Meta:Requests for adminship/Renvoy

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

Renvoy[edit]

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

Not ending before 25 July 2022 07:53 (UTC)

Hi all! Yesterday came long-awaited answer from steward on my request for global sysop permissions. Although result of request was not perfect for me, I totally respect that decision. The only but quite fair argument against was lack of admin experience. To fullfil this requirement, I would like to ask for adminship here, on Meta. This is one of my key projects of interest and I am trying to be active in fight against vandalism/spam, while being active on other pages such as SRG and GSR. Apart from that I have substantial experiences out of Meta, being admin on Ukrainian Wikibooks and active on handful of other projects--reNVoy (user talk) 07:53, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral According to Xtools, the majority of your edits here are in main namespace and to global pages (SRX, GSR), along with a few translations. While edit count is not a formal criterion, that you hardly participate in local/other progresses is a minus to me. Do keep up the good work though, and hopefully one day I'll be able to support you in your local RfA(s). NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 20:04, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Svārtava (t/u) • 01:07, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Trusted user. AlPaD (talk) 04:15, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for similar reason as GS - suggest you gain experience as a permanent admin on a content project first. Meta admins can break things across many wikis at once, so barring specific technical access needs here, I look for more sysop experience on projects with active editing communities first in meta candidates. — xaosflux ^Talk 10:09, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support; experienced enough imo. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:22, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, I don't think "because one request failed, I'm now making another one" is a good reason for adminship. --MF-W 01:44, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, per xaosflux. --mirinano (talk) 04:06, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. Would like to see you become an admin on a content project first. -FASTILY 09:25, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per xaoflux and MF-Warburg. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 09:37, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per xaoflux, Fastily etc --Herby ^{talk thyme} 10:23, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per MF-W. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 14:25, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Xaosflux --Ameisenigel (talk) 14:35, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral because I don't want to pile-on. I suggest the candidate get more experience before applying because I'm seeing a bit of hastiness to get more advanced rights. Jianhui67^{talk★contribs} 17:13, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I would trust Renvoy with sysop rights on Meta although I agree that more sysop experience on content wikis would be preferable --Johannnes89 (talk) 17:46, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Sorry, I supported you in GS but here I can't as fundamentally the issues raised on GS is for you to have content sysop access somewhere and unfortunately, meta is more of a co-ordination wiki and not content wiki and the experience here will not be sufficient to bridge the gap. In addition, I also agree with MF-W and Xaosflux. On the flip side, you have some decent amount of speedy deletion requests, though the number of reverts are quite little. I think this is too premature for now. Hopefully with sysop experience elsewhere the next request will be successful. Thank you for volunteering. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 11:28, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per concerns —MdsShakil (talk) 13:03, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support, while I do not think it was a smart decision on Renvoy's part to run for Meta admin flag right after failing to get the GS flag, I do believe that Renvoy would be of help as a Meta admin. I agree that he could have more involvement into Meta community, but basically his main activity is valid requests for admin involvement and I know he is competent enough to act himself had he had the permissions. In a short while as a temporary sysop on Ukrainian Wikipedia, Renvoy was one of the most active admins, he is a sysop on Ukrainian Wikibooks — he satisfied the admin experience requirement both nominally, and knowing the value of the experience, qualitatively. I do believe we would be losing on potential help if we make him first spend their efforts to obtain a permanent sysop flag somewhere. --Base (talk) 20:09, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question: Why did you requested adminship on Meta just after a global sysop request where there was no consecus? 154.121.49.189 18:01, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing really I can add apart from what I wrote in rationale for this request. reNVoy (user talk) 06:59, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose largely per M-FW. This request right after that one is odd, but normally I would consider their experience sufficient for GS. Solid crosswiki record and I think their experience with the mop is also not that bad based on their logs in ukwikibooks which is a content wiki. Maybe most didn't go past CA to check the experience. I guess it's too late now, but if they reapply in a few months with a little more experience, I will support them.--BRP^ever 08:38, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Base. --Mykola ^talk 20:07, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Closed as unsuccessful. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:20, 25 July 2022 (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.