversation with them. I've found that this works best for the English Wikipedia and for the stewards on Meta. --Rschen7754 01:50, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
With respect, I do believe that it is quite unlikely that this timeliness is going to be required on WV. If for some reason I need to discuss a point urgently and interactively, then, sure, access to IRC is no issue. Obviously, the CU information wouldn't be placed on a public list or onwiki, that's part of the deal. --Inas (talk) 02:10, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment I have reservations about the approach with regard to the timeline and expected outcome, which should be separated from the right to have CU, or the need. CheckUser tool is not a magic bullet, it takes time to learn and to finesse results. One requires a good knowledge of IP addresses and ranges to be able to use it well, with one of the key instructions for any new CU is to be patient, use it wisely, take your time. This is not learnt in a few days, especially where this community's leaders will presumably have other duties.

    What I read in the email to wikivoyage-l somewhat disturbs me …

    "We have some concern that some parties hostile to Wikivoyage (which are already blocked) will spend the week of our launch (January 15!) trolling, disrupting, and trying to drive off new contributors. Having local checkusers would make it easy to see if multiple ips or accounts are being used to circumvent blocks already in place."

    At this point of time, you fall under the default meta:Checkuser policy especially with regard to sock puppets, and I do not feel that you have the scope to undertake CU and action against a SUL with regard to Use of tool in the policy. Sock puppet accounts are allowed, even under your proposal. Prior to enforcing you should be educating all your users to the policy (which is still in draft) and giving them time to understand the consequences.

    I would say block accounts for their behaviour, and utilise the IP component of a block to manage collateral damage. The stewards will certainly make themselves available if you have concerns about troublemakers, and we have even bigger and better tools to manage such troublemakers.

    Progress to your having your CU, that is fine that is why we have the process available but don't have it as your focus. Get the house in order first (policies and education), and add the frills later. Stewards are available, they have much experience with the tool, and have already used it locally. Re IRC it is just a tool that is available, and some can use it, some will not. It is a good way to get a steward's attention, but just one way. Billinghurst (talk) (with my steward and separate enWS checkuser hats on) 03:15, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm.. I don't think we're necessarily on the lookout for "bigger and better tools", although the offers of assistance are appreciated. I certainly hope we won't be needing any. Yes, we have a focus on a launch date right now. We are right to try and harness the momentum and publicity that arises from it, and we have a responsibility to manage the transition smoothly. If the CU process completes, fine. If not, we'll manage the issues as they arise. I don't think we want to go further than we need to with policies, right now. That's another of the risks we face in this phase. --Inas (talk) 04:45, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If we could bring a number of stewards into this process and have them carry the load during the launch instead of our local admins, honestly, that would be wonderful. It would help to maintain a good deal of contact off-wiki for coordination outside the closed CU lists, though, with local admins more familiar with the various goings on here—with a careful mind to following the privacy policy. Because, yes, we will have a ton of work to do, from which learning the CU tools will be a distraction. If that's something we feel we can achieve, I'll withdraw my self nomination. --Peter Talk 07:03, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have no specific concerns over the (renewed) nomination process and if that is your community's wish so be it. This was about managing expectations and what I perceive as the limitations on what you can do with the data at this nascent stage of policy development. [To note to the community that I have now had direct email contact with PF and Inas about this matter, and will quietly withdraw from further commentary.] Billinghurst (talk) 12:38, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Per those emails, I feel that our stewards are now aware of the issues we may face during and after the launch, and will probably do a better job of handling the CU needs we will have in the short term. I'd like to table my nomination to allow stewards to do their work, with the recognition that it may make sense to have local checkusers at some time in the future. --Peter Talk 18:14, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Of course it depends on what your needs are in a few months, but OS is less complicated (it's basically an extra checkbox when doing revision deletion). --Rschen7754 03:57, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Identification

I see something missing here: are the both of you willing to identify to the foundation? That is a WMF requirement for getting checkuser access. --Rschen7754 20:22, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

According to Wikivoyage:Travellers' pub#Checkuser nominations, at least Peter does.--Jasper Deng (talk) 20:24, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Both of you should affirm that you are willing to in the nomination statement, so that this is more likely to be accepted. (Or you could even identify right now, just in case...) --Rschen7754 20:34, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think I did this, by affirming I would comply with the policies as documented. But, for elimination of any doubt, I confirm I am willing to identify to the foundation. --Inas (talk) 10:34, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ditto, and I will do so today, once I get back to my pc. --Peter Talk 19:13, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed

We've hit 25 support votes with no opposition. Given launch is two days away, I suggest Peter and Inas request the permissions ASAP. The information they'll need to submit is here; it may be worth submitting it in advance rather than waiting to be asked for it. LtPowers (talk) 15:07, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've made the request, and emailed the appropriate documents. --Inas (talk) 23:25, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The request was declined as the above discussion was improperly done. --Rschen7754 23:38, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In the opinion of the stewards, it appears to be the case. I'll reset the nomination process. --Inas (talk) 00:29, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In response to the comments above about the unfairness of the process: this happened because it was not possible to support one but not the other. Two stewards (Snowolf, Vituzzu) strongly hinted above that this joint nomination would not be accepted. The bar for CU and OS elections is set very high because of the high level of trust needed for such private information. --Rschen7754 02:35, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Totally, not a big deal, we'll revote and all will be good  :) – cacahuate talk 02:41, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I reject the notion that "it was not possible to support one but not the other". We are not automatons; it is simple to say "Support Inas and Oppose Peter". No one even tried to do so, or implied that he or she would like to. So whose voice was not being heard? Who was silenced? It's absurd. LtPowers (talk) 03:01, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is just a matter of formalities because access to CheckUser is a big deal.--Jasper Deng (talk) 03:08, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Basically. A few months ago, we had someone try and get an English Wikipedia CheckUser's access removed. Thankfully, this was covered in the policy, but you wouldn't want some disgruntled vandal coming over to Meta and asking for their CU tools to be removed over a technicality, right? --Rschen7754 03:34, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No; I just don't see what technicality exists here. I've seen a lot of vague assertions about why the joint nom was unacceptable without any actual, concrete issues being raised. The only semblance of a legitimate potential problem was the "what if someone doesn't support both?" question, which is both easily circumventable, and entirely moot in this case. LtPowers (talk) 13:33, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We have hit the 25 votes needed for Inas without any opposition. Let's roll and congratulations Inas. jan (talk) 20:36, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Transparency

I know I'm not going to be flavour of the month for raising questions of procedure again, but I do feel strongly enough about transparency to object to this edit, which removed the signed writings of many editors. I appreciate that the edit was made with good intentions and interested (and knowledgeable) parties can still review the edit history of this page to find out what happened, but I still find this edit less than satisfactory. -- Alice 23:05, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Nominations archives. --Peter Talk 23:14, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Peter; that resolves my concerns. -- Alice 23:20, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Withdraw?

Since Peter has withdrawn his nom, we should either table Inas' nom as well and let the stewards handle cu for now, or nominate another so that there are two per the requirement. I vote for the former, what do y'all think? – cacahuate talk 05:41, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think Peter's comments when he withdrew his nomination (in this now archived edit) were well thought out (which is partly why I deprecated their almost instantaneous removal from this page) and I have a suspicion that Inas may share them - but I'm sure we'll hear from Inas directly on that score... -- Alice 06:06, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
Probably best to table it since even if successful, he won't get the permissions yet. If we need to in the future, we can go through this entire rigamarole again. LtPowers (talk) 13:18, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I understand Peter's wish to "outsource" this function during the launch phase. We have stewards who have shown themselves to be capable, helpful, patient and responsive, so why not exploit them during the launch phase when there is so much to do :-) (well, perhaps that isn't the best summary of Peter's opinion, but I can read between the lines). There is no rush here, but I personally still think we should have a medium term objective of moving these administrative functions local. I'm not fussed if it is me, Peter, or anyone else, but I remain happy to help. Of course, if people would rather the stewards to continue in these tasks in the long term, then please speak up. If this forms a new consensus, then of course I'll withdraw. If we want to keep moving along this course, then lets just pause here, and resume in a couple of weeks when we're a bit more settled. --Inas (talk) 04:21, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Very well put! Bravo!
I've yet to hear persuasive arguments as to why these functions should be localised, but if and when I do and if the consensus is to localise, you will have my full support. Meanwhile, I think it's an excellent idea to continue to garner support for individual candidates while we debate at leisure the pros and cons of localisation. -- Alice 04:59, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
We could leave Inas' nomination up, let it pass, resurrect mine when I'm ready, and then have local checkusers. --Peter Talk 04:32, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Need a hand?

Hey guys.

Welcome to the WMF family! Since you need at least two checkusers on a project, I thought I could offer my services temporarily until you've got sufficient critical mass. I'm an experienced checkuser on the English Wikipedia and, while I'm not familiar with your processes yet (but I like what I see!) I understand the tool and the Foundation policy well, and I know the usual cross-wiki vandals well.

I don't have tons of time to dedicate to a new project, but I'd really like to help start your checkuser team up on the right foot as my small contribution. Just holler if I can be of use. — Coren (talk-enwp) 04:02, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment It's great that you want to help us out and terrific that you say you have both the technical knowledge and experience on the English Wikipedia. My reservation would lie with your lack of time to devote to the task. You will already appreciate that the IP and cookie trail rarely gives black and white answers and one must often rely on particular grammar constructions and unusual spelling mistakes and punctuation contributions to clinch matters. Obviously I am personally prejudiced, having suffered the incompetent and erroneous declaration of a previous check user for many years now, but I'd hate to see someone not having the time to properly investigate cases when called upon to do so. Thanks again! -- Alice 04:59, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
    • I think that my contribution would mostly be to help your own checkuser team get started by sharing knowledge, giving a hand with the more complicated investigation while they get their feet wet, and providing guidance and crosscheck. It's much better to have a team of "native" checkusers – and that should be your objective – but the first several months are going to be tough on the new guys and having an experienced CU to fall back on could be of use.

      I don't think time is an issue in the short term, but I wanted it to be clear that I could not do a long-term commitment to stay as part of the team once it's up and running.  :-) — Coren (talk-enwp) 13:41, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

      • Thanks for that clarification, Coren. It's very clear from both your clarifying comments above and Rschen's below that it would be terrific if you were able to find the time to provide one-on-one coaching to our local check user team until they all know the ropes — if we decide, on the balance of utility, to actually have a local check user team... -- Alice 20:11, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment I'm obviously biased as Coren is from my home project, and I won't be voting here, but I think that it would be helpful to have him around to help the new checkusers (even if you have two already) learn the tools, even if on a temporary basis. Otherwise, you're stuck with the situation where your local CUs are having difficulty interpreting the results or using the tools, and the stewards are no longer able to fulfill the requests as there are local users with the rights. The English Wikipedia has the most problems with vandalism and long-term abusers, and the experience and knowledge of various ISPs, the locations of known trolls, etc. would also be helpful. (I reported one of those LTAs earlier today, and familiarity with this guy when he comes back to sock would help!) Finally, the English Wikipedia has the most developed CU program on any WMF wiki (see w:en:WP:SPI) and an entire team to make sure that the CUs are behaving properly (see w:en:WP:AUSC). So I think this would be helpful rather than having to start with the CU tool cold. But of course, it's probably best to wait a few weeks when things get less chaotic. :) --Rschen7754 05:11, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • This makes a lot of sense to me. When we get serious about doing this (probably not too far off in the future), I think we should tap a cross-wiki user like Coren. --Peter Talk 07:09, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Checkusers: User:Ikan Kekek user declined

Hold it; I appreciate the vote of confidence, but I haven't agreed to serve in this way. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:22, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Checkusers: User:LtPowers user declined

Checkusers: User:Peterfitzgerald user withdrew nomination

I think it might be useful to have local checkusers in the upcoming week for the launch, in part out of concern that a few known parties hostile to our project launch might harass new contributors and generally be disruptive, using multiple accounts and ips to circumvent blocks already in place. Using local checkusers rather than filing requests on Meta for individual cases will be a lot more efficient, and allows us to keep from fanning flames across wikis ;)

I'm nominating myself and Ian for the role, as we need two per Meta:CheckUser policy#Access to CheckUser, and so that we can keep an eye on each other! I am familiar with the Meta:Privacy policy and will respect it to the letter, using this tool only to investigate significant disruption, and never using it to reveal private information about users per policy: don't reveal a user's "IP, whereabouts, or other information sufficient to identify them, unless they have already revealed this information themselves on the project." I'll let Inas affirm the same in a statement accepting the nomination.

Both of us have been admins with the project for about 5 years, I'm also a bureaucrat, yada, yada. Checkuser investigations will hopefully be rare here, since we don't block people for using multiple accounts unless they are being used to circumvent blocks.

We'll need at least 25 statements of support to satisfy the requirements for local checkuser privileges, so let's see if we have that many people working here! --Peter Talk 07:45, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am withdrawing my nomination per the discussion below. Having local checkusers would mean that our community of stewards would not be able to help with CU needs during the launch, and we would better benefit from their expertise in the weeks ahead.
--Peter Talk 18:16, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Support. Peter is a trusted, and identified member of the community. --Inas (talk) 00:37, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Supportcacahuate talk 01:16, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support - Tom Holland (Xltel) (talk) 01:27, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support. Globe-trotter (talk) 01:33, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support. Jpatokal (talk) 01:44, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6. SupportRavikiran (talk) 01:53, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support, under protest; it's absurd that we have to do this separately. LtPowers (talk) 02:14, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support. I don't understand why my previous vote of support was declared invalid. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:18, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support. --RegentsPark (talk) 02:31, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support, again. K7L (talk) 03:05, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support sumone10154(talk) 03:09, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Oppose per what was said in this email. I'm not sure that this is the correct use of CheckUser and also I'd prefer for CheckUsers to not connect IP addresses with accounts and vice versa.--Jasper Deng (talk) 03:14, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think you are pointing to the right email... Snowolf How can I help? 12:51, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I probably am not, but the quote Billinghurst mentions below is what I'm talking about.--Jasper Deng (talk) 18:06, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support Long term editor with the best interests of the project at heart. Travel Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:23, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support --Alexander (talk) 07:07, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support. Jjtk (talk) 07:13, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support. --Saqib (talk) 07:15, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support--Ymblanter (talk) 08:16, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support Again.jan (talk) 08:18, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support --Avenue (talk) 11:44, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support -Shaundd (talk) 15:33, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support Rogerhc (talk) 17:24, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:AndreCarrotflower

I humbly nominate myself, Andre Carrotflower, as a Wikivoyage administrator.

Though I know the official launch of Wikivoyage as a WMF project has made our site a busy place of late, I have chosen to nominate myself at this particular point in time with the expectation that with a sharp increase in activity at Wikivoyage will come a sharp increase in the need for the duties that administrators perform. As always, I am eager to pitch in and help clean up what will likely be a lot more messes than before.

I've been active on Wikivoyage and the former site for a bit more than a year, since December 2011. Perhaps I don't have as much experience as many others have had upon being confirmed as administrators; however, I feel that that deficiency is more than made up for by the vigor with which I have contributed to (and created) a number of articles, my active participation in policy discussions and processes including the featured article nominations, my firm grasp of our community's protocol and the care that I take in adhering to it, and my amicable relationship with my fellow Wikivoyagers which has helped me to, I think, play as much of a role as anyone else in building up Wikivoyage not only as a resource for travelers but also as a community of people.

-- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 01:56, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support -- Alice 04:59, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Andre knows our policies well, is a great communicator, and just generally has all the tools necessary to be a great admin—except the admin tools. --Peter Talk 07:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 07:53, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. A really excellent nomination. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:55, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Andre is an excellent candidate. --Alexander (talk) 08:31, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I impressed by Andy's consultative and iterative style. Perfect fit for this site. --Inas (talk) 08:57, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Andre: I like your writing style and in discussion (remember Udupi Dotm?) you sticked to the policy. On one side i would prefer to see a longer and more varied contribution history. On the other you contributed during our very difficult times. I will not oppose your nomination because you do good work but i would have prefered to wait for six month or so. Sorry to be the bummer but i want to be honest. jan (talk) 14:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support K7L (talk) 14:24, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support; contributions are a bit provincial (like I'm one to talk), but I'm impressed by a desire to dig in and get his hands dirty with the admin tools. His work on DotM has been stellar and much-needed, and I think that illustrates his dedication to keeping things neat and tidy as much as anything else. Also, not to put to fine a point on it, we need more active admins. My only remaining concern would be that his extra work using the tools would take away from his efforts districting Buffalo! LtPowers (talk) 16:48, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, they say "write what you know". :) -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 20:38, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. With the move to Wikimedia we haven't had as much time for things like admin nominations, but if he hadn't self-nominated I'm sure his name would have appeared on this page as soon as things calmed down again. Has done great work and shown great patience, both of which are excellent qualities in an admin. -- Ryan • (talk) • 16:54, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Unlikely to go berserk and feature disneyworld as dotm. :) --RegentsPark (talk) 17:34, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Pashley (talk) 17:55, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Trusted cyrfaw (talk) 02:36, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -Shaundd (talk) 04:51, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support AHeneen (talk) 15:02, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Ypsilon (talk) 05:04, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Is a valued member of WV and will make an excellent Administrator! - Tom Holland (Xltel) (talk) 00:32, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- sats (talk) 13:49, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Jpatokal (talk) 03:20, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Globe-trotter (talk) 03:26, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support --Rschen7754 09:06, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Supportcacahuate talk 20:44, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • SupportRavikiran (talk) 18:43, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Curtaintoad 10:33, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Knowledgeable and hard-working user who would do well with the tools. JamesA >talk 13:36, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Curtaintoad

I think I will be a good administrator. ;)

  • Oppose You have only one page worth of edits, starting on January 22. Get your sea legs and then come back in a several months or later. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:24, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Lack of editing history and credentials. Start working and we will see in six-nine months. jan (talk) 12:02, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Only 14 edits outside his own userspace. The user hasn't shown that he knows how this site works. --Stefan2 (talk) 12:11, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. More experience needed. INeverCry 21:29, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Per above --cyrfaw (talk) 02:57, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above, and also because of a rather problematic record on the English Wikipedia. He did not heed other users' concerns that the font he chose for his talk page there was too unreadable.--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:09, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, and the font issue is only just scratching the surface of this user's "problematic record on the English Wikipedia". -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 08:36, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per reasons cited above and also due to ongoing serious issues with this user on en.wikipedia -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 08:38, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment while it's probably fine to say that the user is blocked on the English Wikipedia, as an English Wikipedia admin we'd really appreciate it if the exact circumstances behind the block were not discussed here to protect the user's privacy. The w:en:Arbitration Committee apparently blocked the user due to private information submitted to them. --Rschen7754 09:00, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed; I've been following the saga on Wikipedia to some degree, and have read your comments there which opine that describing the specifics of the issue would further aggravate the problem. I agree with you and have endeavored to abide by that in my comments here. However, I think it's safe to say that the Wikipedia issue, and the secondary questions that are raised, are of sufficient gravity as to preclude any motion to elevate this user to admin status on Wikivoyage for the foreseeable future (not to mention this user's general unfamiliarity with even the most basic Wikivoyage policies and guidelines as evidenced here, complete lack of mainspace edits, etc. etc. ad nauseam.) -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 06:39, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose No evidence of an interest in building a travel guide (as opposed to their own user page and chit chat). No evidence of a knowledge of policies. -- Alice 09:03, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose. From our Admin criteria: Administrators have shown a good appreciation of the Wikivoyage policies and guidelines and made significant contributions on Wikivoyage articles.. As of this datestamp, not one edit in mainspace. Peter (Southwood) (talk): 05:48, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]


The nomination fails on all counts and should be closed as frivolous self-nomination. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 05:48, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed; is there some way we can archive this before the 14 days are over? I think it's effectively impossible for this user to overcome the unanimous opposition to his nomination and, frankly, we have bigger fish to fry here than this nonsense. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 06:41, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

AHeneen

Well, I've been around here for quite a while (Oct 2008) racking up almost 3500 edits, including about 1000 since the move to Wikivoyage (almost half of that between the 15th and the time of this nomination). I've participated in a lot of discussions about the move (including a lot of lengthy posts), which has re-acquainted me with all our policies. Hopefully I can be trusted with admin rights...being able to rollback multiple edits at a time, block vandals, & delete pages would have been really useful this week with all the editing going on. Also being able to patrol (and see patrolled/unpatrolled edits) would be useful when going through recent edits to fix issues, spot vandals, & check new users' edits. AHeneen (talk) 15:02, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Good work especially in Africa. jan (talk) 15:05, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I thought you were already an admin. You already act like one, and I of course mean that in the best possible way. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:14, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. No question about it. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 17:38, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Quick look and can't see why not. --RegentsPark (talk) 18:31, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support An erudite and careful editor that invariably edits out mistakes and hones text himself rather than inadvertently losing good material with sloppy, careless and lazy reverts. I am confident he will not abuse the additional tools -- Alice 19:00, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 19:42, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I am surprised to know that you are not admin yet. --Alexander (talk) 20:46, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support sumone10154(talk) 20:48, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The fact that most people think you are an admin already is a good indicator that you should be ;) --Peter Talk 21:16, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. For some reason I also thought you already had the extra buttons. -- Ryan • (talk) • 21:36, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Long term contributor, valued, overdue. --Inas (talk) 21:54, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Pashley (talk) 23:01, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -Shaundd (talk) 04:48, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Ypsilon (talk) 05:04, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Why not? --cyrfaw (talk) 10:54, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support --Avenue (talk) 14:12, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Tom Holland (Xltel) (talk) 00:25, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- sats (talk) 13:48, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Jpatokal (talk) 03:20, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I already thought you were an admin! Globe-trotter (talk) 03:26, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Supportcacahuate talk 20:44, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Sertmann (talk) 15:36, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support You aren't an admin already? Why not? — Ravikiran (talk) 18:44, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Curtaintoad 10:36, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I totally thought you were already an admin! PerryPlanet (talk) 03:38, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Very adept user who should've become an admin long ago! JamesA >talk 13:35, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

After 14 days of discussion (17 - 31 Jan):

  • The nomination has been given the support of the community, including at least two other administrators,
  • The user has indicated a willingness to take on the job of administration, and
  • There are no outstanding objections.

Time to flip the bit. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 06:16, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and if you give me a chance, I'll get to it. I'm not on 24/7. LtPowers (talk) 14:04, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Nurg

Per Wikivoyage talk:Administrator nominations#Nurg.2C putting my hand up Nurg has volunteered to join the shiny button club, and after reviewing this user's history it seems like a nomination is warranted. From the user's own comments:

  1. Logged-in editor since Nov 2003. Edit count: 1,188 at WT; 393 at WV.
  2. Contributor to policy since Dec 2003 when I created Time and date formats.
  3. Main admin for a small non-WMF MediaWiki since 2007 in my professional life. It has little vandalism but a lot of spam so main activities are blocking spammers, deleting spam pages, and dealing with a little vandalism.
  4. Rollbacker on WP since I can't remember when.
  5. Over 17,000 edits on WP (including 500+ in projects, policies, templates), and smaller number on wiktionary, commons, meta.
  6. I don't normally do much pure patrolling-type work here. I normally just write article stuff, and a bit of policy stuff, and otherwise do much more of the same at WP. Have been doing some checking of recent changes here after the public launch though.

-- Ryan • (talk) • 21:09, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Rschen7754 for temporary admin

Rschen7754 is an admin at the english Wikipedia and is since the going live of WV en an excellent spotter for vandals, trolls and spammers that are known convicts from WP/WMF etc (ca. 200 edits within the last days!). I suggest to entrust him (similar as snowolf) with temporary admin rights to help us battle the negative side from our new popularity.

  • Support jan (talk) 17:02, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Rschen is doing some fine work and is highly clueful and trustworthy. Snowolf How can I help? 17:03, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is really a no-brainer, and it needn't be just temporary, either. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:14, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • (For the record, I have accepted the nomination.) --Rschen7754 17:19, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Sure. Hasn't gone (completely!) crazy on Wikipedia so no reason to think he will do so here. We need to build a good admin base quickly so I support the idea of making this permanent. --RegentsPark (talk) 18:33, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support Why ever not? -- Alice 19:00, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 19:41, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Clarification: Support for temporary or permanent admin.
  • Done. Since this was proposed as a way to help out during the current rush and there seems to be strong support I've flipped the bit. If anyone disagrees it can be easily reverted pending further discussion. -- Ryan • (talk) • 20:37, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, for the record. --Peter Talk 21:16, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I also support Rschen7754 for a "permanent"/non-temporary role here as admin, if he wants it. He's a thoughtful, experienced hand that would clearly help us along with our project. --Peter Talk 23:17, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Pashley (talk) 23:02, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Trusted in the English Wikipedia --cyrfaw (talk) 10:55, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - see no need for temporary - permanent would look good sats (talk) 13:47, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Given the splash that he's made in his brief time here, this user obviously knows what he's doing and means business. I'm confident he will be an uncommonly strong asset to our project as an admin. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 18:28, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Clarification: support as permanent admin. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 21:51, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Supportcacahuate talk 20:46, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support --Jasper Deng (talk) 05:30, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Curtaintoad 10:39, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • For the record, in response to my comments below, it seems that we're working things out and I'm not planning to resign :) I'll have to see how things balance out to determine how active I will be, as I'm now an admin on three very active wikis, but I'm still planning on helping out however I can. --Rschen7754 10:11, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

After 14 days of discussion (17 - 31 Jan):

  • The nomination has been given the support of the community, including at least two other administrators,
  • The user has indicated a willingness to take on the job of administration, and
  • There are no outstanding objections.

Time to flip the bit. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 06:17, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see above, the bit was flipped almost immediately after the nomination was made. There are no more bits to flip. LtPowers (talk) 14:03, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Felix505

Felix has a long contributions history, and is an experienced patroller. He is very familiar with the workings of Wikivoyage, and has a deft touch in dealing with more difficult users. The only downside to this nomination that I can think of is having to wait 2 weeks for the demotion! He has indicated his willingness to serve here [21]. --Peter Talk 19:16, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. Felix has an amazing ability of explaining things in the most humble and detailed manner. --Alexander (talk) 20:04, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. How has he managed to avoid the demotion thus far? Pashley (talk)
  • Support. A very constructive and diligent participant in this project. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:23, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support sumone10154(talk) 20:45, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • If I'm going to consider Felix's nomination, I can't just do it in a word. I have to write a sentence, or a paragraph. Better still, and small essay outlining completely all the complexities of Felix becoming an admin. So, firstly, let's look at the benefits of the Felix becoming a Janitor, then move on to a thorough examination of any downside. Let's then incorporate the available evidence. Researched and cited, of course. Then, the final analysis, carefully evaluation the two sides. Discounting any evidence that appears biased or slanted. So, firstly, I'd like to look at all the valuable contributions Felix has made to the site. All the contributions he .. okay, I'll just support.. --Inas (talk) 23:15, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- sats (talk) 02:52, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Jpatokal (talk) 03:20, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Long overdue. jan (talk) 07:24, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 12:53, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 18:26, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Supportcacahuate talk 20:44, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support --cyrfaw (talk) 06:14, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support --RegentsPark (talk) 15:15, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I'm surprised to learn he isn't allready Sertmann (talk) 15:35, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Tom Holland (Xltel) (talk) 03:07, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Curtaintoad 10:44, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. You mean he isn't already an admin?! PerryPlanet (talk) 03:36, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. What Inas said. -- Ryan • (talk) • 01:49, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Result: Confirmed. LtPowers (talk) 16:46, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you to all those who expressed such gracious support for my recent recommendation. I will venture forth with some measured trepidation.-- Felix (talk) 18:21, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]


User:Snowolf

I have been serving the English Wikivoyage community as a temporary admin since mid-November, and I am now proposing myself as a permanent one with the outlook of providing continued support to this project. You might have seen my work around, mainly vandalfighting, helping out (in a small part) with migrating images, setting up or tweaking interface pages and various tools and explaining how the global infrastructure of Wikimedia works. I think I could be of continued help to the project in those roles for quite some time :) Outside of Wikivoyage, I serve as an administrator and oversighter on the English Wikipedia and as a Wikimedia steward on all of the projects. Thank you for your consideration, Snowolf How can I help? 18:49, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong Support Why ever not? -- Alice 19:00, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support lots of experience in countervandalism across all WMF projects. --Rschen7754 19:01, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Of course. Already doing great work. --RegentsPark (talk) 19:37, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 19:39, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Great you like it here. jan (talk) 19:42, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support You have done very good work here. --Alexander (talk) 20:45, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support sumone10154(talk) 20:49, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, and the switch was already flipped ;) --Peter Talk 21:16, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I've been impressed so far, and it's great that we're adding some admins who understand other Wikimedia projects so well. -- Ryan • (talk) • 21:36, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. With your skills and dedication I'm sure your efforts would be welcome on any wiki, and I'm happy you've chosen to support ours. --Inas (talk) 21:52, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Pashley (talk) 23:02, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:22, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -Shaundd (talk) 04:48, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Trusted --cyrfaw (talk) 10:54, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - trusted user across the WM spectrum. --Varnent (talk)(COI) 00:10, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. --Avenue (talk) 09:53, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. -- sats (talk) 13:45, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Jpatokal (talk) 03:20, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure. This concerns me greatly, as 31-hour blocks for vandalism are not in line with current site policy, and indefinite blocks are practically unheard of. This demonstrates a lack of understanding or knowledge of site policy, and isn't that what we usually look for in admins? LtPowers (talk) 18:57, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • It shows an understanding of both global precedent across all WMF sites, and a knowledge of how to effectively combat vandalism. 2 hour blocks just won't cut it. --Rschen7754 19:05, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • We start with two-hour blocks. I notice you don't mention the escalation clause whenever you invoke the "two-hour" duration. LtPowers (talk) 19:18, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Comment I agree we start with 2 hrs but an escalation is 24 hrs and i see no real difference between 24 and 31 hrs. The success of the 31 hrs blocks for trolls imho justifies the increase of 7 hrs. jan (talk) 19:26, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • Should two hour blocks be confirmed by the discussion currently happening, I would most likely resign my bits here. Snowolf How can I help? 19:33, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            • As would I. --Rschen7754 19:34, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            • And again, you ignore the escalation clause, which I just mentioned not minutes ago. I'm very confused by your focus on the two-hour figure. LtPowers (talk) 19:54, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
              • Which, to be frank, would be laughed at on every other WMF site. --Rschen7754 19:56, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
                • Serving as an admin is obviously something that is an individual choice. Both User:Rschen7754 and User:Snowolf are a great asset to our project. However, I don't think there is a place in an admin nomination for statements saying that you will withdraw if a specific policy isn't changed. If you aren't comfortable with using the current policy, I think it would be best to place your nomination on hold until any issues are worked through. I'm currently in favour of retaining our "exponential block" system for vandalism. However, I want to argue the case and reach the best decision/compromise without the resignation of two quality admins hanging over the discussion. --Inas (talk) 01:00, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
                  • Three, as Ikan Kekek states below. I will not retract my statements above - we cannot have en.wikivoyage be the Achilles' heel of the WMF sites. I personally do not want to waste my time fighting vandalism if I am accused for admin abuse for doing what is allowed under policy at every other WMF site, and taking the necessary actions needed to deal with vandals and long-term abusers. Look, I get that you want to retain your identity as a site, and don't want all of your policies and norms overridden, and that's fine. But you're on the WMF servers now, and there will be some things that you have to put up with that every other WMF site has to put up with. --Rschen7754 01:11, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
                      • Again, if you believe there should be such consistent rules as vandal block times across projects, you can state your case. And, it may well find support. However, I'd ask you to point to the policy discussion on any WMF site, that says such rules must be enforced just because we're on the WMF servers now. --Inas (talk) 02:19, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
                        • This isn't an explicitly-written-down requirement. However, consistency is definitely optimal, and facilitates cross-wiki coordination. The WMF wikis are independent of one another, but in order to harmonize well with other WMF wikis consistency is key.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:18, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Lt Powers, I think you are over-reacting. Yes, there are some differences of policy, including use of blocks, between old WT policies, WMF global policies, and likely the policies of WV back when it was separate from both. Yes, those differences need to be discussed and sorted out, mainly on policy talk pages.
    • They do not need discussion here. Snowolf is an experienced admin on other projects and clearly has his or her heart in the right place; making him or her an admin here is a complete no-brainer. Pashley (talk) 19:51, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Which is why I said "not sure" instead of "oppose". I think you're overreacting to my concerns. LtPowers (talk) 19:54, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • I have been summarily blocking users indefinitely (or for 3 months if they are just IPs) for repeated, severe vandalism (e.g., substituting "YOU SUCCKKKK!!!!" in place of 5 entire articles), without warning. If you think that's terrible, I will resign as an admin, too. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:16, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • We should really continue discussing this here. I imagine Snowolf was not aware of our differing policy; While it's certainly up for discussion and change, Snowolf and any other admin should be willing to use the tools in line with local policy – cacahuate talk 20:44, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • I think a bit of bumpiness with the move to the WMF is to be expected, as we gain the help of admins, stewards, etc. who are more familiar with different policies. Snowolf has been around here long enough to figure these things out and is currently helping retool our policies on handling unwanted edits. --Peter Talk 23:20, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Provided that Snowolf agrees to use the tools in line with local policy – cacahuate talk 20:44, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Purplebackpack89 00:05, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 01:41, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Tom Holland (Xltel) (talk) 03:12, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I trust him to show the WMF way of doing things and help (not force) Wikivoyage to adapt local policies.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:25, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Curtaintoad 10:41, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

After 14 days of discussion (17 - 31 Jan):

  • The nomination has been given the support of the community, including at least two other administrators,
  • The user has indicated a willingness to take on the job of administration, and
  • There are no outstanding objections (in my opinion the issue above has been resolved).

Time to flip the bit. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 06:21, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Chihonglee

I am very sure what is wikivoyage and it's policies. I want to be a administrator, since I want to anti-destruction, protecting pages and helping , welcomeing new user. Please vote for me, Thank you. --Chihonglee ◎Talk page 04:43, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose as frivolous self-nomination. This user:
a) has only eighteen contributions to his credit, none of which are in mainspace
b) appears to not be nearly as familiar with Wikivoyage policy as he claims to be (some examples, just off the top of my head, include the warning on his talk page about copying templates from WP and the fact that this nomination was originally at the top of the page)
c) is clearly not proficient in the English language, which would make it extremely difficult if not impossible for the user to perform administrative duties on the English Wikivoyage.
-- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 05:00, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think a particularly high level of English proficiency should be a requirement. But the fact that his main record on Wikimedia projects is at zh.wp, where he was blocked for vandalism, plus the frivolous nominations here and elsewhere (even a steward self-nom), raise concern. --Peter Talk 06:14, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
He's probably very young. Perhaps a polite, friendly and diplomatic suggestion on his user page asking him to withdraw his self-nomination? If he does withdraw, that would be a good indication that he is able to learn and take advice... -- Alice 06:22, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps there's nothing in our policy that specifically bars from admin status on en.wv those who aren't proficient in English, but de facto it's a necessary skill to have. The finer points of things like identifying fluff or touting, and vandalism of the less obvious variety, requires a level of proficiency in English that is higher than this user's seems to be. Anyway, the lack of editing experience and familiarity with policy (to say nothing of his record on zh.wp, which I was not aware of) are more important IMO, hence their placement higher on my list. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 06:38, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In the absence of local administrators who are proficient in the target language, there are sometimes admins on small wikis who do not speak the language at all (and vandal-fighters - the entire premise of the m:SWMT), but that's not the case here. Looking at global contributions, this editor strikes me as what's known as a hat collector - a relatively inexperienced editor who goes around to WMF wikis asking for userrights that they are clearly not qualified for. I've noticed they've filed requests for rights for beta.wikiversity.org and an account on foundationwiki, and access on mediawiki. Chihonglee, userrights are not things to collect, and if you proceed to request userrights that you are not qualified for, you will continue to have your requests turned down and possibly forfeit any chance of gaining them for a very long time. --Rschen7754 06:47, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sidebar: is there some way that all of a user's contributions over all wikis can be seen on the same page, or does it have to be done piecemeal? -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 06:52, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
luxo:Chihonglee. There's many other tools available, such as sulutil:Chihonglee. --Rschen7754 07:02, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Welcome to Wikivoyage, Chihonglee. Stay here a while and familiarize yourself with the policies and culture of this site, and then maybe in a year, you might possibly be a candidate for admin, but I don't guarantee anything. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:20, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I admire the bold way you're plunging forward but I think it's a little too early for us to be sure you have a firm grasp of both our policies and the stamina to be a steady contributor. Good luck with an application in a few month's time. -- Alice 05:25, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose May i suggest speedy finalisation of this hopeless nomination? jan (talk) 10:16, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Seconded. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 10:46, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Things like this on Metawiki (where the user tried to request a steward flag instead of holding an election) shows a huge misunderstanding of Wikimedia policies. Looking at the contributor's very small number of contributions to Wikivoyage, I do not see anything inticating that the user understands how the project works. --Stefan2 (talk) 11:22, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:JamesA

Joined WT last May and has been a huge help throughout the transition. Sweeps the pub, organizes districts, participates in policy discussions, reverts vandalism dutifully. I say we take advantage of his eagerness and put him to work with the mop and bucket. LtPowers (talk) 15:40, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support He's been just an exemplary citizen. He's done so much great work on articles about Bangladesh as well as doing the tasks you enumerate and participating in policy discussions, and he's always done so with good humor. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:47, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support He was asking for the rollback button. Let's give him the mop instead :) — Ravikiran (talk) 17:44, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support Seems to have a good knowledge of and an interest in developing, refining and clarifying our policies. Doesn't hurt that he's an all round nice guy and extremely helpful and knowledgeable too! -- Alice 22:41, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support enthusiastically. --Peter Talk 23:54, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Supportcacahuate talk 00:03, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Thanks everyone for the kind comments and LtPowers for the nomination. I accept, and if granted, will use the bucket and mop to help make this place the best source of travel info on the web. JamesA >talk 01:33, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. -- Ryan • (talk) • 01:49, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Pashley (talk) 04:29, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 05:40, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Kind and focussed on the real issues. jan (talk) 08:55, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - nominators and other supporters comment show this is a worthy candidate sats (talk) 09:24, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Globe-trotter (talk) 15:33, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support --Rschen7754 20:39, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Good editor Travel Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 12:02, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Why not? cyrfaw (talk) 01:56, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. --Saqib (talk) 09:40, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I'm not a regular contributor here, and he did not tell me about this RfA, but I've known JamesA for quite a while, and always found him to have exceptional judgement with using the sysop tools and in his interactions with other editors. Ajraddatz (talk) 23:31, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. --Avenue (talk) 10:54, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- Tom (Xltel) (talk) 16:31, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

14 days of discussion have passed:

The nomination has been given the support of the community, including at least two other administrators,
The user has indicated a willingness to take on the job of administration, and
There are no outstanding objections.

Nomination successful, someone flip the bit.

Thanks everyone for your kind and enthusiastic support. I look forward to a bright future for Wikivoyage. JamesA >talk 12:07, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jmh649 (Travel Doc James / James Heilman)

Would like to apply for adminship. Am interested in continuing to help with the development and maintenance of the main page which since the launch is only editable by admins. While I am a fairly new editor here I have the projects best at heart. Travel Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 12:07, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm inclined to support you, but please say more about your experience on other Wikis, since I think that could help your case. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:39, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sure I have been editing English Wikipedia since 2008 and have been an admin there since 2010. My user page can be seen here. Have played a major role in written around 20 good articles / featured article in English. Am a board member of both Wikimedia Canada and Wiki Project Med Foundation. Have made 75,000+ edits to 57 projects [22] Travel Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 12:51, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was holding out for the same reason Ikan Kekek was, but after reading the above I feel that I can give my support. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 12:53, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I'm having deja vu. Did you apply for temporary adminship before? JamesA >talk 13:03, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No this is my first attempt. A few news outlets however though I was an admin at WT a while ago :-) Travel Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:04, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's been 14 days now and the criteria have clearly been met, so it's time to flip the bit. -- Alice 01:06, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Checkusers: User:Inas

I affirm that I am familiar with the appropriate policies and will adhere to them. --Inas (talk) 10:44, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Supportcacahuate talk 01:16, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support - Tom Holland (Xltel) (talk) 01:28, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support. Globe-trotter (talk) 01:33, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support. Jpatokal (talk) 01:44, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. SupportRavikiran (talk) 01:54, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support, under protest; it's absurd that we have to do this separately. LtPowers (talk) 02:14, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support. I don't understand why my previous vote of support was declared invalid. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:18, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support. --RegentsPark (talk) 02:32, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support, again. K7L (talk) 03:05, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support sumone10154(talk) 03:09, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support Long term editor with the best interests of the project at heart. Travel Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:23, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support. Well, hey, now I get to vote ;) --Peter Talk 06:40, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support --Alexander (talk) 07:07, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support. Jjtk (talk) 07:13, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support. --Saqib (talk) 07:16, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support--Ymblanter (talk) 08:16, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support jan (talk) 08:19, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support --Avenue (talk) 11:45, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support -Shaundd (talk) 15:33, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support Rogerhc (talk) 17:25, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support --cyrfaw (talk) 05:35, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support Riggwelter (talk) 15:32, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support if the consensus is to localise this function from the 40 plus stewards - and I'm waiting to hear cogent and persuasive answers on this score. I must also declare an interest in having my name cleared as a sockpuppet (of exactly who or what is not clear at this stage) and I suspect this is more likely to happen with local checkusers that will be more familiar with my edit patterns. -- Alice 04:59, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
  24. Support AHeneen (talk) 15:02, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support MarkJaroski (talk) 20:30, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 20:38, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support Ypsilon (talk) 05:04, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support sats (talk) 13:51, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 18:29, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support. CURTAINTOAD! TALK! 09:04, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support. PerryPlanet (talk) 03:39, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support - Ian is highly experienced in the Wikivoyage community and we are in need of more checkusers. I believe he has already met the quota so should be promoted? JamesA >talk 13:37, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    A wiki cannot have just one checkuser. The nomination must remain unfulfilled until and unless we approve a second active checkuser. Until then, we're better off using Stewards; that's what they're there for. LtPowers (talk) 19:34, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll bring this up in the pub in the next week or two, and we can decide what we want to do. --Inas (talk) 23:16, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I've now kicked off a discussion at Wikivoyage:Travellers'_pub#Local_Checkusers. Please feel free to chime in. --Inas (talk) 02:13, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:SatuSuro

Noting that in a spree of welcome notices today to new users, I have considered putting my hand up as well. Also due to the fact that rollback/review rights have not been established here at wikivoyage, thought I'd nominate myself.

  1. Admin at commons - a mix of admin and contribution work
  2. Long term editor at wp:en - started a project and supported others - a clean SUL range with nothing worth reporting
  3. interested in supporting wikivoyage on patrolling work

-- sats (talk) 09:10, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Excellent history at the English language Wikipedia. Nick-D (talk) 10:12, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Nick-D --cyrfaw (talk) 11:05, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support We need all the experienced admins we can get. Pashley (talk) 14:00, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait. While obviously a trusted user because of the history on Commons and WP, I would prefer to see a longer contributions history, including participation in discussions here and patrolling—it is critical for all admins to be well-versed in our local policies, which in some cases differ a good deal from other Wikimedia projects. --Peter Talk 19:13, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I want to clarify my reasoning here a bit—I would enthusiastically support this nomination after seeing a record of patrolling. Once I see that someone is reliably working on cleaning up additions that need to be de-touted, have external links reformatted or removed as appropriate, etc., then I feel much more OK with passing out the extra buttons. --Peter Talk 20:28, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

*Wait. I agree with Peter. I really appreciate your kind offer, and I'd be happy for you to have autopatroller rights as a trusted user, if you don't already have them, but I would like to get to know you and your work on this site a little before giving you a vote for admin. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:29, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

*Wait. Perhaps it's poor form to not reciprocate support for the nomination of someone who supported my own. But in all honesty, I agree with the above two commenters. I'd love to see it happen in the future, though. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 23:18, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. Per Pashley. Some functions of the admin bit are universal, such as dealing with disruptive users/vandals and blocks, protections, etc, and Sats has plenty of experience with these. Other things can be learned quickly on the job. He certainly wouldn't screw anything up with the tools. Otherwise, if adminship is going to be reserved for old-timers, why not dispense with the formality and let the 'crats just assign adminship to those they know, atleast for the next few months until non-insiders get more experience? INeverCry 23:42, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • But should they be, when you're facing the exact same vandalism as other WMF sites? --Rschen7754 02:04, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Possibly, but I think we should discuss that at Wikivoyage talk:How to handle unwanted edits. Our project traditionally has had a less confrontational and bureaucratic-style way of dealing with vandals. There are fewer rigid processes to go through, and we discourage use of admin tools when avoidable. We also usually have a lot of community input when using tools like blocks and protects, except for certain defined circumstances. --Peter Talk 02:50, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Another experienced admin from other WMF sites, User:Rschen7754, has been nominated above for temporary admin rights here. Would that be a good solution for SatuSuro? Should it perhaps be a policy; experienced admins from elsewhere can have temp admin here (for how long?), but cannot be made permanent until they have a local record of contributions? Would that satisfy those saying "wait"? Pashley (talk) 23:31, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This would raise alot more issues. Temp for how long? How many contributions would be needed before permanent adminship? Another vote after temp period is up? RFC for the policy? How long does the policy stay in place? Also, what would be the policy for removal of temp adminship, which is a bit like de-sysopping because you'd basically be saying the temp admin didn't cut it? INeverCry 23:59, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I supported the nomination of Rschen without hesitation because I've already seen a good deal of Rchen's work here. I am not familiar with SatuSuro or his/her work and would like to see him/her in action on Wikivoyage for at least a few weeks in order to be able to be able to fairly give it a positive evaluation, as I would fully expect to do. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:03, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I just noticed these RFAs here last 2 weeks, so maybe by the end of this you'll be able to switch to support? Face-wink.svg INeverCry 03:23, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That is very possible. I will pay special attention to SatuSuro's work. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:36, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Its good to see questions raised from my self nom - I do hope that it is of benefit to the project if you get discussion like that. Seeing it is a 14 dayprocess I will indeed 'wait' - to see what else emanates. cheers and thanks for the comments so far. One point - user edit histories and experience that is mentioned by the 'long timers' about their compatriots - has not been migrated into the the new wikivoyage user summaries - perhaps the mention of experience shows a need for new users that there was a life before it doesnt show up in the new format - sats (talk) 01:58, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Ok, let me be the bad guy. Yes you do a good job in welcoming newbies but i would definitely want to see a longer contribution period and also some edits in our policy sections. I nominated Rschen7754 for temp admin because he does an excellent job in combatting the spammers/trolls/nerds that plague us a the moment. WV is slightly different, so imho someone needs to contribute at least for 3-6 months before he can start an nom. We granted snowolf with temp admin three month ago and he now runs for the permament admin without objection. jan (talk) 07:30, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - its interesting to see that some things are being done on the run during the time of transition, and from what I can see it is being done well - - If in fact there is a consensus on your suggestion - then it needs to be up there in the administration nomination text as to exactly that - so that others are not similarly treated to such a mixed response.
  • Also for a wp en editor to come over and see explantions of nominations for people who have unmigrated edit history of 130 edits or so - the template works/tweakers need to consider providing migrated info of candidates from the previous format into the template of an editors history - as from the surface without checking carefully, it looks mightily spurious first off.
Thanks anyways, I find the fact that the other nominations are relatively free of this sort of commentary, suggests that more text is required in the nomination criteria text, if there is sufficient support for working out the issue of temporary and wait time criteria as hard policy rahter than occurring in a nomination. sats (talk) 08:56, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • @SatuSuro: So far we didn't need hard policy because we have been an organicly grown project. The move to WMF resulted in a major jump that we try to cover. I'm sorry that you are the victim of this fast growth. Usually editors participate and over time they grow and the community has a feeling if there is a fit. We created the temp admin nomination due to the WMF transition and the going live which overwhelmed the WV incumbents. I love to see new users feeling comfortable at WV but we are a bit different to WP, therefore imho most of us would like to see some commitment to our policies. I'm positive about WMF/WP but the focus is different. Let us start a bit slowly and i would definitely support temp admin for you. Last: Yes, we need to codify at some point in time the temp admin nomination process but at the moment i'm happy to work on the content tide and utilize our influx to make things (Photos etc.) better here. Regards, jan (talk) 09:15, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    thanks very much for your taking the time to explain, please do not apologise for anything - I would be much happier to see something positive to come out of this nomination of the outcome - just check my SUL - I am no fly by  :) (well maybe at 38 projects) ... and if anyone can invent a welcoming bot aka script - I'd the first to say yay!!, even if I am a bit old for that sort of thing sats (talk) 09:21, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think temporary adminship would be appropriate for 3 months - that's how most "new" wikis start off anyway when new admins are needed but most of the experience is on other projects. --Rschen7754 09:32, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support though this apparently isn't going to pass - knows what they're doing and trusted on other wikis. --Rschen7754 08:24, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - it really is just an exercise in understanding the changes of what are happening here at wikivoyage by watching the discussion at the admin nominations alone - and one wonders how in the long run the process of change will further develop in view of the comments on some of the other nominations - I think the process of assuming that nominees understand wikivoyage policy and logic of formation of articles to date might be one thing, but the other - watching the personalities flex their bargaining skills with I'll resign! suggests that a more formal process akin to some of that is implemented at wp en might be required to actually approach consensus (or at least a significant proportion of agreement) on some issues rather than bulky conversations that appear to lack resolution. Also I fail to see where any one editors comments should or could be 'considered the last word' on a particular subject - the community does itself a disservice if that happens - the diversity of voices in a community like this one should be maintained and respected sats (talk) 01:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I guess I should apologize for an overly extreme remark. I just think it's important for admins to have flexibility, and shortly after launch, I felt we were being deluged with vandals who were wasting a lot of time. It's certainly possible that one of the reasons things have quieted down since then is that people like me summarily banned the vandals, and I would like to think that I didn't do something horrible by indefinitely banning really gross vandals in the clear interest of the site. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:42, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Good work on en wikipedia and commons. While I empathize with the concerns expressed on this nom (and the one way above) that there are differences in policies, guidelines and customs across wikis, and that admin noms should demonstrate an awareness of what the norms here are, I also think that a nascent project like this one should be willing and eager to welcome experienced editors into positions of responsibility. The fact is that this is no longer the old wiki and policies, guideline, norms, and procedures here are going to have to change and the more ideas and thoughts that we have, the better it is for this wiki. SatuSuro has 87,000+ edits spread over almost 8 years on en.wikipedia and is a sysop on commons with over 10,000+ edits. From all available evidence, he/she is a mature and experienced editor who will help shape the project as it grows in its new home and we should be glad to have him/her as an admin here. --RegentsPark (talk) 15:15, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Curtaintoad 10:43, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Sats has gained my confidence and appreciation. I now unreservedly support his nomination to be an administrator on this site. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:46, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I am not sure of my own current status to formally express an opinion on suitability as I have not yet received a demotion to admin status myself, so I will only comment here. I have only seen a sliver of SatuSuro's input here to date but what I have seen certainly indicates an embracing of the project's aims and outlook, plus a broader grounding borne by a depth of cross-Wiki experience, a considerable body of wiki edits, and (wiki) admin experience elsewhere. The project goals appear to be understood and a measured humility suitable to a travel wiki is apparent. My only reservations would be in concurrence with Peter, perhaps a level of specific WV project experience is required Patrolling edits to gain a 'feel' for the quite diverse content issues that often arise on WV. The various permeations of that can be a bit convoluted at times and have a very different dynamic to that found somewhere like WP or Commons. Potential issues arising from some of the content in the Eat, Drink and Sleep listings is a standout in that regard. Without any doubt SatuSuro is a notable asset to this project at any level, including that nominated here. -- Felix (talk) 17:46, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oustanding opposes? I'm still seeing a couple outstanding opposes here by Peter and AndreCarrotFlower, giving this a couple more days to see if they wish to change their comments, otherwise we'll need to archive this for now and try again soon. Would also be good if Jan and Ikan would officially strike out their original opposes, for clarity, since they seemed to change their mind further down in additional comments – cacahuate talk 16:36, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I guess I'm neutral at this point. A longer contribution history (as Inas pointed out below) would be preferable, but frankly the value of the work that Sats has put in to other wikis cannot be deprecated. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 05:19, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. To be blunt, I'd have preferred a longer contribution history - just for the precedent side of things. Our admin criteria doesn't mention a history of quality contributions to other projects, but it isn't explicitly excluded, so I've certainly weighed that in the equation. I have no doubt that sats makes some keen observations on the community by observing the nominations here, but in fairness I've seen a fair bit of development on both sides during the period of nomination. Diversity never hurt the project, and this user has a demonstrated ability to be fair. --Inas (talk) 01:54, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait. It seems this wasn't going to pass anyhow, but as I look more, I also think it isn't necessary at this time. Very nice user, but nearly no mainspace editing, no reverts.... don't see a demonstrated need for admin tools, let's wait and renominate later if it becomes necessary. I'll let another admin close this nom, since i'm now one of the ones holding it up - it's past 14 days anyhow, so someone should close soon – cacahuate talk 03:39, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Since we left the spambot plagued old domain, there have been very few incidents of graffiti, vandalism, or spam for sats to revert. (I know my own position is not popular with some admins who have been abusing their janatorial tools, but remains akin in spirit to the advice given here: "Rolling back unwanted edits. Administrators may use the rollback tool to quickly undo all changes to an article made by the most recent editor. Currently, it is not possible to leave an explanation of a revert in the edit summary, so this tool is usually reserved only for obvious cases of graffiti, vandalism, or spam."). For a while it may be very difficult for sats to demonstrate "a need for admin tools" and, in any case, "There are no carved-in-stone requirements". Finally, I do need to stress that the 14 days bit is a MINIMUM period to deal with any objections and not a maximum. (It was easy to mistake the latter in the previous wording at Wikivoyage:Administrators so, I hope my recent edits to the relevant page have made that part crystal clear.) -- Alice 07:44, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment - ironic, in that the nomination is a test ground for others sorting out what to do with nomninations of not the old gang... however if read carefully, I have said I was more concerned that the nomination process benefit the project, rather than my own particular interests. Also I have tried in a number locations to state that the process is required to make the wikivoyage difference from other wikis as accomodating and friendly as possible. The comments by the re-opening (so please note it had already been closed once... it is important to read the traces) and other editors were of good faith.

I have suggested also that when unsucessful nominations occur, that a simple courtesy requires either the closer/counter to actually communicate with the editor, regardless of how hopeless the case might be... Then also an equivalent list of the particular shortcomings of the application are well worth listing in that communication. Just because the clean support lists of nominations has occured to date, I do not think that there has been enough thought, even yet, as to some of the issues that have can be related to nomination, despite the changes of the requirements.

There is also a peculiar lack of any criteria where re-nominations might occur, as to whether/what the requirements might be where the editor (sic user) might not be very nice user - how the community of wikivoyage admins might cope with less savoury trojan style editors that has occurred at wp en appears to be not sorted out yet. As to 'judging' how the nomination process goes now that there are modifications of the requirements (since this nomination was in place mind you), I am sure, if the diversity of comments above are any indicator, then wikivoyage has a sufficiently robust collection of editors who apart from being well travelled are sufficiently diverse in their opinions as to formulate a project that is well worth being part of... I have no problem at all with waiting, but I will have as I explore this place, be quite certain to make further comment about thing that I encounter. At least administrator nominations has been cleaned up for a start in my time here so far Yes Done sats (talk) 07:39, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Question 1 to cacahuate, jan and Peter: None of you technically placed an oppose vote against this nomination, but all suggest waiting. Now that we have had a better chance to see the nominee in action, what further period of waiting (if any) would you propose, please? -- Alice 01:12, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
Good question. My earlier wait vote, which I later retracted, was consciously intended to express concerns about Sats' nomination without standing in the way of his demotion should the other voters be in favor of it. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 02:10, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well I think, (if you dont mind me joining in at this stage) is that the requirements actually changed between the self nomination and now, not only do I agree with the firmer regulating of the requirements, but consider that my nomination discussion is also so full of range of issues that do not relate to me personally in any way. This is a marvellous opportunity for someone to bite the bullet and perhaps acknowledging that the requirements have changed in the time since this nomination was opened, and now... In many other fields in life such an admission would require some level of tact. sats (talk) 02:30, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually jan (User:Jc8136)has an outstanding oppose unless I have missed something. I hereby request jan to clarify if this opposition still stands. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 13:45, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't see that the requirements have changed substantially. The same things are required of the nominee that were previously required, and that is mainly the confidence of the community, which is indicated by the support of a significant number of established members, and a lack of significant opposition. What has changed is a possibly greater clarity of what history is likely to elicit the required confidence, and how to deal with nominees who are clearly unsuitable. This is a step in the right direction. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 15:09, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question 2 to sats: Do you think you have an extensive knowledge of our policies - especially since, although you have made more than 80,000 edits at the English Wikipedia over the course of the last 7 years or so, our policies are very different in some core areas like NPOV, referencing and voting? -- Alice 05:33, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
I would not call it extensive in the sense of having explored each and every one of the issues that exist at http://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Wikivoyage:Policies, however I have gleaned from what some might have thought a superflous amount of time on recent changes to see admins in action and understand why they were reverting edits - the acronyms they were using and the reason for the processes. My own article editing here at wikivoyage has enjoyed the freedom of not having to worry about NPOV and WP:RS (a wiki that doesnt worry about those issues must be good...) - and I also have been exposed to my own level of ignorance of meta issues in time at the travellers pub - I think that has worked well for others - they might have learnt a few things as well. As I have said at the upper part of the self nomination, my interest is for the project - if others fear for precedent and or credibility of the new re-arrangement of the criteria for nomination, I have no problem with any result here, I am still very keen to work on the big holes that exist in vast parts of the project, it is quite enthrallling the amount of work required here. sats (talk) 09:47, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I have not commented on this nomination until now, as I originally had no opinion on whether User:SatuSuro would be suitable as an admin on this wiki, but over the last few weeks I have developed the opinion that SatuSuro would be a better than average admin who is able to remain detached and objective in a debate like this, and appears to have the best interests of the community in mind. As a consequence I am now able to fully support this nomination. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 13:36, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose granting permanent admin status until 18 March 2013 at the earliest since I am not yet convinced sats has yet demonstrated sufficient knowledge of our policies. I am convinced (like Peter Southwood above) that sats will be able to exercise sound and judicious mopping when he understands all the nuances of our policies. This formal opposition is with the beliefs that in the intervening month he should be able to persuade me and others in this regard and that we also need to resolve this nomination in a way that does not set a bad precedent. -- Alice 07:04, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Support granting temporary admin status until 18 May 2013 when, if full admin status has not been granted, temporary admin status should be withdrawn without prejudice to further nomination(s) -- Alice 07:04, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment - that all makes good sense if one has been following http://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Wikivoyage_talk:Administrator_nominations#New_requirements_to_prevent_newbie_nominations - if the issue is the concern about setting a precedent, and the rather drawn out process at the talk page which I gather is becoming quite tedious for some, the combination is a rather bloated nomination talk page, and a bloated nomination space here, and an equally go no-where nomination. sats (talk) 07:34, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – @Alice: "wait" is a nicer way of saying oppose. This nomination has run it's course, and should be closed at this point. I don't plan to withdraw my own opposition at this time, as I don't see a demonstrated need for the tools, although I'm glad to see that Sats has now started editing in the main namespace. I personally don't think we are in desperate need of more admins, especially since the launch frenzy has subsided; I believe we should get back to experienced and local long-term editors handling those tasks. Would another admin mind officially closing this now? – cacahuate talk 21:58, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait implies a temporary delay, possibly until something is cleared up. Oppose is clear and unambiguous, though possible less "nice". When assessing a consensus, oppose is much easier to understand. I agree there is no 'demonstrated need' for the tools, but think they would be well used if issued.
  • How does one demonstrate need for the tools? Is it a need for the tools to do the work you choose to do, but cannot do because you don't have them, or a need for more people to do the work that needs the tools? It can't be a need for the tools to do the work one is already doing, as one already has those tools, or wouldn't be able to do it. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 09:49, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • There does not appear to be a requirement to need the tools, even less demonstrate this to be the case, in the guidelines that I am aware of. Am I missing something? • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 09:54, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Question: Normally I would ask this question in the Pub but this nomination is very long and the answer may be relevant. Wikivoyage:Administrators#Ending_administrator_privileges states "Administrators who abuse their privileges can have those privileges revoked via nomination.". Where are both the procedures and the nomination page for that, please? -- Alice 23:07, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
As far as I know this has never happened (except in the fringe case of the self appointed IBobi back on Wikitravel, where protests were made, but without any real hope of action). Consequently there has not been a need for a procedure. It would seem reasonable to use the Travellers' pub to start a discussion, and if there appeared to be support, make a nomination on this page to revoke priveleges. The proper place for a discussion on the process would be on the discussion page for Wikivoyage:Administrators. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 06:24, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In the event of serious abuse (admin goes and blocks everyone in sight, compromised account, etc.) stewards can remove the administrator's flags pending discussion from the local community. --Rschen7754 06:42, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the prompt response Peter Southwood and Rschen7754 and I apologise for raising this here rather than at Wikivoyage talk:Administrators. (I have noticed that you recently made an appropriate amendment, Rschen7754). My question was asked in the context of my (perhaps wrongly) perceiving that, since nobody has ever had the mop snatched away from them (except illicitly by IBadmins), some objectors might think they had better be ultra-cautious about appointing any new janitors. -- Alice 07:27, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Per Alice's comment upthread: I certainly don't think having an additional admin would be wasted. It's not like we have a limited budget to pay admins or something (0 x whatever still = 0). However, I won't belabor the point, as there is still outstanding opposition to this particular user becoming an admin at this time. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:56, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I said support back in January, but others said wait. Fair enough, but it has been two months. Can we now close the nomination by making SatuSuro an admin? Pashley (talk) 23:22, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I hope so. And I would add that there has been a considerable increase in spamming lately, and possibly also in touting, so we definitely can use more admins right now. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:59, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Presumably we need to have the outstanding opposition retracted. If so, would those who said wait please indicate whether we have waited long enough yet? I refer you to User:SatuSuro's contributions history, which appears to me to show sufficient mainspace activity to allow us to finalise this nomination. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 05:38, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The only outstanding opposition I'm seeing on this thread is Alice's, and she's curtailed her Wikivoyage activity so sharply that I wonder if she's still an active user. I certainly haven't seen her around lately. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 06:13, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I certainly remain an active user in the sense that I review the many changes to articles on my watchlist every day. However, due to my current duty roster, it is not easy (especially with slow satellite connections) to be confident that my edits will not inadvertently delete text due to cacheing errors. When I switch to the Ethiopean route in a couple of months I hope that situation may change. Being truthful, it also seems less than worthwhile until my "Sooty" tag is withdrawn to bother commenting on policy. Incidents like this are quite discouraging - I really do fail to see how restoring "Sq" as a commonly used abbreviation for "Square" should be thought vandalism. -- Alice 13:33, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
I see a wait from Peter Fitzgerald, an oppose from jan, and a rather complicated oppose/wait/support temporary appointment from Alice. I interpret Alice's position to be roughly equivalent to wait. We have waited, but have we waited long enough? I think we have. I will ping Alice and jan for comment, Peter is unlikely not to notice this discussion. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 10:05, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I still see an outstanding oppose from cacahuate above - or have I missed something?
No, I think I missed it • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 14:20, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I find it very difficult to unreservedly support the appointment of any new admins until we have clarified the procedure for removing existing admins -I still fail to see cogent reasons for trying to make the removal process any less transparent than the appointment process. -- Alice 13:33, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Can we take this as an abstention on principle, and not an opposition to SatuSuro?
As I understand it, If you have a reason to nominate an administrator for desysopping, or whatever the word would be, You nominate them on this page with your reasons, and the procedural details would depend on the reasons given. Since there are many possible reasons, from the trivial, such as death of the admin in question, or voluntary retirement, to complicated issues of persecution, harassment or conflicts of interest, it would be largely a waste of time to try to draw up a detailed process at this stage, since whatever was proposed, would have to be sufficiently flexible to be changed to suit the circumstances, and there would be no guarantee that it would work anyway. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 14:20, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Peter.
Again, and as I would expect from you, correct Peter.
For the avoidance of doubt, I have never proposed any overly complex or tendentious revocation procedure. I've restored the necessary minimum changes with this edit and we will see if the existing admins are prepared to behave in a more collegiate and transparent way by refraining from abusing the revert buttons. -- Alice 00:38, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Support JuliasTravels (talk) 16:45, 3 April 2013 (UTC) Waited long enough, does good work. Procedural discussions shouldn't be a reason to keep an admin nomination from being closed. Also, (on a general note, nothing about Sats) buttons aren't given for life. Sure, a selection procedure and some reviews are a good thing, but if you do a good job and are willing to be an admin, that's great as far as I'm concerned. If it turns out it was a bad call to give buttons to anyone, it's not that hard to correct the mistake. In Sats case however, I'm not worried *at all*. Go for it :-)[reply]
  • Comment I started the mess with my outright opposition to these nomination. As i was almost four weeks on the run, i just checked Sats history and like what i see. Julias correctly says, that procedural questions shouldn't stop good contributors, so i switch my opposition to support even i wished we hadn't such a fuss about it and switched it to temp from the start. Welcome to the club and start mopping;-) jan (talk) 21:15, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I see only ONE outstanding oppose from cacahuate above - or have I missed something again? -- Alice 07:32, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Rschen7754

I've been a temporary admin here for about 2.5 months, and would like to become a permanent admin; I figure now is a good time since I'm approaching the traditional 3 months. I haven't been as active since the launch as I've wanted to be (since I am an admin on the English Wikipedia and Wikidata as well) but I've still made several spambot blocks and done some speedy deletion requests, which I still find the tools useful for. I check my watchlist a few times a day and contribute to discussions when I have something to add, and I also idle in the #cvn-wikivoyage channel on IRC, an automated channel that displays possible spam/vandalism edits for people to check. When I find the time, I want to add to some of the articles as well, as I enjoy travel. I hope that I still have the trust of the community. :) --Rschen7754 05:50, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong support. I never had any doubts about Rschen's abilities with the mop—but if I had, they would have been dispelled pretty quickly. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 06:08, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support. Rschen certainly has my trust both in mop-wielding and in all other wiki-work I've seen here! --Peter Talk 06:25, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I had no idea you weren't a permanent admin. I find it hard to imagine any reason anyone would not support your nomination. Thanks a lot for all you do!!! Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:42, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - You do a lot of great janitorial work around here, and the tools would be well utilised. JamesA >talk 06:49, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support You gained my trust and it would be great to have you around here for the future. jan (talk) 07:43, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Alice, don't be silly. First, we have an adequate revocation procedure — discuss it here, and act if there is consensus. Second, that is entirely irrelevant to this (or any other) nomination. Pashley (talk) 12:12, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that there is no requirement to create or improve the revocation procedures before concluding an admin nomination. Clearly precedent allows this, and therefore it is long standing existing consensus. However this is a page for the opinions of Wikivoyagers about appointing admins, and these should not be reverted just because one thinks they are not valid. Rebutted, sure, but preferably without getting personal. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 13:07, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how revocation procedures have any relevance to this nomination. I don't think we'll get to a point where an admin is on a banning-spree and we have no idea what to do because a strict, step-by-step procedure isn't down in writing. And Rschen has been a temporary admin for a few months, ample time to go on a banning-spree and allow us to revoke his rights. That obviously hasn't happened, so we needn't worry about revoking his rights at a later date. JamesA >talk 14:00, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've made it clear that it is not User:Rschen7754 I am worried about. I remain concerned that existing admins wish the procedures for revocation should be hidden from this page. -- Alice 01:21, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - as far as I can tell one of the very few editors around with true competence in cross-wikiness and meta presence that is essential for the perspective on the relationship between wikivoyage and various sister projects and the issues that arise - that in itself I believe to be an increasingly important perspective. sats (talk) 07:43, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • CommentWait While I would prefer that the admin corps be drawn from the community, I see no reason why one person should dictate what goes on here. If there is one thing I've learned as a Wikipedian, it is that neither I nor anyone else has cornered the market on being right! I hope Rschen will contribute content on Wikivoyage, if only to understand that the differences with Wikipedia and I wish him well. --RegentsPark (talk) 12:46, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd prefer to see some content contributions first. --RegentsPark (talk) 01:12, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ordinarily I'd agree. However, Rschen's crosswiki expertise has been of such value to us over the past months that IMO it's prudent to overlook the relative paucity of content contributions from him. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 01:38, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps. I'm sure he's a useful addition to the admin corps. I'm just uncomfortable with the idea of admins with no experience at all in contributing travel related content. He has expressed the desire to contribute content and I'd prefer to wait till there is some evidence of interest in the purpose of this wiki.--RegentsPark (talk) 01:47, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I will note that User:Snowolf was promoted to permanent admin with even fewer content contributions than me... --Rschen7754 01:48, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
...and on a similar rationale (crosswiki experience), to boot. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 01:54, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also the founder of the U.S. Roads WikiProject on the English Wikipedia, and have written featured articles there, so it's not like this is completely in left field, either. :) --Rschen7754 02:01, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Rschen7754's work here hasn't been in the field of content-generation, it's been in the field of... administrative work. His work has been quite helpful, his participation in policy discussions has shown that he understands our local policies and works well with others, and his active use of the tools shows that he understands how they work and how to use them effectively. We have several admins whose contributions are overwhelmingly... administrative. The tools are needed for functions unrelated to travel writing, so I'm not sure why anyone would think travel writing a prerequisite. We certainly never have before, and there is (deliberately) no mention of this at Wikivoyage:Administrators#Nomination. --Peter Talk 02:30, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I would find it very frustrating if Rschen7754 were to be denied confirmation as a permanent administrator because one person thinks that, instead of judging how trustworthy he's been as a temporary administrator, we should judge him on the quality of his travel article content. People don't have to be admins to add quality content, and while taking the leadership in adding content is a good basis for nominating someone who has otherwise shown him-/herself to be trustworthy, it's that quality of trustworthiness and commitment to the mission of the site that is most important in an admin, and on that basis, I don't see where there would be an objection to Rschen7754. I would go as far as to say that if this nomination gets shot down on the basis of a single objection, we may need to serious consider modifying the rule by consensus, which may not continue to work indefinitely. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:11, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I dispute the relevance of this objection per the requirements for nomination and arguments above. If the objection is not relevent, it does not count as an outstanding objection in terms of the policy. RegentsPark is free to express a preference for more content contributions, but this does not affect the current nomination. It is a matter for a proposal to change the policy, and until the policy has been changed to include the proposed requirement, it remains as it is. Cheers, • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 08:09, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the "guidelines for becoming an administrator" above, "Have a history of article contribution" is one of the criteria, so while I emphatically support this nomination, I don't see how the objection is not relevant. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:21, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I referred to the actual policy page at Wikivoyage:Administrators#Becoming_an_administrator which is a little different - in particular "There are no carved-in-stone requirements". There is also a slight difference between "Have a history of article contribution" and "some content contributions", though probably not much in intent - the first one is a bit vague, second is more specific. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 10:14, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: On this occasion User:Peterfitzgerald's stance is correct in principle if not in fact. I can not see travel writing as being logically a necessary requirement for being given admin's tools. (Speaking generally and without regard to the current candidate, in some ways a lack of content contribution can be an advantage for an admin that may, as a last resort, have to protect a page that is the subject of edit warring). If we are not being completely hypocritical and tongue in cheek when we say this is a "janitorial" position, content generation is not an obvious requirement to have enshrined in policy pages. However, this just highlights the need to have transparent (and clearly stated) requirements for both granting and revoking admin rights. -- Alice 09:32, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
(od) To be clear, this is not a comment on RsChen7754's ability to be a good admin. The general opinion seems to be that he will be a useful permanent addition to the admin corps and I respect that. However, it does seem to me that an admin, on any wiki, should have some minimal amount of content contributions in that wiki if they are to be given a position of responsibility and I don't see that in RSChen's case (actually, I don't see any substantive contributions at all). Every wiki is different (which is why we're not, all of us, admins everywhere else!) and, in my opinion, an editor should understand how that wiki works before becoming an admin. --RegentsPark (talk) 13:18, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Just to make certain this is understood, the admin bits for Rschen7754 should actually have been flipped after two weeks, which is just prior to your comment, but since they weren't, per current policy a single objection is enough for a nomination to fail. Alice objected on grounds unrelated to the user, and as such that comment can be struck from consideration, but per our current policies your objection should cause this nomination to fail. If you feel strongly on the matter then that's fine, but I want to make sure that the objection wasn't made thinking that it was just registering a comment and would not affect the outcome. -- Ryan • (talk) • 14:28, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Which is a very good reason for discussions at nominations to have relatively strict guidelines regarding threads that in the end have nothing to do with an individuals nomination or suitability or capacity to be an admin. sats (talk) 14:46, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I certainly dispute that a single objection is enough for a nomination to fail, especially one so opposed to precede