Meta:Requests for permissions

Arcversin (Administrator)

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 * Withdrawn — Arcversin (talk) 04:19, 3 February 2022 (UTC)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

 * 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. 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. --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)
 * , Do you plan to proceed with this request? --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)

 * 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! --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. --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). --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. --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. --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