Difference between revisions of "Requests for Stewardship"

From Meta
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Undo revision 17821 by H1 (talk): I don't think you are allowed to support your own Stewardship request)
(undo vote editing - Undo revision 17834 by Lawrence-Prairies (talk))
Line 189: Line 189:
  
 
=== Support ===
 
=== Support ===
 +
* {{Support}} I will be trust. [[User:H1|H1]] ([[User talk:H1|talk]]) 10:34, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  
 
=== Abstain ===
 
=== Abstain ===

Revision as of 21:35, 12 January 2017

Requests for Stewardship

This page is a designed to be a place to organize all requests for Stewardship, in accordance with the policy regarding the appointment of Stewards.

Notes:

  • New requests should be created via the button below to preload recommended fields.
  • Keep in mind that, following the policy, all requests for Stewardships must be commented on by at least 20 unique users and obtain a support ratio of at least 80%.
  • Additionally, there is no fixed time requirement for requests to stay open, but the 20+ users should be given time to discuss any potential issues, and the candidate should address any concerns raised.


Void's Request for Stewardship

MT7's Request for Stewardship

DeltaQuad's Request for Stewardship

DeltaQuad's Request for Stewardship


Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Let me try for a better summary. The applicant made a two requests in 24 hours, withdrawing them both. The first one was withdrawn in and attempt to cover up their own stupidity. The applicant instructed others to ignore the applicant's own history on the same page. The second attempt was withdrawn in the face of universal opposition. In a final act, the applicant showed supreme childishness and extreme cowardice by summaring the discussion and putting up a template that locks further discussion. In this the applicant made several patently false statements in an attempt to undermine Miraheze including, "In my opinion, being extremely knowledgeable in all interfaces of MediaWiki should be enough to be granted Stewardship." The applicant proceeded to compare Miraheze unfavorably with its competitors in an act of disloyalty. Finally, the applicant requested once again rights that every single officer of Miraheze personnel has told applicant will never be possible, and because of this blamed their own bad behavior on the officers of Miraheze.
In short, applicant acted in such a way that if Miraheze was a military instead of a wiki farm, applicant would be court-martialed. --Labster (talk) 20:45, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

H1's Request for Stewardship

User: H1 (contributionsCAblocks logrights logglobal rights log)

Reasoning for request

I want to make miraheze grow. And I want to help to some of the work going on here. I'm friends with Host Provider MT7 and have the same, but different houses.I mastered the mediawiki code like PHP and others, I'm glad I could help here, I want to contribute more. However, if this request fails I want to help by making a wiki. Hopefully this is Done :)

Additional comments given by user (if any)

Questions for candidate

What experience do you have as a wiki admin? Where can we go to read already-existing compliments and complaints about your admin style? --Robkelk (talk) 14:23, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Your account has been active on Meta for only two weeks. Why do you think you should be trusted with enhanced rights? --Robkelk (talk) 14:32, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

I've created the wiki itself but failed because of expired domain. So I at least have experience of mediawiki and others. H1 (talk) 14:42, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Comments by other users

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment by CheckUser Although I still personally oppose this request I feel like it was worth pointing out that User:MT7 (above) and User:H1 are not linked by technical CheckUser data. -- Cheers, NDKilla ( TalkContribs ) 04:33, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Support

  • Support I will be trust. H1 (talk) 10:34, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Abstain

Symbol neutral vote.svg Abstain I think you can keep mywiki and not in here. MT7 (talk) 05:29, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Oppose

Strong oppose: One, language skills seem to be poor, and given the official logs and other statements from authority on anything regarding your position will have to be made in English, this does not bode well. Second, this request is essentially "MT7 trying again under a different name", and if you didn't get it once, you shouldn't try to get it again by simply changing your name and changing nothing that got you rejected the first time round. In fact, given this, I have strong doubt whether you could even be trusted with a wiki of your own. GethN7 (talk) 10:16, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Please I'm friends for MT7. I'm not use myfriend account. And I doubt you is sock for DeltaQuad. I think :)H1 (talk) 11:16, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
He's a known guy from ATT, and is obviously not a sock. ;) — revi 11:29, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Okay.I think it was because he was directly opposed. H1 (talk) 03:29, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Strong oppose: For thinking GethN7 is a sock for DQ alone. Seriously. I don't even need to get into the other reasons thanks to that. Having such utter ignorance and lack of foresight to even suggest that is an immediate reason to oppose any attempts of hat-collecting.
I would also like this to be an opportunity if you will, for a request of CU to prove that MT7 and H1 are in fact sockpuppets. There is now enough evidence to suggest that their actually is. LulzKiller (talk) 11:42, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
@LulzKiller: I requested a CU between those two users a little while ago, but it was declined. --- DeltaQuad (talk contribs email), 15:01, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
@DeltaQuad: Was this before they both applied for stewardship, the chance and rationale for doing a CU has now tremendously improved. It is now crucial in the knowledge that this would affect an appointment of a steward. LulzKiller (talk) 15:20, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Oppose Someone voting against your RfS is not a justified reason to claim someone is abusing multilple accounts. -- Cheers, NDKilla ( TalkContribs ) 04:33, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi!! @NDKilla: he is myfriends. He has have one account H1. And he not sock for me but have same host internet provider(XL).MT7 (talk) 05:28, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
@MT7: I still find it such a damn coincidence you're both replying to the same thing at almost the same time, but anyways.. I find it funny how you also claim to know him IRL and use the same internet provider, when that couldn't possibly matter. I won't try to make it super obvious but one of you has publicly linked your account to an open proxy, and since the two accounts aren't linked by CU data (see above), the other person can't be using the same open proxy, so why would it matter who your internet providers are? -- Cheers, NDKilla ( TalkContribs ) 05:41, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
I do not know why it could happen to my provider. I use the same LAN card with which XL H1 use. Where XL host in Indonesia. See clearer provider that I use XL AXIATA MT7 (talk) 14:02, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Oppose Accusing GethN7 of being a sock of DeltaQuad (only because GethN7 opposes your RfS) while we suspect you are a sock of MT7 is a bit ironic, and that is not positive for your RfS. Also, almost all of your edits on this wiki are related to this request, and I cannot see many constructive contributions. Southparkfan (talk) 14:47, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Now I do oppose you after looking at your behavior here, are you going to say I'm sock of GethN7? — revi 17:37, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
I'm sorry :( H1 (talk) 14:44, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Weak oppose According to the applicant's reply to my questions, the applicant has no verifiable experience with wiki administration. I have no way to know whether the applicant would or would not bring personal biases to the role of Steward. --Robkelk (talk) 15:27, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi. If you know I have experience with administrative wiki. At that time, only the domain expired and I decided to break the server because I was not able to extend my domain consumption costs.H1 (talk) 16:21, 8 January 2017 (UTC)