Requests for Stewardship

Archives:
 * Archive 1 (December 2016 - May 2019)

PapercutsExist's Request for Stewardship

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Unsuccessful. If you are still interested in helping out, check out Contributing. Many of the tasks you are interested in doing have little need for the Steward toolset.

User: PapercutsExist ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log )

Reasoning for request
Hello, my name is I come PapercutsExist to you today, the community Miraheze, I can revert pages if a user vandalize it and block them for infinite. My request for stewardship sprouts from my will to help the community further. I always want to assist the community further, by doing whatever I can. Be that processing feature requests (which are now largely redundant), processing wiki creation requests, interwiki edit requests, Code of Conduct arbitration and helping the community wherever needed (the noticeboards etc.). I view stewards as the "community managers" of Miraheze. They are part of the twin pillars that ensure Miraheze's survival - the technical managers and the community manager's. contributions, previous experience with renames or interwiki rights. 「ペーパーカット？！」 PapercutsExist 02:22, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Additional comments given by user (if any)
I think it will be good to be a steward.

Oppose

 * 1)  First of all, you don't have many global edits and only 8 edits on Meta, which is not even close to enough for a Steward, and does not demonstrate activity or ability. Second, many of the things you mention you would like to do in your reasoning are not at all what Stewards do: feature requests are handled by sysadmins, wiki creation is handled by wiki creators, Code of Conduct is handled by the commission. Reception123  (talk) ('C' ) 05:37, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * 2) Not enough global edits and evidence showing they have the skill to be a steward. The comments in the request show that you don't even know what you actually do as a steward.  ~ RhinosF1 - (chat) · CA · contribs · Rights - ) 06:47, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * 3)  I don't think you are now have the eligibility to be a steward, you have to demonstrate your long-term contributions activity work for showing that you exactly has the experimenting and confidently to community, before you can appointment your stewardship in the future. SA 13 Bro (talk) 17:00, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * 4)  I don't believe this user is stewardship material for two reasons, lack of global/local edits and does not fully understand what being a Steward entails. Unless this changes pretty drastically I will remain opposed.  Hypercane  <font color="#8152C6">(  talk <font color="#8152C6">) 17:14, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * 5)  The user has almost no global/local edits and the lack of understanding is most times a tell-tale sign of hat collection. Absolutely not. --<span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 20px lightskyblue, -4px -4px 20px HotPink;font-weight:bold;">Examknow ● talk ● contribs 19:37, 29 August 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

Prueba's Request for Stewardship
<div class="boilerplate metadata discussion-archived" style="background-color: #F2F4FC; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #aaa">
 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Unsuccessful. -- Void  Whispers 18:22, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

User: Prueba ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log )

Reasoning for request
I need to request for Stewardship to block global IPs, add wikis, etc.

Additional comments given by user (if any)
I need to request for Stewardship to block global IPs, add wikis, etc.

Oppose

 * 1) Considering that this is the first edit globally. I think we can snowball this request.-- 15:04, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 2) Stewards are trusted, well-established members of the community. Given the fact you only have 2 global edits as of writing, one of which was writing this request for Stewardship, I do not believe you have the expertise to take on such a role. I would personally recommend you build yourself up in the community, join/establish your own wiki and learn the Mediawiki interface best you can, become a wiki creator and then possibly a CVT member. It is like building a house, stewardship is the roof, you can't craft the roof before you have the foundations and the external walls constructed. &#32;  Miraheze Logo.svg CnocBride | Talk | Contribs  15:47, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 3) w:WP:NOTNOW. S</b>A</b> 1</b>3</b> B</b>r</b>o</b> (talk) 16:12, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 4) This user only has 2 global edits and requesting stewardship immediately -- 17:05, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 5) I agree with the others, you can't gain steward rights this soon, especially with only 2 global edits.  Hypercane  <font color="#8152C6">(  talk <font color="#8152C6">) 23:32, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 6) with the recommendation to speedily close as declined. The user has basically no contributions to any MH wiki. Zppix (Meta &#124; CVT Member &#124; talk to me) 23:45, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 7) Agree with Zppix, this should be closed immediately. --DeeM28 (talk) 16:17, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 8) WP:SNOW - With only sixteen global edits and this being his first on meta I absolutely cannot put my support for this request. Come back when you have more contributions and are better known in the community. Sorry. --<span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 20px lightskyblue, -4px -4px 20px HotPink;font-weight:bold;">EK ● contribs 00:11, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 9) I don't think you're eligible to become a Steward. No one can become a Steward with just 5 edits like you. Stewards are well-established, trustworthy, and reliable members. I absolutely can't support this request. Sorry. Wolf (CentralAuth) (Contribs) (talk) 07:51, 10 November 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

Revocation of NDKilla as Steward
User: NDKilla ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log )

Reasoning for request
First of all I would like to make it clear that I think NDKilla has done a great job as a sysadmin, volunteer and Steward in the past and that I have nothing against him. However, I think if you take a look at his recent contributions you can see that he has only had 10 edits on Meta in 2019 and a few log actions here and there. While he does not qualify for the very lenient inactivity rule I feel like it is safe to say that currently he is busy with other things and does not have enough time to take on the role of Steward and sysadmin. My opinion is that Stewards are really important to this farm because they guarantee that the community has a say and I also think that Stewards should be active people who are ready to respond to requests. I understand if a user is busy at some times but I feel like there is not much point in having a Steward who only uses their permissions a few times per year. So therefore even though I admire the work that NDKilla has done I think that he is no longer fit to serve the community as a Steward due to his inactivity. --DeeM28 (talk) 16:16, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Support

 * 1)  as proposer see rationale. --DeeM28 (talk) 16:16, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) not going to happen sorry bud... Zppix (Meta &#124; CVT Member &#124; talk to me) 16:39, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * That's quite inconsiderate, what is the reasoning behind your oppose? Should there not be a reason in your vote?
 * 1) still active and improving behind the scenes.  ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  16:49, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Respectfully where would you see the activity? If behind the scenes you mean as a sysadmin no one is putting that into question but publicly if you look at his activity as a Steward it can really not be considered 'active'. --DeeM28 (talk) 17:02, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * IRC, Discord, Phab. If they’re here, there’s no reason to remove tools and based on their respond time to recent incidents and this they are. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  17:04, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Comments

 * Just wanted to comment that I'm well aware I'm extremely inactive and barely using the rights. The note on my user page has been there for over a year. However, like you said I still have some edits and such and I don't think not using my rights very much is a reason to remove them. I'm still trustworthy, last I checked, and I do handle some things, like a recent rename (that was requested over discord!) I'm not very active on-wiki, but I'm still in the staff channel on IRC and Discord and I'm still managing the discord (not exactly steward-esque, but I recently created a new role and assigned it permissions for a different type of staff). -- Cheers, NDKilla ( Talk • Contribs ) 17:01, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your input. --DeeM28 (talk) 17:03, 3 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Additional comment less related to me exclusively. It's not like there's an upper bound on the number of Stewards or anything. An inactive Steward holding the permissions isn't preventing anyone else from also being a Steward. We've proven that. By removing an(y) inactive steward(s) you're only guaranteeing that someone who might handle something can't, you're not making it more likely for things to get handled. -- Cheers, NDKilla ( Talk • Contribs ) 17:06, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Sourav Halder's Request for Stewardship
User: Sourav Halder ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; Halder blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log )

Reasoning for request
Hi I'm Sourav Halder. I'm(bn, en-3, bpy-1, as-1) Language wiki Stewardship I want to take the position.global group permissions for add Special:GlobalUsers/steward: please.

Oppose

 * 1) W:WP:HATSHOP I see a sign of hat collecting and this user only has 3 edits on Meta.  10:28, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * 2) Per W:WP:SNOW and W:WP:NOTNOW. --DeeM28 (talk) 11:00, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * 3) No eligible experience to be a Stewardship right now, hat collecting are not reality. S</b>A</b> 1</b>3</b> B</b>r</b>o</b> (talk) 11:29, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Shaunak Chakraborty's Request for Stewardship
User: Shaunak_Chakraborty ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log )

Reasoning for request
Hello, I am an Interwiki admin and the founder of one of the top Miraheze wiki, Gyaanipedia. I am a regularly active user. Gyaanipedia is same as Uncyclopedia or Wikipedia, it is expanding everyday. There are many problems mostly the sock user problem as Gyaanipedia is extending everyday it is not possible for me to request or report each an every problem or query and then wait for a long. I want to resolve all these problems including sock users by myself. It will be time saving and beneficial for me as well as the other stewards also, I have an editing experience of almost 2 years in Miraheze.

Additional comments given by user (if any)
Yes I am accepting that I don't have much edits on Meta but you all can trust on me since two years continuously I had shown my honesty with dedication. In future I am planning to start more an more wikis so it will be very difficult for me to request and report each and every query and then wait, It will be also very time saving for me to create new wikis of Gyaanipedia. I promise that if I got this right then I will complete my duties on Meta on time.

Questions for candidate

 * 1) Without actively engaging on pages such as Community noticeboard or Stewards' noticeboard how can you prove to the community that you are a good candidate for this right as well as prove that you understand our global policies? Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 06:14, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users

 * Wow, a user getting stewardship is very rare... 12:54, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Support

 * My first vote on the Meta. I do see that you have created a popular wiki, and you are an admin on many others. I also see that you have had no blocks in the past. I can see you possibly being a steward, however, you're lack of doing certain admin tasks such as blocking and protecting, as well as promoting and demoting users as a interwiki admin for the meta areas, I am concerned. However, I will assume good faith, and weakly support you. --TFFfan (talk) 12:02, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) Not sure if I can support when you don't have much prior engagement here on Meta. Also while being an Interwiki Administrator is great, I would like to see you being a CVT member or similar first. That will help people see how you'd do with more global user rights and helping out the broader global community. Sorry, but for right now I oppose.  Hypercane  <font color="#8152C6">(  talk <font color="#8152C6">) 20:35, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * , for now, per Hypercane. I don't necessarily think that a lot of edits is necessary for certain global or even local administrator permissions, particularly because the activity and edit levels at Miraheze Meta are considerably lower than, say, English Wikipedia or Wikimedia Meta. While Stewards do help to control sockpuppetry that crosses multiple Miraheze wikis, they also handle a lot of other tasks. I would rather see a stronger nomination statement that further elucidates how the user intends to help out with activities within the purview of the stewards. I'd also like to see some evidence of the user's technical competence for these administrative tasks. CVT sounds like a great option, which could see the user progress as a Global Sysop, perhaps fairly quickly once the user has a demonstrable track record, but to request Stewardship without having been a Global Sysop seems like the wrong approach. Dmehus (talk) 20:21, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) not in a snowball's chance in hell Zppix (Meta &#124; CVT Member &#124; talk to me) 01:27, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 2) Per Dmehus. WickyHoney (talk) 01:45, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 3) for now. I have looked more at your edits, and a message on your talk page was concerning. In addition, I see the message by @ wrote, and I agree with that statement. I don't think you have the experience yet to become a steward. I will say, keep going, and come back maybe in a year. --TFFfan (talk) 22:12, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 4)  I also agree with the other people above that it would be better if you had more activity on Meta and also if you had global sysop before Steward. DeeM28 (talk) 07:33, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 5)  I see no truly sufficient reasoning why you would need such a right. I also do not see enough meta contributions to support you with this.  23:54, 22 July 2020 (UTC) ］ |

ThesenatorO5-2's Request for Stewardship
<div class="boilerplate metadata discussion-archived" style="background-color: #F2F4FC; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #aaa">
 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * per diff.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 09:28, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

User: ThesenatorO5-2 ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log )

Reasoning for request
I founded a wiki with the site name "scpwikimc", and it is going pretty well these days. I also have a few months of experience in daily management tasks and wikitext, and I also have a month of experience in the development of KiWiz, the MW offline reader for macOS and iOS. I am requesting this right to help me participate in X-wiki business and also the development of the software, and also to block or lock abusive users' accounts. I recently also made 400 edits in Wikimedia wikis.

Comments by other users

 * here too?, , , , , , . Should be declined immediatelly. No chance. --MrJaroslavik (talk) 06:06, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) Another clear WP:SNOW, only edits on one individual wiki and unknown by anyone in the community. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 06:54, 29 July 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

Revocation of 開拓者 (The Pioneer) as Steward
User: 開拓者 (The Pioneer) ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log )

Reasoning for request
I want to say firstly that this is nothing against The Pioneer and from what I have seen he has done a good job as a steward and has helped out the Miraheze community. This worries me because in my opinion the most dangerous thing is when someone with high permission leaves or is inactive without telling anybody else. I agree that in my last revocation request I was mistaken because NDKilla was still around and helped out on Discord (and I could not know this because I am not a member of Discord) but in this situation The Pioneer has not been seen anywhere and is missing from the project which for me is dangerous security-wise. I understand if the Pioneer has real life issues and he/she can not be around but I think everyone would appreciate if she/he would have said something on his/her userpage before he/she left so unexpectedly. My proposal is that unless The Pioneer comes back and replies (which will make me withdraw this) he is removed for unannounced inactivity. This does not reflect his performance but is only because of the dangerous security problems it may cause. And before someone will mention the two factor authentification system, every system has its weaknesses and it is better to be careful! DeeM28 (talk) 09:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Additional comments given by user (if any)
I am also of the opinion that in cases like this one there should be a rule that says that if anyone with high permissions is completely inactive for 3 months and gives no warning to the community before why they are leaving they should be removed for inactivity. I will think about doing an RfC for this. DeeM28 (talk) 09:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Support

 * 1)  as initiator. --DeeM28 (talk) 09:47, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 2)  Since even in June only one thing was done (a rename) I decided to also support this. The pioneer seems to have left Miraheze and shouldn't remain steward if that's the case.  12:40, 28 August 2020 (UTC) ］ |
 * 3)  I don't think a steward should disappear without saying anything. --GondorChicken (talk) 17:58, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 4) I agree, no wonder why Pioneer is gone for no reason. -- H ookuai ( Talk to Nuclear Jaws ) 20:45, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 5)  While I usually wouldn't want to support a steward being demoted because of circumstances we might not know, this is a bit excessive for an inactive period. Unless they come back before the vote closes, I will support this.  Hypercane  <font color="#8152C6">(  talk <font color="#8152C6">) 22:19, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 6) A steward needs to be very active Tom191 (talk) 18:59, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Abstain

 * 1)  I will now abstain as I see genuine truth in NDKilla's reasoning, but I will just be left out of this vote.  Hypercane  <font color="#8152C6">(  talk <font color="#8152C6">) 00:27, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 2)  As many of the opposes have pointed out, NDKilla's oppose reasoning was very convincing against revocation. Personally, I agree that it would have been preferable if The Pioneer would've left some sort of notice regarding his complete inactivity instead of leaving with no notice, and that would have been totally fine and acceptable since everyone is a volunteer here and everyone is free to take breaks or concentrate on their personal life. However, I will abstain in this case as I still hope The Pioneer will respond to my messages and come back (at least to explain their situation) and also because it is a bit strange for this request to be made since there is also a policy in place for inactivity, and to change that there would have to be an RfC or some sort of community discussion. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 06:39, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1)  If anybody thought Stewards not using their accounts for 2 months was a security issue we were unwilling to deal with, the current policy would not allow for 6 months of inactivity. Additionally, 2 months does not seem like a long time to me at all, especially when you consider the fact that most of the world is dealing with a massive pandemic at the moment. Maybe they got sick, were dealing with other things, are more focused on employment, etc at the moment. Also, I had a notice on my user page for almost two years, to the summary of basically telling people that they shouldn't come to me for help, even though I remained a Steward the entire time. At the time of my revocation request it was pointed out that I was active behind the scenes, which at the time was partly true. I've been increasingly more active on irc/discord, and occasionally performing CheckUser etc, but this all started in the last year or so of that. For a very long period of time I was barely maintaining enough activity to not be considered Inactive according to the letter of the policy, yet I think it went unnoticed for years. In light of the current situations, and The Pioneer's performance previously, I think it would be unfair to revoke Stewardship before the official inactivity deadline, and see no other reason to do so. -- Cheers, NDKilla ( Talk • Contribs ) 22:52, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 2) * As an additional note, I believe this policy strongly goes against the spirit and wording of the current policy, specifically, This is and should be seen as a pretty relaxed requirement. Like everyone else here, Stewards are volunteers. Stewards should feel comfortable performing any of their responsibilities when it is possible for them to do so. -- Cheers, NDKilla ( Talk • Contribs ) 22:59, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Normally I'd agree with you, but given the fact that even back in June, only one action was performed (a rename), and before that they were were active before May 24, and the fact that they didn't announce their inactivity, I am reluctantly supporting this. 23:14, 28 August 2020 (UTC) ］ |
 * I'd respectfully like to point out that my entire argument still stands including what you said. May 24th is barely over 3 months ago (a few days), no where near the required 6 months according to the policy, and additionally, I would consider the world to still have been royally screwed over by May of this year. -- Cheers, NDKilla ( Talk • Contribs ) 23:54, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You make a very good point, it was been a rough year for some people, which actually may've been a factor in their inactivity. I'll actually consider reversing my vote. 00:18, 29 August 2020 (UTC) ］ |
 * 1)  Although Pioneer only did one edit in June, which is a rename, and I didn't see The Pioneer for over 2 months, it's under 6 months, and this year may be difficult to be active (including me).   Circley  Does Extracter    ( Circley Talk  |  Global   |  Email the Cloud ) 00:23, 29 August 2020 (UTC)  Amended. Moved from weak support to weak oppose  Circley  Does Extracter    ( Circley Talk
 * 2)  I honestly struggled with whether to participate in this request at all, but earlier today, decided that, per 's comments that twenty participants need to express a view, it's better to at least express a neutral view through abstention. On the one hand, DeeM28's most persuasive argument is that  has not made any attempt at communicating with his steward colleagues on the reason(s) for his extended absence and expected date of return. I hear 's counter-argument that we're in the midst of a global pandemic, yes, and maybe he is sick, but, at the same time, he's also still active on his Twitter account (as recently as this past week). It shouldn't be too difficult to shoot off a quick e-mail to one of the stewards or reply to one of the advanced permissions users that has privately attempted to contact him via e-mail. On the other hand, though, 's argument that this is, procedurally, too soon and out of process is compelling. It's difficult for me to outright, or strongly, oppose this, and I'd have an easier time doing so if The Pioneer had been in active communication with his steward and Global Sysop colleagues in terms of the reason(s) for his extended absence and expected date of return. As far as the security concerns go, yes, that is also a valid argument of, but this could be mitigated, somewhat, by either a steward or a system administrator confirming that his account has two-factor authentication enabled, or still enabled. The security concerns could also be eliminated, completely, by either (a) stewards globally locking The Pioneer's account pending his getting in touch with them privately or (b) a community noticeboard discussion from a Mirahezian requesting his account be globally locked pending his privately contacting a steward. But, as of right now, this isn't the forum for that, as bureaucratic as that may sound. So, this is where I sit, weak-ishly opposing. Dmehus (talk) 02:09, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 3)  Per NDKilla and my reply to NDKilla's vote above.  02:17, 29 August 2020 (UTC) ］ |