Wikibooks:Requests for permissions/Archive 5

From Wikibooks, the open-content textbooks collection

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

[edit] Requests for permissions

[edit] Administrator access

[edit] Laleena ( talk |  email |  contribs | logs)

Closed as Not done. Although Laleena has made valuable contributions, several areas of concern have been raised. Laleena is advised to continue contributing and to become accustomed to the community here.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 17:03, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to nominate Laleena as an admin. Laleena is an active RC patroller, and has demonstrated a need for the Import tool. I think we could also trust Laleena with the other admin buttons. --Jomegat (talk) 02:18, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, Jomegat, for the nomination. I realize that it takes trust for a nomination, and I thank you. Laleena (talk) 23:42, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose I'm afraid. Laleena may well prove to be a good admin in due course however I believe it is rather early for now. Specifically they are (or appear to be) unaware of policy as recently they needed reminding that VfDs remain open at least 7 days. They warned a user who had already been warned earlier by myself for the same edit. The "joinus" template was amended to suggest that creating an account would allow people to "rise up through the ranks". There have been a number of minor issues which to me add up to someone not yet ready for these rights. --Herby talk thyme 08:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose - I wouldn't be comfortable with this user having the ability to delete pages. Lots of good work, but still quite a bit to learn about Wikibooks. Webaware talk 11:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Knowledge of how things work here is really not sufficient yet; Herby mentions two cases, but there are others. I also have to disagree with Jomegat's statement that Laleena needs Import permission. Finally, while vandal reverts have been fine, reporting of vandals leads me to the conclusion that Laleena is not ready for the blocking permission. I'd suggest reviewing the nomination for the rollbacker permission (only!), which was not granted. Please do continue to contribute to the project, but I don't think additional permissions are a good idea at this point.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 17:15, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Needs to show a better understanding on how and why the community operates. As with Webaware I would not feel comfortable at this point with granting the user the ability of deleting pages. --Panic (talk) 16:30, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Neoptolemus ( talk |  email |  contribs | logs)

This user has had +rollbacker and +patroller rights for a while now (not a long while, admittedly), and has demonstrated expert use of them. These rollbacker and patroller rights serve as an excellent stepping-stone for new admin candidates, and i think Neoptolemus is the perfect example of how the new system can work. He has over 1300 edits, and has been an active member here for over two months which, incidentally, is how long I was here before I was promoted to admin. For that reason, and with his exceptional performance, I recommend that he be promoted to admin. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 02:02, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Support Neoptolemus is a machine. When it comes to vandalism, I think of him (?) as Neo from The Matrix. --Jomegat (talk) 02:07, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
I am indeed a "he". Minor correction- I only have rollback, not patroller. But thanks to both of you for this nomination and support, which I will accept! Νεοπτόλεμος ( talk | email | contribs ) 02:11, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Support I don't always agree with Νεοπτόλεμος' VfD but feel it likely he will understand not to delete pages without due care and attention. Good vandalblatter. Webaware talk 02:18, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Support --Panic (talk) 02:28, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Support - for sure. - Anonymous DissidentTalk 05:29, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Support - this nom was in my mind a couple of days ago. Good nom, good user, thanks for being prepared to help --Herby talk thyme 07:40, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Support --AdRiley (talk) 11:56, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Support - Now he can delete his own friggin orphaned redirects :P In all seriousness, I think your judgment at WB:VFD especially has been excellent, and I'm sure you'll bring that to bear on all your admin actions.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 15:53, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Support - Has my support all the way, dedicated and knowledgeable. Reece (Talk) (Contributions) 22:32, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Support, I think he would find good use with the tools. Mattb112885 (talk to me) 21:06, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Done, with thanks in advance to Νεοπτόλεμος for good work to come :). --SB_Johnny | PA! 00:47, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to all for your support. One thing- is there any point in my having rollbacker permissions, or is that something that is incorporated in administrator rights? Νεοπτόλεμος ( talk | email | contribs ) 00:54, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
I removed +rollbacker, as the permission is redundant with +sysop, and these kinds of things tend to irritate me despite being totally irrelevant ;)  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 02:32, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bureaucrat access

[edit] Mike.lifeguard ( talk |  email |  contribs | logs)

Withdrawn by the candidate - This wiki has no need of more bureaucrats. I also believe that some of the !votes below were cast for wrong reasons. Bureaucrat tasks are not urgent, but do require a strong ability to weigh consensus. Whether I have that capacity is not for me to judge, but in doing so one should not consider whether I'm quickly available (that's important for admins and CUs, but not for 'crats). Instead, discussion should centre on cases where I've had to decide what the community thinks about some issue. Examples might be the discussion around user rights or my closing of Laleena's RFA or any number of VFDs or the attempt at consensus on the Blocking guideline which I attempted to broker (and failed).
If we come to have need of another bureaucrat in the future we can consider me for the tools, but addressing the relevant issues. For now, since we don't, I withdraw my candidacy. Thanks to all who commented, and my nominator.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 02:53, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Mike is a a highly active veteran here, and if anybody is qualified to be a bureaucrat, Mike is the guy. He's an admin and a CU already. He has over 12,000 edits, with more then half (6,300) being admin actions (4,000+ deletions, 1,800+ user blocks). He's active on wiki and on IRC, so he's easy to get in touch with if people need anything. He's active in new page patrolling, image license issues, vandalism fighting, welcoming new users, and many other thankless tasks. He's an excellent and obvious candidate for the position, and I hope that the rest of the community agrees with me on that.

On a logistical note, We currently have 4 bureaucrats. I know that I have not been as active recently as I would like (although that should be changing as I get closer to the end of the semester). The other three User:Derbeth, User:SB Johnny, and User:Withinfocus have not been as active recently as they once were (although they are not "inactive" in the way we've defined it here either). I personally don't believe that we need to have some sort of finite limit or "quota" of bureaucrats or admins, although I know other members do have reservations about promoting too many. Regardless of the numbers, however, Mike is eminently qualified for the position. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 01:30, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I accept the nomination, and thank Whiteknight for it. I'll try not to make a big statement like I did on the CU nom, since many of the same comments apply here. I do have the time to take on some additional tools, so if I have the community's trust I'll be happy to serve this role.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 05:07, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Support --Jomegat (talk) 01:51, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Support --Mike6271 (talk) 01:55, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Support - Mike has been a huge help with any and all questions new users might have, does a ton of work around here, and if a bureaucrat is needed, I can't think of a better candidate. Νεοπτόλεμος ( talk | email | contribs ) 02:06, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Support - I had noticed the reduced presence of our 'crats (albeit without particular need for their services - yet!) so I was wondering whether we needed to find another. I reckon we've found him :) Webaware talk 02:09, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Comment As I seem people already adding support votes before the user formally accepts the nomination, I would like to point out that votes should came after it (just to preserve some order and remove any kind of pear pressure for acceptance). Lets wait a bit for the user to explain if he has the will, time and inclination to perform the extra function. Please remember to place a notice in on staff lounge at least after the user accepts the nomination. --Panic (talk) 02:12, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
I had put a notice on the bulletin board, I was heading to the staff lounge and I got sidetracked. I'll do it now. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 02:22, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Next time even those steps should wait for the acceptance doing things otherwise takes the air of predetermination, or an offer one shouldn't refuse. In any case since we are commenting on the subject I personally don't think that Mike.lifeguard was the best candidate for the job. I haven't interacted with him to much but to me he seems to been prone to make snap decisions, and short on words, probably his time and attention is already overextended or probably a character trace as he seems to me to be a very decided person. I don't think he is wrong to the job but there are others that have more experience and would ensure a higher level of commitment to the function, again I don't perceive the need for another bureaucrat, not on the number of administrators we have and on the activity the function has, and Mike has already some extra function to deal with. I haven't yet decided my vote but if opposition appears I will probably support that side. That said my vote will not be a reflection of my views on the user since almost any of the administrators could do the job. --Panic (talk) 05:09, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Support - only too happy to. Mike is a very experienced, hard working, fair and neutral Wikibookian who is very intimate with policy. --- Anonymous DissidentTalk 05:11, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Support --AdRiley (talk) 13:49, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Support Mattb112885 (talk to me) 21:07, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Support - A very dependable and experienced Wikibookian. Has my support all the way. Reece (Talk) (Contributions) 20:10, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Oppose - We don't need more bureaucrats, it's that simple. The four already here can do the once a month task that comes up and we have done so quickly and easily in the past. Four bureaucrats is already pretty large for this project. This is unnecessary. -withinfocus 21:06, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Oppose --Panic (talk) 03:15, 15 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] CheckUser access

[edit] Bot flag

[edit] MonoBot ( talk |  email |  contribs | logs)

Bot to tag fair use images without a rationale. The bot will look for two things: the fair use rationale template OR any image with an extra text besides the {{copyright tag}}. If it has these two things it will skip. Otherwise it will tag and notify the uploader. Monobi (talk) 01:24, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

The bot will also notify users only once (ie no flooding of User talk: pages).
Since the code is ready, I've asked Monobi to do a test run of 10 images plus however many User talk: edits.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 03:50, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Last few edits. I did some slight debugging with Mike on IRC and 1) the bot will only warn a user once (but will still tag the image anyways) and 2) will skip images with fair use rationales already. I can (most likely) add features, so just ask me. Monobi (talk) 04:37, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Looks good. Hopefully we can get this bot flagged soon. :) --Az1568 (Talk) 20:39, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
This user has gone on a bit of a "spree" here, and has edited a number of images and user pages. He has flooded the RC list, and has demonstrated to people watching that his bot performs without serious bugs. I'm going to grant the bot flag here temporarily so that he doesnt flood the RC any further. I'll remove the flag again when he finishes for the night. With concensus here, we can opt to have the flag granted on a more permanent basis. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 00:08, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
I was just about to suggest that he be temporarily flagged to get the edits off RC, and I will also support a permanent flag. Νεοπτόλεμος ( talk | email | contribs ) 00:09, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Support the bot flag until this task is done.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 15:52, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Support --Webaware talk 21:31, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Support I agree. I've seen this bot in action, and I can tell you that it can make many good edits very quickly. I just hope that the operator can find plenty of good jobs to do with it. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 22:14, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Oh, you bet I can ;) Monobi (talk) 02:46, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Done -- Clear consensus for a bot that seems to be performing properly. --SB_Johnny | PA! 03:53, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wknight8111 ( talk |  email |  contribs | logs)

I had a bot flag on this account for a long time and I never used it, so I gave it back. However, recently I've been doing bot-related stuff a lot more frequently, and for the sake of our RC patrollers I think that this account should have the bot flag again. I'm planning to run several passes over the Linear Algebra book tonight, because there was a significant donation of content in that book, although it was all in LaTeX format. I'm going to use my bot to covert the new pages into wikitext, and unfortunately it's a tricky task. I've been asked that I flag myself tonight to prevent flooding the RC list because there are some people actively patrolling. If people don't mind I'm going to give myself the flag tonight temporarily for this job, and we can talk about whether it should become permanent. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 01:56, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Support and keep it this time.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 15:51, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Support of course --Herby talk thyme 15:57, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Support --Jomegat (talk) 16:14, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Support --Webaware talk 21:30, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Support - Might have my own uses for it later too. -withinfocus 21:08, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Done: formalities hardly needed here, of course :). --SB_Johnny | PA! 00:52, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Computer ( talk |  email |  contribs | logs)

  • Bot operator: User:White Cat (Commons:User:White Cat) - En-N, Tr-4, Ja-1
  • List of botflags on other projects: Bot has a flag on wikimedia (meta,commons) wikipedia (ar, az, de, en, es, et, fr, is, ja, ku, nn, no, ru, sr, tr, uz, simple...) (See: m:User:White Cat#Bots)
  • Purpose: Interwiki linking, double redirect fixing, commons delinking (for cases where commonsdelinker fails)

-- Cat chi? 16:58, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Of all the many other accounts you have can you point us to a wiki where you have done similar work recently so that we can see what you do, thanks --Herby talk thyme 17:02, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
My bot account on wikipedia:en:User:Computer can be a good referance. -- Cat chi? 17:39, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
FYI: - Please also note that there is a previous, denied request for bot status here.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 17:45, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I wasn't paying attention to it. Real life issues such as an inter-continental relocation distracted me. -- Cat chi? 18:29, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Question - interwiki.py is very safe. redirect.py is safe, but probably not needed, as I run my bot every time the Special: page is updated (and we have so few we don't really need the bot). Nevertheless, both those functions are very safe, and I'm happy to have you perform them. For Commons delinking, we have User:CommonsDelinker already; I wonder what cases you're providing "backup" and what script is being used for that function? If you're using delinker.py, then it would have all the same faults, so I assume you're using something else for that.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 05:24, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Commonsdelinker operates out of toolserv. If toolserv is down for any reason so is commonsdelinker. I would use delinker.py off of my own computer in such cases. -- Cat chi? 11:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Ahh, fine. I hadn't thought of that. Could you point to another wiki where you've done so? Assuming you know how it works, I'm happy to have this bot serve as a backup.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 17:34, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Support -- this bot has been operating on a number of other projects, and I have heard nothing but good things about it. --SB_Johnny | PA! 03:55, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Support — A bot performing safe and boring tasks that is used on many other wikis? No brainer. Zginder (talk) 21:12, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose - There is no need for this account to have a bot flag. Furthermore, I question the need for two of the three specified tasks. Interwiki linking is welcome, and I'd like to see you do interwiki linking here using this account. If the volume is such that a flag is needed, then I'd support a flag for that task only. Fixing double redirects and acting as a backup for User:CommonsDelinker are not required here.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 18:50, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
    I run into the auto spam blocker without the bot flag. It seems like you are quick to change your standpoint. -- Cat chi? 20:02, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
    I looked at Special:Contributions/CommonsDelinker - it makes perhaps 2/3 edits per week. At that rate, we have no need of a backup. Nor should such a backup (if we ever come to need one) have the flag - it's edits shouldn't be hidden from RC. Furthermore, I have to echo darklama's comments that Wikibooks uses interwiki links very much differently from other projects (specifically, from WP). Assuming you can do it right though, go for it.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 03:32, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose - I don't see a current need for the things this bot can do. Wikibooks doesn't have a backlog of double redirects for example, and I'm not aware of any cases where CommonDelinker has failed to delink images on Wikibooks. Different languages of Wikibooks might have different approaches to using interwiki links if they are used at all, which may not make sense for a bot to deal with. I believe for instance on English Wikibooks interwiki-ing is generally limited to the main page of a book, which means interwiki links are probably not currently a problem that English Wikibooks has. I have no idea if other languages have a similar defacto approaches or policies concerning interwiki links or not. Since this bot is mostly used in a wiki environment where every page is a separate article it doesn't make much since for use with Wikibooks where pages belong to a book rather then being independent of each other. --darklama 21:02, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
    Some here actively patrol the CommonsTicker and watch for images that would be delinked, in order to find a suitable replacement if possible; that probably reduces the potential for the CommonsDelinker to fail. Webaware talk 23:27, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
    If the toolserv goes down, so does commonsdelinker. -- Cat chi? 13:19, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Not done Bots are flagged mostly for the benefit of RC patrollers, and the RC patrollers weighing in here seem to prefer that these edits not be flagged. I encourage White Cat to go ahead run the bot unflagged, and we can flag it later if it ends up causing problems for the RC feeds. --SB_Johnny | PA! 19:46, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Very well. -- Cat chi? 13:17, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rollbacker or Patroller access

[edit] AdRiley ( talk |  email |  contribs | logs) (Rollbacker and Patroller)

  • ( let's comment rather than vote!). Perfect example of someone who really should have these rights. Been here a long time, dealt with plenty of the "grunt" work (particularly naming conventions etc), deals with vandalism. I trust this user & I'd be happy to grant these rights within 24 hours if no one else does or objects. ( is this the sort of process?!) --Herby talk thyme 09:38, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
    I've been waiting for AdRiley (and others) to request the permissions too. What's the deal here? Have they all fallen off the Earth? I'm going to nominate a few more of the ones we know in a minute. Let's at least get them to say they'll use the tools before giving them too.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 14:52, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
    Done - I misunderstood what was happening here. AdRiley requested the rights; I though Herby got tired of waiting (like me!) and did the nom. Well, this one's obvious, so I'm doing it now.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 15:04, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Xerol ( talk |  email |  contribs | logs) (Rollbacker)

Has done good vandal reverts. If you want +patroller, please do a few days' worth without the bit so we can see your work.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 15:26, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Accept - Probably won't go for patroller as I'm spreading my time pretty thin as it is. Xerol Oplan (talk) 03:45, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Done with no objections expressed  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 18:03, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Neoptolemus ( talk |  email |  contribs | logs) (Rollbacker)

Has done good vandalism reverts. If you want +patroller, please do a few days' worth without the bit so we can see your work.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 15:26, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I accept this nomination. Thanks, Mike! Νεοπτόλεμος 19:20, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Done with no objections expressed  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 18:03, 28 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Anonymous Dissident ( talk |  email |  contribs | logs) (Rollbacker & Patroller)

Has done good patrolling recently, including the idea to add additional comments to {{query}}, and has made good use of this parameter. Would also make good use of rollback (has +sysop elsewhere, so knows how to use it).  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 21:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Assuming acceptance I support this one. Known to me & admin in a few places so Rollback would be fine. I'd like Anonymous Dissident's confirmation they are happy that they know what should be here before granting Patroller (something that really is different from project to project) --Herby talk thyme 09:00, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
I do apologise for my lateness in responding, but I accept this nomination, and thank Mike for taking the time to nominate me and write his statement. Cheers, - Anonymous DissidentTalk 07:27, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
And yes, I am fairly sure I have an understanding of how the Patroller access works here, thanks for mentioning it, Herby. - Anonymous DissidentTalk 13:45, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Done  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 18:00, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Chazz ( talk |  email |  contribs | logs) (Rollbacker & Patroller)

Chazz has done some good vandalism work & knows this place well enough to do new page patrol.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 15:26, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

(assuming acceptance) - fine with me --Herby talk thyme 15:27, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm reluctant to take this on... I know my strengths, and I am a writer more than anything else. I appreciate the offer, and would accept the RB bit, because I can see how that would help me in the vandalism reversion that I do, but it's unlikely I would make any decent use of the NPP bit. And, despite what Mike.lifeguard says, I don't know much of WB outside my one pet project... apart from administrative stuff like this, I have only about twenty edits that are outside the Muggles' Guide. Chazz (talk) 17:16, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Done and very happily - long time Wikibookian and well trusted (rollback only for now) --Herby talk thyme 20:01, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Panic2k4 ( talk |  email |  contribs | logs) (Patroller)

Panic knows when something doesn't belong on Wikibooks.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 15:26, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

(assuming acceptance) - fine with me --Herby talk thyme 15:28, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I accept. --Panic (talk) 00:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Done Patroller rights granted, feel free to ask if you have any queries Panic --Herby talk thyme 08:31, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Laleena ( talk |  email |  contribs | logs) (Rollbacker)

Laleena has dealt with some vandalism recently, and has done a good job of it. If you want +patroller, please do a few days' worth without the bit so we can see your work.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 15:26, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I accept, Mike, thank you so much. I will be mainly working on Volcanoes for the test, so check there. Thanks for your trust, I really appreciate it :). Thanks again, Laleena (talk) 01:18, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Comment I've been thinking about this one & left it for others to comment - however they haven't. I am far more up to date with en wb than I was however I accept that I have missed out on some things. I see some very good work from Laleena indeed. However I also see one or two edits that leave me a little unsure. Warning an IP for an edit an hour after they had already been warned (& then requesting a block when there had ben no further edits. Equally possibly being unaware of the block log. I would not stand in the way of Laleena being given the rights but I would also be happy if we saw a little more of the work. We are a small community and "rush" is not in the en wb dictionary! Just a comment and no indication of a lack of trust --Herby talk thyme 08:00, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
I have been trying my best to do a good job, however I might not be :o. Which edits made you feel uneasy? Laleena (talk) 23:11, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Not done - Let's a wait a bit then & see some vandalism reverts etc. over the next week or two, and reconsider then.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 17:25, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Jacques Bergeron ( talk |  email |  contribs | logs) (Rollbacker & Patroller)

Has done some excellent work, and would make a good new page patroller (hint hint).  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 15:26, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

(assuming acceptance) - fine with me --Herby talk thyme 15:28, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the proposition Mike. I have not been around for a couple of weeks (university and work rushes at the same time). My idea was to stay out of the admin business so I can concentrate on maintenance work. Since there is a clear shortage on both side and I will be able to reuse some of my university work on the maintenance side (book list and others) I feel it's a better use of resources not to take "admin like" tasks. Regards, -- Jacques (talk) (email) 03:46, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Not done  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 03:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Terra ( talk |  email |  contribs | logs) (Rollbacker & Patroller(s))

I'm a Rollbacker & a New page patroller on Wikipedia I've used the Rollback feature very carefully, and I wouldn't mind having both Rollbacker & Patroller Rights if that's possible. Terra What do you want? 19:08, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Comment I notice that the vast majority of your edits here are to your own user and user talk pages. having the tools and using them responsibly on WP is a point in your favor, but I would like to see that you are interested in being a regular member here as well. This certainly isn't an opposition vote, and if another admin wants to promote this user I would not object to it. However, I think it would be nice to see you in action so that the need for these tools becomese more apparent. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 19:34, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
I'll go on Wikibooks a bit more, I've spent a lot of time over on Wikipedia and wouldn't mind helping out over here if anyone feels I'm not ready yet to have Rollback & Patroll Rights on this site yet then I'm fine with there decision. Terra What do you want? 19:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Agree with WK. In particular, I'd like to see some page patrolling without the bit, especially as you're new to Wikibooks. New page patrol requires non-trivial knowledge of our inclusion policy and related stuff. Give it a little while & we'll revisit this one.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 00:11, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Very Well, I'll do what you've suggested. Terra What do you want? 10:09, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Not done  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 18:16, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ramac ( talk |  email |  contribs | logs) (Rollbacker & Patroller)

Is active on several Wikibooks languages, including as an admin; knows what he's doing.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 06:01, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Support Great work on it.wikibooks and it.wikipedia. A really trusted user. Rock on! :-) --Filnik (talk) 14:49, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Granted rollbacker only - please do some patrolling without the bit if you would like patroller too.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 00:52, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of permissions

[edit] Administrator access

The below administrators have been inactive for one year or longer besides a few spare edits. These users (except where noted) have been contacted on their talk page as well as e-mailed if possible to inform them of this process. All users listed below (except where noted) will have their sysop rights removed on 7 Feb 2008 and a consensus decision is not needed; this section is serving to inform the community of their de-adminship. Should a nominated admin come back and contest the nomination, some discussion may occur and the once-admin will be able to re-apply for adminship at a later date. -withinfocus 23:11, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I don-t wish to be disruptive but what is a 'non-outlying' edit? What does it mean? According to the logs Ђорђе has been active in the past few months although certainly not as active as in the past. Xania talk 22:21, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Not disruptive at all. I have responded below. -withinfocus 02:07, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Request made at Meta. -withinfocus 00:09, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Both done  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 02:06, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Theresa knott ( talk |  email |  contribs | logs)

Last non-outlying edit 4 Nov 2006.

  • Remove as inactive. Made one deletion in May 2007, but apart from that, nothing. As I said below, it is better for admins to be regular editors here. However, Theresa is still around, so it may do good to inform her, if no one has already, out of politeness. Majorly (talk) 01:00, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
    She used to be a major editor here on Wikibooks, and indeed one of the very early major contributors. But I haven't seen her active lately, even though I hold a great deal of respect for her. I agree that this is a classic example of an inactive administrator... although even a minor desire to become active again with Wikibooks would want me to put her back into admin status. If there were a "Hall of fame" for former Wikibooks contributors, she would be on that list. --Rob Horning (talk) 01:12, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
    I agree with that sentiment, Rob. She really was a superstar around here, and her work with Wikijunior especially has been hard to replace. If we had a "Wikibookians.org" website, we could easily have a hall of fame there, but nobody seemed too interested in that idea. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 01:26, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ђорђе Д. Божовић ( talk |  email |  contribs | logs)

Last non-outlying edit 6 Jan 2008.

5 days ago? Xania talk 22:27, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
S/He's got 11 edits on Jan 6, but hadn't edited for over a year before that. As well, has no log entries since December 8, 2007. I'd call that highly inactive.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 22:38, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I put this one up after scanning every admin's contribs a few days ago and after a second glance this user did a spurt of editing in recent months and so now I am slightly unsure. I've tried to contact the user and have received no response. Does anyone actively object this nomination? I know we shouldn't discuss the policy here but we can certainly question where the inactivity line was drawn. I'd be willing to drop this one if we have users here who are opposed to the inactivity date. -withinfocus 02:07, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, this seems to qualify for an extended period of inactivity. Just because edited few days back... a year is a long time. - Anonymous DissidentTalk 02:45, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Comment I just want to direct people to this users Original RFA. The user requested adminship only to help prevent vandalism to the Serbian book. A number of people expressed concern at his promotion (myself included), and he was promoted to admin after receiving only 2 votes in support (I was one of the support votes, but i'll admit now that my rationale was lacking). He has about 150 log entries total since 2006, the majority of which are image uploads or page moves, not admin tasks. The admin log entries he has are almost all page deletions in the Serbian book, not blocking vandalism, or helping to delete other pages. People don't need admin tools just to help develop a single book. We've rejected many nominations on those grounds in the past. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 15:34, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
He did get past just his one book and has been active in other areas of Wikibooks besides this one area. I've also mentioned him and his account explicitly when en.wikipedia was trying to get rid of non-latin user names.... something IMHO is a bunch of BS that I'm very glad hasn't spread here to this project. That this one issue wasn't even raised at all when he became an admin shows how much of a non-issue that really is. 9 admin actions in the log and the recent activity/contributions do suggest that he is monitoring Wikibooks a little bit, and watching his account... what I thought was the main rationale for de-sysopping. I certainly don't consider him to be a problem user by any means. --Rob Horning (talk) 21:53, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
I think the definition of "activity" can be left open for debate. However, this user hasn't participated (to my knowledge) in any discussions on RFA, VFD, VFU, or anywhere in the reading room. He hasn't combated any vandalism anywhere except in his own books (and they are not a common target, as was assumed in his original RFA). The only pages he has deleted are pages in the Serbian and the Wikiversity "School of Magic" for fewer then 100 total page deletions, with 8 of them having been made in the past year (all on December 7 2007). He has no user blocks, no page imports and no page protections/unprotections in his entire history as an admin here. If he needs 8 pages in the serbian book deleted, he can tag all 8 of them with {{delete}} for the same amount of energy as what he is doing now. we can call him "active" or "inactive" or whatever, but he really isn't using the tools and hasn't demonstrated a need to have them. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 19:01, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
I agree entirely. If this user were to have an RFA right now, I don't think they'd be able to show the need for the tools. This may not technically fall within the "inactivity" clause of the policy, but we should desysop them regardless.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 19:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Agree to desysop. Limited access just for your own books isn't suitable nowadays, and anyhow, he's been barely active since promotion. I'd prefer admins who were regulars here, not those who stopped by occasionally and not knowing what they are doing - especially with no discussions in admin, or otherwise discussion pages. Majorly (talk) 00:58, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Inactive Administrators

The following administrators have been inactive for a minimum of one year, and are to be desysoped per policy. The request will be made at Meta in one month's time. The users below have been informed on their talk page, as well as by email if one was confirmed. As always, no discussion is needed; policy discussion should happen at Wikibooks talk:Administrators, not here.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 00:28, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Daniel Mayer ( talk |  email |  contribs | logs)

  • Daniel is a steward, and gave himself sysop rights here on 03:54, 19 August 2005. Since then, he's made a single edit to his userpage, and has no log entries. While stewards are welcome to take action here in emergencies, it is unnecessary and possibly contrary to policy to leave the sysop bit on where there is an active community, such as here. Judging by Luxo's, Daniel is not active anywhere.
  • Last edit was: 23:57, August 18, 2005 (hist) (diff) User:Daniel Mayer‎ (w:en:user:maveric149 (sysop), meta:user:Daniel Mayer (sysop, steward), wikimedia:user:Daniel Mayer (Wikimedia CFO)) (top) [rollback]
  • Last sysop action was 23:55, August 18, 2005 (diff) (deletion log) (Restore) . . MediaWiki:Sitenotice (fund drive start)

[edit] Dragontamer ( talk |  email |  contribs | logs)

  • Last edit was 19:26, March 15, 2007 (hist) (diff) Wikibooks:Requests for permissions‎ (→{{User3|Iamunknown}})
  • Last sysop action was 17:59, December 22, 2006 Dragontamer (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "Image:Vanilladome.gif" ‎ (Super Mario World was also deleted a while ago...) (restore)

[edit] Jguk ( talk |  email |  contribs | logs)

  • Last edit was 18:04, February 25, 2007 (hist) (diff) User talk:Whiteknight‎ (Wikibooks:Blocking policy)
  • Last sysop action was 11:46, January 14, 2007 Jguk (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "Wikijunior Alphabet/Alternative version" ‎ (restore)

[edit] Brion VIBBER ( talk |  email |  contribs | logs)

While Brion is WMF's lead developer, he doesn't need sysop rights here, and if he ever did, could give them to himself. Brion has stated that he may be desysopped on any wiki where he has the bit.

  • Last edit was 16:33, February 17, 2006 (hist) (diff) Wikibooks:Reading room‎ (→Conference proceedings and simil