I am requesting sysop status, as I am an admin on MediaWiki.org and am involved in the MetaProject to transfer content to MediaWiki.org. It would be useful to be able to edit protected pages affected by this project (especially the main project template Template:MoveToMediaWiki, which needs tweaking) and to be able to delete unwanted content that is not worth moving. I have read the admin policy, though I am unlikely to become involved in admin tasks not directly related to mw.org. If temporary sysop status is more appropriate, then please move this request (although it should be noted that the project has already been going on for about a year and a half, and is likely to take a good while longer yet...) --HappyDog 05:11, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
+ I know HappyDog from MediaWiki.org and I trust him with the tools (whether it be permanently or just temporarily). Cbrown1023talk 01:26, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Seems to be a reasonable request for sysop tools. As for length of time, it can always be extended if needs be. Perhaps it could be "long term temporary" whilst dealing with the project you mention. Majorly (talk) 02:08, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
So, he's wanting long-term temporary adminship here, obviously knows MediaWiki well, and has a good reason for wanting the tools. Personally, I say add him as a regular admin and see if we can sucker persuade him into doing regular admin work here too. Howsat? ~Kylu (u|t) 05:22, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Kylu, THIS is a request for regular adminship, basically ... --Aphaia 16:35, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes, but he was considering limiting the role to the uses specific to his need, whereas I think we could persuade him to do other administrative tasks also. See? ~Kylu (u|t) 07:41, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Point taken <g> --Aphaia 11:50, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
HappyDog is now a (regular) sysop. Majorly (talk) 06:23, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. --HappyDog 12:32, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Comment You have a sensible reason for requesting. Hopefully relevant question to your task, I see sometimes MediaWiki Help meta wiki URL in a printed matter as a reference to MediaWiki: as for moving pages, how will you handle those soft redirect? Just curious. --Aphaia 05:25, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure I understand the first bit of your question, but in terms of the move, yes they are handled by soft redirects. See here for an example. --HappyDog 05:51, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your quick response. I mean ... sometimes soft redirects (normally six months) are deleted. I'd like to know if it is the case of "moving to MediaWiki" soft redirects. --Aphaia 05:54, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
In that case, no. These redirects should never be deleted, as per this guideline. --HappyDog 09:50, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, nice to know it :)
My I am now inclining to support your temp adminship from two reasons 1) your reason sounds me sensible, but I haven't support anyone who I don't know closely, so I am positively abstain. You may be supported by Wikimedia tech cabal, but normally they have no interested in voting. 2) More bureaucratic, I am not sure MW.org is "Wikimedia project" whose sysopship is required for request for meta adminship. It would be necessary to discuss (and I am inclining to include .. why not?) and take some times. On the other hand, temp adminship on technical necessary is casually granted, and if you stay in the limitation of your published request reason, none would mind. So how about avoiding a complicated path, keeping this request as is, but starting with a temp adminship? I hope a week or around, we can reach a consensus on the second point, though. --Aphaia 10:05, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
I am assuming you meant 'not inclining to support' in the above statement. :-)
Re: Point 1 - that is fair enough. Just for reference (in case it helps), I have been a very active participant at MW.org, since I registered 3 1/2 years (when it was teeny tiny) and have been an admin for nearly 1 1/2 years. I have made over 6000 edits to the wiki, which is over 20% of the total. (To put that in perspective, if you don't count user space, there are currently 5129 pages, including redirects and the MediaWiki: namespace.)
I have been registered at meta for longer (about 4 years in total) but with only about 1000 edits, a large number of which have probably been in relation to MW.org.
Re: point 2 - given that MW.org (a) is run by the MW foundation and (b) was created to hold the content from meta relating to the software (as opposed to the other content-based projects), I don't see why adminship there should not be considered being 'an administrator on another Wikimedia project'. However, that is for the meta community to decide and I will obviously go with that decision.
Re: your final point - I will be staying within the bounds of this request, as that is my area of interest. As stated, I am happy for temporary adminship if that is deemed more appropriate. My only concern is that this will only last for 30 days, which is not really long enough (the content transferral project is on-going).
Thanks for your comments --HappyDog 00:53, 5 September 2007 (UTC)