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.
I have to close this request as unsuccessful. For whatever reason, it did not get enough participation, which is a pity, since we really need admins now. I encourage the applicant to try again after some reasonable waiting period.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:32, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
Oppose I don't think it's fair to shade the facts about the past adminship that obviously. They did not "simply expire". --Vogone (talk) 20:53, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
Also, I consider  to be a rather strange method to make people aware of a user rights request. --Vogone (talk) 21:14, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
@Vogone: How so? I just wanted to point him to a discussion which was essentially saying, "Had I had these tools, I would have done it myself--if you think I would be a good candidate, let me know." Do you think it's inappropriate? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:15, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
I personally wouldn't have done it that way, in my opinion it's not very useful to "select" the people to participate in a certain permissions request, there is already the watchlist notice to make aware of such requests and people who are willing to participate are surely going to do it. Though, of course I do not automatically expect others to feel the same about this. --Vogone (talk) 21:35, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
Neutral: Whilst I don't have any problem with the question on the noticeboard, there wasn't any need for it either. I had already seen the request for adminship here and didn't want to make the first comment. My reservations would be with Koavf's commitments. They seem to lie elsewhere. I might not be active in certain fields on Wikidata, but I'd like to think I dedicate a lot of the time I have to fighting vandals and doing what else I can. I don't think it would be a problem if you were an admin again, but you're just not very active here. I see from your sparse few recent contributions that you have written descriptions with an initial capital letter, you don't seem to be aware of the ±1 issue on adding population statistics, and I just don't feel at ease that you aren't here often enough to stay on the ball. That is my main concern. I wouldn't have a problem with your admin tools expiring again like the previous time, that's your loss, but others, namely Vogone, do, and I respect his objection when considering this request. This is why, at the present time, I am neutral. Jared Preston (talk) 19:01, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
Weak support Koavf is a good editor, but I do hope he stays active after getting the tools. I agree with Jared Preston. Jianhui67talk★contribs 03:33, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
Weak support -- Trusted user and very active at some WMF projects. Wagino 20100516 (talk) 09:44, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Support Sure, if they go inactive again then we have a process for that. Thanks for volunteering. Ajraddatz (talk) 18:49, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
Support Trusted user. All the best: RichFarmbrough, 19:34, 3 December 2015 (UTC).
Will you only delete requested items? There is a huge backlog that requires attention every time, empty items about templates or categories for example. There is also a lack of uninvolved administrators for discussions (RFC's and property deletions), do you think you can handle that kind of stuff? Sjoerd de Bruin(talk) 12:11, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
@Sjoerddebruin: In the new year, one of my resolutions is to devote an hour a day to basic maintenance at the different WMF projects (in English and Spanish). I can't do all of this myself but many hands make for light lifting, so I'm happy to do my part. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:21, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.