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 am withdrawing, since it appears that an important part of the community would like to see more before supporting me. Thank you for your support or your constructive comments. I will continue editing as usual unless someone wants to give me any sort of advice regarding anything. --Kostas20142 (talk) 12:02, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikidata contributors! During my stay in Wikidata so far, I have been active mostly in 2 venues: First of all in new pages patrolling for small (under 1,5KB) items that require either deletion or improvement, as well as for inappropriate pages in other namespaces. The second is patrolling recent changes using customized filters to detect vandalism or spam. The reason I am requesting adminship is to be able to delete these pages (that unambiguously require deletion) on my own instead of sending them RfD like I am doing now and take the appropriate actions when encountering vandalism, as well as to help handling similar request on RFD and AN. Regarding languages, my native language is Greek but I also speak English and French (less fluently though). Regarding relevant experience, I am a sysop on Greek Wikiquote. Disclosure: I have 2 alternative accounts globally, Kostas20142 (alt) and Kostantinos20142, both of which I plan to create here especially if granted the permissions. Thank you for your time --Kostas20142 (talk) 17:27, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
SupportMbch331 (talk) 17:49, 4 February 2018 (UTC) I see Kostas20142 a lot on RfD and his request are valid requests.
SupportOppose per MisterSynergy below; I'd wait quite some time before making another request. Thank you, Nick, for the notice about his rights-gathering; I do think that Kostas is nevertheless a trustworthy person whose requests we've generally honored at WD:RFD and WD:AN. Mahir256 (talk) 18:19, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
Support little experience but good will, it is enough for me. Pamputt (talk) 06:22, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
Oppose 1,555 edits on Wikidata seems to me not enough experience to be an admin. I would encourage the user to gather more experience with Wikidata and then reapply. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 16:51, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
Oppose This user has always been interested in acquiring user rights and permissions first and foremost, any help they can provide will be secondary to their hat collecting quest. Their interest in hat collecting was a significant issue at their first RfA on English Wikipedia (see w:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kostas20142 for evidence) and it's only a few weeks since they were requesting OTRS access here. I would expect significantly more experience and serious evidence of their dedication to this project, because my suspicion is that this is just a stepping stone to another RfA on English Wikipedia. Nick (talk) 17:00, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
Oppose. The candidate's main experience with Wikidata is to do with patrolling items and nominating items for deletion. I understand the purpose of having admin rights so he can delete things directly without bothering another admin, but RfD isn't overwhelmed with backlogs just yet and the candidate's level of experience on Wikidata isn't sufficient for making deletion decisions without another editor's participation yet. Deryck Chan (talk) 19:03, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
Oppose, as not experienced enough. I would have also opposed the October 2017 RfA on en.WP but that was snow closed. Take some time and do some serious work, and I'm sure your fellow editors will be much more inclined to support you. Schwede66 (talk) 11:27, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Special:CentralAuth/Kostas20142 says you have temporary sysop rights at elwikiquote, and a total of only 112 edits in that project. When and why does that role expire, and how much sysop experience do you really have? Something else: you started contributing at Wikidata significantly less than two months ago, and you collected ~1.5k edits with your account. While I appreciate your efforts for this project at WD:RfD and I do indeed see you as a promising candidate, I am not sure whether it is already about time to run for adminship… —MisterSynergy (talk) 18:45, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
@MisterSynergy: my adminship expires on 06:24, 2 September 2018. Basically, for such small wikis it is granted only on temporarily and can be renewed (like I have already done once. according to xtools I have 35 deletions and 2 revdels. I don't claim that this is significant, and my sincere apologies if it was perceived that way, but merely that I have carried out sysop tasks in past. --Kostas20142 (talk) 19:04, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
As I noticed you hardly created any new items, have you tried to expand or correct a group of items in one or the other fields? --- Jura 10:57, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
@Jura1: Indeed, I have created 5 items, all of which fall under the "structurally needed" category (3 film directors and 2 books as references). However I have expanded a few already existing items, especially recent creations by automated tools that had only an instance of (P31) or not even that. --Kostas20142 (talk) 14:37, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
I'm beginning to doubt after Nick's statement. I don't see an issue in the number of edits, but the hat collecting does look like a valid point. What's your response to the hat collecting claim? Mbch331 (talk) 18:28, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
@Nick:, @Mbch331:, I will be really honest with this: I have done mistakes. And I have requested permissions that appears I shouldn't have. For the sake of transparency I will also disclose that I had requested Global renamer some months ago. However, stating that helping Wikimedia projects is secondary to me, is an unsupported accusation. I might have given this impression, however that's not the case. First of all, why to stay here, especially after my unsuccessful RfA and the OTRS request you mentioned? If I merely wanted hats, I could simply go elsewhere and make a fresh start seeking hats there. Instead, I have stayed here contributing globally. You mentioned the English Wikipedia RfA. Some people thought that I could be trusted back there, some others thought either that it was too early, or that I was hat collecting. My intentions were pure, and the reason why I stopped participating in admin-related areas is that I found some comments a bit discouraging and felt unsure about my next step to fix the things and prove that these accusations were indeed wrong. Not following the advice I had been offered not to run was indeed a mistake. Maybe I was over-confident, maybe I thought it was a minority view. Either ways, I learned from this mistake and sought advice on whether it would be appropriate to run here. This was done privately, and I would prefer not to disclose the user unless this user is ok with this. (I had not mentioned the en.wiki RfA because I found it irrelevant) Regarding the OTRS, well, I really thought that I could be helpful to the team however I withdrew after 2 comments (one of which was Nick's) that expressed opposition. And this was done because I found continuing as candidate although I was not trusted, counterproductive. And to be honest, I don't think that this team would be suitable for a hat collector; although public few people know you are in and the activity is monitored so.... And especially in Wikidata I have done other things than admin related tasks as well; I first came here to edit manually linking items to el.wikiquote pages and later started contributing to items. Regarding Nick's closing comment, no, I do not plan to run again. Of course I have done mistakes, made bad choices and could have been better in many areas. However my intentions were, are, and will be pure. Hope I have covered all your points. I am at your disposal should you need to ask anything else. --Kostas20142 (talk) 21:38, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your explanation. For me you've answered the question. Mbch331 (talk) 22:42, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.