Meta:Requests for adminship/NDG

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a closed Meta-Wiki request. Please do not modify it.

NDG

NDG (talk • contribs • deleted user contributions • logs • block log • abuse log • CentralAuth • stalktoy) Bureaucrats: user rights management.

Not ending before 16:11, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello, everyone. I am nominating NDG for adminship today. NDG is an administrator and interface administrator on kshwiki, where he performs basic maintenance over there; he is also a global rollbacker as an active member of the SWMT. If elected as a Meta administrator, he will plan to assist with RFH and CAT:DEL, maintain (global) abuse filters against vandalism/LTAs/spam, and also maintain the spam and title blacklists. With my offer of help and guidance to the candidate (especially the abuse filter and technical fields), I hope you will join me in supporting this adaptable, hardworking, and respectful candidate. Thank you for your consideration. Codename Noreste (talk • contribs) 16:11, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I expressly agree to the nomination, thank you very much. The ability to block vandals and quickly delete pointless pages would be a huge help. Thanks for your feedback and consideration. NDG (talk) 16:24, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support as the nominator. Codename Noreste (talk • contribs) 16:25, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nominator --Der-Wir-Ing ("DWI") talk 16:38, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose having multiple recent blocks and a strongly opposed RFA on your homewiki, plus only administrative experience on a small project I don't think you are ready for adminship on a project with global impact, especially when the reasoning is to work on components with global impact. — xaosflux ^Talk 19:13, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Xaosflux: Noting that the two most recent blocks (in January 2026 and August 2025) were self-requested blocks, and that the last dewiki block for cause was in May 2025. This is just a note as for the block portion of the comment, I'm not questioning the oppose (and don't have any particular opinion about this RFA). EPIC (talk) 19:18, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
There are also other blocks that appear to be about disruption last year, and the current block/conditional (can't tell if that conditional was subsequently removed) unblock seem to indicate additional friction. Having less than 1 month of project admin experience and wanting to work on global abuse filters (when their project currently has 0 active abuse filters), and blacklists (where their project has no titleblacklist or spamblacklist) without any experience is is also a reason I am not supporting. — xaosflux ^Talk 19:37, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Xaosflux There were indeed blocks stemming from a mutual user conflict in my early days. A condition I had requested against both user accounts was unintentionally violated by me, whereupon I explicitly agreed to the one-day block on May 5th. I fully understand concerns, which are not easily dispelled by my unsuccessful dewiki candidacy. On a global level, I have come to appreciate the collaboration with many colleagues since July. These are things that, however, are not reflected in my home wiki. Regarding my experience, I can only point to my reports on RFH, my reverts/rollbacks, and my deleted edits. kshwiki has no vandalism (and nearly no recent activity) and is maintained by me for idealistic reasons (my regional dialect). NDG (talk) 20:33, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support NDG does a great job at anti-vandalism on Meta that I believe sysopship will be an overall net positive. shb (t • c) 20:05, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Saroj (talk) 20:43, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't think the dewiki issues (the latest of which is one year old; I don't care about the failed RfA) rise to something that requires opposition here. The lack of adminship experience is not an issue - NDG is a global rollbacker which goes a long way in this case, and it's not like there is no precedent for users getting adminship on this wiki without comparable experience elsewhere. Leaderboard (talk) 07:04, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support trusted user, dewiki issues were about relatively specific local topics imo – no objections for this role. --Icodense (talk) 18:46, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree with the comments above. Good Luck! :D PieWriter (talk) 02:09, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Your anti-vandalism efforts on Meta are a great help! You have been a bit hot-headed on dewiki, but I am happy to Support, provided you make a conscious effort to remain cool, calm and collected as a Meta admin. --Count Count (talk) 06:26, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great editor and great work so far. Happy to support. – DreamRimmer ■ 07:50, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support As I suppose a slight tale, I succeeded in a request for adminship with no formal admin rights elsewhere, and with around 200 edits on Meta total. I'd like to say I've done well, if I may toot my own horn a bit. I see no reason why NDG could not either. They are, I believe, trustworthy enough, and while I might be more eager to support a limited adminship here, I have no issues with them becoming a regular administrator. EggRoll97 (talk) 09:45, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'm well aware of NDG's active contributions and their value to the SWMT. However, reviewing your recent GS requests[1], I noticed that you have requested deletions on wikis that clearly have active local administrators, some even with more than 10 admins. While using GS requests as a way to flag items or as a precautionary alert is acceptable, I would find it difficult to support this nomination if these actions reflect a disregard for local wiki autonomy. I share the concerns raised by Xaosflux regarding this point. If you can demonstrate an understanding of and respect for local control, I would be inclined to support your candidacy.--Infinite0694 (Talk) 19:05, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your feedback @Infinite0694. That was clearly a mistake and I don't want to make excuses, but I can't use active_sysops.js at the moment (issues with Monobook and other tools). I will make sure to modify my interface so that hopefully this won't happen again. As a GR and SWMT-Member, I respect the autonomy of smaller projects and don't want to cause any irritation. NDG (talk) 19:58, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Ok Support --Infinite0694 (Talk) 19:23, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support A trusted user for the toolset, and the global rollbacker permission shows this. They also do amazing cross wiki vandalism and LTA work, and, as such, I do believe this would be a net positive. I do still hold slight concern about some of the de issues, but, like others said, the de issues don't seem like issues that would impact their work here on meta. LuniZunie (talk) 19:15, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ameisenigel (talk) 18:43, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support --V0lkanic (talk) 13:10, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support 🪶-TΛNBIRUZZΛMΛN (💬) 02:39, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support I understand the concerns and if this were a request for GS then I would be less inclined to support, but NDG regularly requests admin attention here and his reports here are good. I trust them enough to become a sysop here. --Ferien (talk) 21:00, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jianhui67^{talk★contribs} 00:27, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Completely Support per nominator -- Lampje (talk) 13:53, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support He took the role of mentoring me in the art of CVU and I am 100% convinced he will excel in this position. --AsepTisch (talk) 16:00, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support Although he is on his way to become a hat collector ;) -- Martin _(Mpns/Disk) 16:05, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The consensus here is clear and I am happy to grant admin rights based on that support. Still, I want to specifically highlight the concerns raised by Xaosflux. When someone with such a level of experience flags a potential issue, it isn’t a hurdle, it’s a guidebook. I’m moving forward with this, but the whole community is asking NDG to take those points to heart as he moves around during the first few months with the necessary balance and cautiousness. --M/ (talk) 16:13, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@NDG I certainly agree that the community support emerged in this discussion, would all of the 'crats have become involved I would have closed this as promotion over my personal objection; never hesitate to ask your peers for help. — xaosflux ^Talk 17:35, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The above request page is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Comments about this page should be made in Meta:Babel or Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat.