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[edit]

Co-founder of Wikivoyage, has root access on 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[edit]

Co-founder of Wikivoyage. Has sudo access on, 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[edit]

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 , 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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

  • 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[edit]

  • 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[edit]

User:(WT-en) Sapphire[edit]

  • 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[edit]

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[edit]

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)

(WT-en) OldPine[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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/ 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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

[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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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. -- 18:55, 12 June 2007 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) Texugo[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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)[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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)[edit]

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)[edit]

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)


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)


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)[edit]

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)[edit]

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)

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)
  • Support. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:25, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
  • 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)
    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)
    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)
    In my opinion, "temporary" means until the end of the beta period. --Atsirlin (talk) 15:01, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
  • 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)
    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)
    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)
  • 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)

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)

  • 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)

User:Snowolf (self-nomination for temporary admin)[edit]

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)

  • Support. -Shaund (talk) 21:44, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Support and thank you for your help! --Atsirlin (talk) 22:16, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Support. What Atsirlin said! Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:25, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
  • 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)
  • 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)

User:Ikan Kekek (self-nomination for admin)[edit]

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)

  • 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)
  • 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)
  • 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)
  • Promoted. Ikan Kekek's accounts are verified as matching; see here. LtPowers (talk) 12:38, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

User:Yann (nomination for admin)[edit]

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)

  • Support Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:03, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
  • 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)
    • 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)
  • 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)
  • 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)

User:Sumone10154 (self-nom for admin)[edit]

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)

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

Checkusers: User:Peterfitzgerald and User:Inas[edit]

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)

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)

  • Strenuous Support - and I hope the first thing you'll do, Peter, is run a checkuser on me and whoever you currently claim is my puppetmaster and then, when you get the result, publicly apologise and stop unjustifiably calling me a Sockpuppet! -- Alice 07:55, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. You are obviously a good and reliable candidate. --Alexander (talk) 08:03, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Jjtk (talk) 08:18, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. I trust you guys. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:33, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. My support with you. --Saqib (talk) 08:43, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support, no problem--Ymblanter (talk) 09:07, 12 January 2013 (UTC
  • Support. Absolutely -- MarkJaroski (talk) 09:51, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Riggwelter (talk) 12:28, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Pashley (talk) 13:04, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support LtPowers (talk) 14:21, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support sumone10154(talk) 14:41, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Thank you for commitment. jan (talk) 16:43, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Thanks! - Tom Holland (Xltel) (talk) 16:46, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support K7L (talk) 16:50, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Supportcacahuate talk 17:02, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Definately needed. Travel Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:05, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. -- Ryan • (talk) • 17:06, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. -- Bill-on-the-Hill (talk) 21:23, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support --Shaundd (talk) 22:25, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support --Rogerhc (talk) 23:40, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support AHeneen (talk) 00:17, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support --Avenue (talk) 02:37, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support --Globe-trotter (talk) 03:15, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
  • SupportYpsilon (talk) 10:30, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. --SU FC 12:25, 13 January 2013 (UTC)


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)

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)
I'm reading something slightly different at
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)

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)

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)
Pashley, how can you vote for all four candidates at once? --Saqib (talk) 17:33, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
  • 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)
  • 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)
  • 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)
  • 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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
  • 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)

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)
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)
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)
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)
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)


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)

According to Wikivoyage:Travellers' pub#Checkuser nominations, at least Peter does.--Jasper Deng (talk) 20:24, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
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)
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)
Ditto, and I will do so today, once I get back to my pc. --Peter Talk 19:13, 13 January 2013 (UTC)


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)

I've made the request, and emailed the appropriate documents. --Inas (talk) 23:25, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
The request was declined as the above discussion was improperly done. --Rschen7754 23:38, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
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)
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)
Totally, not a big deal, we'll revote and all will be good  :) – cacahuate talk 02:41, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
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)
This is just a matter of formalities because access to CheckUser is a big deal.--Jasper Deng (talk) 03:08, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
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)
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)

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)


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)
Thank you, Peter; that resolves my concerns. -- Alice 23:20, 14 January 2013 (UTC)


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)

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)
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)
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)

Need a hand?[edit]

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)

  • 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)

      • 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)
  • 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)

Checkusers: User:Ikan Kekek user declined[edit]

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)

Checkusers: User:LtPowers user declined[edit]

Checkusers: User:Peterfitzgerald user withdrew nomination[edit]

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)

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)
  1. Support. Peter is a trusted, and identified member of the community. --Inas (talk) 00:37, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  2. Supportcacahuate talk 01:16, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  3. Support - Tom Holland (Xltel) (talk) 01:27, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  4. Support. Globe-trotter (talk) 01:33, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  5. Support. Jpatokal (talk) 01:44, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  6. SupportRavikiran (talk) 01:53, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  7. Support, under protest; it's absurd that we have to do this separately. LtPowers (talk) 02:14, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  8. Support. I don't understand why my previous vote of support was declared invalid. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:18, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  9. Support. --RegentsPark (talk) 02:31, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  10. Support, again. K7L (talk) 03:05, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  11. Support sumone10154(talk) 03:09, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  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)
    I don't think you are pointing to the right email... Snowolf How can I help? 12:51, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
    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)
  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)
  14. Support --Alexander (talk) 07:07, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  15. Support. Jjtk (talk) 07:13, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  16. Support. --Saqib (talk) 07:15, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  17. Support--Ymblanter (talk) 08:16, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  18. Support Again.jan (talk) 08:18, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  19. Support --Avenue (talk) 11:44, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  20. Support -Shaundd (talk) 15:33, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  21. Support Rogerhc (talk) 17:24, 14 January 2013 (UTC)


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)

  • 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)
  • Support. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 07:53, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. A really excellent nomination. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:55, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Andre is an excellent candidate. --Alexander (talk) 08:31, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. I impressed by Andy's consultative and iterative style. Perfect fit for this site. --Inas (talk) 08:57, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
  • Support K7L (talk) 14:24, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
Well, they say "write what you know". :) -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 20:38, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
  • Support. Unlikely to go berserk and feature disneyworld as dotm. :) --RegentsPark (talk) 17:34, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Pashley (talk) 17:55, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Trusted cyrfaw (talk) 02:36, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support -Shaundd (talk) 04:51, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support AHeneen (talk) 15:02, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Ypsilon (talk) 05:04, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - Is a valued member of WV and will make an excellent Administrator! - Tom Holland (Xltel) (talk) 00:32, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support -- sats (talk) 13:49, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Jpatokal (talk) 03:20, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Globe-trotter (talk) 03:26, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support --Rschen7754 09:06, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Supportcacahuate talk 20:44, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • SupportRavikiran (talk) 18:43, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Curtaintoad 10:33, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - Knowledgeable and hard-working user who would do well with the tools. JamesA >talk 13:36, 29 January 2013 (UTC)


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)
  • 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)
  • 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)
  • Oppose. More experience needed. INeverCry 21:29, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose Per above --cyrfaw (talk) 02:57, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
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)
  • 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)
  • 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)
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)
  • 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)

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

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)


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)

  • Support Good work especially in Africa. jan (talk) 15:05, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
  • Support. No question about it. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 17:38, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Quick look and can't see why not. --RegentsPark (talk) 18:31, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
  • Support I am surprised to know that you are not admin yet. --Alexander (talk) 20:46, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support sumone10154(talk) 20:48, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
  • Support. For some reason I also thought you already had the extra buttons. -- Ryan • (talk) • 21:36, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Long term contributor, valued, overdue. --Inas (talk) 21:54, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Pashley (talk) 23:01, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support -Shaundd (talk) 04:48, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Ypsilon (talk) 05:04, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Why not? --cyrfaw (talk) 10:54, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support --Avenue (talk) 14:12, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - Tom Holland (Xltel) (talk) 00:25, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support -- sats (talk) 13:48, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Jpatokal (talk) 03:20, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. I already thought you were an admin! Globe-trotter (talk) 03:26, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Supportcacahuate talk 20:44, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Sertmann (talk) 15:36, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support You aren't an admin already? Why not? — Ravikiran (talk) 18:44, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Curtaintoad 10:36, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. I totally thought you were already an admin! PerryPlanet (talk) 03:38, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - Very adept user who should've become an admin long ago! JamesA >talk 13:35, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

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)

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)


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)

  • Support. He's an experienced editor, who somehow joined the project in 2003, and we clearly need more hands on deck. --Peter Talk 21:15, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support, What I have seen has been good. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 21:22, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Pashley (talk) 00:22, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support --cyrfaw (talk) 05:06, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:13, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. When I see his name on my WP watchlist, I smile, because his edits always help make the wiki a better place. A very safe pair of hands. --Avenue (talk) 12:27, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. sats (talk) 13:44, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Jpatokal (talk) 03:20, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Supportcacahuate talk 20:44, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support --RegentsPark (talk) 14:52, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
  • SupportRavikiran (talk) 18:47, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - Tom Holland (Xltel) (talk) 03:12, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Curtaintoad 10:41, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Result: Confirmed. LtPowers (talk) 18:49, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

User:Rschen7754 for temporary admin[edit]

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)
  • Support Rschen is doing some fine work and is highly clueful and trustworthy. Snowolf How can I help? 17:03, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support This is really a no-brainer, and it needn't be just temporary, either. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:14, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • (For the record, I have accepted the nomination.) --Rschen7754 17:19, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
  • Strong Support Why ever not? -- Alice 19:00, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 19:41, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
  • Support, for the record. --Peter Talk 21:16, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
  • Support. Pashley (talk) 23:02, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Trusted in the English Wikipedia --cyrfaw (talk) 10:55, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - see no need for temporary - permanent would look good sats (talk) 13:47, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
Clarification: support as permanent admin. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 21:51, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Supportcacahuate talk 20:46, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support --Jasper Deng (talk) 05:30, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Curtaintoad 10:39, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)

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)

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)


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)

  • Support. Felix has an amazing ability of explaining things in the most humble and detailed manner. --Alexander (talk) 20:04, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
  • Support sumone10154(talk) 20:45, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
  • Support -- sats (talk) 02:52, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Jpatokal (talk) 03:20, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Long overdue. jan (talk) 07:24, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 12:53, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 18:26, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Supportcacahuate talk 20:44, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support --cyrfaw (talk) 06:14, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support --RegentsPark (talk) 15:15, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support I'm surprised to learn he isn't allready Sertmann (talk) 15:35, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - Tom Holland (Xltel) (talk) 03:07, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Curtaintoad 10:44, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. You mean he isn't already an admin?! PerryPlanet (talk) 03:36, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. What Inas said. -- Ryan • (talk) • 01:49, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Result: Confirmed. LtPowers (talk) 16:46, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)


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)

  • 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)
  • Support Of course. Already doing great work. --RegentsPark (talk) 19:37, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 19:39, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Great you like it here. jan (talk) 19:42, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support You have done very good work here. --Alexander (talk) 20:45, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support sumone10154(talk) 20:49, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support, and the switch was already flipped ;) --Peter Talk 21:16, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
  • 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)
  • Support. Pashley (talk) 23:02, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:22, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support -Shaundd (talk) 04:48, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Trusted --cyrfaw (talk) 10:54, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - trusted user across the WM spectrum. --Varnent (talk)(COI) 00:10, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. --Avenue (talk) 09:53, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. -- sats (talk) 13:45, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Jpatokal (talk) 03:20, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
    • 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)
      • 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)
        • 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)
          • 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)
            • As would I. --Rschen7754 19:34, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
            • 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)
              • Which, to be frank, would be laughed at on every other WMF site. --Rschen7754 19:56, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
                • 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)
                  • 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)
                      • 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)
                        • 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)
    • 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)
      • 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)
        • 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)
      • 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)
        • 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)
  • Support. Provided that Snowolf agrees to use the tools in line with local policy – cacahuate talk 20:44, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support: Purplebackpack89 00:05, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 01:41, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - Tom Holland (Xltel) (talk) 03:12, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
  • Support. Curtaintoad 10:41, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

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)


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)

  • 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)
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)
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)
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 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)
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)
luxo:Chihonglee. There's many other tools available, such as sulutil:Chihonglee. --Rschen7754 07:02, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
  • 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)
Seconded. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 10:46, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)


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)

  • 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)
  • Support He was asking for the rollback button. Let's give him the mop instead :) — Ravikiran (talk) 17:44, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
  • Supportcacahuate talk 00:03, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
  • Support. -- Ryan • (talk) • 01:49, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Pashley (talk) 04:29, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 05:40, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Kind and focussed on the real issues. jan (talk) 08:55, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - nominators and other supporters comment show this is a worthy candidate sats (talk) 09:24, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Globe-trotter (talk) 15:33, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support --Rschen7754 20:39, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Good editor Travel Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 12:02, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Why not? cyrfaw (talk) 01:56, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. --Saqib (talk) 09:40, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
  • Support. --Avenue (talk) 10:54, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Support -- Tom (Xltel) (talk) 16:31, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

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)

User:Jmh649 (Travel Doc James / James Heilman)[edit]

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)

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)
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)
  • 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)
  • Support - I'm having deja vu. Did you apply for temporary adminship before? JamesA >talk 13:03, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
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)
  • Support. I support you, too. I've noticed how you've been instrumental during the entire process of integrating Wikivoyage into the Wikimedia family. Your roundup of your record on Wikimedia amply clinches your case. Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:35, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Pashley (talk) 13:37, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. --Avenue (talk) 14:36, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. sats (talk) 14:38, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
  • SupportRavikiran (talk) 15:40, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Support per Ikan. --Peter Talk 19:13, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Support • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 20:46, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Support cyrfaw (talk) 02:04, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Supportcacahuate talk 05:12, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Great transition work and hopefully some travel stuff to follow. jan (talk) 10:13, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Support --RegentsPark (talk) 19:13, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Support -- Tom (Xltel) (talk) 16:34, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
  • SupportAHeneen (talk) 03:58, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Support -- Alice 01:06, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Support K7L (talk) 04:10, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Seems to be a good editor here. Curtaintoad (curtain or toad) 06:22, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

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[edit]

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

  1. Supportcacahuate talk 01:16, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  2. Support - Tom Holland (Xltel) (talk) 01:28, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  3. Support. Globe-trotter (talk) 01:33, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  4. Support. Jpatokal (talk) 01:44, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  5. SupportRavikiran (talk) 01:54, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  6. Support, under protest; it's absurd that we have to do this separately. LtPowers (talk) 02:14, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  7. Support. I don't understand why my previous vote of support was declared invalid. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:18, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  8. Support. --RegentsPark (talk) 02:32, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  9. Support, again. K7L (talk) 03:05, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  10. Support sumone10154(talk) 03:09, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  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)
  12. Support. Well, hey, now I get to vote ;) --Peter Talk 06:40, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  13. Support --Alexander (talk) 07:07, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  14. Support. Jjtk (talk) 07:13, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  15. Support. --Saqib (talk) 07:16, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  16. Support--Ymblanter (talk) 08:16, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  17. Support jan (talk) 08:19, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  18. Support --Avenue (talk) 11:45, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  19. Support -Shaundd (talk) 15:33, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  20. Support Rogerhc (talk) 17:25, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  21. Support --cyrfaw (talk) 05:35, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
  22. Support Riggwelter (talk) 15:32, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
  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)
  25. Support MarkJaroski (talk) 20:30, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  26. Support SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 20:38, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  27. Support Ypsilon (talk) 05:04, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
  28. Support sats (talk) 13:51, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
  29. Support. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 18:29, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  30. Support. CURTAINTOAD! TALK! 09:04, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
  31. Support. PerryPlanet (talk) 03:39, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
  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)
    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)
    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)
    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)


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)

  • Support Excellent history at the English language Wikipedia. Nick-D (talk) 10:12, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support per Nick-D --cyrfaw (talk) 11:05, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support We need all the experienced admins we can get. Pashley (talk) 14:00, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
  • 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)

*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)

*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)

  • 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)
  • But should they be, when you're facing the exact same vandalism as other WMF sites? --Rschen7754 02:04, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
  • 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)
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)
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)
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)
That is very possible. I will pay special attention to SatuSuro's work. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:36, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
  • 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)
  • 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)
  • @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)
    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)
  • 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)
    • 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)
  • 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)
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)
  • 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)
  • Support. Curtaintoad 10:43, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
  • 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)
  • 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)
  • 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)
  • 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)
  • 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)
  • 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)
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)

  • 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)
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)
  • 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)
  • 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)
  • 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, 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)
  • 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)
  • 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 - 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)
  • 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)
  • 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)
  • 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)
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)
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)
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)
  • 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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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 :-)
  • 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)
I see only ONE outstanding oppose from cacahuate above - or have I missed something again? -- Alice 07:32, 14 April 2013 (UTC)


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)

  • 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)
  • 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)
  • 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)
  • 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)
  • 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)
  • Strong support Great candidate and will do well as a permanent administrator. --Curtaintoad curtain or toad 08:27, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Suport per all above comments. --Saqib (talk) 08:44, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - An obvious choice. Texugo (talk) 11:35, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Support --cyrfaw (talk) 22:43, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
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)
  • 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)
    I'd prefer to see some content contributions first. --RegentsPark (talk) 01:12, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
...and on a similar rationale (crosswiki experience), to boot. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 01:54, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
I certainly dispute that a single objection is enough for a nomination to fail, especially one so opposed to precedent as this one. (And one so frankly bizarre, given that "RegentsPark" himself proposed [23] that Rschen7754 be made a permanent admin.) Consensus is not unanimity. Furthermore, the addition to the above list that is being interpreted as some sort of travel writing requirement was added recently without discussion, and I sincerely doubt that there would be support for such a criterion, as some of our most valuable admins have had minimal work in that field. The fact that Rschen7754 is already a valuable admin, the objection, coming from a user who has been inactive for years following a pretty dismal history of interaction here, makes me even less likely to consider this an objection that should hold up a nomination. I'll start a discussion about this, anyway. --Peter Talk 15:43, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
Consensus isn't the threshold for approval according to current policy - per Wikivoyage:Administrators#Discussion a criteria for a successful nomination is that "there are no outstanding objections". Also, the "pretty dismal history of interaction here" is pretty harsh, particularly given that the user in question was given unanimous support during his/her admin nomination: Wikivoyage:Administrator_nominations/Archives#User:.28WT-en.29_Wandering-- Ryan • (talk) • 15:54, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
That was prior to the interactions I'm referring to. I would not support such a nomination today. I will also start a discussion recommending that we resolve admin nominations by consensus. --Peter Talk 16:19, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
My point is straightforward. A wiki is primarily driven by its content contributors and understanding the needs of these content contributors is an essential part of the job of an admin. He or she cannot do that if they've never contributed content. Putting ad-hominem arguments to one side, it seems like a reasonable position to hold. We have a particularly free spirited wiki in wikivoyage (spend enough time on Wikipedia and you'll see what I mean) and that is partly because most editors here have a commitment to adding travel content. We should try and keep it that way. --RegentsPark (talk) 16:46, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Has been helpful and knowledgeable in all ways that are relevant for admins on Wikivoyage, and will be particularly useful as an admin since he can provide insights about tools and processes we may not be aware of based on his admin experience at Wikipedia. -- Ryan • (talk) • 05:44, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Jjtk (talk) 17:00, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment: Peter says "Consensus is not unanimity." How is consensus different from unanimity? My impression is that this site functions a bit like the League of Nations, and may ultimately stop functioning, on the same basis the League of Nations stopped functioning - because a single objection ended any action. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:46, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
I've always taken "consensus" to be roughly equivalent to "a clear majority". Unanimity requires, as a condition of any final decision being made at all, that there be no outstanding objections. Consensus, as I've taken the concept to mean for us at Wikivoyage, merely implies that any objections have to be duly noted and accommodated to the greatest degree possible when crafting the final decision, even if the objecting minority isn't always completely placated in the end. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 18:18, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
In practice consensus, as distinct from unanimity, has meant all but one agree ;) Our consensus policy also explains that simply objecting without providing a valid rationale doesn't count. Determining that a rationale is not valid requires looking at precedents, discussions, and policies. --Peter Talk 18:28, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment: I am just amazed that there is this much discussion over either User:Rschen7754 or User:SatuSuro. let alone opposition to either. To me, promoting both just seems completely obvious given that both have done enough here to indicate good intentions and both are experienced wiki admins, which very few of the rest of us were at the time of promotion. Pashley (talk) 18:55, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
    I'm not sure being an admin on Wikipedia is a great qualification for being an admin here (as Peter would doubtless agree) :) but, for the record, most of this discussion is unnecessary. --RegentsPark (talk) 19:13, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - It's good to have content edits to demonstrate understanding of our policies, but I think it can also be shown through policy discussions and how touting, vandalism and other unwanted edits are handled. Based on what I've seen, I support Rschen being a permanent member of our janitorial team. -Shaundd (talk) 04:48, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Result: Confirmed as administrator on a permanent basis. LtPowers (talk) 15:07, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
That's a relief. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 15:18, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

I have noticed an uptick in the amount of spam lately. As the northern hemisphere summer is approaching, doubtless a number of admins will be going on vacation and may have limited internet access or limited time to spend online. So I believe this is an opportune time to select more admins. There are a number of good candidates. I am proposing two below. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:06, 7 June 2013 (UTC)


Saqib was using a template, "Busy," which went through the Vfd process and was deleted. Yet he did not depart from the site in a huff, but instead, continued to work hard, never asking for anything in return. He has done so much outstanding work, for example in articles about Pakistan. You can see his contributions here: [24]. I have checked with Saqib, and he is willing to serve as an admin and would like admin tools to help combat spam. I think he is a great user, a great person (I know him only through this site), and would be a great admin. What say you all? Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:06, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

  1. Support Pashley (talk) 22:48, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
  2. Support Does good work and can communicate. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 07:18, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  3. Support Trusted candidate. curtaintoad | chat me! 11:32, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  4. Strong support for this tirelessly hardworking candidate. It's a bonus that he is able to bring fluency in languages other than English (eg:Punjabi and Urdu) to his tasks. -- Alice 12:20, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  5. Support - A great candidate who will do much great work for this site. Giving Saqib the tools will only ensure the continued smooth running of Wikivoyage. James Atalk 12:31, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  6. Support I thought Saqib already was an admin. Ypsilon (talk) 12:34, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  7. Support sats (talk) 13:45, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  8. Support jan (talk) 20:52, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  9. Support DerFussi 15:06, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  10. Support -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 16:14, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  11. Support --Andyrom75 (talk) 16:15, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
  12. Support. --Peter Talk 18:02, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
  13. Support - User is very helpful and knowledgeable. TCN7JM 22:15, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
  14. Support - A great Wikivoyager; I'm sure he'll do great things as an admin too. --Nick talk 22:58, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
  15. Support --Alexander (talk) 20:21, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
  16. Support --Rschen7754 20:22, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
  17. Support JuliasTravels (talk) 20:25, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
  18. Support Danapit (talk) 06:50, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Done by User:Peterfitzgerald. --Rschen7754 19:38, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
Many thanks to all those who participated in my request for adminship. I was surprised at the turnout and support I got and I am deeply humbled and honoured by your trust. --Saqib (talk) 18:33, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

User: Seligne[edit]

Seligne is another outstanding user. She has done a large amount of great work on articles about Thailand and Cambodia, many of which before her arrival were either very thin on information, touty, or/and written in bad English. She has also maintained the articles by reverting spam, touting, and just plain poor writing whenever she's seen them. I believe Seligne would benefit from having admin tools that make it easier for her to revert spam and block spammers, and she has expressed willingness to serve if we make her an admin. You can see her contributions here: [25] Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:06, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

  • Support Pashley (talk) 22:48, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Support With some good edits, and it's about time for this user to be an admin. curtaintoad | chat me! 11:34, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - Seligne should be lauded for her regular maintenance work and curation of Southeast Asian articles. She would definitely benefit with the tools and continue to improve our site. Thanks for all your hard work. James Atalk 12:31, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Superb work on Southeast Asian articles indeed! Ypsilon (talk) 12:36, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Support sats (talk) 13:44, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Strong support for this prolific and accurate editor. As an added bonus, her diplomatic skills mean that she can be trusted to gently correct and not bite the newbies.... -- Alice 14:35, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Support very kind, detailed work, great attitude, so strong support. jan (talk) 20:50, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Support per all of the above. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 16:14, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. --Peter Talk 18:02, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - Great contributor to the site. --Nick talk 23:05, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - Seligne has done a lot of great work on Wikivoyage. --Alexander (talk) 20:20, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Support --Rschen7754 04:59, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Done by User:Peterfitzgerald. --Rschen7754 19:38, 21 June 2013 (UTC)


This user was nominated before, see the long messy discussion at Wikivoyage:Administrator_nominations/Archives#User:SatuSuro. A major concern there was insufficient history of edits in WV main space. I think that is now resolved, see [26], so I am re-nominating him. Pashley (talk) 22:59, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

  • thanks for your confidence sats (talk) 13:43, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Support --Rschen7754 23:01, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
    • Note: candidate has indicated that he will be away for a while due to lack of Internet access. --Rschen7754 23:37, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
      • just to clarify from transit in Dubai, when I return to Australia, no editing and no access at least till after 17th at least. sats (talk) 13:39, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
      • further travel (sic) delaying regular editing again, probably till late June sats (talk) 09:07, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Support I agree that SatuSuro's qualifications for being an admin at Wikivoyage are stronger now. He has my full confidence and I am sure that he will do a great job if given the chance. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:35, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Supported then and support now. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 01:00, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Still support • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 07:18, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Trusted and well candidate. I have seen this user in welcoming newcomers, working in discussions; among doing other content work. So it's time for this user to be an administrator. curtaintoad | chat me! 11:38, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - If he is interested, why not? Ypsilon (talk) 12:39, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Unqualified support. -- Alice 14:35, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - Quickly checking over his contributions, Sats has definitely proven himself since the last nomination of being a great candidate for adminship. James Atalk 14:42, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Good work and kind attitude. jan (talk) 20:47, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. --Peter Talk 18:02, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - Welcomes many people to site and a very good contributor. --Nick talk 23:08, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - A good Wikivoyager. --Saqib (talk) 12:00, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
Done by User:Peterfitzgerald. --Rschen7754 19:38, 21 June 2013 (UTC)


Since joining the project six months ago Nick has made an outstanding number of contributions, from the new Main Page design to the Wikivoyage:Tourist Office to the Wikivoyage Twitter account, and probably many more things that I'm overlooking. He's active, knowledgeable, and has indicated a willingness to wield the awesome power of the shiny buttons. -- Ryan • (talk) • 23:37, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

  • Support. --Rschen7754 23:53, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Pashley (talk) 01:06, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Strong support. This user has, IMO, made a real splash. In six short months, Nick has gone from merely impressing me with his enthusiasm to being one of the more fully engaged members of our community in terms of policy proceedings, approaching sometimes contentious issues with a calm, reasonable, and levelheaded demeanour - all the while working tirelessly to improve a wide range of articles, especially (aside from the contributions Ryan already named) our coverage of UK destinations and the Airport Expedition, in which he has played a key role. In sum, I can name very few people I'd trust more than Nick with the admin tools who don't already have them. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 01:30, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Very good contributions for a rather "young" contributor. jan (talk) 07:54, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 08:23, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Of course, a perfect candidate for the tools :-) JuliasTravels (talk) 10:07, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Good user with good contributions. --Saqib (talk) 10:12, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support No doubt! Danapit (talk) 10:27, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support per above --cyrfaw (talk) 10:45, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support An intelligent, reasonable, creative and genuinely nice guy - but heck, that shouldn't be an obstacle --W. Franke-mailtalk 10:46, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Globe-trotter (talk) 11:32, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you all very much for your very kind words - I'm honoured to be nominated. :) --Nick talk 16:55, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support and thumbs up! ϒpsilon (talk) 17:26, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Strong support. I've been meaning to nominate Nick for a while. In addition to the reasons given above by Ryan and Andre as to why he is such a trusted and valuable user, there's a pretty strong reason for giving him the extra gunk—he regularly has reasons to edit protected mainspace and MediaWiki pages. Heck, he designed our Main Page! --Peter Talk 21:48, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
  • As someone not really involved in Wikivoyage much, I would like to note that this user seems very qualified to be an admin. I've seen him around, and he seems to be an asset to Wikivoyage. So I Support (if I am allowed to vote) PiRSquared17 (talk) 03:08, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support As mentioned above, Nick is a great asset to Wikivoyage and I have not seen any reason to doubt his trustworthiness as an administrator. AHeneen (talk) 07:51, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Great hands-on contributor and always friendly. Comes up with great ideas too. -- torty3 (talk) 02:18, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Great nominee, for the reasons stated above. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:51, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. For the reasons stated above. --Alexander (talk) 06:11, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - Although I'm very hesitant to name new admins, I can't resist supporting Nick. He has contributed to this project significantly and it would be very different without his hard work. He would use the tools efficiently and appropriately. James Atalk 06:48, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - Heck yeah! Nick's been a great help, and I was honestly surprised to find out he wasn't already an admin. PerryPlanet (talk) 07:32, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - Unquestionable support. I thought he was already an admin. Texugo (talk) 19:26, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Nomination successful, someone flip the bit please. --Saqib (talk) 19:06, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Two weeks from nomination is July 24. Please, have a bit of patience, and trust that a 'crat will tend to the bit-flipping in due course. If a couple of days have passed beyond the 14-day discussion period, then you can send a polite reminder message. LtPowers (talk) 19:16, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
Ops. I thought its 24th already. Really sorry. --Saqib (talk) 19:19, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
Not that it makes a difference, but where Saqib is, it is already July 24. Texugo (talk) 19:26, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
Texugo, It is 12:30 AM right now here and my computer calendar showing July 25th so it was a mistake. I got confused. --Saqib (talk) 19:34, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Result: Nomination successful. -- Ryan • (talk) • 23:36, 24 July 2013 (UTC)


I've been meaning to nominate both Nick and Torty3. While someone else stole my fire above, I'll still get one in ;) I'm about to leave on a mini-travel, so to be brief, look at User talk:Torty3#Thank you for a few reasons why I think Torty is a fantastic contributor. I also think he (or she?) is trustworthy, and needs the buttons: Torty is our en lead for dynamic maps development, and needs to be able to edit protected MediaWiki pages regularly. I've been trying to make those changes upon request, but am usually hours late, which is a waste of Torty's time. --Peter Talk 22:43, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

I take it that I'm making too many requests on the admins :) I've been trying to keep it to a minimum, but it would undeniably be easier to make changes and also correct mistakes if given access, so I accept the nomination. I'm caught up in exploring technical aspects because of the dynamic maps right now, so I'll be comfortable helping out on both feature development and content in the future. -- torty3 (talk) 06:17, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support for the reasons so cogently stated by User:Peterfitzgerald. --W. Franke-mailtalk 09:13, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 13:03, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose for now. I truly want to support this RfA, as I'm pretty sure Torty3 would do fine with the tools but I think that the candidate should be more experienced with more edits. --Saqib (talk) 15:44, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
    Torty3 has over 1000 edits on the English Wikivoyage. Is there a particular number you're looking for? Keep in mind that Torty3 would have more edits if Torty3 didn't have to ask admins to perform certain tasks. LtPowers (talk) 18:26, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
    Looking at Torty3's qualifications per Wikivoyage:Administrators#Becoming an administrator, the only guideline that does not clearly apply to him/her is "a track record of at least a few months". Torty3's first contribution to Wikivoyage is datestamped April 18th, 2013 January 20th, 2013; careless mistake on my part. While it's not unreasonable to describe that length of time as "a few months" (depending on how "a few" is defined), it's true that his/her contribution history is of a somewhat shorter duration than the usual nominee for administrator. But look at the diversity of those contributions. They span every facet of Wikivoyage, from policy discussions like this one, to minor grammatical fixes, to template work, to addition of content to articles. I think it goes without saying that the best way to familiarize oneself with Wikikvoyage is to put one's fingers in as many pies as possible, and Torty3 is easily one of our most well-rounded contributors. Add that to the fact that s/he is uncommonly skilled and enthusiastic about contributing to the behind-the-scenes technical work that keeps the site up and running, which goes over the heads of even many seasoned Wikivoyagers - certainly over my head - and that, in fact, his or her nomination springs from a need to engage in that type of work in a less encumbered fashion, and it becomes clear that the shortness of Torty3's tenure as a Wikivoyager thus far is of marginal importance. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 20:29, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
    I think Saqib's original concerns were valid, and I considered it carefully even before accepting this (somewhat sudden) nomination. But as Andre put it very kindly, I've explored many different bits of Wikivoyage, out of necessity for the expedition and out of curiosity, and I feel that I have a pretty good working knowledge of the site to help improve it further. I would like to start back on content soon, but dynamic maps are also fairly important to me and there is only so much time. -- torty3 (talk) 02:01, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. User has a six month edit history and around a thousand contributions, has been involved in policy discussions, and has a demonstrated need for admin rights per Peter. -- Ryan • (talk) • 20:10, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Ticks all the boxes and can make good use of the tools. An edit count only says so much anyway; quality matters more than quantity. Keep up the good work, Torty. JuliasTravels (talk) 22:03, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Torty has been doing great work, and really could use the buttons! His/her contributions on the technical field are very valuable to the project. Globe-trotter (talk) 22:08, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - a great user who has made some excellent contributions to the site. I'm sure Torty would make a brilliant admin. --Nick talk 03:26, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support AHeneen (talk) 07:53, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support for the reasons stated above. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:27, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. I am impressed by Torty's work, and I am sure he will make good use of admin privileges. --Alexander (talk) 06:09, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Strong support - Torty3 has been very helpful and industrious and will undoubtedly use the tools responsibly. Texugo (talk) 19:26, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Support ~ curtaintoad ~~ talk ~ 07:25, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

The community given support to Torty's nomination so lets give him the admin privileges and close this nomination. --Saqib (talk) 14:37, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Result: Nomination successful. -- Ryan • (talk) • 04:33, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


Danapit has been with us for six months, and right from the start has been jumping in with cleanup and administrative tasks, as well as cogently and eloquently contributing to policy discussions... exactly the sort of person we need on the administrative team. I think it's time for some more responsibility. What say you? LtPowers (talk) 19:03, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

I am honoured ;) --Danapit (talk) 20:07, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Support. Danapit is one of the most outstanding users here. If she is willing to accept this nomination and pick up a mop, I certainly would support her in that. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:08, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

  • Support Best activity of the week!jan (talk) 19:13, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - I've seen nothing but good stuff from this user. Texugo (talk) 19:41, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Good luck! JuliasTravels (talk) 20:53, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. I've seen nothing from this user but active, constructive community engagement and content work of the highest quality. Danapit will be an excellent addition to our admin team. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 21:15, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - A brilliant contributor to site who would make a great addition to the janitorial team. :) --Nick talk 21:57, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Support • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 06:18, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - Great combination of need and trust. --Saqib (talk) 06:37, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - sure! We had a great collaboration districtifying Helsinki and adding geocodes to listings a few months back and Danapit is doing a lot of valuable work here everyday. ϒpsilon (talk) 18:02, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. --Peter Talk 04:28, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. We haven't really crossed paths, but the contribution history makes the nomination reasons obvious. --Inas (talk) 04:16, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Friendly and great contributor. -- torty3 (talk) 11:29, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
I have been asked to clarify my earlier equivocal statement of support and this I am happy to do:
  • Support with the only slight reservation that she does not seem to have made a distinction between Tony's critical (and admittedly acerbic) analysis of faults in processes and cultures here and actually being abusive to individual editors when commenting on Tony's proposed 3 day ban. Ideally, I'd prefer to promote admins that are able to analyse and apply our current written policies and not move any further down the road of censorship of comments (that are not abusive, profane, blasphemous or libellous or contrary to other specific policies) in WV or User namespaces. I have seen some religious Wikis that seem to be able to function with heavy censorship and a complete lack of humour, but they're the exception. --W. Frankemailtalk 20:58, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Support with the reservation that she does not seem to have made a distinction between Tony's critical (and admittedly acerbic) analysis of faults in processes and cultures here and actually being abusive to individual editors when commenting on Tony's proposed 3 day ban. Ideally, I'd prefer to promote admins that are able to analyse and apply our current written policies and not move any further down the road of censorship of comments (that are not abusive, profane, blasphemous or libellous or contrary to other specific policies) in WV or User namespaces. If she genuinely thought that Tony was a troll rather than the erudite, perceptive and concerned reformist Wikipedian he claimed to be, then his non-article namespace edits could simply have been ignored. I have seen some religious Wikis that seem to be able to function with heavy censorship and a complete lack of humour, but they're the exception. --W. Frankemailtalk 14:48, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Support --~ curtaintoad ~~ talk ~ 07:58, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Friendly and clearly a great contributor to the site. PerryPlanet (talk) 04:22, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Result: Confirmed as Administrator LtPowers (talk) 15:39, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


JuliasTravels is an experienced user and I was surprised to learn she was not an admin yet. She contributes to discussions in focused, logical and constructive way and I am sure she would be a very good admin. As JuliasTravels is now working hard on recreation of skeleton articles, delete button would be a useful tool for her.

Thanks for the confidence and nomination, Danapit :) The job of admin never sounded all that attractive to me, to be honest, as I'm not a particular fan of mopping in daily life ;-) However, a delete button would indeed be handy now and I would also be glad to participate in RC patrol again, something I used to do until that utility was turned off for non-admins. JuliasTravels (talk) 12:11, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Support, per above. Danapit (talk) 10:56, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. I thought she was already an admin! Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:15, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. JuliasTravels is a very experienced user and she's done an awful lot of good work on here - a very worthy nominee! --Nick talk 11:19, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Support, I am happy to back this candidate. --Saqib (talk) 11:21, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Silly oversight of me focusing on the deletions and not the proper obvious solution. -- torty3 (talk) 11:29, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Support • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 11:44, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Support wholeheartedly. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 13:58, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - courteous, good judgment, fine contributions. An obvious choice. Texugo (talk) 16:44, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Seems like a sensible and hard working editor that's not too thin-skinned. --W. Frankemailtalk 21:00, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Support ϒpsilon (talk) 08:42, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Support --~ curtaintoad ~~ talk ~ 07:58, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - I've very confident will put the tools to good use. --Inas (talk) 22:17, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. What everyone else said. PerryPlanet (talk) 00:34, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Nomination successful, someone flip the bit please. --Saqib (talk) 20:30, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Result: Nomination successful. -- Ryan • (talk) • 20:44, 19 October 2013 (UTC)


Andrew is a great Wikivoyage editor, with an excellent contribution history in his wake. He's been very active at both combating vandalism and contributing to policy discussions as well as editing our articles themselves. With that in mind, I think he's very worthy of the WV-brand mop and bucket. --Nick talk 03:38, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

  • Strong support, Andrew has been doing great a job here and if he is interested in becoming an admin he has my full support. ϒpsilon (talk) 05:27, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Question: what do you think is the state of Wikivoyage? Where do you think the project should be going, what problems need to be addressed, etc. ? --Rschen7754 06:23, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
WV is at a fortunate point right now. It has been able to grow over the last couple of years to an extent that it is demonstrably a superior offering in terms of both content and technical execution. More recently its Google page rankings have improved a great deal and it can become a leading travel guide for the web.
It does however have organizational issues in terms of consensus building towards content and policies. Although there are no easy answers, the community is proving itself strong enough to ask the difficult questions of itself now. Ideally the resolution handling groundwork needs laying now so that we can comfortably scale to double the number of contributors should they appear.
I believe that WV could also improve greatly by growing content in the regions of Africa and South America. It would be great to promote some outreach to potential contributors in those regions. This might involve greater interaction when such contributors work on an article for a short while. China is also a huge country with high traveler potential that seems to get relatively little attention from local contributors, and I know from living here that the Chinese will make a huge impact on world travel in the coming years. Andrewssi2 (talk) 12:03, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
IMO, this kind of optimistic yet pragmatic attitude is exactly what WV needs. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 22:32, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Strong support. I have had the pleasure of working closely with Andrew on a number of contentious issues of late, and I can personally attest to the fact that he knows his stuff and is worthy of our trust. He is an asset to the Wikivoyage community already and would similarly be an asset to our admin team. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 06:40, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Support If Andrew's willing, I think he's an excellent candidate. JuliasTravels (talk) 11:22, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Support — I thought you're admin already. I appreciate you were helping us at Wikivoyage:User ban nominations as an regular user. --Saqib (talk) 11:33, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Support to this trustworthy contributor. You will be a valuable member of our janitorial team! Danapit (talk) 12:19, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - A very good choice. Texugo (talk) 14:09, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Support. I've actually thought of nominating him for some time, but had held off on nominating anyone while issues like consensus and when and why to block problematic users were thrashed out. However, Andrew has helped thrash out these issues, and since he's willing to act as an admin, I think we should welcome his offer and take him up on it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:20, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
  • 'Support. I've thought about this for a few days now, and this is where my !vote falls. I was quite troubled by the candidate's push to rangeblock an entire ISP, as that would have caused significant damage to the site. But in the end, the candidate has generally been reasonable, and I believe this would be a net positive, especially per Ikan. --Rschen7754 18:42, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Support, since any misgivings about being overly quick to "hang 'em high" were allayed by this response. (I reserve the right to remind him of it later). He also wrote there that he had "the relevant technical skill set to create Spambot rules" and I do think we need to start preparing now for the deluge that has been inundating Wikitravel for some while... --118.93nzp (talk) 20:49, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
Time to flip the bit. --Saqib (talk) 11:05, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Result: Nomination successful. -- Ryan • (talk) • 16:46, 30 January 2014 (UTC)


Jamie is responsible for a great number of excellent contributions on Wikivoyage, combined with a proven track record of dealing with policy discussions and vandalism. As a fellow Brit, he's been particularly helpful when I've tried to make improvements to our articles about the United Kingdom. I believe he'd make an excellent addition to the janitorial team. --Nick talk 19:36, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

  • Question: what do you think is the state of Wikivoyage? Where do you think the project should be going, what problems need to be addressed, etc. ? --Rschen7754 19:54, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Support — Although I never actually noticed Jamie in policy discussions but I still believe he would be a good addition to our admin team. --Saqib (talk) 20:01, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Hmm. I'm seeing a fairly impressive contribution history in mainspace, but I agree with Saqib that there's not been active participation in policy discussions up to this point. I'm not going to oppose this nomination outright, but before I can support it I would need to see a demonstration that the user is familiar with Wikivoyage policies. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 20:27, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Doesn't a user's good contributions in main namespace articles depicts user familiarity with WV policies? Jamie contributions so far clearly shows that xe's familiar with our policies. --Saqib (talk) 20:35, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
"Policy" encompasses a lot of different things, some of which can be sussed out by work in mainspace, others which are best learned through interaction with other members of the community in discussions on policy pages. For instance, knowing how to properly write for Wikivoyage, or even knowing what to look for in eliminating vandalism, etc., wouldn't help a user very much in making a policy-informed argument on a page like, for instance, vfd. That being the case, I don't want to assume what Jamie's level of expertise may be in any aspect of policy. It may very well be that s/he has indeed read some of our policy pages or otherwise familiarized him/herself with those types of policies that can't be intuited from simple content contributions. What I'd really like to see before I register a vote of either yea or nay is some feedback from the user so that some of these blanks can be filled in. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 22:11, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment ThunderingTyphoons! has made great contributions, but I would like him to please make his case for why he believes he would be more valuable as an admin than by continuing in his current capacity as an excellent autopatroller user. I am neither opposing nor supporting the nomination at the moment but would just like some more information. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:20, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Not yet. The user's mainspace contributions are greatly appreciated and I hope they will continue, but the lack of contributions in policy discussions, and the lack of response to concerns raised in this nomination, seem to indicate to me that at this time it would be better to hold off on pushing this nomination forward. If the user is simply on vacation or for some other reason hasn't had time to reply then that obviously changes this response, but given the silence since this nomination was made a week ago and the concerns raised about familiarity with site policy I would be uncomfortable supporting this nomination at this time. -- Ryan • (talk) • 00:43, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Comment: The candidate has demonstrated at Talk:United_Kingdom#British_or_American_quotation_marks his ability to discuss civilly and productively "policy". --118.93nzp (talk) 21:16, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
What do you mean by "O edits in namespace"? The namespace totals in the linked chart seem to total 570. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:20, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
0 edits in the Wikivoyage: namespace, that is. --Rschen7754 01:20, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Noting that I would likely support in the future with some additional experience in sitewide policy discussions. --Rschen7754 19:53, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Tentative support: the fact that this editor beavers away and accepts policy without dispute, may actually be a "good thing" if we are genuine about this being a janitor's role rather than a police position. This editor hasn't been around for a week or so since he was alerted to this nomination and the fact that he writes that he is not "...some kind of fame- and power-hungry narcissist..." may make a refreshing change. --118.93nzp (talk) 01:49, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Not yet. While I value Jamie's contributions a lot and also Nick's opinion, I agree that I haven't seen much of contributions from Jamie in policy discussions, so I find it difficult to judge his degree of familiarity with our polices. This makes me saying not yet right now. This might be a little unfair, because I don't think that every admin must necessarily discuss policies, but it is one way to show one's readiness to become an admin, I guess. As I work in different WV areas, I haven't cooperated with Jamie yet. 118.93nzp showed examples of Jamie's productive way of discussion. I have a gut feeling Jamie is on a good way to become an admin in a near future. Danapit (talk) 12:04, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Result: Not yet. -- Ryan • (talk) • 03:21, 5 February 2014 (UTC)


I'd like to nominate WOSlinker for administratorship on Wikivoyage. WOSlinker has been with us since 18 January 2013 and has done quite a bit of Wikignomish work to keep our articles in line with our policies concerning layout and manual of style. WOSlinker has also demonstrated the ability to work well with and communicate with others, especially in the technical area of Module/Template coding, and has held administrator rights on the English Wikipedia since 25 August 2010. A stellar addition to the Wikivoyage administration team. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 20:42, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

  • Procedural note: the candidate has accepted at their talk page. --Rschen7754 20:54, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Support. WOSlinker has proven him-/herself with a large amount of extremely valuable work. If s/he feels that having admin tools will help him/her work more smoothly and effectively, I'm happy for him/her to be given them. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:53, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Support If this bot super productive fellow Voyager would like to have administrative tools to become even more productive then why not. Especially as WOSlinker also already has experience of adminship at Pedia. ϒpsilon (talk) 21:02, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

  • Support not only for his abilities here, but from what I've seen of his work on the English Wikipedia for years. --Rschen7754 21:03, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment — While I truly admire User:WOSlinker contributions (general maintenance) but I'm sorry for not being supportive to this nomination until WOSlinker start contributing content as well. Otherwise WOSlinker is doing great and could be great admin too. --Saqib (talk) 21:04, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
    • I have done some, although I'd admit that there has not been a lot. The general maintenance that I've been doing is starting to draw to a close, or at least a reduced level as a lot of the "easier" (for me) tidy up work is nearly done. So I have been thinking about what to look at next. While there will still be some tidying up that I'll be doing, I've also been looking at adding stuff to see in the UK and there's a list of about 380 places on Doing an exteral links search shows that only about 70 of those places are listed here, so I'm going to add the rest and also update the existing ones. -- WOSlinker (talk) 22:15, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
In that case, here's my Support vote for you. --Saqib (talk) 11:33, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Pashley (talk) 23:15, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Support WOSlinker is working hard in the background. Danapit (talk) 07:02, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Support sats (talk) 10:33, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - An excellent member of the WV community. --Nick talk 11:46, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - Excellent organizational work. Texugo (talk) 12:24, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Support No doubt about WOSlinker's ability to add content, plenty of good work done in other fields. JuliasTravels (talk) 21:18, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - per above. Seen only good history from this user... --Goldenburg111 (talk) 21:22, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Absolutely Support - Frank nominates Frank to be an administrator? Too funny to not get behind this business! At some point the Frank admins will outnumber the nonfrank admins & he'll have what he's after. SpendrupsForAll (talk) 22:54, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
You're courting a userban with this behavior. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 06:32, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

14+ days since the nominations and no Oppose votes. ϒpsilon (talk) 10:56, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Result: Nomination successful. -- Ryan • (talk) • 14:46, 24 March 2014 (UTC)


I nominate Saqib (contributions) to get his admin tools back. Most of you undoubtedly know that Saqib was an admin, and it wouldn't surprise me if many of you believe he still is. He is a gracious and extremely helpful and motivated person. One time, he let a confrontation get to him and I was one of the people who felt at that time that it was necessary for him to lose his admin status over that incident. Since then, his behavior has been exemplary, and he has continued to do a lot to improve and even promote this site. In addition, he has posted great photos to Commons for articles on places in Pakistan, and quite a number of them have been honored as "Valued images." He is a diligent mapmaker, is happy to handle the changeover of featured articles on the front page when User:AndreCarrotflower is unavailable, and is in many ways a go-to guy for all kinds of useful tasks. But there are things he can't do right now, like block vandals and spammers, which would help the site. I think Saqib has amply earned the return of his admin tools, and he has agreed to resume being an admin if we so choose. What say you all? Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:07, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

  • Strong support - Saqib is a great contributor to this site and we owe a lot to him. The return of admin tools is very well deserved. --Nick talk 13:36, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - See the statements above. -- DerFussi 14:07, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - Trusted user. --Varnent (talk)(COI) 14:18, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Andrewssi2 (talk) 14:20, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support, I wanted to suggest the same, only IK acted faster. --Danapit (talk) 14:47, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - Joachim Mey2008 (talk) 15:05, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - Texugo (talk) 15:08, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - Everyone makes mistakes, and aside from one incident all of his other actions have been exemplary of what an admin should be. -- Ryan • (talk) • 15:15, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Pashley (talk) 16:22, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - WOSlinker (talk) 18:49, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 19:23, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Unsure. Unfortunately, this is not like a usual admin nomination, for which all of the above would be outstanding reasons to support. Since this is a renomination, the operative question is whether Saqib has learned from the mistake he made and has resolved to avoid similar mistakes in the future. Once we receive such an assurance/explanation, I'd be happy to support, as I think the de-sysopping was probably an overreaction anyway. Powers (talk) 20:30, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
Yes, it was my fault that I had stepped on toes when not meaning to. But anyhow, I've learnt from my mistake and I'll try not to get too emotionally attached with conflicts here. I'll seek to be careful and ensure you to always act with consideration in future. --Saqib (talk) 21:18, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for your response. I can support your nomination, but do understand that you may be watched closely for a time. (Not by me, though.) Powers (talk) 18:06, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Powers question was appropriate, and Saqib response has been in both words and actions. --Inas (talk) 23:17, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - About 5 weeks ago we had some page-move vandalism. Saqib acted promptly and did his best to fix it by moving the pages back, but because he did not have admin tools he was unable to move them without leaving redirects from rubbish pages, which required double-handling as other admins had to mop them up. We need Saqib to have the mop again, IMO. Nurg (talk) 08:46, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support I believe Saqib has learned and grown since that time and has done a lot of work in the meantime to prove his value. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 12:42, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Strong support. The word I think best describes Saqib is "prolific". Not only is he, pound for pound, the best content contributor this community has, but he's also constantly hard at work Wikignoming and, during his first stint as admin, was among our most active. The proof of the pudding is that even after he lost the admin tools, his participation in the day-to-day behind-the-scenes aspects of the project barely abated. As Ikan pointed out, he's always game to update DotM when I'm out of town (and sometimes when I'm not!), as Nurg pointed out, in spite of the fact that he didn't have access to the tools he was still front and center in the cleanup effort after the recent page-move vandalism spree, and he was instrumental in the development of the latest iteration of the Main Page - among many, many other examples. A lesser contributor may have let his hurt feelings drive him away from the project, which leads me to my next point: his unfailingly collegial and cooperative attitude is just what the doctor ordered in a community where strong and divergent opinions have often led to fractiousness. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 00:41, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Strong support no doubt about it. --Andyrom75 (talk) 07:22, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Yes of course Travel Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:55, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Gobbler (talk) 17:06, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Lkcl it (Talk) 07:41, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - Just how could anyone possibly say no? We all know that Saqib is doing splendid and valuable work here every day both when it comes to the articles themselves as well as more administrative stuff. ϒpsilon (talk) 17:06, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Result: Nomination successful. Powers (talk) 14:34, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Many thanks to all those who participated in my RfA. I am deeply humbled and honoured by your trust. --Saqib (talk) 14:40, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

User:Texugo (for bureaucrat)[edit]

Currently LtPowers and I are the only active bureaucrats, and I'm going to be traveling for an extended period later this year. While the workload on bureaucrats is generally very low, we really should have at least two active at all times in order to handle renames, WT contribution merges, and admin promotions, so per Wikivoyage talk:Bureaucrats#Revisited I'm nominating Texugo. He's been an active contributor and admin for years, has the required technical knowledge to deal with issues like renames (see Wikivoyage:Maintenance panel for an example of his technical handiwork), and is definitely trustworthy and competent enough to handle the job. -- Ryan • (talk) • 02:03, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

  • Support as per above. -- Ryan • (talk) • 02:03, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support. Absolutely trustworthy and up to the job. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:31, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 03:24, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Good choice jan (talk) 06:36, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Pashley (talk) 14:33, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support — A fine admin and I'm pretty sure could be excellent bureaucrat. --Saqib (talk) 16:17, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support --Nick talk 16:57, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support --Andyrom75 (talk) 05:29, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Accept - Thank you for your support. Texugo (talk) 11:14, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - highly unlikely to go flipping bits willy-nilly. Powers (talk) 01:12, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support. Very trustworthy. Danapit (talk) 05:39, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - Per all of the above. ϒpsilon (talk) 16:59, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Texugo is a long-time trusted contributor. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 05:01, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
  • BTW now it's been two weeks and two days since the nomination. Powers? Ryan? ϒpsilon (talk) 04:12, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Result: Nomination successful. -- Ryan • (talk) • 04:55, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


As you can see from his contributions and the list of activities and areas of contribution on his user page, Traveler100 has participated in a wide range of fields on this site, from policy discussions to organizational discussions to content creation, in the course of thousands of posts since 24 December, 2012. He has expressed willingness to serve as an admin, and I think it's clear he can be trusted not to abuse admin tools. I appreciate his contributions to the site and believe that he would be an excellent addition to the administrative staff. What do you all think? Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:12, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Support PrinceGloria (talk) 17:33, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - yup, he'll be a good admin. ϒpsilon (talk) 18:33, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - I have no doubt they can be trusted with the buttons. --Inas (talk) 20:11, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - he's been a tremendous help with a number of maintenance tasks and other things, no reservations here. Texugo (talk) 20:36, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - Good level of community participation and many article edits. Andrewssi2 (talk) 00:03, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support — How could I say NO. I was the one who suggested this candidate. I believe you will be a great addition to team. Best wishes from Pakistan! --Saqib (talk) 00:09, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - lots of great work on articles, maintenance and policies -Shaundd (talk) 15:36, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support why not? Jianhui67 (talk) 16:04, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support, me too! --Danapit (talk) 10:05, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support I've had little personal interaction with this candidate but the nomination by Ikan Kekek made me check his contribution record. This is outstanding and generates no suspicion that he would abuse the tools - which is certainly more than can be said of some inactive and monomaniacal Admins... --W. Frankemailtalk 10:28, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support — Long overdue. K7L (talk) 13:13, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 14:34, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support -- Of course. JuliasTravels (talk) 19:00, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support --Nick talk 21:45, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

It's been over 14 days with nary an objection. Could a steward please flip the switch? Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:09, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

No need to call in a steward (and they wouldn't do it anyway because we have bureaucrats). I've asked before for everyone to please have patience when it comes to these user rights; we're not on at all hours of the day, and sometimes it takes us a day or two to check in on the nominations page. There's no need to call us out every time we're 12 or 24 hours late. Powers (talk) 15:41, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Result: Nomination successful. Powers (talk) 15:42, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Ah yes, I forgot about Bureaucrats and was misremembering you as being a Steward. Anyway, I wasn't being impatient, just posting a reminder. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:55, 21 September 2014 (UTC)


User:Ibaman has made a wide variety of valuable contributions throughout this site, including loads of janitorial work reverting edits in violation of Wikivoyage policies including vandalism, touting and external links and tour policy violations, showing that he understands the rules and guidelines on this site thoroughly; listification and other structural and stylistic improvement of existing articles; contributing new content; and participation on dotm and Talk page discussions. The contributions by User: are also by him.

I think that particularly his already extensive and very effective janitorial work shows that Ibaman is trustworthy and would use the additional tools he'd get as an Admin judiciously and helpfully. He has indicated a willingness to acquire some more tools for patrolling.

To anticipate one possible demurral: Given the length of time Ibaman has participated on this site and the types of edits he's made, I don't think that the non-huge number so far is an important reason not to make his good job a little easier by making him an Admin. He's never shown the slightest indication of having any desire to injure the site, only to help it, and I can't see that changing. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:44, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Speaking for myself, I want to express my thanks for the nomination, and the support already manifested, it's an honor and I'll do my best for the benefit of our fellow travellers. My account is much younger than my activities. I've been around voy, at en: and pt: since day one, having gained editing experience when we were at the old site before IB took it over. Saqib has pointed out not seeing much of mine at policy discussions and actions other than janitorial daily mopping, which is true; most of the time, I tend to care less about arguing policy points than about complying and enforcing whatever consensus is reached about them. However I remember having said things that mattered on the discussion about military tourism, and would like to boast a little about some heavy bricklaying work done on the St. Petersburg districtification (IPs,, and were me as well), and also on the Brazil Expedition led by Texugo before last World Cup.
Almost every working day, I keep an open browser tab on our Recent Changes page, always watching and taking proactive actions whenever necessary. You can count on it. Ibaman (talk) 14:10, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • PS - after a little chatting with Saqib, I think I must express in very clear terms that my chosen name comes from IBAMA, my workplace, the Brazilian environmental protection federal agency, and has nothing whatsoever to do with Internet Brands.
  • Support by nominator. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:44, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Week support — No doubt, he's doing amazing yet tiring job, cleaning-up the mess. But I may have some concerns because I never seen him in policy and other dicussions other than making reverts, perhaps I've missed to note his participation in discussion since he was editing under IP for more than a year. But yes, I think he need admin tools especially roolback rights as he's choosed to become a janitor. So a little vote of confidence from Pakistan to Brazil. --Saqib (talk) 02:53, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Support and here is at least the IP Ibaman used when helping out with Fortaleza. Ps. also see the talk page of that IP. ϒpsilon (talk) 05:05, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Why not? Jianhui67 (talk) 05:07, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Support His edits are consistent with those of an Administrator. I would encourage more community participation however. Andrewssi2 (talk) 05:26, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Support - Always trustworthy, and while he may not have participated in community discussions very much here, his participation in them has at times been much appreciated over on pt:, so I know he's on level. Texugo (talk) 11:11, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Support - I was not certain, since I did not recognise the name when he or she was nominated, though a quick peruse of some contributions gave a favorable impression. Texugo's comments tip the balance to clear support. Pashley (talk) 13:19, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Result: Nomination successful. -- Ryan • (talk) • 16:17, 9 April 2015 (UTC)


User:Illinoisboy18 – I know what an administrator is supposed to do, and I have the confidence that an administrator should have. Illinoisboy18 (talk) 20:16, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

No, does not meet any of the criteria listed above. This nomination is his only contribution so far. Pashley (talk) 20:34, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry; who? Can we speedily delete this thread, as this nomination is frivolous and no-one will vote for it except the boy himself and perhaps some random vandal? Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:57, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
I would not object. Pashley (talk) 20:58, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
No need to waste much time here... Danapit (talk) 21:02, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Result: Speedily archived as frivolous. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:04, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Prof. Manna (User:Prof tpms)[edit]

I have edited Wikivoyage 5,815 times and have contributed 119 pictures to Commons. I have 1,416 live edits on Wikipedia including 133 articles created. My knowledge of Wikivoyage policies is good. Kindly allow me to serve Wikivoyage more as an administrator. Prof. Manna (talk) 00:54, 18 December 2015 (UTC) My user ID is prof_tpms

Prof. Manna, as you know, I've followed your contributions closely and appreciate them. But before we pass judgment on whether you should also be an admin, I think you should answer the following questions: Have you engaged in any policy discussions? Have you done any janitorial jobs (reverting spam and touting)? If not, what else do you want to do as an admin that you don't already do? Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:59, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
Thank you Ikan Kekek (talk) for the quick response. Yes, I was active in janitorial work and many of my edits reverted spams and touting. In fact, I give great value for keeping Wikivoyage clean and useful. I have read the policies extensively and have involved in policy discussions quite frequently as you can see in my talk page. Regards, Prof. Manna (talk) 01:05, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
What your user talk page shows is that others have had discussions with you about the application of Wikivoyage policies to edits you've made. Can you give a listing or some examples of posts you've made on policy discussion pages? Also, give some examples of edits you've done to revert spam and touting. Users don't automatically get promoted (demoted?) to admin (janitor) based purely on number of edits. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:37, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Dear Ikan, I quote the following paragaraphs from my talk page to show my activity in policy discussionsː Addresses and directions

Hi, Prof. I waited a little to bring up a new topic on your user talk page, because I don't want to deluge you with too much stuff to think about, but let's talk about addresses and directions now. An address in a Wikivoyage listing should be a street address. If that's not possible, Wikivoyage:Geocoding is best, all-round. P.O. Boxes are totally useless in finding a place and should not be given in lieu of street addresses, because the "address" tab is about finding the place, not snail-mailing someone there.

As for directions, x, y or z km does not constitute directions, because while it says how far someplace is (presumably from the town centre?), it says nothing about how to get there.

For a travel article to be usable, all the places that are listed need to be clearly reachable solely by consulting that article, not by attempting to find the crucial missing information somewhere else.

What's your sense of what makes a listing truly usable for someone reading who plans on visiting a given town?

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:13, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Very useful advice. Kilometre information is given to help the traveler choose the nearest. Once the km is given it is easy to negotiate with an autorikshaw driver. I will also add 'near...' for confusing places. I give Street addressees, but in India street name is not useful for main streets because for kilometres on end the same street name is used. That is the logic of giving so much prominence to km information. regards, Prof tpms (talk) 04:27, 14 May 2015 (UTC) Kindly revert your revert of Feroke hotel listing because I have removed the name of a second hotel accidentally clubbed with another hotel. Prof tpms (talk) 04:28, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

   I don't know which revert you're referring to, but please go ahead and edit anything as appropriate. I get your point about the number of kilometres. The thing is, there are very long streets in many places, but are there no address numbers in towns in Malabar? I mean, here in Manhattan, you can find 1 Broadway and 3000 Broadway, and then Broadway continues into the Bronx and all the way north to Sleepy Hollow, but there's no mistaking the street addresses because of the numbers. If there really are no numbered addresses, the best solution, if possible, really is Wikivoyage:Geocoding. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:28, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Ikan Kekek Dear Ikan, The numbering system is followed in some Indian cities of big size. In other places, a landmark is used to locate the place. That is why I give so much importance to the km information in case of properties which are landmarks themselves. Regards, Prof tpms (talk) 08:39, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

   I understand. But let's keep in mind that not only an autorickshaw rider but a driver in their own or a hired car that they're driving should be able to find the locations in question; otherwise, the article isn't really usable. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:42, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Well, for an outside driver I may be required to say '2 km towards the so and so road'. I don't know whether people can follow leads like east and west. Prof tpms (talk) 09:08, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

   x-number of kilometres from the centre of town along Y Road is a helpful instruction. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:16, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Exactly. It is implied that the traveler stands in front of the railway station or the city centre which are usuallly the same in India. Prof tpms (talk) 09:17, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

   This kind of thing might be good to explain in India#Get around if it isn't already explained there (I'm not going to check right now). Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:33, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I have checked that especially the paragraph about 'Addresses'. There also the same opinion is repeated. All Indian properties have door numbers but they are given in the order of registration and not location wise. So completely useless for searching purpose. Landmarks are useful provided they are updated every year because Indian businesses of larger size have the tendency to go bankrupt and close because of Soviet style taxation. Prof tpms (talk) 09:44, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

   I see. Tokyo has a similarly opaque address numbering system, based on how old each building on a given street is. Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:07, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

My next objective is to create the district page for Kasaragod Prof tpms (talk) 14:13, 15 May 2015 (UTC) Prof. Manna (talk) 06:24, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

I'd recommend that you go by the name User:Prof tpms. I had no idea who Prof. Manna was, and therefore the application appeared to be from a new user. Andrewssi2 (talk) 06:37, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
Prof, as I said, that constituted a discussion with you about the application of Wikivoyage policies to edits you've made. Policy discussions that admins or people applying to be admins are expected to engage in would apply to the entire site. An example off the top of my head would include the recent discussion on Wikivoyage talk:Region article template, starting at "Rethinking region articles - request for feedback". Do you have any edits in Wikivoyage space, as opposed to edits on destination articles, talk pages for them, user talk pages, your user page and the Pub?
I will say right now that I don't think anyone is too likely to second your nomination to be an admin, but I've tried to indicate to you why that is. Admins are not only expected to know and enforce policies but to engage in discussions about whether and how policies should change, and whether aspects of the site should be reorganized. You've done a lot of work on your region of India, but there are a lot of other corners of the site (and I don't mean geographic regions) that you haven't explored. Have you ever looked at dotm, to take one example? And do you read the Pub regularly or look often at Requests for comment? Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:17, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Ikan Kekek, It is the strong urge to get involved in policy matters that one wants to be an administrator. As about Janitor work, pages on India have a shortage of people to look after them and do the necessary cosmetic touches. I think I have a role. Regards, Prof. Manna (talk) 07:30, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

I think that the most important thing you can do is continue your work creating and editing articles about Kerala and nearby places. But if you really want to become an admin, get more active in reverting spam and touting, and otherwise editing out touting as a regular user, and look at some of the other areas of the site to interest yourself in policy and organizational discussions. I should emphasize that admin is _not_ a more important role than content creator. It is the content creators who are of most basic worth to this site. Of course, the roles can overlap. But as I understand it (perhaps some other admins may disagree), the primary roles of admins are to enforce policies and help organize the site. It's no insult to you to say that you are most useful as a content creator, and that it would be best for you to do nothing that would stanch your productivity, regardless of its effect or lack of effect on an eventual promotion(?) to admin. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:37, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Dear Ikan Kekek, I understand you perfectly well. Editors and contributors are in a more advantageous position to help Wikivoyage. I only felt that pages on India are not getting sufficient attention because of Wikivoyage having smaller number of Administrators taking time for this region. It need not be me, we just want more hands here. Regards, Prof. Manna (talk) 08:01, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

I think the main problems with articles about India are not due to ongoing editing but the current state of the articles. I've been patrolling new edits to articles about India pretty carefully, and other admins and non-admin users have been helping too, including User:Saqib. I and some collaborators have detailed a lot of the issues in Wikivoyage:India Expedition and its sub-pages, though I haven't kept up with your edits of articles about Kerala, and I'm less than halfway through updating the sub-pages that haven't been updated since last December (Wikivoyage:India Expedition/Madhya Pradesh would be next).
Several users — most of them not admins — have made great contributions to improving numerous articles about India, including User:Matroc, User:DaGizza and User:Gobbler. In addition, User:Ypsilon, User:Matroc and User:Ibaman were among the people who did a lot of good work along with me to make Jaipur good enough for a Destination of the month feature, and User:Ravikiran r, a longtime admin by the way, has been doing a lot of work on Udupi, among other articles. If you'd like to help more in fixing deficiencies of articles about India, please have a look at the India Expedition page, and get to work. You don't need to be an admin to help. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:38, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose -- This self-nomination remind me of this. While, I'm not against self-nominations but in this case, I'm. Though User:Prof tpms has been making a a lot of efforts to improve Indian-related articles but yes as far I can feel he's not yet ready for administrators job. IK has very well gave the explanation that one not need to be an admin to improve articles. Professor I hope you will keep your valuable work and don't get disappointed. Thank you! --Saqib (talk) 10:53, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
I support Saqib's point of view for the moment. Ibaman (talk) 11:36, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment - Nice to see you take an interest, Prof. Manna, and you've been making great additions. I'll be happy to support you in the future, if you've become more involved in the "administrator" kind of tasks. At this moment, I think you're misunderstanding the administrator task a bit. Articles and regions are improved by good editors; whether they have administrator buttons or not makes no difference at all. To be an administrator, you need to show that you have a good understanding of how our policies work. You're doing excellent work in expanding articles, but since you have not yet participated in any general policy discussions, we can't really judge. Looking through some of your recent edits, I get the impression that maybe you're not familiar with all of our policies yet. Take for example Beypore. You recently moved that article to Beypore Beach because, you say, the beach is the only important attraction. While that may be true, and while it would be perfectly fine to create a redirect for Beypore Beach, it is not our policy to name articles after their main attraction. Also, if you do move a page, you're supposed to fix the article title and the incoming links. Don't worry: it's not a big problem, we will change it back. These kinds of edits do show however, that you are not yet aware of all our policies. I'd like to suggest you read some more of them, apply them and start participating in general discussions. Then, in a few months, I'm sure you'll find plenty of support here! Keep up the great work! JuliasTravels (talk) 13:43, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you all for the comments on my edits even though there is some criticism. I believe in learning from such pieces of advice. With regards, Prof. Manna (talk) 13:51, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

  • Not yet This user's contributions are hugely appreciated, but at this time I don't think the contribution history demonstrates that the additional capabilities provided by administrator status would be needed. In the future, when the Professor has done more work in crafting Wikivoyage policy and patrolling edits, this nomination should be revisited. -- Ryan • (talk) • 16:15, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Result: Not yet. -- Ryan • (talk) • 02:02, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Ikan Kekek for Bureaucrat[edit]

As I'm the only active bureaucrat at the moment, I would like to nominate Ikan Kekek to assume the same responsibilities. Even though we can always fall back on stewards for bit-flipping tasks, I think it's nice to have local bureaucrats who understand the community and local consensus. Ikan is undoubtedly trustworthy and probably the most level-headed active editor here, myself included. His record as an administrator is sterling and I absolutely trust him with the power to add and remove admin status. What say you? -- Powers (talk) 17:10, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

  • Full support from my side. The community needs active bureaucrats. --Alexander (talk) 17:22, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Full support. Simply put, Ikan is the epitome of a trustworthy editor. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 17:36, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Full support -- Matroc (talk) 18:06, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Full support. I have never seen Ikan type an unreasonable thing. --ButteBag (talk) 18:12, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Full support. Ikan is active enough, and has always been very sensible. --Bigpeteb (talk) 18:28, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Support Very active member here and has shown good judgement in the past. —Justin (koavf)TCM 19:52, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Full support --Andrewssi2 (talk) 21:20, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Full support -- I've disagreed with Ikan on a number of content issues, but have found him to be reasonable and respectful. Ground Zero (talk) 22:16, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Support -- Shaundd (talk) 02:21, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Support -- --Traveler100 (talk) 03:11, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment: I'm touched by everyone's support and kind words. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:28, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Strong support - Power made the right choice. Best wishes to you IK but just be careful not to block or desysop someone in haste by assuming that the account is hijacked. [27]. --Saqib (talk) 11:58, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Good point. I'll be careful not to do that. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:18, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Support. –Davey2010Talk 14:37, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Support. Great and trustworthy editor. --Zerabat (talk) 15:54, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Strong support before he comes to his senses and ducks out of the way. :) K7L (talk) 16:00, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Strong Support excellent and committed editor/admin to the 'voyage who will do a great job as bureaucrat. Gizza (roam) 22:09, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Support. Nurg (talk) 11:13, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Support. Globe-trotter (talk) 15:34, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Full supportStellarD (talk) 17:03, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Support --Drat70 (talk) 06:29, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Support -- WOSlinker (talk) 12:55, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Support -- Pashley (talk) 17:47, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Support - of course. JuliasTravels (talk) 13:51, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
Time to flip the bit @LtPowers:? --Saqib (talk) 13:56, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
  • support if I haven't already, let me say once more that Ikan Kekek is a splendid user and we can be glad to have him. Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:09, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment: Thank you, everyone. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:41, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Support Good candidate, would make a good crat. I hope I'm not late for the party. Ikan Kekek has my full support. Jianhui67 (talk) 16:14, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
  • SUPPORT - Everyone knows Ikan is an invaluable Wikivoyage contributor who's been patrolling and editing here pretty much every day for several years. Just flip that bit already! --ϒpsilon (talk) 16:40, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Support /Yvwv (talk) 07:59, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Full support Danapit (talk) 12:20, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Result: Approved. Powers (talk) 20:33, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

User:Ground Zero[edit]

User:Ground Zero quickly established himself as a valuable user and has continued to be very active and helpful ever since his first edit last January (user contributions here). He's shown a strong commitment to improving the site in the interest of travelers and has been involved in just about every aspect of the discussion and activity that take place here. He's had some disagreements with me and one or two other folks on just how much content to cut in streamlining articles; that's well within the normal range of differences among people of good faith (I consider the disagreements between the two of us not much more than marginal, myself). You can see at User talk:Ground Zero#Admin? that he has agreed to serve as an admin if the rest of us want him to. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:31, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

  • Support as nominator. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:32, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Support --Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:38, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Support - per nom. --Saqib (talk) 06:20, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Support per nom. Will be an excellent admin. Gizza (roam) 12:36, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Support Fantastic! --ButteBag (talk) 14:08, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Support per nom. Will be a great admin. –Davey2010Talk 18:26, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment - Is the relative lack of votes an indication of a lack of enthusiasm? There have been no negative votes so far, but I'm not too comfortable with a 6-0 vote as a consensus; are 7 votes required? But please keep the context in mind: We need more admins. If any of you lack strong confidence in the nominations I'm making, please contact people you would prefer and see if they'd be willing to take on the admin's mop and pail. There are certainly other good choices, but either way, I think we should thank anyone who's willing to take on the work. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:26, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Support Drat70 (talk) 06:16, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment - I believe that the lack of votes is just down to fewer contributors being familiar with Grond Zero's work than (for example) yours. It would be good for some more admins to weigh in. Maybe AndreCarrotflower  ? Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:29, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment - I appreciate the nomination and the support of those who have commented above. I've been an active contributor only since the beginning of the year. If people would rather wait until I have a longer track record, I won't be offended. Ground Zero (talk) 11:33, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
In consideration of the fact that Ground Zero giving more time to Wikivoyage instead of his home wiki Wikipedia where he's admin, I am comfortable with giving him mop and bucket. He's an experienced Wikipedian and I am pretty sure he will make a great Wikivoyager as well. Until we see some sort of opposition in this nomination, we shouldn't be hesitant to switch the bits. --Saqib (talk) 16:30, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
  • I was holding off on voting here, because I find the issue of draconian content streamlining that Ikan brought up in his introductory remarks to be a legitimate concern. However, upon further reflection, I suppose that's not an issue that has much to do with the sysop tools per se. I'll support this nomination. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 16:47, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Support -- WOSlinker (talk) 12:55, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Support -- Pashley (talk) 17:49, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Support -- Matroc (talk) 18:30, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Support -- JuliasTravels (talk) 13:52, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Support -- Ibaman (talk) 19:52, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Support Jianhui67 (talk) 16:15, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Support --ϒpsilon (talk) 16:46, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Support Danapit (talk) 12:22, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Result: Approved. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:57, 26 June 2017 (UTC)


As you can see from looking through User:DaGizza's output, he has been an extremely helpful and prolific editor. Most of his edits have been of the "wikignoming" type, though a more thorough search will show participation in policy and organizational discussions in the Pub and in vfd. I would think everyone would trust him to use admin tools wisely, and he has expressed enthusiasm about helping to combat vandalism and picking up the slack from the admins who have resigned.

  • Support as nominator. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:26, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Support --Andrewssi2 (talk) 05:41, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Support --Drat70 (talk) 06:20, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Support an experienced Wikipedian who could be a great addition to WV community. Your contributions were missed last year. I hope you will be more active from now on. --Saqib (talk) 16:34, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
    • Yes I was busy IRL last year and wasted time on other things but my life is more settled now. I'm also trying to move beyond maintenance and gnoming towards more content creation. Gizza (roam) 01:59, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Support. I've been following DaGizza's Wikivoyage activities for some time now, and have consistently liked what I've seen. He will make a fine administrator. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 16:49, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Support -- Ground Zero (talk) 23:28, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Support -- WOSlinker (talk) 12:55, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Support -- Pashley (talk) 17:49, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Support -- Matroc (talk) 18:30, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Support -- JuliasTravels (talk) 13:53, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Support -- Ibaman (talk) 19:52, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Support -- –Davey2010Talk 14:27, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Support Jianhui67 (talk) 16:16, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Support --ϒpsilon (talk) 16:44, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Support Danapit (talk) 12:23, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Result: Approved. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:57, 26 June 2017 (UTC)


When ThunderingTyphoons! was nominated 4 years ago (see Wikivoyage:Administrator nominations/Archives#User:ThunderingTyphoons!), it was felt by a number of voters that he should spend more time as a user and participate more widely across different areas of the site. I think you will agree that he has done so: user contributions. He has been extremely helpful, and he has agreed to take up the broom and dustpan if we choose to give him those tools. I think you'd all agree that we could profit from another trusted user having the tools to combat spam and vandalism, and that ThunderingTyphoons! is a trusted, proven Wikivoyager. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:08, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

  • Support. I'm kinda surprised to learn that TT is not an Admin - how on Earth?? May he be very welcome on the Admins' bandwagon. Ibaman (talk) 11:21, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Sure! --ϒpsilon (talk) 11:37, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Also surprised s/he's not an admin. Let's fix this oversight. Ground Zero (talk) 11:45, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Pashley (talk) 11:57, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Will be a worthy addition to our admin team. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 16:27, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Nurg (talk) 23:46, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - Andrewssi2 (talk) 03:58, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Agreed with Ikan Kekek --Inas (talk) 05:17, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Support -Shaundd (talk) 08:02, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Jianhui67 (talk) 14:40, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment Thanks to everyone for expressing their opinion. 14 days have passed since the nomination, and with more than 7 votes in favor and none opposed, I will change ThunderingTyphoons!' status to administrator. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:57, 25 January 2018 (UTC)


Yvwv has been a great contributor to all facets of this site since January, 2013; see user contributions. I wouldn't be surprised if most of you think he (I think Yvwv is a man?) is already an admin; I actually didn't realize Yvwv wasn't an admin myself until I checked his status a few days ago. I believe that all users who are familiar with Yvwv's edits have confidence in him as someone with a clear record of working to improve the site and readily collaborating toward that aim (so not at all intemperate or likely to do rash things with admin tools). Yvwv has indicated that he would accept a nomination for admin. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:12, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the confidence. For the record, I am male. /Yvwv (talk) 00:21, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the confidence. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:51, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Drat70 (talk) 00:52, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Support, of course. --ϒpsilon (talk) 05:28, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Support • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 06:00, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Pashley (talk) 09:34, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment - 15 days have elapsed since the nomination, and as there are a sufficient number of supporting votes with no opposition, Yvwv's status will be changed to Administrator tonight. Thanks to all who voted and expressed their opinions. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:41, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

User:Jay Jay Marcus Keize13[edit]

I nominate myself for being an Administrator of the English Wikivoyage. I understand the policies and guidelines of wikivoyage, and what is expected of Administrators. I have done quite a lot of reverting vandalism, spams, and edited articles that needed attention. I think the Administrator rights would be excellent in my hands—I could get a hold of tools, and do more in reverting vandalisms, and helping Wikivoyage to grow. I am very dedicated to Wikivoyage, and is oline almost every day. Thank You. Jay Jay Marcus Keize13 (talk)

  • Not yet. Before handing out the sysop tools, we really prefer to see a more extensive edit history. That said, you've had a good start here at Wikivoyage - you'd be encouraged to try again in a few months after you've got more experience under your belt. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 14:31, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
  • I think Jay Jay looks a very good candidate for admin-ship, and agree with Andre that we can make a better determination in a couple or a few months. Ground Zero (talk) 14:59, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
  • I agree with you guys on all counts. Jay Jay, you may be an excellent admin candidate in a year or so, but not yet. Have patience. And here's a relevant thread on my user talk page. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:35, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
  • I have to agree with the prevailing consensus that it is too soon in your Wikivoyage career to be considered as an admin. Besides, there are other ways to be more active within the community besides being an admin. If you'd like to become more involved in the running of the site, why not take part in more policy discussions, both at the pub, and elsewhere? Doing so will certainly make you a better candidate for admin-ship in the future. Your contributions to the travel guide are certainly impressive though. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 01:19, 24 March 2018 (UTC)


I nominate SelfieCity who has contributed in the following ways:

  1. Has been a registered contributor since 15 Dec 2017, with 2000-2500 edits
  2. Has learned our policies quickly - in the discussion on deleting the Esperanto phrasebook, s/he based his/her arguments on Wikipedia policies
  3. Has a history of significantly expanding articles, contributing to "guilty_until_proven_innocent" policy discussions, nominating an article as a Destination of the Month and actively participating in discussion of other DotM noms, and combating vandalism/spam by alerting admins
  4. Has a demonstrated ability to work with the community.

Ground Zero (talk) 02:26, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

I thought I was the one who posted about that rule for VfD first. Anyway, I support the nomination and would trust SelfieCity to use admin tools wisely. Ground Zero forgot to mention that SelfieCity has stated a willingness to serve in this capacity (see his user talk page). Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:50, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
Support. Quickly understood the conventions of Wikivoyage and has made plenty of constructive contributions. --Traveler100 (talk) 10:34, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Trustworthy contributor and patroller. Ibaman (talk) 11:44, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Pashley (talk) 13:19, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Support seems like a good and capable candidate Chetsford (talk) 22:06, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
  • I have thought long and hard about whether I should post my thoughts here, because I personally like this user very much, I admire the enthusiasm and dedication s/he has shown thus far in improving the site, and I think s/he will eventually be a very good candidate. And I don't want to dampen that enthusiasm or for anyone to doubt that I'm one of this users' biggest fans. But being honest about the situation, I have to say at this point SelfieCity is just too green, and some of his/her comments e.g. on various DotM nominations as well as premature VfD nominations for such articles as Salsa dancing in Latin America indicate that s/he needs to get more of a feel for the finer points of policy. I would highly encourage a repeat nomination once s/he has a little more experience under his/her belt, but at the present time, in my heart of hearts I have to vote not yet. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 15:01, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
  • I agree with AndreCarrotflower here. I think SelfieCity has made great contrbutions and I appreciate his positive and collaborative attitude. But the recent deletion nomination of a photo hosted on Commons is the most recent of several things that convince me that he doesn't yet have a solid understanding of how things work on Wikivoyage. SelfieCity has become a valuable contributor and I'm sure he will be a good admin in a year or two. But not yet. —Granger (talk · contribs) 01:50, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
  • After reflecting on this a bit more, I have to agree with Andre and Mx. Granger. Understanding the deletion policies and where files are hosted are important things for an admin to know. SelfieCity, if you continue working tirelessly and demonstrating your passion towards the project, you will be an admin in no time but for now I have to say not yet. Gizza (roam) 03:03, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: an administrator does not need thorough understanding of all of our rules. I am still learning how things work here, as in SelfieCity. I would bet that some of the other 14 active administrators would feel that they still have much to learn here. I think that Wikivoyage would be strengthened with more administrators. Of the active editors we have now, SelfieCity is the most committed, and the one who has been involved in the widest range of Wikivoyage activities. Over the next 1-2 years, we can expect that some of our group of 15 will leave or find that they have less time to spend here. Expecting administrators who know things thoroughly and don't make mistakes may limit us to a very small group. Ground Zero (talk) 03:19, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment The folks saying "not yet" have made a good point. Let's give him more time to learn about things like deletion policy and slush this nomination for now. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:47, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Fair enough; as much as I hate to say not yet I do expect candidates show a basic awareness of the history of the project so as to avoid an obvious 'faux pas' in handling sensitive issues. K7L (talk) 02:48, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
  • In view of the content of the discussion in the Pub, I definitely oppose this nomination for now. While I believe SelfieCity has good intentions, that stuff is very serious. I suggest waiting a year or so before we revisit this nomination. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:49, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Not yet. I would like to see SelfieCity develop more experience at WV first. Nurg (talk) 04:00, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Ikan Kekek. As someone who took part in the migration and got legal threats from Internet Brands, I deem the relation to WT a very serious issue that can't be taken as lightly as the candidate does. --Alexander (talk) 17:04, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
  • I would personally say that, at the moment, (while this is somewhat hard to say being the candidate) I would agree with the not yet for my nomination. Recent developments have shown that there's still a lot more I need to know about this website, its general policies, its history, where to contribute and where not to contribute, and those kinds of issues before becoming a administrator of the website, which in de facto is like being on the website's leaders. I still need to a lot more understanding and learning on a lot of these issues, and that I'm far from Wikivoyage's greatest editor/contributor. After all, I've only been active on this website for a couple months in total: the end of December and since April, I think. Selfie City (talk) 00:49, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
There's a lot you still need to learn, but maybe not as much as you think. The fact remains that you've made more progress in your first four months than almost any other Wikivoyager I've seen. I hope you don't let the results of this nomination get you down too much. The philosophy here is "plunge forward", and built-in to that philosophy is the understanding that new users will inevitably make mistakes, that oftentimes the best way to learn is through one's own mistakes, and that it's virtually impossible to make a mistake on this site that's not fixable. You're a valuable contributor, Selfie City, and one thing Wikivoyage needs is more of those. I look forward to seeing you nominated again soon. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 02:23, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Not yet. I wouldn't rush such a nomination, since Selfie City has only had half a year to gather experience on WV which might be too short to understand the numerous sensitivities on WV. I personally don't see involvement with WT as an issue. I'd prefer to see Selfie City renominated in about half a year time, coinciding with their first anniversary on WV! ArticCynda (talk) 08:35, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • In response to AndreCarrotflower, part of the reason I said what I said was to throw out any chance of my nomination now so we can get back to contributing for 6 months - year. Selfie City (talk) 13:25, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Nomination withdrawn' at nominee's request. Ground Zero (talk) 18:54, 11 June 2018 (UTC)


  • I have helped combat Telstra and the Fuerdai vandals.
  • I've contributed to policy discussions and made multiple proposals.
  • I've worked with the community since day one.
  • Been a contributor since May (almost 4 months)
  • I've made 716 edits and written countless articles.
  • I have at least a half-decent knowledge of policy.
  • Yes, let's get this out of the way. I was blocked one time. But I've more than made up for it in my efforts to combat vandalism. User:ThunderingTyphoons trusted me enough to give me the link to none other than the account creation log.

Libertarianmoderate (talk) 23:14, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose, speedy archive - not nearly enough experience or familiarity with policy. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 23:17, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
  • I would say not yet. Give it a bit more time. As you say Libmod, you have a "half-decent knowledge of policy". While nobody is expected to have perfect knowledge, it should be good enough to handle most situations an admin is likely to come across. Also the block and evasion (creating another account) was too soon. And there was the random comment about SJWs on the pub. We've had people on both sides of politics make irrelevant comments and derail discussions on what should be about travel into politics, and in doing so distracting many people from our ultimate goal of making the best travel guide in the world. Gizza (roam) 00:09, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Also, not yet. I give him/her lots of points for enthusiasm and spirit, but would be better tempered with some more experience and knowledge. Ground Zero (talk) 01:59, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose, as noted an enthusiastic start but does not yet understand a majority of conventions of the site. For example currently 13 article that have incomplete definitions or lacking templates created recently by this user. --Traveler100 (talk) 05:45, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose per others. Demonstrate for a year or more that you're a great trusted user. So far, your early history here, while enthusiastic, has been checkered. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:56, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[edit]

  • Has been very active with clean-up of listings for well over a year. Is knowledgable and active editing templates and module code, a skill in short supply here. I would like to tighten edit rights on some templates but still allow to continue editing them. --Traveler100 (talk) 09:25, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure I understand completely. Are you saying you'd like to restrict the editing on some templates to administrators only, and therefore, we have to grant admin status to continue editing them? What about Patroller? Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:58, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Another solution would be good. Do we have another level apart from autopatroller? There are some templates that call templates that call templates and modules that creates a situation a minor tweak to a low level piece of code would change every article page on this site. SOme of these are open to all users to edit, although a closed a few down the other day. If I go into change protection level for a page, options are "Allow All Users", "Allow only autoconfirmed users" and "Allow Only Administrators". Would like to protect a page from confirmed users but acceptable to a few named users. Only way I know is to make them administrators, but open to other suggestions. --Traveler100 (talk) 10:07, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia has a "template editor" user right for this exact purpose (w:WP:Template editor). I'm sure we could set it up here if we wanted to. —Granger (talk · contribs) 10:18, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
If I look at w:Special:Listusers on Wikipedia the "Group" pulldown box has a long list of permissions, including "template editors". If I look at Special:Listusers here, the "Group" pulldown box is missing many of those permissions; there is no "template editors" listed. Do we need
$wgGroupPermissions['template_editors']['editprotected'] = true;
in the server's configuration file to do this? K7L (talk) 15:23, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Looks like a good method. @LtPowers: as the only bureaucrat on this site, I assume you would have to set this up.--Traveler100 (talk) 10:45, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
I'm also a bureaucrat. As I said, there is a status of Patroller. It's distinct from Autopatroller. My question is, would it provide sufficient tools and permissions to enable to do this editing? Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:36, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
What's wrong with creating a new group of user-rights? Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:48, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
It requires an edit to a configuration file on the server, which would have to be done by a Wikimedia system administrator with 'shell' access. As we don't have that level of access, we'd need to get consensus here and open a phabricator: ticket - odds are WMF would make the change, not sure what the leadtime is on such a request (and no, the patroller and autopatrol tags have nothing to do with 'editprotected'). K7L (talk) 21:00, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Raised ticket T198056. --Traveler100 (talk) 16:27, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
@Traveler100, Ikan Kekek: I'm a site requests volunteer (which means, I'm able to do this change for you). Who should be able to add/revoke the templateeditor right? Without explicit consensus, only stewards will be able to do it (which is 100% not wanted). Ping me please in your reply, or post it to Phabricator. I don't watch this page. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:16, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
Martin Urbanec, admins? Or if that's not possible, bureaucrats? Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:29, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. I believe has shown to possess the technical skills required though his numerous contributions to templates and modules, most notably those related to public transport. ArticCynda (talk) 08:40, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Just here to say 'thanks for the nomination', honor! :-) Seems the outcome will be different though - but in any case, I think in the foreseeable future I wouldn't have time to do any administration stuff anyway (unless explicitly asked). I'm mostly interested/busy with the technical stuff around here, rather than spam-monitoring or welcoming/tutoring new users :) But maybe that's what WV needs though, up to you to decide... cheers! (talk) 19:22, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
Resolved - There is now a new user group - template editor, and a new new article protect level - Allow only template editors and administrators. --Traveler100 (talk) 09:35, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
Super! Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:18, 29 July 2018 (UTC)


request for interface-admin rights

I've made changes to MediaWiki:Common.css in the last couple of years, so I'll apply for this right. -- WOSlinker (talk) 06:30, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

  • Support. Unquestionably trusted. Thanks for all your help to date. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:49, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - active, constructive, responsible . --Traveler100 (talk) 05:42, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support no doubt will put the interface-admin rights to good use. Gizza (roam) 13:03, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support per above. --Rschen7754 04:22, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. It's not often that a self-nomination is as unquestionably deserving as this. You'll make a great addition to the motley crew. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 14:53, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 15:05, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support --ϒpsilon (talk) 15:20, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Ibaman (talk) 17:04, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Pashley (talk) 19:18, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Ground Zero (talk) 00:38, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Result - Approved. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:51, 28 August 2018 (UTC)


request for interface-admin rights

I open this request based on the ping here. As all of you know, I am not active on English Wikivoyage, for a long time and for a good reason. Nevertheless, I am watching the site and occasionally edit the interface, especially when it comes to maps and other features that are used throughout different language versions of Wikivoyage. That said, I am ready to continue with this activity, and will be happy to introduce any changes that the community agrees upon. I am watching the wiki on a daily basis and always come when you ping me (like WhatamIdoing just did). On the other hand, I give no promise for becoming a more active contributor at English Wikivoyage, and I will have no problem to close this request if there are enough "local" people interested in becoming interface editors here. --Alexander (talk) 21:32, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Support: You are trusted, regardless of your feelings about English Wikivoyage. Since you'd like to have the power to help, we should give it to you, IMO. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:48, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 15:05, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Thank you for putting yourself forward. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 15:13, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support --ϒpsilon (talk) 15:20, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Long-time trustworthy user. Ibaman (talk) 17:04, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Pashley (talk) 19:18, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Question - What should we do? Normally, noms are open for 2 weeks and I believe it's customary to expect 7 "support" votes if there's no opposition. However, this looks like a consensus. Would anyone else like to voice an opinion about this nomination? Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:55, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Likely a formality as this is just giving admins access that they've always had, but I guess that makes seven? K7L (talk) 05:00, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
Do we all have such access? If so, I don't know. Anyway, thank you, and to be fair, since this nom has been left open so long, I'll leave it open another 24 hours or so, in case someone wants to object. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:02, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Mx. Granger[edit]

Mx. Granger has been updating listings for over two years now. Has also requested deletions and reverted vandalism. I think would benefit from having some more tools available to do those things directly. -- WOSlinker (talk) 13:15, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

  • If Granger wants this nomination, I definitely support their candidature. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 13:33, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Wait a minute, Granger's not already an admin? Let's fix that. Support. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 14:22, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support, of course. ϒpsilon (talk) 14:42, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support, for sure. Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:40, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support, they'd do a good job. K7L (talk) 16:43, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Pashley (talk) 19:18, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Since I'm not an admin myself I wouldn't normally vote here, but this is a user who definitely should have the administrator tools. SelfieCity (talk) 20:18, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
All users have every right to vote on admin noms. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:26, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Ground Zero (talk) 00:38, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support thought Mx. Granger was already an admin. Gizza (roam) 05:48, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Totally. Solid contributor. --Traveler100 (talk) 10:10, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Most definitely. The dog2 (talk) 00:00, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Result: As more than 14 days have passed with a unanimous vote of support, the nomination has been successful. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:38, 13 September 2018 (UTC)


I am not keen on doing patrolling work, so thought I'd have little use of admins' tools – until yesterday morning. It seems I am sometimes here when few others are, so without too much extra work I might be able to sometimes be useful. I have not been combating vandalism and spam, and I do very little of that work at sv-wp, where I have been an admin for a long time (my main contributions as admin there are page moves), but I might do it at times. I also do not have an extensive knowledge of the policies, but I think reading up before doing anything foolish will be no problem for me (I have made active work on them back at sv-wp, and I will honour the differences). Although I have followed policy discussion and admin work only from aside, my contribution in discussion at the pub hopefully show I can handle working with the community.

I will probably be mostly offline the rest of this week, but I thought I'd better start the process immediately anyway.

--LPfi (talk) 16:57, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

  • Support. I think you're selling yourself short. I feel like you've demonstrated a good knowledge of Wikivoyage policy. However, you also know how to find out about anything you're not sure of. More importantly, I think it's clear you can be trusted with admin tools. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:25, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. I see you've been here and active since the WT/WV split in 2012 so you've had plenty of time to look around, find where the toilets are tucked away on the main floor, familiarise yourself with policy and how everything works around here and make some good contributions. Don't sell yourself short. :) K7L (talk) 02:09, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - it would be good to have LPfi able to handle vandalism and other issues that arise. Ground Zero (talk) 04:51, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support agree with above. Gizza (roam) 06:20, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
  • LP would like to be an admin? Support! ϒpsilon (talk) 08:21, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 08:25, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Ibaman (talk) 14:30, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 14:41, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support ARR8 (talk) 03:06, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
  • SupportGranger (talk · contribs) 07:27, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Confirmed by unanimous vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:21, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

User:AndreCarrotflower for bureaucrat[edit]

Over at Wikivoyage talk:Administrators we're in the midst of checking on the status of inactive administrators, and a while ago ThunderingTyphoons said something along the lines of even if we give these folks the courtesy call letting them know their sysop tools are in danger of getting pulled, we still need a bureaucrat to commit to following through. That problem has since been solved, but his comment inspired me to go through the logs and see how many bureaucrats we have - and to my surprise, Ikan Kekek is the only one who is more than marginally active. I think for safety's sake, we ought to have multiple, so I'm putting myself forward as a candidate. You guys all know me: I've been around Wikivoyage a long time, I'm active as all get out, I've taken a leadership role in many different arenas from dotm to vandalism abatement, and back in 2013 you found me trustworthy enough to serve as an admin. So let's hear if we're ready for me to take the next step. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 14:57, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

  • Support with no reservations. Ibaman (talk) 15:02, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
  • SUPPORT!!! --ϒpsilon (talk) 15:24, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support with enthusiasm.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:07, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. I'm glad you're volunteering for this. I fully agree that we could use another Bureaucrat, so that we have a better chance of promoting (demoting?) Admins in a timelier fashion and also for the occasional de-sysopping. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:09, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support, of course. Thank you for volunteering. Ground Zero (talk) 18:43, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Ikan's active, LtPowers might have made ten edits in the last four months. We need two active bureaucrats but for some reason it's getting harder to find good people willing to slave away on this. Andre would do a fine job. K7L (talk) 18:54, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support, having two active bureaucrats is important for the stable operation and independence of the wiki. --Alexander (talk) 18:55, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support without hesitation. Enwikivoy has grown to a point where we need more bureaucrats. Gizza (roam) 22:38, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. I've thought that he should be administrator for some time. Otherwise, we're more or less with one active bureaucrat. I also think DaGizza, Pashley, GZ, and Traveler100 could be considered as more potential bureaucrats in the future if we need more people as bureaucrats. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 22:46, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support ARR8 (talk) 03:06, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support WOSlinker (talk) 22:09, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Yes OhanaUnitedTalk page 07:35, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. I don't think we could wish for a more suitable candidate. Thank you for wanting to take on this responsibility. JuliasTravels (talk) 16:05, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

I believe the nomination period is at an end with unanimous support (congratulations in order). Now who is going to do the honours? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 19:50, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Yep, agreed. Ikan Kekek, how soon would you be able to make AndreCarrotflower a bureaucrat? --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 00:44, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
I do not have that power. I think we have to petition a steward to do that. I know some stewards patrol this site for vandals now and then. I think Vituzzu is one of them, but I can't find his/her user page. Anyone know offhand the names of stewards to contact? Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:56, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
meta:Bureaucrat says that a bureaucrat is a user who has the technical ability to promote other users to administrator or bureaucrat; there is a list of flight attendants stewards at meta:Stewards if you need them. K7L (talk) 02:49, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek: Are you sure you don't have the ability to do it? According to Wikivoyage:Bureaucrats, you should be able to. You can try at Special:UserRights/AndreCarrotflower. —Granger (talk · contribs) 03:58, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
I'm shocked, but yes, I was mistaken and actually was able to do it! Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:28, 10 November 2018 (UTC)


As most of you know, this is my second nomination. The first was back in June, when I was nominated by User:Ground Zero. However, since then, I've done quite a lot of work from being janitor to reverting edits by vandals. Also, User:Ikan Kekek today said on my talk page that he would vote for me as admin now. So I'm putting myself forward and re-nominating myself to be an admin. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 23:49, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

  • SelfieCity has come a long way since his first nomination. I already expressed my support for him on his talk page - in fact, IIRC it was me who first broached the topic of re-nominating him - and I certainly am willing to support him officially. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 23:53, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
  • SelfieCity has made himself very valuable to this project and I believe he's established his trustworthiness. I'd be pleased for him to have admin tools to help swab down the deck and keep the sails up. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:10, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. today and always, proactive and indefatigable about improving the travel guide. Ibaman (talk) 00:19, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support SelfieCity has always been a tireless worker but now has the nuanced understanding of WV's history which was one of the concerns expressed by people in the first nomination. Definitely ready now. Gizza (roam) 01:11, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
  • I am very happy to see this re-nomination. SelfieCity has learned a great deal over the past months and will be an excellent admin. Support. Ground Zero (talk) 04:14, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support SC has over the last months been active and shown great interest in different types of administrative tasks, and I believe he knows the policies and customs well, so sure, he gets a support vote from me. ϒpsilon (talk) 18:12, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: I currently have about 9,000 contributions. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 00:16, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Andrewssi2 (talk) 00:50, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Not yet. I think SelfieCity needs to learn still more about WV's policies and practices. Two months' ago they tried to move a page by doing a cut and paste - see here. SelfieCity is well-intentioned and enthusiastic, which is all great - just needs to be even more familiar with things. I have hesitated to say "not yet", because I don't like to discourage well-intentioned editors. To avoid discouraging, I was going to suggest that SelfieCity be given some other tools as an intermediate step, but I see that they have already been given Patroller rights recently, and I support that. Since then, I see they have accidentally used the "rollback" button on mobile, and are trying to avoid doing so again - so perhaps further reason to exercise caution and give them more time to practise with a few tools first. Sorry, SelfieCity - but do keep learning. Nurg (talk) 01:38, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
I think it may be worth clarifying that, during my first nomination in June, it was stated that we should wait 6 months–year before another nomination. I was planning to renominate myself around January 2019, but the nomination was brought up earlier — I think it was October of this year. However, objections were raised, but at the end of last month the person who raised the main objections stated that they would now support my nomination. Therefore, I nominated myself.
So that is why I nominated myself. By no means do I blame those who raised objections for this current situation. I am willing to go either way with this nomination, but I encourage those editors who voted support before to review my comment and Nurg's comment and re-evaluate. That way, we can decide the nomination one way or the other. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 03:01, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
I have struck out my comment about the rollback accident. I do not use the mobile version and did not know that its user-unfriendliness leads to accidental rollbacks. Nurg (talk) 08:27, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Not yet. I didn't want to be the one to do it, but my main objection is - why so soon? SC was only given patroller rights a week before the nomination. When the nomination began, he'd only patrolled 7 mainspace edits. Now that I check again, he's done a few more, but it's still very little. Shouldn't some time be spent with the patroller tools first? ARR8 (talk) 03:25, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I think some of us need to think about whether we're holding prospective admins to an unreasonable standard. "I see they have accidentally used the 'rollback' button on mobile". "He's only patrolled 7 mainspace edits [since becoming an autopatroller a week ago]." With all due respect, are you people joking? I've been an administrator for going on six years and, barring some massive sea change in the consensus, I'll be taking a step up to bureaucrat in a few days. Seven mainspace edits patrolled is seven more than I've done in the last week. And I still do accidental rollbacks from time to time. It's got nothing to do with poor judgment and everything to do with the user-unfriendliness of the mobile version of this site. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 03:48, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
    • I also continue to make rollback errors, and I do not know all of our policies well. I will continue to learn, as SelfieCity is doing, and apologize where I make mistakes, as SelfieCity does. We don't have a lot of active administrators, and that puts a burden on us. We could use more help, and SC is absolutely the right person for the job. Ground Zero (talk) 03:58, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support just. Activity and enthusiasm, no question there. Has a few times not fully understood policy or technical topic and jumped to conclusions. But on the whole as come a long way in a short time and we are all still learning and make mistakes. As the main point of admin is blocking and cleaning up after vandals, is not about being a badge of merit, and we need more help in this area on balance I think this is a good idea. --Traveler100 (talk) 09:55, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
By my count, we have 16 active administrators to monitor a 24-hour-a-day site. Ground Zero (talk) 11:11, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment. Most people don't get patroller status; they go straight to admin. I was given patroller status because at the time Ikan Kekek still had some concerns related to the previous nomination. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 14:38, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - While I understand some of the concerns about the user's freshness, we do actually need more of our active contributors to take on the admin's toolkit. The site is growing faster than I've ever seen it, so our cohort of admins must do too. Since some of our long-term users have repeatedly turned down the opportunity, we need to look to newer members of the team for help. In SelfieCity, we have an extremely active, enthusiastic, and trustworthy editor who has shown continued capacity to quickly learn from his mistakes and improve even more. He shows every sign of good faith in everything he does, and has in my view demonstrated commitment to Wikivoyage. Most importantly, he actually wants the job! And at the end of the day, there's nothing an administrator can do which can't be undone in a few minutes, and this will only get easier with the addition of a new bureaucrat any day now.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 15:37, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment - I haven't changed my mind. SelfieCity has been so active that his learning curve has been compressed to such a degree that what he did a few months ago is almost irrelevant, and I'm grateful to him for being willing to pick up a mop and pail. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:38, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. From my limited interaction with this individual, he seems to be courteous and knows what he's doing. OhanaUnitedTalk page 03:38, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment - I'd like to hear from those who voted not yet to see if they have been persuaded by the responses to their reasoning, and whether they would be willing to reconsider? So that's directed @ARR8, Nurg:. We don't need unanimity of course, but it would help to know if you thought your concerns had been addressed. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 15:17, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Yes and no. There were some good points raised, but, precisely because we don't need unanimity, I'd rather keep my 'vote' the way it is. I want to make it clear that I have thought about this. For me, more important than janitorial work for an admin is their role in representing the site to new editors. I acknowledge that having more administrators would be helpful, but I think mistakes and learning experiences should be had while not serving as a model and potentially misleading new editors, and I predict that a few more learning experiences are in store for SC. ARR8 (talk) 18:39, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
If the nomination passes (and if it remains with only two "not yets" and no "nevers", I consider it has sufficient support), I would congratulate SelfieCity and say, "You'll be fine with the admin tools as long as you are cautious and use them in line with policies." However, I am not sure whether caution is part of SelfieCity's nature. Am I misjudging perhaps? Nurg (talk) 03:01, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Question: I'd like to ask those of you who don't support making SelfieCity an admin: If we hold off now, how much longer would you like to wait before reconsidering? Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:31, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
I don't support holding off now. The concerns expressed by the minority here are not only overblown, but they betray a fundamental misunderstanding of what exactly the roles and responsibilities of an admin are, to such a degree that I think both "not yet" votes ought to be rejected as lacking policy-based rationales. Specifically, there's nothing written in our policy that says admins are representatives of the site or liaisons to new users or anything like that, nor is that true de facto. On Wikivoyage there are quite a few editors, such as Ypsilon and K7L just off the top of my head, who are not admins yet are active and prolific enough for new users to seek them out for assistance. There are also quite a few administrators who are inactive or borderline inactive and thus cannot really be said to have any role on Wikivoyage at all, at least currently. As for SelfieCity's alleged recklessness, we are forgetting just how little actual, irreparable damage can be done with admin-level sysop tools. The question is not whether SelfieCity will misuse the tools; if it were, every admin who's ever mistakenly hit the rollback button ought to be desysopped. The question is whether he will do so in bad faith. And I think the obvious answer to that question is no. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 19:20, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi Ikan. I have no specific period in mind. Are you thinking that with the two "not yets" we are below the bar for consensus? Nurg (talk) 09:12, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
No, we probably have consensus, but I'm happy to hear the "not yets" out. If you aren't sure what could satisfy you, though, I wouldn't see a point in suggesting we wait for x amount of time and reconsider. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:21, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
I'm not sure on a specific period. I would have had fewer reservations with the original planned January date, but it seems ridiculous to think a two-month wait would make any difference now. If I were to call for more than that, I don't think anyone would agree, since so many editors think that now is fine.
Briefly, regarding the points raised above: Wikivoyage admins are de facto representatives of the site. How is a new user supposed to tell the difference between a prolific user and a barely-active one? They're new. ARR8 (talk) 16:34, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

It's 14 days, as of now. I think we have a consensus. But if others would rather keep debating, let's try to wrap it up soon.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 21:08, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

My count is 10 supports, 2 not yets, and 1 neutral (me). Two of the supports are bureaucrats, the rest are mostly admins, and of the not yet votes I believe one is an admin and the other is a fairly new user. Votes don't mean everything; it's consensus that counts, but this is a general picture of it all as I see it. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 21:14, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Comment: I want to say that I do understand the reasoning of the "not now"s. However, since there's no clear roadmap for how to accommodate you guys, other than by withdrawing this nomination indefinitely, the only solution seems to be to make SelfieCity an admin and see how he does. I think it's quite unlikely he'd do anything malicious with admin tools. If he should do anything rash, we could always reopen this discussion at that time, though I hasten to add that most types of rash actions aren't likely to lead to immediate de-sysopping.
I'd suggest keeping this thread open for another 24 hours in case anyone else wants to comment. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:07, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
I'm okay with that. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 02:15, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
Ten people support and two have reservations, wishing that the renomination had not come so soon. That is a high level of support (albeit not unanimous, as it might have been 6 months or so after the previous nomination). I have already said that I consider the nomination has sufficient support and I interpret ARR8's remark that "we don't need unanimity" to mean they think similarly. Fourteen days have passed and I see no need to wait. Congratulations SelfieCity, you'll be fine with the admin tools as long as you are cautious and use them in line with policies. Would a bureaucrat please hand out a mop to SelfieCity. Nurg (talk) 10:28, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
My thoughts exactly. ARR8 (talk) 14:48, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Yes Done. Welcome aboard, SelfieCity. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 15:37, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 17:50, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

User:JakeOregon for Patroller[edit]

This is not an admin nom, just that Jake is a very active and helpful editor who would like to have the ability to roll back vandalism with one click, and although we have more admins now, there are still times when no admins are active and Jake is. If you look at User talk:JakeOregon and his user contributions, I think you'll find him trustworthy, and I doubt this nomination will be controversial but thought that since the status of Patroller comes with a couple of tools, going by the book means making a nomination here, though not necessarily waiting 14 days if a clear consensus develops more quickly than that. Do you agree that Patroller noms should be put here, or is that unnecessary?

  • Support as nominator. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:35, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I don't think a patroller nomination is necessary. We didn't have one for SelfieCity two weeks ago. You didn't hold one for me or Hobbitschuster a couple of years ago. That said, I support Jake's nom.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 19:57, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Agree with TT but of course I support if we're going to do a nomination. I brought up something similar for User:K7L, but I can think of at least one more person who is a trusted user on Wikivoyage who doesn't have patroller status. We should use this status for people who don't want to be an administrator but are trustworthy. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 20:17, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I thought we did have one for SelfieCity. We never have noms for Autopatroller, but I'm unclear about Patroller because it's a much newer designation, or at least wasn't used on this site until more recently. I'll start a thread on the talk page, so we can determine whether a nom is needed for this status. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:37, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I guess this thread isn't necessary. I'll wait a few hours, and if there are no other comments, I'll just make the change. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:27, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Moved here. I'll flip the switch right after I finish posting this sentence. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:21, 19 November 2018 (UTC)


This user has been around for some time and is willing to become an admin, per User talk:JakeOregon. He has been a good user and example since he signed up and has the qualities we would want for a Wikivoyage admin. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 01:10, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

  • Support ARR8 (talk | contribs) 01:12, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. Yes indeed. He and ARR8 have both been extremely helpful, active users and haven't shown any indication of being anything but trustworthy. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:04, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Support He's been quite helpful! Mbrickn (talk) 02:19, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Support JakeOregon has been a great, dedicated editor who will help Wikivoyage further with the mop. Gizza (roam) 03:15, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Sure! -- ϒψιλον (talk) 07:48, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment - I am not too familiar with Jake's contributions, so I had a look. In his most recent 1000 edits (i.e. roughly since he was made patroller), there are very few talk page contributions, and zero contributions to pages like the pub. In my view, an admin must take part in such discussions regularly both so that they are visible and credible to the community, and also so they themselves can maintain a solid and current understanding of policy.
Secondly, there is a lack of reverts in Jake's history - this may be considered a positive, as it shows a constructive, rather than combative, approach to edits. On the other hand, in this period of high vandal activity, I would have liked to have seen some use of his patroller tools against vandals. That is the bread and butter of being an admin, is it not? All the successful adminnoms that I have seen here have been for users who were already engaged in admin-like activities prior to nomination. I can see little evidence for this from Jake.
None of this is to detract from Jake's excellent contributions to article space; he's clearly an active, committed Wikivoyager and, like the rest of you, I have no doubts about his trustworthiness.
So, put me down as on the fence. I can't support this nom with the information I currently have, but I could be persuaded by some of you who have shown faith in Jake, and also by Jake himself. What would he do with the admin tools?--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:01, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
I think this is a question for you, JakeOregon. What would you expect to do with admin tools? Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:18, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
  • JakeOregon is a prolific contributor, which is commendable, but that alone does not a good admin make. Indeed, I've yet to see anything from this user that indicates any real interest in doing anything at Wikivoyage other than adding content. In his contribution history I'm seeing next to no activity in projectspace or on talk pages, as ThunderingTyphoons already said, and furthermore I'm also seeing one particular bad habit that indicates a fundamental misunderstanding of a core Wikivoyage policy: virtually none of the listings he's added include any blurbs in the "comment=" argument, or anything other than contact information and URLs where applicable. Policy, of course, says that we're supposed to provide information to the listings we add in order to contextualize them within our coverage of the destination or topic and explain their significance, rather than simply feed readers bullet-point lists of POIs with only addresses and contact information attached. I'd love to see Jake on our admin team someday, but not yet, and frankly we've got a ways to go before we can confidently talk about such a promotion. I'd need to see him demonstrate an interest in and propensity toward engaging and collaborating with other editors, and I'd need some sense of how familiar he is with site policy: the aforementioned habit of adding naked bullet-point listings may be an indication of larger deficiencies in that area or it may be a fluke, but given the aforementioned lack of contributions anywhere other than mainspace, we can't know for sure. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 23:36, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
  • I'm not yet convinced by the "not yet" arguments, because from what I see, this is still a trustworthy user. But I will take a quicker look at his contributions and consider whether I should change my vote. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 01:23, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Result: nomination unsuccessful; the user has decided that he does not want to become an admin. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 01:48, 11 February 2019 (UTC)


This user has accepted this nomination; see User talk:ARR8. A trusted user with a good record and good contributions, including some improvements to the listing editor we use. A few months ago, ARR8 felt it was too early to become administrator, but with the user's great record, I think we're now all ready to make a new administrator out of ARR8. I support making ARR8 an admin and, judging from User talk:ARR8, it's clear that others will also be quick to support this nomination. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 19:27, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

  • Support -- ϒψιλον (talk) 19:35, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
  • ARR8 has my support.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 19:58, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Support -- WOSlinker (talk) 23:03, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:18, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Ground Zero (talk) 00:07, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Support ARR8 has been an excellent editor since joining Wikivoyage. Gizza (roam) 06:05, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Support --Traveler100 (talk) 18:04, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Support wholeheartedly. A more-than-worthy addition to our admin team. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 18:19, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Support--JakeOregon (talk) 23:47, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Definitely -- Matroc (talk) 17:10, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. May he be very welcome to the frontline. Ibaman (talk) 17:17, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. --Inas (talk) 22:51, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment: could we wait on this nomination just a couple more days? I do not intend to oppose the nomination, but there is an issue brought up at User_talk:ARR8#Policy_and_violations_thereof that I think needs to be addressed before ARR8 becomes an admin. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 14:55, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. ARR8 is a great editor. It seems to me a minor disagreement over section header formatting is not a concern at all. —Granger (talk · contribs) 15:29, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Yes, I misunderstood the concern. As I have stated on User talk:ARR8, since that is such a minor issue, I think the nomination should go ahead now. From the original comments on that talk page, it seemed to be a very serious concern, which is why I took the action I did on this page. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 17:31, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
I was the one who raised that issue with ARR8, but it is not a big issue, and I continue to support his/her nomination for admin. Ground Zero (talk) 17:43, 17 February 2019 (UTC)


request for interface-admin rights

The norm for this type of request seems to be a self-nom, so I have opened one.

I have done much interface-related work on Wikivoyage. Much of this has been by proxy, as a peek at the bottom of User talk:WOSlinker will exemplify, since I cannot edit many of these files without this user right. I ask for this right to make it easier to do some of the work I already do. In the past, this has included, among other things, substantial additions and fixes to the listing editor, and an almost complete rewrite of much of the main page code to make it work better on mobile. Some other such tasks are listed at Wikivoyage:UX Expedition.

I think the record also shows that I do not make changes to these parts of the site without consensus, and I believe I have been open to questions/suggestions about interface changes. When I make strictly-technical changes, I take great care to make sure nothing changes from the point of view of editors or users.

Sometimes I have inadvertently introduced bugs while making interface edits. Some number of bugs is unavoidable with technical work, and having this right would in fact make it easier to undo these bugs quickly.

There are some minor bug fixes I would like to implement now, and I think I have bothered the current interface admins enough :). Thanks for your time. ARR8 (talk | contribs) 18:31, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

  • Support. This user has certainly earned our trust, and we could always use more hands on deck when it comes to this kind of technical work. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 18:38, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. Definitely trustworthy. Ground Zero (talk) 18:43, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Let's give ARR8 whatever rights he needs; I might be wrong but I don't think we have very many voyagers who know coding well. --Ypsilon (talk) 19:21, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support - always does a good job. --Traveler100 (talk) 19:42, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. I don't think I even fully understand what you say you're doing, but whatever it is, I'd like you to be able to do it unimpeded. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Abstain. To be clear, I am not opposed to this nomination, but because of what took place at Wikivoyage:Travellers' pub#A message to editors I do not feel I should give an opinion on this matter. However, it is always good to see users get more involved in the project. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 20:34, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. I have full confidence in ARR8's technical abilities and judgement. —Granger (talk · contribs) 07:20, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. WOSlinker (talk) 14:12, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support - Gizza (roam) 01:41, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Result: Nomination successful. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:25, 24 May 2019 (UTC)


I noticed that (s)he's been an active contributor, and has been doing a lot of janitorial work, particularly on the English language varieties and Japan articles, and has also reverted vandalism. Therefore, I'm proposing that this user be given administrator tools to be able to do a lot of this stuff more easily. I'm not an admin so don't take my word for it, but I'm sure (s)he would be a good addition to the team, if (s)he is willing. The dog2 (talk) 17:29, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

  • That's an important question. User:Bigpeteb, would you be willing to serve as an admin? Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:07, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Preemptively, I'm going to voice some hesitation. Bigpeteb's record as an editor in mainspace is exemplary, and he's also shown himself willing to engage with the rest of our editor community on talk pages when the need arises. But his contribution history in projectspace is almost nonexistent. This is an important barometer we use to suss out how good of a handle a prospective admin has on policy. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 22:00, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
  • What about giving the user patroller status for now? --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 03:01, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Let's wait and see if he wants to be a patroller. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:46, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
Agreed. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 04:36, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Well, I'm flattered and honored by the suggestion, and by the confidence everyone has in my ability to contribute positively. But I think I have to agree; I've mainly just been an ordinary contributor who's been vigilant in helping to maintain a number of pages I have a personal interest in or knowledge of. For me, WV is just something to do when I have a bit of free time at work. 😒 I really can't commit more time to WV than what I already put in, and I don't think administrator status is something I would really make much use of. Patrolling, I could probably do, although again since I can only manage small bits of time here and there, I'm not sure there would be too many edits for me to patrol that someone else wouldn't take care of first. --Bigpeteb (talk) 16:10, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks for replying. We can give you patroller status if no-one objects. No vote needs to be taken to approve a nomination for patroller, though. I'll just wait 24 hours to see if anyone has any hesitation about granting you that status. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:30, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Done. I think we can archive this nomination now, unless anyone else has any quick remarks for whatever reason. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:53, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Result: Made a Patroller, not an Admin. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:17, 9 June 2019 (UTC)


This is a bot I control to do mass edits using AutoWikiBrowser. Request to temporarily give it admin rights so that I can edit protected user pages (most of which are User:(WT-en) pages). Intention is to replace all the individual 305 user language templates with the #bable module. --Traveler100 (talk) 07:09, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Can we get this activated? Should be able to get this done over the weekend. --Traveler100 (talk) 01:27, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

I have a vague sense that 7 votes are needed, but that could be wrong. What's the minimum number of votes for this kind of nomination to be successful? Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:38, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
Consensus from the community, including at least two administrators, after 14 days of discussion. Nurg (talk) 09:30, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
Is there any minimum number of users needed to amount to a consensus? Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:56, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
Not that I can find. The last paragraph in the green header above just says consensus, and Wikivoyage:Administrators#Discussion says consensus, including at least two administrators. Nurg (talk) 08:05, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. On the bot's user page, I see it's been used for other tasks in the past. It can be useful to have a bot here on Wikivoyage with administrative privileges (if there isn't one already), not only for the babel templates but also for future situations where a large number of protected pages need to be edited. Ypsilon (talk) 05:58, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
This is a bot that I control, and I already have admin privileges. Just want to keep these edits separate from my normal edits. Bot has already run over all user pages that do not have admin protection on. Those that are left are mainly WT users and a few admins that have close of page because of vandal targeting. --Traveler100 (talk) 20:18, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
Point well taken. I'll promote the bot if no-one objects within 24 hours. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:28, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Traveler100, I've made the bot an admin. You said make it an admin temporarily but didn't give a number or days, weeks or whatever, so it's an admin indefinitely. I can change that if you like, or you can just contact me whenever you'd like me to end its admin status. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:57, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

User:The dog2[edit]

He or she was user Superdog in Wikitravel days, has been active here regularly since the move, & seems to me to meet all the qualifications. See Talk:Fujian#Renaming_regions (down at the end of the section) for the discussion that led to the nomination. Pashley (talk) 14:20, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

  • I'm not sure the discussion shows he wants to be admin, but if he does, I support and think he would be a reliable and trustworthy administrator. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 15:39, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
  • I'm sorry, I'm going to have to oppose. The dog2 is a valuable contributor who we should all be thankful for, but he has shown a repeated tendency to go needlessly into controversial issues not related to travel and has previously made many edits based on observations about the United States based on his limited personal experience of it that are at odds with everyone else's experience and knowledge, leading to long, distracting debates. I also saw that he expressed doubt about being an admin himself. Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:27, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
  • I think The dog has done a commendable job reining in the worst of the tendencies Ikan described above, but I think there's still room for improvement in that regard. I think he's potential admin material in the future, but as of right now, not yet. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 16:37, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Conditional support - It may be too late to persuade those of you who have opposed, but I'm going to try anyway. I've given this a lot of thought since the nomination went up yesterday, because there were reasons in my head to support and reasons to be cautious. On the support side, The dog2 has a huge amount of wiki experience, certainly more than I do, and that includes admin-like functions such as reverting vandalism and participating in policy discussions. In many ways, he's already an admin without the buttons.
The reasons I felt more cautious are obvious, because they've already been stated. I have also been frustrated in the past by the long, non-travel-related discussions. However, I agree with Andre that the "worst tendencies" have been "reined in", but additionally and crucially, I don't think those conversations should count against The dog2 in whether he qualifies for admin. Have these off-topic posts annoyed people? Yes. But so what? I annoy some people, too, and so do some other admins (you know who you are!). Has The dog2 ever edit warred over these contentious issues? Not as far as I know. Has The dog2 respected the consensus when other users have gone against his proposals? Absolutely yes.
Self-aggrandisement aside, all an admin is, is someone we trust to have a few extra buttons for site maintenance and fighting vandalism. Nothing I know about The dog2's edit history or personality gives me any doubt that I can trust him to perform those tasks in a manner which respects policy and common decency.
What's the "condition", you ask? Well, as two of you have already pointed out, the linked discussion doesn't show a great deal of enthusiasm on The dog2's part; if we've misread that and he does actually want to be an admin, then he has my support both now and, if necessary, a later nomination down the line.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 14:17, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
That's what I think. We need to remember the purpose of administrators and why they are nominated: patrolling, vandalism, deleting pages according to the proper procedure, etc. I don't see how off-topic discussions have any connection to those actions.
Sometimes we unfortunately assume that "admin" means "power," so we think that we shouldn't give that power and influence to contributors with whom we've had concerns, either at the present or in the past. But the "power" given to an administrator (to revert vandalism, etc.) shouldn't be confused with the consensus that guides the community. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 14:44, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment: If I may have a few words, certainly, becoming an admin is a big responsibility, and the last thing I want to do is become one just for the sake of boosting my own ego. That's the main reason why I have been apprehensive to recommend myself for the position. That said, if the community feels that I can do a good job as one, I'd be willing to serve.
And to address some of the previous issues regardless of the outcome of this discussion, looking back, I will admit that my understanding of the U.S. was a lot more limited at that time, especially since my circle back then was mainly limited to college students or fresh college graduates. My views have definitely changed since then, and while this is not a forum for political discussions, I will say that from meeting and getting to know more people over the past few years, I have definitely noticed there are more reasonable people on the left than I realised, and not every left-leaning American is on the extreme end of the PC spectrum (in fact, I have since found that even some solid leftists like Kyle Kulinski, David Pakman, Cenk Uygur and Ana Kasparian have called out that kind of extreme PC censorship).
Anyway, I'll leave it to the community to decide what capacity I can best contribute as, and whatever the decision is, I want to say that I'm glad to be part of this community, and I'm still happy to contribute regardless of what capacity I am assigned to. The dog2 (talk) 22:21, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
  • I find ThunderingTyphoons!' argument convincing. I remember as well that there was a similar sentiment when SelfieCity was promoted to admin, but concerns that he might misuse the sysop tools proved to be unfounded. I'm going to strike out my "not yet" comment, but will need think for a while about how to proceed forward from there. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 23:03, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
  • I, too, have crossed out my opposing vote. I understand the pro arguments, agree that The dog2 has a positive attitude, and will respect the consensus on this nomination. And whether he's an admin or not, I'll be happy to continue working with him. Ikan Kekek 14:17, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Have crossed out "Conditional" to just support given the answer.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 14:24, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
  • I didn't welcome this nomination when I saw it because of The dog2's tendency to see Wikivoyage as a place to write about politics and history without the constraints of requiring reliable sources. This discussion shows that that tendency is still strong, although constrained by the recognition that others will push back. However, Thundering Typhoons!, Selfie City and AndreCarrotflower have convinced me. We have every reason to believe that s/he will use admin powers responsibly, and no reason to believe that s/he will abuse them, so I support this nomination. Ground Zero (talk) 16:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Support - The dog2 has been here for a long time, and knows his way around. While he's added some controversial content to articles in the past, I couldn't imagine he'd start using admin privileges for harmful edits. Ypsilon (talk) 17:36, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
  • The more I ruminate on this, the more I realize the importance of the quibbles about irrelevant/contentious information are just a minor blip on what is, on the whole, a very long and productive, even distinguished, record on Wikivoyage. I was just reading The dog2's remarks on the RfC regarding what variety of English to use in our coverage of China, and I think that's a perfect example of the valuable perspective he brings to the table. In fact, you could argue that a tendency to not see eye-to-eye with the prevailing opinion is an asset rather than a liability when it comes to elevating a user to the admin team, as it forces us to see things from a different perspective and helps us avoid the pitfalls of groupthink. IMO, there's no good reason for me to hold off on a support vote. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 02:39, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Support with no reservations. We've been building Age of Discovery off of each other lately, we quarrel over some words, but overall, the partnership is nice and constructive. He's welcome to the line. Ibaman (talk) 03:08, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. They have been consistently active for many years, making substantial contributions to a wide variety of articles, and have worked with others to improve WV's policies as well as content. --Bigpeteb (talk) 00:35, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment: In case any clarification is helpful, I have no further objection to this nomination. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:35, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
  • 14 days have passed and it looks like we've got a pretty solid consensus. I'm going to flip the bit tomorrow or so; if there are any last-minute objections, now's your time to speak up. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 05:15, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Result - nomination successful. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 03:29, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for transwiki importer: User:SelfieCity[edit]

w:Category:Copy to Wikivoyage lists 3 Wikipedia pages are considered better off on the Wikivoyage project. We need someone with transwiki importer rights to move these articles to Wikivoyage. SelfieCity has agreed to take this on. I will commit to adapting the resulting articles to Wikivoyage format and content requirements. Ground Zero (talk) 17:32, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

  • Support. I've never seen a nomination for "transwiki importer". Does an admin need to be specially nominated for such a role? Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:41, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment: transwiki importer grants import rights that are already included in the admin group, so this is unneeded --DannyS712 (talk) 21:30, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
OK! So any admin can do this? That’s great. Is there a tutorial somewhere explaining how to do it? I’ll take a look on Wikipedia. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 21:48, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
I've imported stuff before from Wikipedia and didn't need any extra rights. I just went to Special:Import. -- WOSlinker (talk) 21:49, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
I’m only seeing three options, though. What about the other wikis? --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 21:51, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Yep, it's only setup for 3. I'm guessing it might be a phabricator ticket to get others added. I was just importing from Wikipedia, so used the "w" option and put the page name in the box below that. -- WOSlinker (talk) 21:54, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
@WOSlinker: thank you. I have imported Vienna microbreweries, so it seems to have worked. Ground Zero (talk) 22:04, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Result: no action taken — the nomination was unnecessary. Ground Zero (talk) 22:30, 12 July 2020 (UTC)


I'd like to nominate Andyrom75 for the Administrator role and also the Interface Admin role as well. This nomination is a little bit different from some others in that Andyrom75 does not have a large editing history here but they do maintain the ListingEditor gadget and I think it would be beneficial if they could update it themselves. Andyrom75 does have a longer editing history over at the Italian Wikivoyage, where they are already an Administrator. -- WOSlinker (talk) 21:26, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

  • Trusted editor of the website; support, assuming administrator rights are needed to complete said tasks. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 21:29, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
(The contribution history looks long enough to me.) --SelfieCity
  • Support. And agreed that he has a pretty extensive posting history on en.voy, since January, 2013. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:37, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support - Most of us know Andyrom, and the Italian community obviously trust him.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 21:50, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support for the reasons listed above. Ground Zero (talk) 22:02, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support trusted, valid need --DannyS712 (talk) 22:12, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support — Given that the Italian Wikivoyage community trusts him, I don't see why we shouldn't. The dog2 (talk) 22:45, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support agree with the above. Gizza (roam) 23:07, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks to everybody! :-) --Andyrom75 (talk) 21:11, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

  • Promoted (demoted?) by acclamation. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:05, 24 July 2020 (UTC)


@DannyS712‎: - user is very experienced and active in Wikidata, Wikispecies and Wikipedia, engaged in janitorial work in Wikivoyage, and has expressed wish for access to adminship. As for the last days, I can testify lots of efforts on user's side against vandalism here, in an agile and efficient manner, which compels me to action to nominate. Ibaman (talk) 22:08, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for those kind words and for the nomination, which I accept. While I don't have as many contributions to the content side of things here on Wikivoyage, I have been working to combat some vandals/long term abusers here, where adminship would help with blocking/revision deletion/protection as necessary. I have experience with the tools from other wikis and will be sure to take things slow and ask for advice if there are things I am not familiar with regarding using the tools here on Wikivoyage. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 22:30, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Support as nominator. Ibaman (talk) 22:08, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Oh, definitely. Danny has been really helpful in combatting vandalism, giving coverage when admins weren't online. I will say this: If anyone is concerned that he has yet to participate in other aspects of this site, we could at least make him a Patroller, but I think Admin is the right status because that way, he can block vandals. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:32, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Support as at least patroller, but if it comes down to a question of patroller vs. full-fledged administrator, I have no problem with the latter option. I think it's obvious that Danny wouldn't misuse the sysop tools if he had access to them, and that's the most important consideration. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 01:53, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
    @Ikan Kekek @AndreCarrotflower I've been a patroller since November 2019, see Special:Redirect/logid/3586934 and User talk:AndreCarrotflower/2019#Request for patroller --DannyS712 (talk) 02:07, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Sure. Danny's main activity here has been reverting vandalism; and given the furious reactions he's received on his talk page by vandals it's obvious he's really good at it. --Ypsilon (talk) 07:11, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Question - There's no doubt about DannyS712's good faith and great track record; the user rights he has elsewhere in the Wikimedia family speak for themselves. What I want to clarify is what Danny envisages using the admin buttons for. Is it just for reverting and blocking obvious vandals when they arise, or does he plan to be more involved on a day-to-day basis, e.g. dealing with touts, guiding newbies, deleting pages, patrolling edits? If the former, then more power to him; however, if the latter, I wonder whether he feels he has a strong enough understanding of Wikivoyage's policies and conventions? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 10:40, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
    I already patrol edits so that wouldn't change. At first I would focus on just the reverting/blocking/deletions of obvious vandals, but as I get more familiar with the specifics of enwikivoyage I would hopefully feel comfortable working with new users, touts, etc. For now, my understanding is definitely not strong enough to do those. As I noted above, I "will be sure to take things slow and ask for advice if there are things I am not familiar with" DannyS712 (talk) 22:41, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
Uh, sorry for the lack of a response. I find your answer acceptable, so support the nomination.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:04, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
  • it seems we have achieved consensus about promoting Danny to admin. Let's do it? As of this moment, I would be glad if he could already be blocking vandals. Ibaman (talk) 16:00, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Support per nomination. It would be great to have another defender on the job. Ground Zero (talk) 16:25, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment: As you can see in the green section above, the rule is to wait until 14 days have passed since the nomination before changing a nominee's status to admin. So be patient. I also think we've generally required at least 7 supporting votes, but I stand to be corrected. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:22, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
    • Then let's add my support. –LPfi (talk) 11:59, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Today it's been 14 days since the nomination. --Ypsilon (talk) 06:29, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Promoted by unanimous vote. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:28, 6 November 2020 (UTC)


I nominate myself for administrator rights.

I am nominating myself because I have made a lot of very constructive edits on the mainspace and I have a good grip on the policies. I also have been reverting vandalism and reporting it to admins as well. Finally, I'm good at working with the community and posting messages on article talk pages for any fixes needed to be made. Thanks! CatDog1234539 (talk) 16:20, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

  • Oppose. Your help is appreciated, but you have less than 1 month of contributions, and just in the past week, you were involved in some controversy in welcoming new users who hadn't made any edits or whose only edits to the site were vandalistic. Come back in a year or two after you've demonstrated a record of valuable participation in discussions about policy and shown consistent good judgment in your interactions on the site. Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:29, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above; also, to nominate oneself to adminship is really unheard of and sounds very preposterous; most Wikivoyage admins were actually invited to the post after a long record of valuable edits. You should strive to attain autopatroller status first, which cannot be simply asked for, must be earned as well. Ibaman (talk) 18:03, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Not yet - Contrary to user:Ibaman's comment, anyone is welcome to nominate themselves, per the first sentence in the green box. However, I agree that you're too new to Wikivoyage to become an admin. You've made a good start, but you need months more experience and a proven track record. Since I can't imagine anyone is going to support your nomination at this time, and there's no point in more and more people piling in with the same answer, I propose that a bureaucrat should close this nomination early, but only with your permission.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 19:09, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Fine I'll come back in a few months. CatDog1234539 (talk) 19:13, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

  • Archived as unsuccessful. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:35, 13 January 2021 (UTC)


User - @KevRobbAU:.

Reason - KevRobbAU is very experienced and active on Wikivoyage since 2019, engaged in janitorial work in Wikivoyage as the user is frequently on the Travellers Pub. Since this user is currently an auto-patroller now on WV, I think this user would highly benefit these tools. As for the last days, KevRobbAU has been creating a new article for each and every town in New South Wales, which are mostly outlines but still can be used, which compels me to action to nominate.

Thanks, TravelAroundOz (talk) 07:59, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

I don't think he's engaged in any policy discussions, and has he said he wants to be an admin? Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:12, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
Not sure. But he was involved in the filter discussion; which was one of the major discussions here at my time here at WV. TravelAroundOz (talk) 10:05, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
You mean he complained about a filter he was unintentionally caught in. That's not the kind of policy discussion I'm talking about. He simply hasn't been here long enough or engaged in policy and organizational discussions sufficiently to be an admin. I'm very happy to have him as a content-creator, as he's doing a great job at that! If he does want to be an admin, we can reconsider that in a year or so. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:10, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
I mean, do what you think what's best. TravelAroundOz (talk) 11:00, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
That's really not an argument, and I don't make unilateral decisions here. Look at the text box at the top of his page. I'd ask you two questions: (1) Do you really think he fulfills all the criteria? (2) Are you yourself familiar enough with Wikivoyage policies to have sufficient information, knowledge and experience to be able to determine that he does? It's no disrespect to say that both he and you are doing great content-creation and that neither of you are close to ready to be given moderation tools that need to be used with a longer track record and clear knowledge of Wikivoyage policies. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:31, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
Actually, forget about my request. Considering that Kev is blocked on the french wikipedia, let me take back the request. TravelAroundOz (talk) 07:56, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Contributions to fr.wikipedia here. It's unfortunate that he got himself blocked by edit warring over matters of style in a foreign language. I don't think that's all that relevant to his record here, but no-one else has even noticed this thread, so I'll archive it within 24 hours if nothing changes. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:17, 1 March 2021 (UTC)