Jump to content

Meta talk:Requests for adminship/TonyBallioni

Add topic
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Latest comment: 5 years ago by TonyBallioni
  • This RfA ended on 22 March 2019 03:51 (UTC), as such I have not taken into consideration any vote casted after that time. With that in mind, the tally is 22 supports, 8 opposes and 1 neutral (Vogone; although it looks its leaning oppose). That makes it 73,33% < 75% required for promotion. If I even go ahead and discount votes of users with, say, less than 50 edits at Meta, the tally would be 18 supports, 7 opposes and 1 neutral, which would make a 72% < 75 % (the affected would be: RhinosF1: 26 edits; Bradv: 17 edits; Natureium: 42 edits; Barkeep49; Arifin.wijaya: 20 edits). As such I think there's no consensus for promotion at this time on both scenarios. Sorry. Pinging my fellow bureaucrats Matiia and MF-Warburg as well. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 19:21, 22 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
  • *I have no problem with whatever you all decide, but I do have two questions: first, I have it as 26 support and 9 oppose (revi supported but didn't mark it), and I could just be counting wrong, but I've done it several times throughout the day and that's what I get to.

    Second, on the discounting, I would also suggest stuff like Special:Contributions/Iwan_Novirion would be fair to include in the not active camp, which would make it either 75% using your numbers, and 76% if you didn't add revi's. Either way it's close and like I said, I think either one is fair, but since you're getting into numbers, I thought it worth bring up. Thanks for taking the time to do this, Marco, it is appreciated. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:37, 22 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

      • Also, yeah, figured out where the number discrepancies are: NovakWatchman and Ajraddatz used {{support}}. Tulsi and revi supported without templates. MF-W opposed without a template. That'd bring you using your methods to:
        • All votes 26/9/1 (74.28%)
        • Discounted 22/8/1 (75%) and if you use my suggestion that a first non-minor edit in almost two years isn't active 22/7/1 (75.8%).
As I said, fine with whatever, just wanted to get the math straight since it seems to come down to that. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:54, 22 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
Doh. I misread that you weren't counting the late votes. Yeah, your numbers are fine. Again, thanks Marco. Sorry for the confusion :) TonyBallioni (talk) 20:10, 22 March 2019 (UTC)Reply