Meta:Requests for permissions/Archive 8

__NOINDEX__

Magogre (Wiki creator)

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * There is consensus here that the candidate is active on Meta Wiki, principally, and generally competent from their observations of the user's edits and other logged actions. Though there is no discussion on the candidate's understanding of the principal policy for wiki creators, there is also also no apparent dispute at present with regard to the candidate's belief in their stated understanding of Content Policy and ability to apply it in not only wiki request approvals but wiki request declines. On that point, and as a practical matter, I would encourage the candidate to exercise caution and, where they are unsure, to refer to colleagues or to stewards for advice. If unsure on whether to approve a wiki request, it is rarely, if ever, a problem to ask the wiki requestor for more details on the purpose and scope of their wiki. Additionally, it is never a problem to place it on hold for another wiki creator or steward if they are still unsure. That's all part of demonstrating good judgment in one's approach. Accordingly, this request is ✅, and I'll follow up with customary wiki creator tips following this close. Dmehus (talk) 04:35, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Group: Wiki creator Reason: Hi. I am Magogre, formerly edited as Mazzaz. I would like to become a wiki creator to help reviewing the wiki requests. I have been active since June 2021 and regularly edit Meta. I have read all the related policies and guides and I believe I have a good understanding of relevant policies such as Content Policy and Dormancy Policy. Thanks! --Magogre (talk) 10:20, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Apart from my main account (Magogre), I have used the following accounts to edit Miraheze:More (used for tests on PTW),.The latter two were already disclosed on my User page and I don't know their passwords. --Magogre (talk) 07:45, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Questions for candidate

 * 1) What is your -N native language? Is there any notable work you have done on meta in this language?  dross  (t • c • g) 18:00, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
 * A: My native language is ks-N (more specifically ks-arab-N) but I don't write it well. I know Urdu (ur-3) and a little Hindi I haven't contributed in my native language but I have translated pages into Urdu. I have also created pages in English such as Closed wikis and the recent one Shortcuts. --Magogre (talk) 18:35, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Discussion
Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.


 * , given Mag has been a regular contributor for some time, has been found in various areas of Miraheze doing decent work beyond just here, and in my experience has been open to communicate and discuss logic for decisions as well, something I think is desirable for holders of the WC bit. As far as his knowledge, I have not seen evidence to question it even if I don't think it's been tested often enough to say. But really, this bit is where it actually starts getting tested anyways. Ultimately I think his judgement is competent enough to carry the distance. --Raidarr (talk) 13:00, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
 * 1)  Active contributor of meta, skilled in making decisions.  Anpang   Talk   Stuff  09:10, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
 * 2)  YellowFrogger (✉ Talk  ✐ Edits ) 18:35, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
 * 3) I would like to make clear that I do not so much appreciate that the Wiki Creator group feels as though it has become a sort of "hat collecting" responsibility with the nearly unnecessary combined amounts of wiki creators and functionaries we currently have. However, I foresee serious benefit to having a wiki creator who might be able to fill some of the current approval time gaps. Considering all, I am inclined to believe that Magogre would be effective with this access.  dross  (t • c • g) 07:27, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
 * 4)  While it is true we are well stocked with wiki creators and that we don't tend to have a huge backlog generally with most requests being processed in a relatively short amount of time, having another active member on the team wouldn't hurt. We generally tend to fluctuate between 2-5 active wiki creators out of 23 wiki creators at this present moment so having a wiki creator who is actually active would be wonderful. Additionally, I also agree with Dross' statement above about Magorge being able to undertake this responsibility.  Agent Isai  Talk to me! 07:59, 26 November 2021 (UTC)


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

YellowFrogger (Wiki creator)

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Closing as unsuccessful. Almost unanimous opposition and what appears to be questionable behavior with people interacting around the discussion. It's my belief if you'd like people to support you continue to be active around here as 1 month of meta activity seemed to be a big point, and also... 'hahaha' 'you're so funny' just laughing at all the people opposing your request without actually discussing it solves nothing. Since nobody appears to be here to discuss this further, going to close. -- Cheers, NDKilla ( Talk • Contribs ) 01:47, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Group: Wiki creator Reason: Hello everybody. If you don't know me or haven't seen my name in recent changes (which is difficult if you're inactive): I joined Miraheze in early October 2020, which at first was not interested in contributing to Meta. As there were many pages that lacked language translations, I contributed to several translations. I have seen that most wiki creators are inactive, and especially at dawn, where it takes up to 2 hours for a wiki to be accepted or declined. That aside, the good thing is that Miraheze has been gaining wiki creators lately, and, I now want to get on with it (volunteer). To learn more: My timezone is UTC-3, I have 27,300 global edits (23,000 on the my ownership wiki), and other contributions to my wikis from personal annotations, or voluntary contributions to other wikis, and I like to look at recent changes to dedicate my lovely time to see what's going on. I try my best to see what users are asking for in the CN or SN (if I'm not aware of the matter I ignore it for a steward/admin to rate) and make Miraheze better. I have a smattering of content policy, and if I don't memorize, I have time to reread the entire page. I also see the CoC and respect what is written there.

Discussion
Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.


 * 1)   Good candidate, well there are already lots of wiki creators but there's still some wiki requests that have a more than 2 hours delay between request creation and review. *realizes he's only been active recently* oh *turns vote to weak*  Anpang   Talk   Stuff  03:40, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * 2)  sadly per WP:NOTNOW. Have no doubt that you are a valued contributor and I thank you for your enthusiasm but 1 month of experience on Miraheze Meta is too little. The bulk of your edits began in October and has mainly consisted of translations. I would really like for you to at least wait another 2 months before requesting the bit as it does feel like hat-collecting for you to request the right so soon. Additionally, your "smattering" (meaning small) knowledge of the Content Policy does concern me as wiki creators must know the Content Policy like the back of their hand. On top of that, I strongly suggest you develop better communication patterns with fellow editors other than making abstract comments and telling an administrator to calm down as he was a "15 year old" without patience or vandalising articles to say Stewards are slow unlike Fandom staff when you experience a delay in response time. Should you resolve all of that, have no doubt you have my support in 2-3 months :)  Agent Isai  Talk to me! 04:03, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * In fact, I started contributing to Meta (by replying to CN and SN messages) in September (two months) if you roll my contributions down further. I have knowledge of wiki code (including modules, templates, etc.) and a medium knowledge of HTML and CSS (so my theme is modified a bit). As I stated, I read the content policy again and I will take what is written there. As for what you said about my vandalism, it was meant to be an opinion only, as it's warning you on the page that it's not official, and at that time the stewards were really quite inactive, which prompted me to write all of this. About what I told the teen user, I told him to just be calm, but I still consider him a good user. I will review my attitudes not to commit all of this again. Hope you change your mind after reading it. YellowFrogger (✉ Talk  ✐ Edits </b>)</b> 04:19, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your commitment to watching your attitude but even so, I am concerned about your knowledge of the Content Policy. You should know it well before requesting wiki creator. Again, I strongly suggest reapplying in 2-3 months as I feel this is a WP:SNOW and WP:HATSHOP case sadly. Should you reapply in a few months, I will definitely consider giving you my strongest support as a valued contributor :) Agent Isai  Talk to me! 04:23, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * 1)  There is not an easy way to say this especially given the typical wiki presumption of good faith, but I don't have a good feel on this one. There are rough edges in both English use and in approach to other users that must be ironed out. In particular and in slight response to another conversation, one thing I would like to see is the reasoning being given before, or instead of an extreme response like NOOOOOOOOOO or otherwise strongest opposes thrown against the crowd for no immediate reason. Frankly, I think there is a maturity and a convention/policy familiarity problem here which would only result in complications to the wiki creation system, not to mention the short period of time that lead to this request. --Raidarr (talk) 09:12, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * You should be content with a wiki creator who speaks other languages. Miraheze does not have a standard for all its wiki creators to use English, not least because they are not obligated. And recently I've been trying to improve this second language, without using translate, for example. There are people who use fake accounts, and they get a second chance, and someone who responds normally with the impression that he's being rude, but he's not, ends up getting complicated because of that. I understand your placement, so actually, I take my time as well to reread the content policy and improve along with it. Didn't see the comment above? I review my attitudes about not committing all this again, but it seems you quoted that "I would be a complication to the wiki creation system" nonetheless. YellowFrogger</b> (✉ Talk </b> ✐ Edits </b>)</b> 13:14, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Growth is not an on/off switch; it takes time both to improve in practice and in image. Your improvements are commendable, but do not excuse weak points that I believe continue to exist and an unease that has only grown witnessing the various replies here. My position stands. Multiple languages are a bonus, not the deal maker. --Raidarr (talk) 18:54, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Hahahahah, funny! YellowFrogger</b> (✉ Talk </b> ✐ Edits </b>)</b> 18:57, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I need you to solicit reasons from the Oppose other than Hat, Snow, the most sincere "NOT" in the world and blah blah. Linking to diffs of mistakes made by me to see if I can improve. Just like that. It's no use just a big text. YellowFrogger</b> (✉ Talk </b> ✐ Edits </b>)</b> 19:12, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I have not mentioned hat, snow or 'not', though I am not against assessing again in the future. When I am in front of a desktop I will, in good faith, break down what I consider problematic through your talk page if you wish. However, the trouble is complicated and cannot be made short in a way I think would sincerely help you. Singling out diffs only reflects part of a wider impression that even very skilled English writers would find tricky to break down. --Raidarr (talk) 20:12, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * 1)  Per the above. -- Cheers, Bukkit ( Talk • All Contribs ) 12:00, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * The quote above is an excuse to vote Oppose. As always here in Miraheze's Request for permissions, besides of course, rules imported from Wikipedia here, (like snow and hat collecting). Well, I'd rather vote controversial opposition than create a fake account and say it fooled me. YellowFrogger</b> (✉ Talk </b> ✐ Edits </b>)</b> 12:38, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * The issue has been resolved. I'm inclined to strongly oppose this. -- Cheers, Bukkit ( Talk • All Contribs ) 16:23, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * @YellowFrogger, Keep in mind everyone has the right to vote, and express as they wish (Excuse or not), As mentioned above by Other's i would strongly advise trying again in a couple of months, And Withdrawing this.  Aside from all this  i  recommend that you Interact with the community more, and Continue  editing, without any Group....
 * FYI (Their is many ways to help out at meta and other communities without user rights)
 * Additionally the reason why an assumption of this being hat collecting is because your still Fairly new and of course i would agree its still early) Cocopuff2018 (talk) 16:28, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * "The issue is resolved", and a link again to a Wikipedia policy page (as usual importing rules from Wikipedia). The rule says: "Don't relive dead subjects". If so, this rule should also apply to what the Raidarr said above. Cheers. <b style="color: #1965e0;">YellowFrogger</b> <b style="color: #069404;">(<b style="color: #069404;">✉ Talk </b> <b style="color: #069404;">✐ Edits </b>)</b> 18:09, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Everyone has the right to vote, at no time did I say that voting to oppose is wrong or I'm condemning the person for that, I just said that all the mentioned problems have already been resolved and that I won't even commit again, so there is little reason to vote to oppose. (Note: It's been two months since I've been editing Meta commonly). I don't even need to cite edits with community interaction, just see my contributions here on Meta and I commonly answer on CN and SN (of course, just about things I know, so I try to help beggars who ask for help on wiki code or something if a Steward doesn't respond first). Also, you have already asked for Wiki creator privileges, stating that we need more Wiki creators, but withdrew due to lack of time. So, what does it cost to vote for a volunteer who will devote some of their time to it? On Wikipedia's Hat Collection Rule page, it says: "When applying for stewardship or any other rights, you must demonstrate that you will actually use these tools to help improve Wikipedia. They should not be used ​​just as a means to yourself. displaying or stimulating someone's ego.", "is the process of gaining rights on Wikipedia (and other wikis) just to show off or to boost one's ego, rather than because you have any actual use for them." Are you claiming that I'm wanting to be a wiki creator for the sake of others, to stimulate egos? That I will have no use and no use at all? I came to Meta to contribute, and never thought about those Snow or Hat Collecting deals or what their page(s) says. <b style="color: #1965e0;">YellowFrogger</b> <b style="color: #069404;">(<b style="color: #069404;">✉ Talk </b> <b style="color: #069404;">✐ Edits </b>)</b> 18:31, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) Trust me you're an awesome volunteer and hardworking too, but lets wait for a little while and request later on. It'll help you become more prepared and duly ready. per, 2 to 3 months time wouldn't hurt. Ugochimobi (talk) 19:20, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * 2) I was going to wait a bit before replying, but I decided to make my stance on this request now. While I do not edit the Meta that often, rather check out here multiple times a day to respond to any noticeboards that might need my input, I have noticed that you are a helpful user. However, I will agree with what the others have said by stating that while this is a good-faith request, your communication skills with other users are fairly problematic and can be incredibly confusing at times. To relate to that, as Raidarr mentioned, you have given some very extreme responses that frankly don't help in cases (Such as the "NOOOOOOO!" in this recent RFC). This also could be just me, but you also seem to get a little aggressive at times. I would recommend that you wait about a few more months or at the very least try to improve behavior before requesting this again. TigerBlazer (talk) 20:22, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * 3) after behavior on discord and in this reques, I wouldnt even consider this request. Zppix (Meta &#124; talk to me) 01:08, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Haha you're so funny, I'll find a circus for you. Forgets. Seriously: it just doesn't make sense to vote to oppose this topic ja surrendered, and even quote "behavior at Discord, since I was respectful and didn't do any harm or say anything bad to any user". But forget. Health. <b style="color: #1965e0;">YellowFrogger</b> <b style="color: #069404;">(<b style="color: #069404;">✉ Talk </b> <b style="color: #069404;">✐ Edits </b>)</b> 01:24, 7 December 2021 (UTC)


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

Bukkit (Wiki creator)
<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.
 * I can agree with YellowFrogger and DarkMatterMan, that it is still a bit too soon. I’ll probably be back with a request sometime within Feburary, or even later than that. -- Cheers, Bukkit ( Talk • All Contribs ) 18:58, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Group: Wiki creator Reason: Recently, I have been on Meta most of the time, and seeing the RC Logs, I can tell that some requests can take a while to get a response from a wiki creator (understandable, as we are all volunteers). I will be available for a lot more, due to logging into my main account (This account) on all of my devices (including my Samsung smart-fridge). for reading this request, and as I have said, I have made a statement. -- Cheers, Bukkit ( Talk • All Contribs ) 21:59, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Questions for candidate

 * Thank you for volunteering! All wiki creators must know Content Policy like the back of their hand when reviewing wiki requests. In your original request, you did not mention you had knowledge of the Content Policy or of any of the other global policies nor of the Wiki creators guide however, through past interactions with you and your previous RfP for Wiki Creator, I know you do possess knowledge of them. As such, I would like to know what you think of the following requests and if you would approve or decline them and what your reasoning is for that. Thanks!


 * Wiki name: "Hero's Journey" Wiki subdomain: herosjourney.miraheze.org Description: "Hero's Journey is an MMO game. Our current wiki is on Fandom but we want to move to Miraheze because it gives us greater freedom. Fandom's policy changes also are concerning because previously acceptable wikis are now all of a sudden closed. We want to move to Miraheze because we can customize our skin and domain."
 * Wiki name: '揭露“猎虎打苍蝇”' Wiki subdomain: zhenxiang.miraheze.org Description: "Help the wiki show the real government policy. Wiki shows all people the real little bear how it is and nature of company."
 * Wiki name: Free for All wiki Wiki subdomain: free4all.miraheze.org Description: "The Free for All Wiki is devoted to let users write about whatever they want! Users can also test MediaWiki at the same time while they write about whatever they want."
 * Wiki name: My Notes Wiki subdomain: semiinotes.miraheze.org Visbility: Private Description: "Private notes for my Seminar II class."
 * Wiki name: 4chan gen wiki Wiki subdomain: 4chanwiki.miraheze.org Description: "General wiki about 4chan. Will discuss and archive all notable 4chan events across all boards. It will include info on the OP and follow ups by the OP to the original post, including trilogies. Will also discuss notorious 4chan users."
 * Wiki name: Hitler in WWII Wiki subdomain: hitlerinwwii.miraheze.org Description: "This wiki will focus on Hitler during World War II. This wiki will go deeper into his thought process according to sources in the matter and will document his ideology change through different periods in his life." Agent Isai  Talk to me! 23:08, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello, and thanks for the questions.
 * 1. Accept, this request has a good reasoning.
 * 2. Request clarification, as I cannot tell exactly what this wiki will be about.
 * 3. Decline, as we can only have 1 test wiki, and “let users write about whatever they want!” concerns me, as this doesn’t directly mean that it would allow users to violate, but it might have no policies to the wiki.
 * 4. Accept, as IIRC, private wikis can have a short description, as long as it wouldn’t sound like it would violate the content policy.
 * 5. Decline, as it says “It will include info on the OP”, and “Will also discuss notorious 4chan users.”, and can have the potential to violate the CP.
 * 6. Accept, as this will be documenting history.
 * Again, I would like to thank you for the questions, as if I got one wrong, it would better my knowledge. -- Cheers, Bukkit ( Talk • All Contribs ) 23:29, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
 * 3. (extended) And by no policies, I mean local. It also might not enforce global policies, requiring CVT intervention. -- Cheers, Bukkit ( Talk • All Contribs ) 16:46, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * All your answers are okay except for #1. #1 does not give you enough information on the wiki or it's scope. Generally, the request should have 2-3 sentences worth of description, not filler. The Fandom part was purely filler and did not give you any indication of what the wiki is about and when considering a wiki request, should not be counted to the quota of 2-3 sentences. I encourage you backread through some wiki requests and see how we approved/declined them and for what reason. Should you become a wiki creator, I exhort you to never doubt in asking for help from other wiki creators when something is unclear or falls under a grey area. Thank you for answering these questions. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 17:05, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * . I have looked back on the description, and yes, I entirely agree. -- Cheers, Bukkit ( Talk • All Contribs ) 17:26, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Discussion
Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.


 * 1) He started editing in October (163 local edits in Meta, most of them in their own user subpage), although we need wiki creators. Also, 5 months ago, he was already accused of creating a fake account and reporting it himself (something childish), even so it's old. However, you have to wait longer or contribute by helping with some things like CN (or translations) in Meta. To gain the necessary trust with you, wait more. Next time, you'll probably get my vote. <b style="color: #1965e0;">YellowFrogger</b> <b style="color: #069404;">(<b style="color: #069404;">✉ Talk </b> <b style="color: #069404;">✐ Edits </b>)</b> 23:08, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I fully understand your concern, however per the “contribute by helping with some things like CN (or translations) in Meta,” part, I have actually been contributing on Discord, Phabricator, and GitHub as well as on Meta. -- Cheers, Bukkit ( Talk • All Contribs ) 23:38, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
 * There is no way to contribute to Discord. You must be active on Meta to be a wiki creator. Have you seen Wiki Creator with 0 edits here? <b style="color: #1965e0;">YellowFrogger</b> <b style="color: #069404;">(<b style="color: #069404;">✉ Talk </b> <b style="color: #069404;">✐ Edits </b>)</b> 23:44, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I am a patroller here, and spend time throughout my day to make sure that I can see edits here. Check my patrol logs, please. -- Cheers, Bukkit ( Talk • All Contribs ) 23:51, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm a Patroller, I do the same thing too. That's not why I'm a Wiki Creator. <b style="color: #1965e0;">YellowFrogger</b> <b style="color: #069404;">(<b style="color: #069404;">✉ Talk </b> <b style="color: #069404;">✐ Edits </b>)</b> 00:00, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I really don’t want to start an argument, so I’m leaving it here. I respect your !vote, but just wanted to point something out. -- Cheers, Bukkit ( Talk • All Contribs ) 00:05, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Remember when he's User:WikiJS? He moved accounts to User:Bukkit in June. He's active in June. Anpang   Talk   Stuff  01:23, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * YellowFrogger became active in September I believe; the transition may have been missed on him, and the full history is not immediately clear. --Raidarr (talk) 02:09, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) ; I do not see the urgency claimed so far for additional hands on deck. If anything I think the need lies in more attention from creators rather than having more out of a wish to minimize wait times, which to my knowledge are rarely unreasonable especially in recent times. I will note, Bukkit is merely the latest account of a series that began to my knowledge with, which carries a registration in 2020 and a reasonable edit count, including just shy of 200 on Meta. I do not believe this right hinges on one's noticeboard activity or translation work, though they could certainly help to tell one's commitment. Rather the key questions are if the user is trusted to be familiar with Content Policy and trustworthy enough to have the necessary discretion in interpreting what requests may be more likely to cause issue than others. To put it another way, I think a wiki creator should demonstrate competent policy knowledge, have a keen sense of judgement and work well with the community at large. I'm not convinced based on evidence so far. However I know another volunteer is working on questions. Their answers may change my impression, and I do not hold my votes as absolute if new details come up. --Raidarr (talk) 01:18, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * 2)  Doesn't this seem a bit too soon? --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 17:07, 5 December 2021 (UTC)


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

Excelsior (Bot)
<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.
 * I saw that I have no needs none made to run with this account. Also, don't need this bot flag. I will have more plans in the future. --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 21:54, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Group: Bot

Reason: An alternative to lazy human edits, with this flag, perhaps it performs some more advanced responsibilities. I'm learning with .php and AWB, and I don't rule it out! Thanks. --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 21:51, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Discussion
Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.


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

YellowFrogger (Wiki creator) (2)
<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.
 * As per a user's concern, and I also think I don't need those rights now. In fact, it was another user who asked to open it, I would only open it at the end of this month, he also mentioned that he would not vote. I don't know what CIR is, but maybe mentioning IDHT. Support from wiki creators is currently reasonable and I won't ask until March or April again after the old threads are archived. As WC, I planned to fulfill requests for wikis mostly at off-peak hours from the WCs. It is not possible to quote the delay of the wikis being created because this is unintentional. --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 18:46, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Group: Wiki creator

Reason: Greetings. With these privileges, I especially would serve requests at less active hours of wiki creators. Requests will be reviewed responsibly guiding the content policy on all of them, and I will consolidate my service in Miraheze as patroller. This is just another important form of volunteerism, one of several in addition to fighting vandalism here. --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 03:31, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Additional comments

 * First of all, I'd like to point out that this is just a voluntariness and I don't want to collect hats or open like a snowball. I was planning to open on January 30th, but an argument changed my course. I think I have a knowledge of the content policy and have been actively contributing since September. Please ask questions to train me.

If this RfP closes as unsuccessful, I would be inclined to open only in February. Regards, --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 04:17, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Discussion
Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * 1) Oppose There are many, many CIR issues with this user. I also recall that this user previously had wiki creator and it was removed, although I looked in the users rights log and do not seem to see this. I think nothing has been articulated and there is also very little if not zero connection between wiki creators and patrollers which is another problem in the request statement. Naleksuh (talk) 04:18, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
 * YellowFrogger never held wiki creator but did have his patroller revoked for CIR issues. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 04:26, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm aware of that and did check the log as said in the original comment. I might have been thinking of their unsuccessful wiki creator request which I now see has not even been archived from this page yet which is another problem. Naleksuh (talk) 04:32, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
 * That was a month ago. Maybe I explained myself and everything was resolved. Please, Drop the stick. --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 04:44, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
 * And now the person being nominated is replying to opposes telling them to drop the stick for opposing. That essay doesn't work here, particularly because I did not participate in your original request for wiki creator. Regardless, if I had not opposed already I certainly would now. Naleksuh (talk) 17:23, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I didn't want to answer. There's no way to prove that I'm on the right track, unfortunately. It was not to be expected that this would be mentioned. There have been no more problems like these recently, this being the last one. All that is needed is to wait, now. --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 17:51, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
 * There have been multiple CIR issues since the last request, not just that itself, and in addition you have "waited" a little over a month, not a substantial amount of time like six months to a year. I encourage you to withdraw this request and wait longer both due to the chances of this passing now being very low and to show reception of feedback from other editors. Otherwise I will not be commenting on the request further. Naleksuh (talk) 18:04, 15 January 2022 (UTC)


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

SoyokoAnis (Wiki creator)
<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.
 * Though there is no minimum support ratio required for the  bit, and, indeed, the candidate scored a perfect 5/5 in their responses to the questions YellowFrogger posed, the absence of any support arguments precludes approval at this time. The opposing views are incredibly weak and carry relatively little weight to the neutral arguments expressed by several users. Significant Meta Wiki activity is not required, we do have an urgent need for non-English wiki creators, though users should be at least a bit active on Meta Wiki before requesting the   permission. I would suggest translating a few pages in your native language, then reapplying in about thirty (30) days from today, linking to this first request noting your solid Content Policy understanding and Steward assessment, and you should sail through to a clear, probably unanimous, approval. Dmehus (talk) 05:07, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Group: Wiki creator

Reason: I am going to try this again, I understand the policies/per content policy and know that there are hours of requests being stale for hours. Most of my requests are well understood. While I may not have many contributions, I know how Meta operates and can contribute a lot more as a wiki creator to help users get their wiki's made faster. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SoyokoAnis (talk • contribs)

Questions for candidate

 * 1) As we like to show people your knowledge of content policy (as a second chance), answer this quiz (from Agent Isai):
 * Wiki name: "Hero's Journey" Wiki subdomain: herosjourney.miraheze.org Description: "Hero's Journey is an MMO game. Our current wiki is on Fandom but we want to move to Miraheze because it gives us greater freedom. Fandom's policy changes also are concerning because previously acceptable wikis are now all of a sudden closed. We want to move to Miraheze because we can customize our skin and domain."
 * Wiki name: '揭露“猎虎打苍蝇”' Wiki subdomain: zhenxiang.miraheze.org Description: "Help the wiki show the real government policy. Wiki shows all people the real little bear how it is and nature of company."
 * Wiki name: Free for All wiki Wiki subdomain: free4all.miraheze.org Description: "The Free for All Wiki is devoted to let users write about whatever they want! Users can also test MediaWiki at the same time while they write about whatever they want."
 * Wiki name: My Notes Wiki subdomain: semiinotes.miraheze.org Visbility: Private Description: "Private notes for my Seminar II class."
 * Wiki name: 4chan gen wiki Wiki subdomain: 4chanwiki.miraheze.org Description: "General wiki about 4chan. Will discuss and archive all notable 4chan events across all boards. It will include info on the OP and follow ups by the OP to the original post, including trilogies. Will also discuss notorious 4chan users."
 * Wiki name: Hitler in WWII Wiki subdomain: hitlerinwwii.miraheze.org Description: "This wiki will focus on Hitler during World War II. This wiki will go deeper into his thought process according to sources in the matter and will document his ideology change through different periods in his life." --<span style="background:linear-gradient(90deg,#89005E,#89005E, #FF00AF); -webkit-background-clip:text !important; -webkit-text-fill-color:transparent;">YellowFrogger ( talk ) ( ✔ ) 15:34, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 * @YellowFrogger
 * Accepted! May not have a great summary on why it was requested but the wiki on Fandom may make up for it.
 * Unaccepted. For one, the request is not well formed. For two, this wiki is mainly to spready unsubstantiated hate or false information.
 * Unaccepted. User may use the PTW(Public Test Wiki) for those types of edits and does not have a clear scope or purpose.
 * Accepted. Make sure to use the private wiki feature to keep others for editing your notes.
 * Accepted. As long as it follows the content policy and to not spread false rumors or unsourced rumors.
 * SoyokoAnis 17:35, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately you are wrong in #1 and #5. The first only mentions that the wiki is from FANDOM, it doesn't mention the scope around the MMO game, although the wiki creators have the service of knowing the scope of wiki. Generally a the big description is not mentioning the scope of the wiki. The wiki description has to be the scope sentences, not just aggregate, while #5, although you mentioned right "in not insulting hatred against a group of people", you were wrong to accept. We cannot guarantee that a wiki will follow CP, where it quotes: "Content on wikis must be fairly balanced, meaningful or substantiated by independent referencing." . Although you missed two (and didn't answer #6, which I'm still waiting for), the quality is still acceptable by your answers. I suggest that you always re-read the Content Policy to stick in your mind, and, track wiki requests at Special:Log/farmer to see how wiki scopes are met. --<span style="background:linear-gradient(90deg,#89005E,#89005E, #FF00AF); -webkit-background-clip:text !important; -webkit-text-fill-color:transparent;">YellowFrogger ( talk ) ( ✔ ) 18:03, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 * You may also read Guide to writing wiki requests :) <span style="display:inline-block;border:2px solid #bfff00;border-radius:8px;background-image:linear-gradient(to bottom right, #75ff75, #ffff80)"> Anpang 📨 10:00, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Discussion
Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.


 * 1) You have only 50 edits, an autopatroller on Meta, and an account created in April 2020, but it looks like you only came to contribute now. I won't oppose, but I won't vote support either, as you could have more experience (you just edit from period to period on noticeboards (starts editing in a month and only goes back to editing several months later)). In doing so, you would demonstrate that you are credible and aware of the content policy, which is more important for a wiki creator, than asking for the rights late. --<span style="background:linear-gradient(90deg,#89005E,#89005E, #FF00AF); -webkit-background-clip:text !important; -webkit-text-fill-color:transparent;">YellowFrogger  ( talk ) ( ✔ ) 15:16, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) per WP:NOTNOW - As pointed out by YellowFrogger, you have 50 (57 as of writing) edits on Meta. I would like to see some more engagement locally such as on the noticeboards before applying for wiki creator.  Agent Isai  Talk to me! 18:40, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 * @Agent Isai If you don't mind me asking, how would engaging in noticeboards help my request to wiki creator? I see it, wiki creators jobs are to accept or decline wikis based on if they would match with the content policy and their summaries and scope. I would love to be active on noticeboards, but questions ask may be too confusing to answer for me. SoyokoAnis  22:04, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Replying to noticeboards is a way to help beyond just making edits. Of course this doesn't have much to do with wiki creations, but it's to show that you participate in a community way. If you find it too difficult (the questions), answer the ones you know or go contribute in another way (translation, if you know another language, mini edits, Phabricator). Unfortunately it is. There are some that I don't understand and I leave it to other editors. So when it's a simple question like: "How do I change the name of my wiki", all experienced editors know this and it doesn't hurt to answer: "You can change the name of your wiki in Special:ManageWiki/core", that's it., did the service on the noticeboard. But I have to agree that the most important discipline for the wiki creator is content policy and trust. --<span style="background:linear-gradient(90deg,#89005E,#89005E, #FF00AF); -webkit-background-clip:text !important; -webkit-text-fill-color:transparent;">YellowFrogger ( talk ) ( ✔ ) 22:33, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 * , unfortunately. Very less active on meta. Like Agent, I would also like to see you active on Meta before requesting the rights. --Magogre (talk) 18:55, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  You're not exactly that active enough though. Your request definitely looks noble on paper, but the amount of edits you have currently isn't exactly sufficient enough to get the wiki creator rights you're looking though. My advice, stick around, make some good contributions, and you'll be all set to go from there. :) --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 00:01, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  got 2 of the questions above wrong and not active <span style="display:inline-block;border:2px solid #bfff00;border-radius:8px;background-image:linear-gradient(to bottom right, #75ff75, #ffff80)"> Anpang 📨  09:57, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * 3)  not necessarily for getting questions outright 'wrong', but because the logic in answering to me doesn't hold up. That's really the key here, as a strong line of thought for me is key and there are certain accept/decline reasons  you can only understand by being more familiar with the conventions of wiki creators, some of which are entirely unwritten. But there is a clear lack of Meta engagement (a key point for a wiki creator). A somewhat bouncy wiki request history including a transparent drive to create a network of wikis that I assume would be a central objective of attaining this right. And a lack of evidence both on Meta and beyond of being particularly familiar with platform policy, conventions and good practices. I would be uncomfortable supporting this without a large demonstration of change. It's not a matter of requesting intermittently until you're accepted. It's a clear change from the conditions that caused people to oppose in the first place. I see no such change. --Raidarr (talk) 10:14, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The questions are designed to test your familiarity with politics, content policy, which is the only discipline to a WC, even so, most of the requests are rejected for lack of overview of the scope, if you got anything wrong with that, it's a problem, and the important thing is this user's wiki requests lately. As for the amount of edits it wouldn't matter if you were a WMF editor. I don't suggest waiting for "such months", or that it's "early" and such nonsense, instead, I suggest you participate more in the community by joining our IRC or Discord channels, help in some way on Phabricator or in any way on-wiki to gain the necessary trust and show an understanding of the policy. Even so, I miss a Miraheze that is less bureaucratic, fair and with second chances. Of course, what I agree with is that the bigger the better. There shouldn't be this thinking of numbers, "there's already too much", from users. In my opinion, I always expect more wiki creators. --<span style="background:linear-gradient(90deg,#89005E,#89005E, #FF00AF); -webkit-background-clip:text !important; -webkit-text-fill-color:transparent;">YellowFrogger ( talk ) ( ✔ ) 19:10, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * As for the questions, they were not as wrong as mentioned. This is the smallest of all, and furthermore it is handled by automatic messages provided by the extension itself. I don't see a great urgency in this. --<span style="background:linear-gradient(90deg,#89005E,#89005E, #FF00AF); -webkit-background-clip:text !important; -webkit-text-fill-color:transparent;">YellowFrogger ( talk ) ( ✔ ) 19:13, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * In part I'm not sure what you're responding to in part, but as for what I'm parsing; I think the importance of the questions has equal measure in how they are answered as well as being answered correctly or incorrectly, which at times can be incredibly subjective between existing WCs and does come up rather often. There are variables I would rather have in the process, being manual, than not having so turnaround for acceptance is nothing. As it is the expectation is to review each submission in full and with some gravity, and I don't believe that's always done well as it is. Thus new participants are always welcome, but my acceptance requires various conditions per above striving for quality of acceptance. A second chance is always on the table, if there is a reasonable balance of time and actual change from what was refused the first time. How that balances out is up to each voter. But I think to dive more deeply in this we should direct the conversation to my talk page if it's my discretion being questioned, or the wiki creator talk page if the standards themselves are up to open discussion. I do think there is evidence of differing standards even in neutral/opposition. --Raidarr (talk) 20:36, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  The only reason I'm opposed is that there is less Meta activity. Contribute to Meta or Miraheze in general by checking noticeboards and assisting other users with issues related to wiki creation, It will help you demonstrate your grasp of policies. With these, you should be good to go anytime you believe you are. --   Joseph  TB  CT  CA   10:29, 22 January 2022 (UTC)


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

Arcversin (Administrator)
<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.
 * Withdrawn — Arcversin (talk) 04:19, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Group: Administrator

Reason: I would like to make myself available to the community as an administrator so that I can help ensure that administrative/maintenance tasks, such as page deletion, are carried out expeditiously, and that vandalism is dealt with as quickly as possible. Furthermore, I have experience with abuse filters, so I'll be able to help out with their development/maintenance. I have two-factor authentication enabled for anyone that's wondering. — Arcversin (talk) 00:05, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Questions for candidate
I'd like to see you citing the policies. I don't think we should have a limitation on the number of admins (it's ridiculous to say that "we already have many admins and we don't need more", when in fact it's not). Can you answer the questions below? — Arcversin (talk) 01:09, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Why are you interested in becoming an admin? And what are your goals with it? I'd like to see you delve into this.
 * 2) Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress?
 * 3) If you come to a situation where you block a bad user, but an admin goes and unblocks it, what would you do? --<span style="background:linear-gradient(90deg,#89005E,#89005E, #FF00AF); -webkit-background-clip:text !important; -webkit-text-fill-color:transparent;">YellowFrogger  ( talk ) ( ✔ ) 00:23, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * 4) I'm interested in becoming an admin because it means that I would be able to serve the Miraheze community in additional functions, such as dealing with vandals (beyond reverts), mediating (local) disputes, working with abuse filters, and processing administrative requests (i.e. deletes, no-redirect moves, etc).
 * 5) I'll assume this isn't referring to obvious vandals/LTAs. I'm lucky enough to have not been one of the parties to a serious conflict between users, but I've seen enough of those on the Meta noticeboards to know that it's best to deal with such disputes by remaining calm and responding in a thought-out, collected manner, assuming good faith to the greatest reasonable extent.
 * 6) I'd need to know more information about that scenario before I can give a concrete answer, because the proper mode of action in such a situation is highly dependent on the exact details of such an incident. What I can say, however, is that I would not reinstate the block, as that would be wheel warring.
 * 1) I've asked you to read the comments before acting on a wiki request before, you seem to refuse. Being a sysop both requires reception to stuff like that, and taking care in actions and not rushing/making too many mistakes. Would you like to say more on why you refuse to read comments and act directly on requeusts on hold? Naleksuh (talk) 01:36, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * With regards to the requests that were "on hold", I acted on those requests because they were still classified as "in review", which left their status unclear, as generally convention had been to decline a request if a response was required. As convention has changed regarding "on hold" requests, I'm not going to do that in the future. — Arcversin (talk) 02:03, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Can you identify administrative backlog(s) on Meta or user request(s) which have taken too long to receive a response? Where are they documented, and what is your process to identify and find them?  dross  (t • c • g) 03:00, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * They're generally made at the Administrators' noticeboard, though in my experience they'll sometimes get posted on the Community noticeboard. Checking the various noticeboards is routine for me, and they show up in the IRC feeds along with the rest of the recent changes, which I can use to ensure speedy response times. Luckily, we haven't had much of an administrative backlog recently, but there were times where responses could take a day or two. — Arcversin (talk) 03:17, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Any specific requests of note which took too long to receive a response? dross  (t • c • g) 03:20, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, off the top of my head, there were a couple of requests for inactivity exemptions that took a couple of days to be processed (still on SN actually), though that's an admin thing. There's also Category:Candidates for deletion (another place requests are located, by the way), which currently has a request to delete a userpage subpage that's been sitting for almost a day. As I mentioned, Meta doesn't have much of a problem with excessive backlogs, but things like this do occasionally happen. — Arcversin (talk) 03:36, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Discussion
Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.


 * 1)  Not sure how to go about this one here. Sorry. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 02:23, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * So, I'm really not seeing any need for this bit with this user at this time. I did some extensive digging through Arcversin's contributions and logged actions, and apparently most of the user's work is in wiki creation with a small amount of evidence of countervandalism (though, I understand Meta vandalism tends to be relatively rare in general). I respect Arcversin, and appreciate all the work this user does. Unfortunately, I don't see any evidence of any actions on Meta which would be enhanced by access to sysop tools. Please, point me to any evidence I may have missed of past work which would be enhanced by sysop tools. Otherwise, I feel that there is no need for sysop at this time. dross  (t • c • g) 02:36, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * My primary need for administrative tools would be in handling requests and situations that I come across whilst monitoring for wiki requests, which I would not otherwise be able to handle. This includes dealing with vandals (which, as you mentioned, are much less common on Meta), requests to delete a page, and in general the assortment of tasks, requests, and situations that one comes across whilst monitoring activity on Meta. — Arcversin (talk) 02:53, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your response! I've also added a question above. dross  (t • c • g) 03:01, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * While I understand that, the remaining factor here is you have less than 500 edits here on Meta (which isn't a problem on its own), which isn't what I would call sufficient enough. You may have good intentions for applying as an administrator of Meta, but maybe when you commute more to Meta (like I have been), then I would definitely support you there. There's always more opportunities out there for you. Now don't me wrong everyone, I'm not trying to say that what Arcversin is doing isn't good enough, but I'm just saying that he could help out more by getting involved in community voting. Just a thought. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 11:30, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  Per Dross and only an editcount of 195, has some trust so I'm voting weakest. <span style="display:inline-block;border:2px solid #bfff00;border-radius:8px;background-image:linear-gradient(to bottom right, #75ff75, #ffff80)"> Anpang 📨  02:49, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  Well, our number of administrators is large, but most of them could be more active, and it doesn't matter if we have a lot. Users have an ugly habit of saying that "they already have a lot, and they don't need more", when in fact it is not so. I'd like to see you say you're aware of the policies, yet take my vote of support (for I've never had a problem with you and my boldness in wanting more administrators). Maybe this user doesn't like (or is apt to be GS/S), he is more apt to be an administrator in Meta. --<span style="background:linear-gradient(90deg,#89005E,#89005E, #FF00AF); -webkit-background-clip:text !important; -webkit-text-fill-color:transparent;">YellowFrogger  ( talk ) ( ✔ ) 03:19, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * 3)  As it has been said in the comments before me I would like to thank Arcversin for all his work on Meta and that I am sure is appreciated by everyone. That being said I am not currently convinced that Arcversin has fully demonstrated what he would do with the tools and also (as Dross mentions above) that his past experience demonstrates that he has a particular need for the tools. In addition to this, I do not currently think it is very necessary to add a new administrator to Meta at this time. Meta is regrettablly still not a very large project yet and does not seem to attract a lot of vandalism or other things that would require rapid administrator action. While it can certainly be argued that out of the current 8 Meta administrators 3 are extremely inactive, in my opinion even 5 administrators would currently be enough to handle the very light workload that arises from Meta as far as I am able to see. If a better case is presented for why the tools are needed and why the current administrators are not enough to handle the workload of Meta I would be willing to reconsider this. Keep up the good work. --DeeM28 (talk) 06:18, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * 4)  While I want to praise them for wanting to help the project out, I just don't see a need for another administrator just yet either. Additionally, I would like to see them have more contributions here before being able to support, unfortunately.  Hypercane  <font color="#8152C6">(  talk <font color="#8152C6">) 08:00, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * 5) ; I don't think there is a competency or trust issue here, but rather skepticism on the ability to routinely follow up on the promised topics and the necessity of the permissions. In other words the activity is consistent in terms of coming eventually, but not persistent in a way that convinces me things will routinely be addressed much more quickly. There are around 4-5 admins at the moment who I do think carry the current workload well enough even if some details need to be manually reminded from time to time (ie, Category:Candidates for deletion is due for review). I think that's more of a priority/visibility problem easily fixed with a quick note and developing the habit than an activity one necessitating more hands on deck. The AbuseFilter competence is a good argument and something I'd like to see, but I'm not sure if that alone will carry the vote per other opinions above. Overall I'm ambivalent on this request and feel that Meta needs more vision and collaboration than janitorial workers in an admin capacity at this time. --Raidarr (talk) 23:18, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * 6) Many oppositions, with the argument that we have many administrators. If I were you, at least I would close the discussion, and, in a few months, try to apply with other more useful rights if you continue to contribute. Edit more and have increased global activity. --<span style="background:linear-gradient(90deg,#89005E,#89005E, #FF00AF); -webkit-background-clip:text !important; -webkit-text-fill-color:transparent;">YellowFrogger  ( talk ) ( ✔ ) 23:23, 2 February 2022 (UTC)


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

Magogre (Administrator)
<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.
 * Withdrawing. Thank you everyone for participating.

Group: Administrator

Reason: Hello. I am Magogre. I am a Miraheze regular since June last year but I have been around since March 2021 using the accounts which are listed on my loginwiki userpage (near the bottom). I am among the most active Miraheze meta users and active in helping users on CN and SN. Apart from that I work as a patroller and a member of wiki creator team. I am also the most active translation administrator on meta (pagetranslation log) and this is the area where I most often come to need the tools. I would like to request adminship because there are not many active admins and many of them are either rarely seen or a part of MH SRE. I believe being a sysop will help me to serve the community in more effective way. To be able to do the minor copyedits related to translation administration like updating tvar syntax (on protected pages) and other general cleanup like deleting abandoned translation units (listing them on AN is a pretty tedious and time consuming task), etc would be great. I already have most noticeboards under my watchlist and would like to help in the regular meta maintenance too, if elected. Thanks, Magogre (talk) 07:38, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Questions for candidate

 * 1) You indicated that requests are consistently fulfilled by current administrators through means of noticeboards and discussions pages. It has also been very clear within the community that more WikiJanitors are not necessary on Meta. What can you or do you bring to Meta as an administrator that the other administrators cannot or do not?
 * A: Thanks for the question, . I agree that the administrative work on meta goes smoothly and we currently have 8 sysops but there is nonetheless the less activity of admins in translation related work. We have many full-protected pages still using the old translation syntax which needs to be updated and as I indicated in my nomination, I am already active in translation administration of Meta-Wiki as a translation admin. But that alone isn't something why I am nominating myself for adminship. I can handle the requests like these myself (there are still many pages like these on meta). I am an active meta user and often need the tools to better perform the translation work. I do not believe that we don't need more admins, it won't hurt to have additional set of eyes looking at Meta. --Magogre (talk) 09:56, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * If you can name the pages, we can lower protection for a bit or you could do it in a subpage? ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  10:03, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * If you are referring to me,, I did requested a meta admin to update and fix the Request features page (diff) but the page wasn't updated and is still broken. Magogre (talk) 11:17, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I lowered the protection there. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  11:45, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * .Yes, there are many protected pages that should not be protected, at least semi-protected to give accessibility to users who want to contribute and have no rights. --<span style="background:linear-gradient(90deg,#89005E,#89005E, #FF00AF); -webkit-background-clip:text !important; -webkit-text-fill-color:transparent;">YellowFrogger ( talk ) ( ✔ ) 17:10, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * The extent of used protection is a subject that would need a larger discussion due to how systemic it is and how it has been maintained by the Meta administration continuously with only deliberate exceptions so far. In other words a matter for Meta consensus, as much of the rationale behind this request is in fact a matter of current admin practice, not a lack of activity or will when pointed in the needed direction. ---Raidarr (talk) 20:55, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Magogre, Do you plan to proceed with this request? --<span style="background:linear-gradient(90deg,#89005E,#89005E, #FF00AF); -webkit-background-clip:text !important; -webkit-text-fill-color:transparent;">YellowFrogger  ( talk ) ( ✔ ) 17:13, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Discussion
Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.


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

YellowFrogger (Wiki creator)
<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.
 * With three (3) active Meta Wiki community members opposing this permissions request, and the requestor unable to overcome their valid concerns, a successful outcome is extremely unlikely. As such, I'm closing this request, so as not to waste any more of community members' limited time. As indicated by several users, the requestor is well advised to wait a significant period of time before requesting permissions on Meta Wiki or globally, and again seek out a willing mentor who would, in turn, nominate them upon successful completion of the mentorship. Further permissions requests that merely amount to hat collecting and which aim to waste the community's time may be met with a partial block. Dmehus (talk) 01:15, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Group: Wiki creator Reason: Hello Mirahezians! I hereby request the hat of Wiki creator. Given my knowledge already tested by users like, I think I'm ready to volunteer. I will use it responsibly, especially since this is the most interesting form of contribution, at least for me, I don't like any hat other than WC. I also don't want to collect hats — sorry if I give that impression, what I especially want is the goal of creating a more efficient wiki, although that's not on purpose. I have relatively reasonably good knowledge of the Content Policy, where requests will be reviewed on that accountability basis. I also confirm a knowledge of the more in-depth policies: Terms of Use, Dormancy policy, etc. although these have nothing to do with the act of creating wikis and analyzing them. There was an episode recently where I created a shortcut, and, I didn't know it was appropriate especially due to the lack of information, which resulted in my hats being revised [revoked] precisely, where I was also cheering for this to happen so that I can review all my actions - whether future or present, a steward assured it will be restored after issk. I agree that, I should be ordering later, it hasn't been 1 month since the last time I applied, but the main key, for me, is the experience. Experience in politics, CSS, wiki code, and some other future stuff we've learned over time. To point out a few more things, I try my best and do, helping users in noticeboards, translations, requests for adoption and other areas that I will plan in the future, all of good faith. I've been an active contributor since September 2021 and look forward to more as time goes on — learning from mistakes, as in the recent case, with all of us deserving of a second chance. I was waiting 8/9 PM at night (in my time zone) and we're here, ready for the wiki creator bit. I look forward to a constructive community reception and that, if you can, please feel free to submit questions. Thanks! --<span style="background:linear-gradient(90deg,#89005E,#89005E, #FF00AF); -webkit-background-clip:text !important; -webkit-text-fill-color:transparent;">YellowFrogger ( talk ) ( ✔ ) 23:45, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Questions for candidate

 * 1)  Why did you pursue a self-nomination for this permission, instead of having your mentor, Raidarr, nominate you? Dmehus (talk) 00:02, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, I should have done it (description he would give, etc.) just lacking the courage. This RfP has already been sent, and the only way is to see Raidarr ask questions for a form of proof of my experiences in the area. I also don't know if asking for self-nomination is against the rules: it might not be, but since there's no page about it, I'm not sure, not even looking at the Wikipedia essays. --<span style="background:linear-gradient(90deg,#89005E,#89005E, #FF00AF); -webkit-background-clip:text !important; -webkit-text-fill-color:transparent;">YellowFrogger ( talk ) ( ✔ ) 00:07, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * YellowFrogger, I'm afraid I don't follow. What do you mean by you "should have done it [...] just lacking the courage"? As I recall, I strongly recommended you seek out a mentor, which you did, and then, ideally, have your mentor nominate you, or at least be a first !voter so they can express their confidence in your abilities. This does not seem to be the case here, so I'm just wondering (a) why the rush and (b) why another self-nomination, given the advice expressed to you? Self-nominations aren't against the rules; this is just more of a recommendation for you, to have someone with the "street cred" backing you up. I also question your assertion that the "only way to see" is to have Raidarr ask you questions; you're both active on Discord, so I don't see why you couldn't ask him, "Hey, am I ready to run for wiki creator, and will you nominate me?" Dmehus (talk) 00:13, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * The intention was not bad, but it seems that it came out that way by accident. The courage I was referring to about requesting: I don't want to give the impression that I'm just using it to gain rights or a name on a wiki. In theory it may not look bad, but for the person it is a slight challenge. It's embarrassing, to say the least. I agree that I should have done this and also with the practice of haste: as you can see in my edits, I'm on Meta every day, but it seems like 1 month has passed. I have to say admitting that I seem rushed, but this is the third time (first time in November, where most users cited it was early and should wait 2-3 months. November = February = 4/3 months). --<span style="background:linear-gradient(90deg,#89005E,#89005E, #FF00AF); -webkit-background-clip:text !important; -webkit-text-fill-color:transparent;">YellowFrogger ( talk ) ( ✔ ) 00:25, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Agreed, YellowFrogger, this was done in haste. I think, in your first request, some users were quick to express opposition without giving you a chance. Nevertheless, the path you were on was a good one; seek a mentor, which you did, and have your mentor nominate you. Continuing to flip flop after "partially retiring," then unretiring, all in the same day, is a bad look for you. Additionally, requesting permissions too frequently and without thought arguably necessitates a partial block on Meta Wiki from Requests for permissions, Requests for global rights, and Requests for Stewardship, at least for a few months, as otherwise, this continues to waste the community's time. I hope it doesn't come to that, but if a request was made at Administrators' noticeboard from a member of the community, I would not be able to defend not doing that. Dmehus (talk) 00:30, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Everything analyzed. I will not ask for any rights. I just want to improve the site in some way — the wiki creator in this, oddly enough, is a way for me. Especially a block on RfS and RfGR wouldn't be necessary, for the fact that, I would just like to be a WC, which in this case should be on the RfP page, and I think GS/steward is too much and I don't plan on that. I affirm that I will not request until the estimated time or have someone make a request for me. Really no reason to request rights in a hurry, which I already have a thought about it, very well known by the page hat collecting and seems to distrust the community. I request rights to seek some form of contribution beyond noticeboards and RfAs. --<span style="background:linear-gradient(90deg,#89005E,#89005E, #FF00AF); -webkit-background-clip:text !important; -webkit-text-fill-color:transparent;">YellowFrogger ( talk ) ( ✔ ) 00:53, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  Thank you for volunteering. Out of sheer curiosity, why are you applying for wiki creator right now just after your autopatrolled was revoked for lacking competence and after you semi-retired? If anything, this request is looking a bit rash and hasty. Why did you pick to make this request right now?  Agent Isai  Talk to me! 00:28, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * My autopatrolled was also considered by the self-request impulse. I had already admitted to Dmehus that I needed to have my rights revoked for a few blunders. Today was more of a surprise. I didn't know that the shortcut was not valid on these types of pages, but I kept going a few times, which caused it. Also, I already canceled my partial resign, in which I was thinking about the lack of time, the main thing, but I saw that it is possible to change that. On the same page, I had stated that I would like to volunteer as a Wiki creator more than a few rights: GS, and even steward. As this has already been sent and I don't want to withdrawn, I will wait. If it fails, I will request it in 4 months by asking another user as directed by Dmehus. Greetings. --<span style="background:linear-gradient(90deg,#89005E,#89005E, #FF00AF); -webkit-background-clip:text !important; -webkit-text-fill-color:transparent;">YellowFrogger ( talk ) ( ✔ ) 00:39, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Administrative note: The removal of  in January was a self-request; the removal today of   was not a self-requested removal. It was a for cause removal by a Meta administrator. YellowFrogger is thanked for agreeing with the removal, though. Dmehus (talk) 00:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Discussion
Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * 1) Nothing has changed, if anything it has only gotten worse since your last request. I see this request was filed just 5 hours after your autopatrolled permission was revoked and you were given a CIR warning, with this request being filed just hours later. Also, just like last time, your previous unsuccessful request is still on this page at Requests_for_permissions. I would recommend that you wait a significant period of time (i.e. 6 months, not <1 month) before requesting again, making sure there are not new issues raised. And certainly not filing a request for new permissions just hours after this. Naleksuh (talk) 00:19, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) I'm sorry, but the nominator has gotten their autopatrolled flag taken off just hours earlier, making me oppose this up front for the moment. Also, their questionable behavior from Discord left a bad taste in my mouth. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 00:47, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * "Questionable behavior" was more of a joke of mine. Friendly users do this, especially in chat and reply apps, like Agent did talking about trademark/NFT. It shouldn't be taken seriously and I didn't shoot anyone. --<span style="background:linear-gradient(90deg,#89005E,#89005E, #FF00AF); -webkit-background-clip:text !important; -webkit-text-fill-color:transparent;">YellowFrogger ( talk ) ( ✔ ) 00:58, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I wasn't making an implification whatsoever about you shooting anyone. It's just that the joke wasn't funny at all. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 01:04, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree with the unfunny joke, but didn't need to hold a grudge about it. It was a joke to HCaptcha and reCAPTCHA that it is, really slowing down a lot of users. --<span style="background:linear-gradient(90deg,#89005E,#89005E, #FF00AF); -webkit-background-clip:text !important; -webkit-text-fill-color:transparent;">YellowFrogger ( talk ) ( ✔ ) 01:11, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  Per Naleksuh - it's been less than a month since your last request (and you never understand the word "per") <span style="display:inline-block;border:2px solid #bfff00;border-radius:8px;background-image:linear-gradient(to bottom right, #75ff75, #ffff80)"> Anpang 📨  01:08, 14 February 2022 (UTC)


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

ChioGaming2007 (Administrator)
<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.
 * Request made in error; rights are not being requested on Meta. Please request on Stewards' noticeboard. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 13:22, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Group: Administrator Reason: I was in miraheze for about 2 years, I initially went to miraheze because I was interested in moving my wiki in the fandom to miraheze but because of problems the activity was canceled but after I was taken down from the Fandom I tried to move here, my friend has a Wiki here that is no longer used (link : https://tolololpedia.miraheze.org/wiki/Halaman_Utama ) i've opened the wiki but now i want to get more permissions so i can manage the wiki completely

Discussion
Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * 1)  Too early, as you only have 8 edits as of the time I'm writing this, not to mention the concern of hat-collecting, and it's too soon for you to be requesting Meta rights at this time. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 12:12, 19 February 2022 (UTC)


 * This is because I haven't used this account for 2 years and besides I have got permission from my friend to manage the wiki ChioGaming2007 (talk) 12:29, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
 * @ChioGaming2007:Hello, you want to have sysop/admin on your wiki? HeartsDo (Talk / Global / Wiki Creator) 12:33, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Of course ChioGaming2007 (talk) 12:35, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Could you please confirm that you actually want admin rights on your wiki and not Meta? Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 12:51, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Admin rights on my wiki are not meta ChioGaming2007 (talk) 12:54, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Because the friends who own the wiki don't need the wiki anymore, so I'm welcome to be an admin/owner there but unfortunately they forgot their account on miraheze ChioGaming2007 (talk) 12:57, 19 February 2022 (UTC)


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

Arcversin (Administrator)
<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.
 * Withdrawn with thanks to all participants for their comments and advise. — Arcversin (talk) 14:20, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Group: Administrator Reason: In light of recent vandal attacks, I would like to volunteer myself to take part in the development and maintenance of abuse filters used to counter vandal/LTA attacks. I have experience both with the abuse filter syntax (primarily from fighting spambots) and the regular expressions used by filters to detect potentially unconstructive edits (and other actions) with varying degrees of certainty. I will of course also be available for routine maintenance tasks/antivandalism, but my primary realm of activity as an administrator will be the abuse filter. — Arcversin (talk) 02:46, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Discussion
Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.


 * 1)  We have a lot of vandalism here now. Quantity is becoming more important now <span style="display:inline-block;border:2px solid #bfff00;border-radius:8px;background-image:linear-gradient(to bottom right, #75ff75, #ffff80)"> Anpang 📨  02:53, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
 * , regrettably. While I do thank you for stepping up to the administrator batting plate, I think it is too soon for you to be requesting the  bit. Indeed, regex knowledge is helpful but you seem to base yourself off that entirely in this RfP and not so much so on other aspects of adminship. You are more than welcome to assist administrators on Discord, IRC, or in private on those two venues on making effective abuse filters and that should be no impediment to you helping the Meta community. Additionally, I feel like this request was made too soon after your previous, unsuccessful RfP. Furthermore, you seem to barely have 260 edits, I would like to see more activity too before supporting. For these reasons, I must oppose. Let this not be a stumbling stone to you however, you are more than welcome to continue contributing to Miraheze Meta and to keep assisting users as you do on Discord and on-wiki as a wiki creator. I think there is great potential in everyone and I would like to encourage you to keep volunteering as you do currently.  Agent Isai  Talk to me! 03:01, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I certainly did not mean for the focus on the abuse filter in my request statement to interpreted as an indication that I would neglect or ignore other areas of adminship, which I most definitely would not. Rather, I focused on that aspect because countering the recent flare-up in vandal attacks is my primary impetus/rationale for making this request. I will also note that developing effective filters is not particularly feasible without access to the tools, as you cannot use the testing/development/debugging interface provided by the extension, nor can you access the content, logs, or history of private filters, which severely hampers your ability to evaluate their effectiveness, for example by using log-only mode to safely test the usefulness of new filters. I will also note that solely looking at edit count can be a bit misleading, given that they don't include logged activity such as wiki creations. — Arcversin (talk) 03:35, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Some of our abuse filters are actually tested first on the Public Test Wiki, that could serve as a test ground for any proposed abuse filter. Additionally, there is precedent where local administrators have shared some abuse filters with highly trusted users for the purposes of helping tweak or improve them. As for the edit count, my main point was that I would like to see you interact more with the community, not so much see more activity. I know you're one of our most active wiki creators but I would certainly like to see trust in you built up before seeing you as an administrator. Trust is very important, how can the community support an administrator who they've barely interacted with? My point still stands too that this request feels like it was made too soon after your previously unsuccessful RfP. I would've at least liked you to have waited a few more months along with having contributed more to Meta on the noticeboards and such. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 03:44, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
 * That is a good point about the Public Test Wiki, but I will note that requires the vandal to actually target that wiki (and that it's not an LTA who would get sysop there), and that still does not allow access to the filter development tools or logs with regards to edits on metawiki. I understand the concern regarding this being potentially too soon after the previous request, I wouldn't have done so this soon afterwards if not in response to the recent vandal attacks. — Arcversin (talk) 04:02, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Why would it be required that a spammer first spam the test wiki before you're able to make an abuse filter? You can observe behavior on Meta and tweak your filter on the PTW accordingly and then propose it to the attending sysop and see what happens. Additionally, what logs could you need from Meta that are not publicly visible? What matters are the edits that were let through, the ones which weren't caught by any AbuseFilter. The ones which were caught by the AF aren't very relevant but even so, we can usually examine the caught entries. We also have many Meta sysops would are Consuls and sysops on there, certainly development can't be hindered because a Meta sysop here doesn't have rights over there. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 04:48, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Ah, I thought you were referring to using PTW as a place to actually test filters. In the process of developing abuse filters, you'll very often set a new filter to log-only mode in order to catch false positives before actually setting it to warn or deny. — Arcversin (talk) 05:07, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  My comments since the last request remain valid despite the vandalism attacks that took place since that was simply an isolated event. With the addition that I do not think it is a very good idea to try to request administrator so soon after having withdrawn a previous request. I would recommend waiting another month or so at least before reconsidering to request. --DeeM28 (talk) 06:19, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) . per above Comments, i have no concerns towards this candidate --Cocopuff2018 (talk) 13:24, 21 February 2022 (UTC)


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