Wikidata

Wikidata:Administrators/Confirm 2013/5

< Wikidata:Administrators‎ | Confirm 2013

This was the voting page for administrator confirmations running from 12 Feb to 16 Feb. Voting ended at 23:59 (UTC) on 16 February 2013.

Raystorm (talk • contribs • logs) edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Unsuccessful; administrator right is to be removed upon expiry. — Hazard-SJ  ✈  00:11, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nomination statement: Hi, I've been quietly contributing regularly to Wikidata since I joined last October. We all know there has been little for admins to do to date (and what little there was, Wiki13 took care of at warp speed! :) Basically, my reason for asking to keep the tools is the same as what Sannita said in their reconfirmation: I am one of the biggest supporters of this project on the Spanish community, and an admin on Spanish Wikipedia and, like most, I believe vandalism will raise soon enough, and I believe I can be useful with the tools. After Spanish Wikipedia, this is the wiki I'm most active in, and I'd like to keep helping any way that I can. I will understand if the community chooses otherwise, no problem. Cheers Raystorm está aquí 17:17, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  1.   Weak support at all Vogone (talk) 00:13, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Neutral Low edit count and only one log action. Not enough to oppose though.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:47, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Oppose Sorry, but your last fifty edits span three months and you've only used the tools once. You obviously don't need them for your work here. I will gladly support if you ever did. Ajraddatz (Talk) 01:28, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Weak oppose, as above. --Stryn (talk) 06:29, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Oppose There's tons of ways that admins can help other than deleting duplicates and blocking vandals. For instance, there's always a handful of users who should be autopatrolled, which can be found just by checking Special:RecentChanges. If vandalism ever rises to a high enough level that we need more admins than we already have (or if there's enough Spanish vandalism that we need more Spanish-speaking admins), then I'll probably support you at a new RfA, but until then, I don't see any need for the tools. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 10:05, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6.   Oppose for lack of activity. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 10:13, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7.   Neutral Not that active if you look at the logs. But I don't want to oppose for this reason. --Wiki13 talk 10:22, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8.   Oppose for lack of activity. Lukas²³ talk in German Contribs 12:37, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9.   Oppose. Not enough activity. — mantis [religiosa] — 14:30, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10.   Support for two reasons. Firstly (s)he is good as an admin. Secondly, if we sort wikidata users per language, using tools:~robin/?tool=prefstats then spanish users are in fifth place with 90 users. I think that deserves a admin which has a decent knowledge in spanish.--Snaevar (talk) 22:10, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11.   Oppose less than 500 edit and only one delete log. --Jitrixis (talk) 17:10, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12.   Support if he is "one of the biggest supporters of this project on the Spanish community" he would be a good contact person between Wikidata and esWiki. Karmela (talk) 20:56, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13.   Oppose -- Wagino 20100516 (talk) 12:32, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14.   Support Low activity, but trusted user who'd like to help with sysop tools, that's enough for me. — Arkanosis ✉ 22:17, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15.   Support --Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 12:25, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16.   Oppose --Daniel749 talk 13:15, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17.   Support. We need supporters in the languages as well as admins in Wikidata. Conny (talk) 19:40, 16 February 2013 (UTC).[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

CennoxX (talk • contribs • logs) edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Successful; administrator right is to be retained indefinitely. — Hazard-SJ  ✈  00:11, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nomination statement: Hey, I'm CennoxX. I'm from the German Wikipedia and I would like to keep my rights as a admin. I use this right for editing in the MediaWiki-namespace, espechialy in german translations. For example if there's something new in the preferences. It's not a big deal, but it's something which have to be done.--CENNOXX (talk) 16:07, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  1.   Neutral Vogone (talk) 00:13, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Weak support - active in terms of edit count, would like to see more log actions.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:45, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Support - Needs the tools for mediawiki stuffs. Ajraddatz (Talk) 01:32, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Neutral not many log actions, but some edits to mediawiki-mainspace. --Stryn (talk) 06:29, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Weak support per Stryn. Delete a few dozen duplicates or autopatrol a few users within the next 5 days, and I'll drop the "weak". — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 10:12, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6.   Weak support per Stryn. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 10:15, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7.   Support, trusted and active --Iste (D) 11:00, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8.   Neutral per Stryn. Lukas²³ talk in German Contribs 12:38, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9.   Oppose. Active user that has done some edits on MediaWiki namespace, but no enough actions on his log. Sorry. — mantis [religiosa] — 14:41, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10.   Neutral --Snaevar (talk) 22:10, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11.   Neutral --Wiki13 talk 14:23, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12.   Weak support trustable user, much activity on Query but only one log. --Jitrixis (talk) 17:13, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13.   Support There is a huge need for translators in every language. Karmela (talk) 21:00, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14.   Support Legoktm (talk) 00:35, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15.   Neutral -- Wagino 20100516 (talk) 12:33, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16.   Support — Arkanosis ✉ 22:17, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17.   Support --Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 12:26, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18.   Support --Daniel749 talk 13:16, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  19.   Support Needs admin for Mediawiki pages. Conny (talk) 19:41, 16 February 2013 (UTC).[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Moe Epsilon (talk • contribs • logs) edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Successful; administrator right is to be retained indefinitely. — Hazard-SJ  ✈  00:11, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nomination statement: Hello, my name is David and I've been an administrator on Wikidata since the latter part of November. Next to the English Wikipedia, this is the wiki I am most active on, where I (normally) contribute on a daily basis. I have about 4,500+ edits and I spend most of my time writing new data entries, but I also do other things such as fix interwiki conflicts on other projects for us, edit MediaWiki pages and look out for RFD requests. I only have a few administrative logs to date, but this isn't due to inactivity or a lack of trying. I currently maintain a schedule of having daily activities outside of the internet that encompass the hours where most administrative logs are made, I presume. Currently, I try to edit between the 12 to 5 a.m. EST hours where there isn't as much editing going on, but I hope once I can clear my day schedule I can go back to contributing during the day more. I am active on the Wikidata IRC channel as Moe_Epsilon where I can handle requests or emergencies when they pop up. I hope I can continue serving as an administrator for Wikidata. Also of note, I have not been active as of the past week, and I may not be here at the time this reconfirmation RFA goes active, which I have detailed at Wikidata_talk:Administrators/Confirm_2013#My inactivity. I hope this doesn't greatly affect the work I've done to try and help out by giving a misconception of my dedication to the project. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 22:37, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Update I should be active during my reconfirmation, so that there was only true inactivity from January 26 to February 2. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 19:37, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  1.   Support Don't care so much for your times of activity :-P Vogone (talk) 00:15, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Support --Sk!d (talk) 00:29, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Support I understand real-life difficulties - those don't make me believe you can't be trusted.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:41, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Support Ajraddatz (Talk) 01:29, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Support --Stryn (talk) 06:29, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6.   Support, no problem--Ymblanter (talk) 08:38, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7.   Support Legoktm (talk) 08:56, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8.   Support, if only because anything starting with "I'd like to see more..." would seem to be in bad taste.  Seriously, though, good admin. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 10:17, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9.   Support -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 10:19, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10.   Support Per above. --Wiki13 talk 10:23, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11.   Support --Iste (D) 11:02, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12.   Support Lukas²³ talk in German Contribs 12:40, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13.   Support Why not? --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 12:59, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14.   Support. — mantis [religiosa] — 14:43, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15.   Support - Hoo man (talk) 17:50, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16.   Support --CENNOXX (talk) 21:08, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17.   Neutral --Snaevar (talk) 22:10, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18.   Support --Avenue (talk) 00:14, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  19.   Support --Rschen7754 09:26, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  20.   Support --Jitrixis (talk) 17:17, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  21.   Support contribution is sufficient Karmela (talk) 21:04, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  22.   Reconfirm Very good admin. Sven Manguard Wha? 03:51, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  23.   Support --Stevenliuyi (talk) 09:12, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  24.   Support Bináris (talk) 14:33, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  25.   Support ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 20:13, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  26.   Support - Csurla (talk) 20:17, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  27.   Support -- Wagino 20100516 (talk) 12:34, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  28.   Support — Arkanosis ✉ 22:17, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  29.   Support --Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 12:28, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  30.   Support --Daniel749 talk 13:17, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  31.   Support Active admin. Conny (talk) 19:42, 16 February 2013 (UTC).[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Bene* (talk • contribs • logs) edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Successful; administrator right is to be retained indefinitely. — Hazard-SJ  ✈  00:11, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nomination statement: Hi, I am Bene* and I would like to be confirmed as an administrator here. I was active almost all the time since I am an editor here (there were private things the last weeks) and helped this project to start and grow. As you can see here, I am the fouth activest admin and have got almost 10,000 edits. There are several ways I contributed to Wikidata. I am running a bot and created an own framework for automatically editing Wikidata. The most time I spent on creating gadgets like RequestDeletion, Search, SitelinkCheck and Preview and this is also the main reason why I would like to keep my rights. Other tasks are deleting duplicate/empty items and do tasks in the MediaWiki namespace. I also contributed to the Wikibase extension a bit and created the special pages for editing Wikidata without javascript (Special:SetLabel, Special:SetDescription, Special:SetAliases). Thanks in advance. -- Bene* talk 19:04, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  1.   Strong support Very helpful coder and contributor to this project. I see very much effort in his work. Cheers, Vogone (talk) 00:10, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Support --Sk!d (talk) 00:30, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Support per Vogone.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:43, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Strong   Support Ajraddatz (Talk) 01:29, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Support. Geagea (talk) 02:55, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6.   Support --Stryn (talk) 06:29, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7.   Support Activity is sufficient--Ymblanter (talk) 08:39, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8.   Support Legoktm (talk) 08:57, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9.   Strong support per Vogone. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 10:09, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10.   Support Through your bot, you have a better record as a "strong content editor" than perhaps any other user on any Wikimedia project. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 10:18, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11.   Support Per Vogone. --Wiki13 talk 10:24, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12.   Support --Iste (D) 11:03, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13.   Strong support per Vogone Lukas²³ talk in German Contribs 12:41, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14.   But of course. — mantis [religiosa] — 14:34, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15.   Neutral, very active and 100% good faith... but I'm still not a fan of deploying own gadgets (with security flaws) without any further discussion - Hoo man (talk) 17:50, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16.   Support --CENNOXX (talk) 21:08, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17.   Support per Vogone --Leyo 22:45, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18.   Support --ValterVB (talk) 23:02, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  19.   Support --Avenue (talk) 00:16, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  20.   Support --Rschen7754 09:35, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  21.   Support very active and trustable user --Jitrixis (talk) 17:17, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  22.   Support -- feuerst – talk 19:54, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  23.   Support --Hosiryuhosi (talk) 20:17, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  24.   Support useful technical skills Karmela (talk) 21:06, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  25.   Support --Shanmugamp7 (talk) 02:38, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  26.   Reconfirm Very good admin. Sven Manguard Wha? 03:51, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  27.   Support --Stevenliuyi (talk) 09:12, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  28.   Support Bináris (talk) 14:33, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  29.   Support ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 20:13, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  30.   Support - Csurla (talk) 20:16, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  31.   Support -- Wagino 20100516 (talk) 12:35, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  32.   Support — Arkanosis ✉ 22:17, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  33.   Support --Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 12:28, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  34.   Support --Daniel749 talk 13:19, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  35.   Support --Frigotoni ...i'm here; 18:26, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  36.   Support Creates great tools. Conny (talk) 19:43, 16 February 2013 (UTC).[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Zolo (talk • contribs • logs) edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Successful; administrator right is to be retained indefinitely. — Hazard-SJ  ✈  00:11, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nomination statement: Hello, I would like to be reconfirmed for the same reason I wished to be an admin in the first place: I have been very active in the project, and I need the admin tools, mostly to delete duplicate entries. If I do anything controversial in the process, I'll revert myself and start a discussion. --Zolo (talk) 09:28, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  1.   Support okay for me Vogone (talk) 00:16, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Support --Jasper Deng (talk) 00:42, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Support Ajraddatz (Talk) 01:29, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Support. Geagea (talk) 02:54, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Support --Avenue (talk) 04:06, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6.   Support --Stryn (talk) 06:29, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7.   Support Clearly active--Ymblanter (talk) 08:40, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8.   Support -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 10:19, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9.   Support, though I'd like to see some slightly higher deletion stats. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 10:20, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10.   Support, but I also agree with PinkAmpersand. --Wiki13 talk 10:25, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11.   Strong support, very friendly and helpful user --Iste (D) 10:59, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12.   Support Lukas²³ talk in German Contribs 12:41, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13.   Support. — mantis [religiosa] — 14:36, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14.   Support - Hoo man (talk) 17:50, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15.   Support - Jarekt (talk) 19:25, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16.   Support --Eric-92 (talk) 19:31, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17.   Support --Snaevar (talk) 22:10, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18.   Support @PinkAmpersand: Don't forget about MediaWiki edits. --Leyo 22:49, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  19.   Support --Rschen7754 09:29, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  20.   Support trustable user --Jitrixis (talk) 17:18, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  21.   Support very active Karmela (talk) 21:07, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  22.   Support --Sk!d (talk) 00:08, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  23.   Reconfirm Very good admin. Sven Manguard Wha? 03:51, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  24.   Support --Stevenliuyi (talk) 09:13, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  25.   Support -- Wagino 20100516 (talk) 12:35, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  26.   Support — Arkanosis ✉ 22:17, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  27.   Support --Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 12:29, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  28.   Support --Daniel749 talk 13:20, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  29.   Support Needs them for his work. Conny (talk) 19:43, 16 February 2013 (UTC).[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Kaldari (talk • contribs • logs) edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Unuccessful; administrator right is to be removed upon expiry. — Hazard-SJ  ✈  00:11, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  1.   Oppose no nomination statement at time Vogone (talk) 00:17, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Oppose per lack of activity (never has used admin tools (except perhaps editing the MediaWiki: namespace, only 54 edits).--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:40, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Oppose Obviously don't need the tools. Ajraddatz (Talk) 01:30, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Oppose not active. --Stryn (talk) 06:29, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Oppose for lack of nomination statement. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 10:10, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6.   Oppose No nomination statement and didn't do any log actions since his appointment as administrator. --Wiki13 talk 10:28, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7.   Oppose, has never used his admin rights --Iste (D) 11:06, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8.   Oppose Lukas²³ talk in German Contribs 13:01, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9.   Oppose. — mantis [religiosa] — 14:32, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Comment: Please note that for this RfA to pass, it would need to receive 27 support votes. Purely as a matter of courtesy, I'd strongly encourage users to hold off on pile-on opposing unless the support numbers increase. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 14:59, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11.   Support Strong technical and people skills. Strong bot writing skills. --Jarekt (talk) 19:27, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12.   Oppose No admin actions and only 56 edits.--Snaevar (talk) 22:10, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13.   Oppose not active --Jitrixis (talk) 17:19, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14.   Oppose even factoring in the comments on the talk page, too inactive. --Rschen7754 19:50, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15.   Oppose Because of inactivity, since he has global editinterface he can still assist with things in the MediaWiki namespace, which seem to be his only sysop actions. Legoktm (talk) 00:34, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16.   Oppose -- Wagino 20100516 (talk) 12:49, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17.   Neutral Nothing against the candidate, actually I'd probably have supported him if he had requested the tools again, but until then, there is no indication wether he wants to keep the tools or not, so neutral. — Arkanosis ✉ 22:17, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18.   Neutral --Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 12:30, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  19.   Oppose --Daniel749 talk 13:20, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  20.   Neutral Waitn for statement. Conny (talk) 19:44, 16 February 2013 (UTC).[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Hosiryuhosi (talk • contribs • logs) edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Successful; administrator right is to be retained indefinitely. — Hazard-SJ  ✈  00:11, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nomination statement: I'm inactive here now. but I want to continue a sysop here, because I'd like to help for Japanese speakers (e.g. system message translation, or request written in Japanese ), and when I find the spam or vandalism, I'll delete and block it. if I have a time, I do cope to some requests (In many cases, I can't do it, because other sysops do cope speedy). I'm sorry for the delay in writing a statement. --Hosiryuhosi (talk) 16:28, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  Oppose no nomination statement at time though I highly trust this user Vogone (talk) 00:18, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  1.   Neutral I have trust, but I'm awaiting a nomination statement.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:37, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Support Massive gaps in activity but uses the tools, and is kinda active. Will support if they make a nomination statement. Ajraddatz (Talk) 01:30, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Changed from neutral to support. Ajraddatz (Talk) 17:37, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Neutral good as an admin, but I would like to see also some other activity. --Stryn (talk) 06:29, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Oppose for lack of nomination statement. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 10:10, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Neutral --Wiki13 talk 10:32, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      Oppose per Vogone. Lukas²³ talk in German Contribs 12:58, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6.   Oppose. — mantis [religiosa] — 14:35, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7.   Weak support in benefit of the trust after the nomination statement was created. I would like to see more activity though. Regards, Vogone (talk) 17:23, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8.   Support Good as an admin.--Snaevar (talk) 22:10, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9.   Support --Jitrixis (talk) 17:20, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10.   Support, the user seems to be recovering activity--Ymblanter (talk) 20:45, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11.   Support --Rschen7754 20:48, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12.   week support help for Japanese speakers Karmela (talk) 21:20, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13.   Support --Shanmugamp7 (talk) 02:37, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14.   Neutral I'm neither here nor there on support, but I do support the candidate retaining translation administrator if he is not reconfirmed. Sven Manguard Wha? 04:11, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15.   Support -- Wagino 20100516 (talk) 12:51, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16.   Support Lukas²³ talk in German Contribs 14:32, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17.   Support — Arkanosis ✉ 22:17, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18.   Support --Eric-92 (talk) 03:02, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  19.   Support japanese admins are needed --Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 12:33, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  20.   Support --Daniel749 talk 13:20, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  21.   Support --Frigotoni ...i'm here; 18:25, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  22.   Support Per Ajraddatz. Conny (talk) 19:45, 16 February 2013 (UTC).[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Bináris (talk • contribs • logs) edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Unsuccessful (candidate resigned); administrator right is to be removed upon expiry. — Hazard-SJ  ✈  00:11, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is my decision: Hereby – after long consideration – I withdraw my nomination as I don't want to expose myself or others to such unearned personal attacks we got here. I got seriously wounded and I am tired of this case and want to keep my dignity and health. This is my first election in any wikiproject ever where I fail. That's the community who needs my adminship, not me. Perhaps I apply again later after a more active period. I wish to keep and use my bit until 18 February when my temporary adminship expires and then be removed. Thank you for opinions. Talk page is open for further discuss. Bináris (talk) 19:29, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Nomination statement: Hi folks, thanks for the votes by this time, and sorry for being inactive for a while. I was the one who initiated the Wikidata being deployed on Hungarian Wikipedia first and came here to serve the community. My job wishes varying amount of time; in near past, I could not be here as I would have liked. This may change from time to time, and (although I understand those who wish a continous activity) I think I am still useful as an admin and the community will take an advantage of trusting me. I have been admin and CU on huwiki for five years now, with a lot of experience and have plans to translate interface that may require editing MW namespace. As a member of Pywikipedia bot developer team I may need admin access for developing and testing bots. I don't believe that good admins are only those who spend a lot of time here daily; there are different kinds of work that need different approaches, and the more admin there is in a project, the better it is against vandalism. This is my experience in a long term project; this wiki is still young but will face this problem. I don't see any issue with "last log action was on 22 January" -- there is no constitution that requires to delete something every week. Bináris (talk) 21:57, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  Oppose no nomination statement at time Vogone (talk) 00:19, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  1.   Oppose - low activity (only 125 edits and last log action was on 22 January).--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:35, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Oppose Not active. Ajraddatz (Talk) 01:31, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Oppose not active. --Stryn (talk) 06:29, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Oppose for lack of nomination statement and generally low activity. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 10:11, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Oppose Mostly per Daniel Mietchen. In general low activity in both controbutions and logactions and didn't create a nomination statement. --Wiki13 talk 10:34, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6.   Oppose inactive. Lukas²³ talk in German Contribs 13:02, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7.   Oppose. — mantis [religiosa] — 14:37, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Comment: Please note that for this RfA to pass, it would need to receive 24 support votes. Purely as a matter of courtesy, I'd strongly encourage users to hold off on pile-on opposing unless the support numbers increase. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 14:59, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9.   Support he is a reliable, stable wikieditor and huwikiadmin. (Sorry for my English) --PallertiWD talk | huwiki talk 18:45, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Please do not ask users to come and support the candidates. Some users frown upon such notices of coming to vote. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 20:42, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I do not agree. This elections affects the operation of huwiki. The huwiki-editors need to know about the election. This is not lobbying, but the information for huwiki editors. --PallertiWD talk | huwiki talk 21:17, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    No, that's not fair to the other candidates. Should we spam everyone's homewiki when their candidates are up for election? --Rschen7754 07:55, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10.   Support user with tremendous technical and bot writing skill. Someone that can benefit from such tools. Jarekt (talk) 19:24, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      Support He is an outstanding, technically skilled and reliable admin on the huwiki--94.27.251.73 20:04, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Only registered users can vote.--Jasper Deng (talk) 20:15, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11.   Support He was one of the key persons to introduce Wikidata by uns. It seems to me that the young community of Wikidata tends to ignore the activity when the efforts in the interest of Wikidata are made in the Wikipedia domain and not direct in Wikidata. Please recognize that they form together an organic unity, and efforts Binaris made in the Hungarian Wikipedia to manage work and disseminate knowledge were essential to the introduction of Wikidata.
    As an admin of the hungarian Wikipedia he filles his role in a very constructive way. Wikidata will profit from his extensive technical skills. Karmela (talk) 20:09, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12.   Support He is very good admin in the huwiki. Aros  Telegram 20:40, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13.   Comment [1]. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 20:42, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14.   Comment For those not understanding Hungarian the message cited by Moe Epsilon says: please vote at your discretion. It has not been a call for canvassing at all. Csigabi (talk) 21:19, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for the translation. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 21:23, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I would still think it's rather inappropriate to ask editors who don't actively edit Wikidata to come vote here, regardless of who it is for.--Jasper Deng (talk) 22:48, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15.   Support He is a reliable admin of Hungarian Wikipedia and could help us a lot if he was an admin here. Several Hungarian editors don't even speak a little English, or can do so with difficulty, so it would be a great help to them if they could ask a Hungarian wikidata admin to delete duplicate entries or do other Wikidata-related stuff. Alensha (talk) 23:29, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16.   Oppose inactive, and to counteract the blatant canvassing. --Rschen7754 04:03, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    My oppose still stands due to inactivity, and due to the canvassing issue. I think Sven's comment was a little blunt, but I largely have to agree with him that the candidate's response to this was less than ideal. --Rschen7754 06:10, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I still can't support due to the inactivity but I'm not going to pile-on oppose here. --Rschen7754 10:39, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17.   Support I think you should consider not only his activity here but his support in the Hungarian Wikipedia at the introduction of the Wikidata as well. --Hkoala (talk) 06:41, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18.   Support I think it is generally a good idea for support projects to "share" an admin with all large language communities. Also, Bináris is active in pywikipedia script development, so access to admin tools would probably enable him to create more versatile scripts. --Tgr (talk) 07:32, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    After more consideration   Neutral, but will support if he writes a nomination statement. --Tgr (talk) 07:40, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  19.   Support He is one of the best administrators on the Hungarian wiki and played a significant role in introducing the wikidata into this community. He can be a very important link between the huwiki and the Wikidata also in the future.--Szilas (talk) 07:46, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment I do edit wikidata, please check it. To raise the subject of canvassing against a language community is very much unfortunate.--Szilas (talk) 08:04, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    That doesn't mean those who don't can be canvassed.--Jasper Deng (talk) 08:40, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't really understand your last remark. I would highly appreciate if you could reformulate it. I ask this only because as I see you are a native speaker. Thanks in advance--Szilas (talk) 09:41, 13 February 2013 (UTC).[reply]
    Whether you yourself are active on Wikidata has no bearing on whether the canvassing should have occured or not.--Jasper Deng (talk) 20:36, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  20. While I was planning on not voting, as this seemed to be a fairly obvious and routine consensus to remove rights for low activity, I am forced to   Oppose changed to weak below due to Pallerti's uncollegial and inappropriate behavior. I'd like to direct everyone's attention to WD:AN#Pallerti for my suggestion of what we should do to counteract this issue. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 14:04, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't see why if someone else canvasses that should result in an oppose for the candidate. The candidate should be judged on their own merits.Legoktm (talk) 00:40, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd like to clarify that the more I see of Bináris, the more I like xem. (Though I hope xe'll listen to my point below about forgiving misunderstandings.) And the canvassing situation has been repaired as best it can be, though I think several huwikipedians chose to create unnecessary drama out of what could have been a mundane issue; on that note, I feel it would be inappropriate to oppose Bináris simply because xe received un-asked-for help that falls into a policy gray area. What I'm left with is this: I still don't see any real need for the tools. Bot-op matters can be dealt with on the test repo, and running a bot here does not require being a sysop. That said, Bináris is clearly a trusted Wikimedian, and if xe would like to remain an admin, all xe should be required to do is meet a basic activity level. So, I'll extend the same "offer" of sorts I've been giving to most of our less-active admins: If, before this RfA concludes, you can delete a few (10-15) pages, or autopatrol a few (3-4) users, I'll support you. Until then, though, I'm sticking with   weak oppose. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 19:02, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  21.   Strong Oppose (Oppose stands, see below) I opposed the last person who canvassed during an election, as did a whole lot of other people. For a second candidate to do it shows not only that the candidate's ethics are questionable, but also that the candidate has a disregard for the community's views. That's not something I want to see on the project, let alone in an admin. Sven Manguard Wha? 15:10, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Hold on... did I miss something... where did Bináris xyrself canvas? The only diffs I've seen are on Pallerti's part. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 15:15, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Sven Manguard, can you please reconsider your statment on Bináris's ethics after re-reading this section thoroughly? Thanks. Csigabi (talk) 16:04, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    To be fair, it wasn't Binaris canvassing. --Rschen7754 18:03, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Sven Manguard, your only luck is that my English is not rich enough to tell you my opinion nicely. This kind of "logic" is a shame on you and I definitely do expect your apologies. Whether or not I get your vote: I am no more interested in. No person on Earth is allowed to question my ethics and no person on Earth has a valid reason for that. I really did not initiate any canvassing and asked nobody to vote for me, and the whole fear of so called "canvassing" is a damned disease in some wikipojects. People either have the right for voting here or not, that must be clearly defined before beginning of the election, and not vivisected during the election. Bináris (talk) 22:09, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    While I very strongly oppose the canvassing, I do agree that Sven should not have accused you of doing it, because it was another user on your wiki. With that said, though, I believe that activity is something to look for in sysops.--Jasper Deng (talk) 22:57, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    "Should not have" is a very weak expression here, but that's another question. Though I understand your opinion, let me remind you my above arguments. Bot developers do need admin access and this kind of activity does not require a continuous presence as editor. On the other hand, people who have 5000 edits, wont't be able to develop bots. Bináris (talk) 23:04, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    It is possible to develop bots without having adminship; the Wikidata test repo can be used if you absolutely need it.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:12, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I've struck the original comment, as I did misread the situation. That being said, my oppose stands. I suppose that I really don't have any grounds to be upset with his response to me, I was clearly insulting to him, he was clearly insulting to me. It's his response to the canvassing that I can, and will, complain about. If someone canvasses on a candidate's behalf, and you the candidate knows about it, there are only two appropriate responses; either the candidate replies to the post immediately and says that canvassing is inappropriate and asks for it to be removed or collapsed, or the candidate removes or collapses it himself. That's it; anything else is an inappropriate response in my eyes. Sven Manguard Wha? 03:46, 14 February 2013 (UTC
    If you hurt someone deeply with no reason, it is completely uninteresting, what the "good" reaction from the hurted person would be in your eyes. If you were a gentleman, you would know what to tell in such a situation. You proved that you are unable to overview a situation before judging, so YOU are an inadequate person to adminship. I clearly told that I expected your apologies for this insinuation. "Misread" is not that. Thus your ethics are questionable as well as your basic capabilities to understand situations and judge people. A tape recorder saying all the time "canvassing! canvassing!" would do instead. You have no right to judge anybody and speak about acceptable behaviour as yourself don't meet the criteria of that. Bináris (talk) 06:10, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    One more thing, User:Sven Manguard. I am talking to you. I was neither here nor on huwiki when you imagined that I "canvassed" and stated that I was an unethic man. Now I am here and I am talking to you. Don't pretend I wasn't here, don't speak about me in the third person. Look in my eyes and apologize honestly. This is not about my election as an admin which I think is already lost; this is about basics of human-like behaviour and moral. Bináris (talk) 06:27, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I would suggest you calm down, especially since Sven has admitted his error.--Jasper Deng (talk) 06:19, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    No, I was clear. He must apoligize clearly and honestly. What is "admission" in such a situation when one's honesty is questioned and doubted? Bináris (talk) 06:27, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Your temperament does not reflect that which an admin should have - I think he was rude, to be honest, but you're not helping either. --Rschen7754 06:32, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree with Rschen7754 above. He clearly said that his initial comment was in error, and he struck it out. I strongly recommend that you drop this issue, because these comments will not do you any good with regards to your reconfirmation.--Jasper Deng (talk) 06:40, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, what would still do any good? :-) You are right, but I told: this is no more about reconfirmation. I am sure that all of you and other readers clearly know the basic difference between saying something was an error and apologizing which he is not willing to do. Strucking out is really nothing. Yes, I finished here as this is an admin confirmation page and I will know in the future where to put this user. Have a good day! Bináris (talk) 06:49, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I would have apologized had you not ordered me to. Yes, you have a right to be angry, and yes, my accusation was factually incorrect. I already admitted both of those things. However as angry as you are, trying to force me to apologize is counterproductive. I am not five, I am perfectly capable of knowing when I've screwed up and when I need to apologize for my mistakes. Had you said adopted a different tone, such as saying that 'your interpretation was wrong and I would appreciate it if you reconsidered it' I'd have apologized, but if you "definitely do expect" an apology, you're not going to get one from anyone, and if you do, it's not going to be sincere. I was wrong, I know that, but your response was also wrong. Sven Manguard Wha? 15:17, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  22.   Oppose not active}} --Jitrixis (talk) 17:23, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  23.   Oppose Inactive -- feuerst – talk 19:48, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  24.   Support Bináris is a bot developer and if sysop status will help him with that, we should encourage that. I would like to see him around a bit more often though :) Legoktm (talk) 00:37, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  25.   Support - Csurla (talk) 06:06, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  26.   Support Very competent technically on all aspects of Mediawiki and botscripting. His admin activity will be much more needed here in the future than in the very first moments of Wikidata. Oliv0 (talk) 07:15, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  27.   Support --Rita (talk) 07:34, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, but please don't vote here as your first edit. This community -- not like our one -- does not have clear criteria set before beginning of an election who may vote, and some people will judge me instead after this kind of support. Bináris (talk) 07:39, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Bináris, to prevent further instances of this occurring, can you please remove the message from hu.wiki? Most of the first edit voters are coming from that forum where your confirmation RFA was announced. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 07:49, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I have posted at the above page, but have not gotten much luck. We're asking for the Hungarian Wikipedia to respect our community and our processes, just as we respect theirs. --Rschen7754 07:52, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I have already posted a request there to avoid this election. Bináris (talk) 08:48, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    It was not a call to vote in favor but belátásotok szerint = "as you see fit / at your discretion," so it is not clear it was really WP:canvassing defined as "done with the intention of influencing the outcome of a discussion towards one side of a debate" or rather "Appropriate notification": not "mass posting", not "biased", not a "secret" message, and the audience was the first Wikipedia with Wikidata phase 1 in real use and where Bináris has been quite active in discussing and explaining Wikidata, so even the criterion of choosing an audience for its "partisan" character does not fit quite well. And if you wonder, French Wikipedia is where I contribute most and Bináris has been helpful to me with his bots. Oliv0 (talk) 09:10, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  28.   Support - Winston (talk) 08:32, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  29.   Weak support After reading his nomination statement I do not see a reason for removing his sysop flag anymore. He seems to be a very important contact person for the huwiki community, which already works with Wikidata. Though I dislike the canvassing issue, which is not Bináris' fault at all. Regards, Vogone (talk) 10:32, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  30.   Comment I got criticism of reacting to unacceptable behaviour of user:Sven Manguard. Non, je ne regrette rien. This was a personal attack against me, and I took it as such and community should take it as such, too. I think it is quite natural and needless to say that I would never act as admin in such a situation where I am involved – anybody can overview my five years of adminship in huwiki that I never did. Should you think an admin must be like a rock and never have temperament in whatever kind of circumstances, please vote against me. Bináris (talk) 10:53, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree that Sven's comment was out of line, but I think it's important to understand when people make mistakes. Yes, his comment accused you of a serious infraction you did not commit, but the only thing he's truly guilty of is not reading through the whole thread before voting. I also agree with you that your response doesn't have anything to do with your fitness to carry out administrative duties, but am merely speaking in general here - I've been called all sorts of nasty things on en by users who thought that they were working in the better interest of the project, and the more time I spend around them, the more I see that they're not bad people, but that they simply misread a situation and failed to realize how that misunderstanding would seriously hurt my feelings. Just a thought. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 14:48, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment Admin has to cope with hard words sometimes. Please come back and open the confirmation! Conny (talk) 19:48, 16 February 2013 (UTC).[reply]

There is no point in, as the vote will be closed in a few hours. Feel free to nominate me at any time in the ordinary way. Bináris (talk) 19:56, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Administrators/Confirm_2013/5&oldid=1102548559"