Wikidata

Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Administrator/Ladsgroup 2

< 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.

✓ Done per community consensus (11/2/0 | 84.615384615385%) Vogone talk 15:53, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ladsgroup 2 edit

Vote
RfP scheduled to end after 16 October 2013 13:21 (UTC)

Hello, as I said in my last request for adminship, I need this access to work on technical aspects of Wikidata, to clear up what my bot (User:Dexbot) does, and merge items when I'm fixing interwikis from Persian Wikipedia (you can see my RFDs in the archive of RFD), I've worked on Wikidata Since October of 2012 (before it goes live) and my bot has more than 5M edits in Wikidata (and my bot has made tons of messes as well), I have almost 1.6K edits which is not very good but I think It's not very bad though --Amir (talk) 13:21, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Votes edit

  1. As the first to oppose last time, allow me to be the first to  Support this time around. My only previous concern was this project's need to maintain independent adminship standards, and it's clear to me that in the 7 months since then Ladsgroup has met those standards. Furthermore, we have a significant dearth of admins who speak Middle Eastern languages—something that's been true since this project's inception, but which took a sharp turn for the worse at the start of this month, when admins Amire80 (he-5) and Meisam (fa-5) were desysopped for inactivity. I look forward to welcoming Ladsgroup to the admin team. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 09:47, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2.  Support-I see tracks of him in almost every page history. he's an old active user.--دوستدار ایران بزرگ (talk) 17:10, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Strong  Support Legoktm (talk) 17:12, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4.  Oppose --Succu (talk) 21:41, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Any particular reason why? --Rschen7754 07:11, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Admin rights „to clear up what my bot (User:Dexbot) does“ - thats a little bit strange. --Succu (talk) 17:26, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5.  Oppose Edit count is on the low side, but that's not what bothers me. For someone planning to work on RFD, I look for at least 50 RFDs. Last time I checked, you had something like 28. That leaves cleaning up after Dexbot as a reason for getting adminship--Ladsgroup, could you explain why you need admin access to clean up after Dexbot? Thank you. One last word: Don't get disheartened if this fails. You appear to be a good user, and you can always try for adminship again. --Jakob (Scream about the things I've broken) 23:43, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I usually request RFD in IRC, or sometimes I just blank the item (and after that, bots will delete it). If you want to know how many items I've requested for delete you can see my deleted contribution (and even It's not all of them) because sometime I just make a list and send it to one of admins and ask them to delete. About Dexbot, let me explain to you this way, someone in Persian Wikipedia or any wikipedia, make an article (or category) about X (which already have an item here) but he/she didn't add the interwiki (the old way or even the new way) so my bot makes a new item and these two items needs to get merged (I'll review new articles made by my bot) Amir (talk) 08:41, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for explaining. I am switching to  Support. --Jakob (Scream about the things I've broken) 18:26, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6.  Support per PinkAmpersand.--DangSunM (talk) 00:29, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Strong  Support.--Calak (talk) 09:10, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Strong  Support. Amir is active user in fa.Wp and here, he is very creative and alwayes has new ideas. his bot had +5 millions edits in Wikidata. Darafsh Kaviyani (Talk) 16:47, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9.  Support StevenJ81 (talk) 16:49, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10.  Oppose Did not respond as well as I would've liked to concerns raised at Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard#Full STOP for User:Dexbot and the bot's talkpage (I'm sorry if I seem like I'm making adminship a bit of a big deal, but I think that's a basic failure to communicate). Dexbot was blocked less than four weeks ago as well.--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:02, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Communication issue: I never saw the AN topic until now (It's not a polite behavior to tell admins block someone without leaving a message in his/her talk page), I answered to the user in here and I think my answer was civil and polite (If you think my answer was a failure in communication please tell me so I can learn :) ), My bot issues: What my bot is doing is different (It's harvesting information from what human wrote and turn it into something that machine can process i.e. a bridge between human and machine) and It's working on a very large scale (I've harvested infoboxes person, book, film, song, single, album, officeholder and partially taxobox from English Wikipedia) so bugs and errors are inevitable despite that the scripts have one of the most complicated algorithms in this field and if you want i can show you how complicated is the scripts are. I never said I won't make any error, I said If my bot is working incorrectly, I'll stop it as soon as possible, I'll fix it, and I will write an script the correct mistakes and I did it every time my bot did something incorrectly Amir (talk) 20:25, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    The block of the bot for editing outside of community consensus is, to me, a sign of misunderstanding of the bot policy and consensus.--Jasper Deng (talk) 22:44, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11.  Support To be perfectly honest, there is no issue with the user at all. As far as I can see, Dexbot was neevr editing out of consensus and the lack of communication is down to the users always leaving the botop out of discussions saying 'Look admins! They don't respond, bot is bad. Block it.'. So really, no issues, no concerns just a support. John F. Lewis (talk) 19:01, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12.  Support - A bit of controversy with the bot, but I don't think it'll impact how Ladsgroup uses the tools. Looks OK to me... Ajraddatz (Talk) 22:21, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13.  Mendukung -- Wagino 20100516 (talk) 11:09, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments edit

  • ...
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/Ladsgroup_2&oldid=78680267"