Wikidata

Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Administrator/Josve05a

< Wikidata:Requests for permissions‎ | Administrator

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.

 Not done - withdrawn. (Non-bureaucrat closure) --AmaryllisGardener talk 22:52, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Josve05a

edit

Vote

RfP scheduled to end after 5 June 2014 00:41 (UTC)

A lot of you probably don't know me, but my name is Josve05a and I am a very active user on enwp and semi-active on svwp.

On Wikidata, I mostly request items for deletions, merging of items, and converting a few infoboxes to statements and add multiple authority control-identifiers.

I plan to use these administrative tools to delete merged items located at the RfD-page, and due to the Wikidata-game which has been released by Magnus, a lot more request will be coming in; therefore, a lot more admins will be needed.--(t) Josve05a (c) 00:41, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Votes

edit
  1. Decent support If trained further, with Josve05a's substantial experience on enwp and numerous contributions to Wikidata, I think the user will be able to use administrative tools well. In addition, the user will be able to help coordinate efforts with the Swedish Wikipedia. --JustBerry (talk) 00:50, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  2.  Oppose, rather strongly. Does not know how things work around here, as evidenced by this premature vote. Lacks judgement as evidenced by what I've seen from him on IRC in #wikipedia-en-help. Little countervandalism work here. Also, @Josve05a, JustBerry: please explain this.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:39, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  3.  Oppose Needs more time to understand how things work here, as was shown by Jasper Deng. ElfjeTwaalfje (talk) 12:03, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  4.  Support I don't think the issues raised by Jasper Deng matter much. The voting thing doesn't bother me and IRC (especially the Wikipedia channel) is not relevant to what goes on here unless they expressed a desire to delete the main page or something similar. Beyond that, Josve05a has plenty of experience and has done a good amount of merge work. --Jakob (talk) 12:35, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  5.  Neutral Not very sure. I will stay neutral for now. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 12:41, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  6.  Neutral I have concerns with some of the stuff Jasper brought up, but it doesn't give me enough reason to oppose. --AmaryllisGardener talk 12:44, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  7.  Support Has a decent amount of experience with the project, though I'm concerned with maturity/ability to use the tools well. That being said, the candidate has hundreds of deleted contributions (merged items) and I cannot find any in their live contribs, so their merges should be good. Supporting to balance out those voting otherwise due to a vote on an RfB, actions on another project's IRC channel and lack of CV work - all are very poor reasons to be basing a vote on IMO. The vote of the RfB in particular is hardly an example of how well they understand how things work here. Ajraddatz (talk) 16:44, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  8.  Oppose At least two merges recently performed by Josve05a had to be reverted (and I declined the RfD's). I think some more experience is needed, but the enthousiasm is good. Give it some more time! Lymantria (talk) 07:21, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    @Lymantria: How is 99% accuracy (2 erroneous merges out of about 200) a bad thing? --Jakob (talk) 23:39, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Admins are supposed to check the correctness of deletion requests and I expect some more accuracy than Josv05a performed, where I didn't check 200 merges by far. Tools like The Game and merge.js will allow admins to delete their own merged items automaticly and I am not totally confident about that yet. That's why I encourage to go on and gain more experience first. Lymantria (talk) 07:15, 31 May 2014 (UTC) P.S. This ping did reach me[reply]
  9.  Support Language knowledge is one of the main reasons to support the users request. BTW: Sweden has a lot of minority languages protected by constitution. I would be happy if @Josve05a could take care of some of them. Beside merging we need also a group of admins which understand "splitting" of items with multiple ontological meanings. Good luck! gangLeri לערי ריינהארט (talk) 16:44, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    According to his babel Josve05a knows Swedish and English. Stryn, Soulkeeper, Matěj Suchánek‎, and Innocent bystander also have knowledge of Swedish. ? --AmaryllisGardener talk 16:57, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  10.  Neutral--DangSunM (talk) 23:07, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  11.  Oppose per Lymantria --Rippitippi (talk) 23:31, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  12.  Neutral Matěj Suchánek (talk) 08:44, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

edit
  • To comment about my lack of CV-work: I havn't done as much CV-work here on Wikidata, because I do not really see a need for it. On enwp I do CW-work (almost) daily (or at least weekly), with help of Huggle 3. So I know how to handle vandalism.
Ajraddatz, you said you were concerned about my maturity/ability to use the tools well, could you please explain at little more about why, so I could better myself in the future, thanks! (t) Josve05a (c) 16:50, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The way you approached your RfA on the wikidata IRC channel was a little off-putting. In general, I'd like to see more involvement in the coordination side of the project (WD:PC, etc) so I can get some sort of idea how you react under pressure. Keep in mind that I am still supporting; my concerns come from lack of exposure or example, and I don't assume that just because I haven't seen something you are unable to do it. Ultimately, adminship is not a big deal. Ajraddatz (talk) 17:29, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Lymantria: I might be compleatly wrong here, but you declined this. Dimetopia (Q14585809) is listed as a synonym to Trachymene (Q2943959) on enwp. (t) Josve05a (c) 12:01, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, that's what enwp says, but not necessarily that is followed in the rest of the world, or even in other wiki's. All depends on sources that may or may not agree with each other. In addition, that two genera are called synonyms still does not mean that they have ever been used as synonyms in linguistic sense. In most cases species of one genus (usually the "newer" one) are included in the other one and bear the new genus name. Merging is hence not an immediate option, perhaps not the best option at all. Taxonomy can be quite minefield. Please, take a look at Wikidata:WikiProject Taxonomy/Tutorial to start with. This is the second request I declined. Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 21:51, 30 May 2014 (UTC) P.S. Ping didn't reach me, perhaps it doesn't work here.[reply]
  • I herby withdraw my nomination for myself as administrator. So if someone could please close this, thanks! (t) Josve05a (c) 21:56, 31 May 2014 (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:Requests_for_permissions/Administrator/Josve05a&oldid=138582684"