Requests for comment/Riadismet sysop flag on Arabic wp

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

The following request for comments is closed. The request was successfully resolved.

Very Honorable Stewards, I am here to claim for justice, because there is some abuse on ar wp. In fact, a voting session for sysoping the user Riadismet was opened on 23:48، 18 April 2008 (UTC). The voting session was ended by a new bureaucrat one day before its real time of end (he ended it on 23:48، 8 May 2008 (UTC) instead of 23:48، 9 May 2008 (UTC))!!! Another problem is that the voter must have at least 100 encyclopedic contributions in wp articles to vote, and there is a voter (أحب للبتراء (I love Petra)) who has not the sufficient number of encyclopedic contributions (he voted against Riadismet). So me as a sysop told them that his vote must not be counted but a user deleted it (please see here: English translation). You can see the voting session here (English translation). As you can see, The results of the voting are: 19 votes with, 6 against (while not counting the vote of I love Petra), so more than 75% as what the rules on ar wp stipulate.

Thank you very much. --DrFO.Jr.Tn (sysop on ar wp: DrFO.Tn) 12:32, 10 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This an ar wp issue. Discuss there. Санта Клаус 12:48, 10 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear DrFO. Simply Patra is well known active user at Arabic Wikipedia, she is reviewing images licenses and sources, she has too many encyclopedic edits there, she can't be a troll! Also, she has more than 100 edits at 0 namespace, and her edits are very useful, you know.--OsamaK 15:26, 14 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I must agree with OsamaK, the majority of contributions by user "I love Petra" were along the lines of tagging copyvio/wrong licensed/unsourced images, which led to the deletion of those articles/images she contributed in. Deleted pages do not show up under Special:Contributions , and that will be why user "I love Petra" seems to have less edits that she had actually done.
I think DrFo however is referring to 2 other actions which he considers to be "abuse". The first one being the early termination of the voting process, as he points out above. The second is the fact that one of the users who voted in support was disqualified even though they had the correct number of edits (on grounds of suspected sockpuppetry). There's discussion going on about this on ar. --Lord Anubis 15:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dear DrFO, Petra, (by the way, her user-name translates into sound of Petra , not I love Petra) is way more active than you, thousands of her contributions got deleted ( as you know ) cause she usually tags copyvios, which we delate later ( as you already know ). On the other hand the canceled vote was a single purpose user account, a sleeper , a user who made nothing but a 100 really minor contribs (some actually included adding a space into a paragraph , as you already know) and went into hibernation for a good period of time before he resurfaced just to vote and did nothing else after ( as you already know ). Again , (as you already know) we do not welcome such votes or behaviours back on . Now, you are here to ask for Admin rights for Riadismet? You know better than to do so. We have both a community (hmmm , and and 3 bureaucrats as you already know ) back on . None suggested the cancellation of the sleeper vote was a mistake. And none even dared to accuse Petra with such an accusation you provided. ( will actually the last admin how suggested something similar about Petra was was voted out) .
Dear DrFO, Riadismet can always reapply again for admin rights. I hope him the best when he does. From my side of view I see nothing wrong with the vote, but yet that has to be decided back on not here on meta.
Now about the chief of the cabals thing. Are you serious? You already know that that is nothing but a wiki Joke, or don't you! --Tarawneh 16:33, 14 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • 28 total votes, 20 support, 7 against, 1 neutral = 71% as Google says. Come back in 45 days and ask again for it. There is no injustice here. salam. --Alnokta 10:24, 15 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]