From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
< Stewards‎ | Confirm‎ | 2012
Jump to navigation Jump to search
The following discussion is closed: This election is closed and these pages are an archive of that event.

logs: rights, globalauth, gblblock, gblrights | translate: translation help, statement

  • Sprachen: de, en-4, fr-3
  • Informationen zur Person: Hallo. Da ich erst letztes Jahr zum Steward gewählt wurde, ist dies meine erste „Bestätigung“. … (Statement oder Übersetzung nötig)
  • Languages: de, en-4, fr-3
  • Personal info: Hello, there. This is my first re-confirmation as a steward, as I was only elected last year. As to my actions, I haven't been quite as active as I would have liked, but nevertheless got together a few steward actions. One of the first actions I did was nudging the people from Portuguese Wikipedia to elect their own bureaucrats, as a project of their size ought to have some. My professional situation has changed recently, which should give me more time to devote to stewardry on Wikipedia. I still believe that as a steward I can be of help to the many small wikis out there.
  • Idiomas: de, en-4, fr-3
  • Información personal: translation needed
  • Kielet: de, en-4, fr-3
  • Henkilökohtaiset tiedot: Hei. Tämä on ensimmäinen oikeuksien vahvistustilaisuuteni ylivalvojana, koska minut valittiin vasta viime vuonna. Mitä tulee toimintaani, en ole ollut aivan niin aktiivinen kuin olisin halunnut, mutta olen joka tapauksessa saanut tehtyä muutamia ylläpitäjätoimia. Yksi ensimmäisistä toimistani oli portugalinkielisen Wikipedian käyttäjien saaminen valitsemaan omat byrokraattinsa, koska sen kokoisessa projektissa pitäisi olla byrokraatteja. Ammatillinen tilanteeni on hiljattain vaihtunut, minkä vuoksi minulla pitäisi olla enemmän aikaa ylivalvojuudelle Wikipediassa. Uskon yhä että voin ylivalvojana olla avuksi monille pienille wikeille.
  • Языки: de, en-4, fr-3
  • Личная информация: translation needed
Tiếng Việt:
  • Ngôn ngữ: de, en-4, fr-3
  • Thông tin cá nhân: Xin chào mọi người. Đây là lần đầu tiên tôi tái xác nhận tiếp viên, bởi vì tôi mới được bầu năm ngoái. Đối với các hoạt động tiếp viên, tôi đã không hoạt động được khá như bản thân mong muốn, những vấn có xen kẽ một vài tác vụ tiếp viên. Một trong những công việc đầu tiên của tôi là định hướng cho các thành viên Wikipedia tiếng Bồ Đào Nha bầu chọn hành chính viên cho dự án cua họ, vì quy mô lớn của dự án này cần vài người như vậy. Hoàn cảnh cuộc sống của tôi đã thay đổi gần đây, và sẽ cung cấp thêm cho tôi thời gian để cống hiến nhiệm vụ tiếp viên trong Wikipedia. Tôi tin rằng với vai trò tiếp viên này có thể giúp đỡ nhiều wiki nhỏ hơn.

Comments about Eptalon[edit]

  • Keep Keep--Vituzzu 00:15, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep Keep--Jcaraballo 00:17, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Confirm. -Barras 00:19, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Oppose Has disregarded local Checkuser policy twice, did not reply to requests for explanation by several users. Regards, HaeB 00:47, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Confirm, made two mistakes shortly after having gotten the steward bit. We gave him a piece of his mind, should be okay now for me. —DerHexer (Talk) 00:49, 8 February 2012 (UTC) I'm changing to neutral. —DerHexer (Talk) 22:42, 17 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Neutral Neutral --minhhuy (talk) 02:27, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep Keep Matanya 07:13, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Oppose As HaeB, the checkuser action there on dewiki was an no-go, since stewards have to respect the local checkuser policies. We could forget it if Eptalon would have regret his action, but there is no sorry of him. A steward has to admit his mistakes. --Filzstift 07:26, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Neutral Neutral--Jusjih 10:20, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • thx but no thx, i agree with HaeB here basically. the point isn't just that he violated a longstanding policy, which is in place for good reason (can happen) but that he - in opposite to other stewards - did nothing to help clean it up despite the fact that he was made aware of the problem, regards --Jan eissfeldt 11:31, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep Keep, obviously made a mistake early in their tenure, but that was almost a year ago. As far as I am aware, a clean record since then. Craig Franklin 12:10, 8 February 2012 (UTC).Reply[reply]
  • Neutral Neutral, I am concerned about the comments above, but do not want to hurt the candidate, as I believe in acting in good faith. Wojciech Pędzich Talk 12:49, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep Keep --FriedrickMILBarbarossa 16:57, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Neutral, concerns with activity and comments above. Ajraddatz (Talk) 17:59, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Change to oppose. Due to lack of activity as a steward, and the concerns raised above and below I am moving to oppose. Everyone makes mistakes, but concerns arise from not acknowledging those mistakes and taking clear steps forward. Ajraddatz (Talk) 01:39, 23 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep Keep. -Orashmatash 19:18, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep Keep. Mistakes can happen when human beings are involved. Apart from that - stewards are allowed to CheckUser on projects with local CheckUsers in emergencies, and that applies for dewiki too. Imo you shouldn't make a big deal of it and embrace the people who only want to help you (but that's something completely different). Trijnstel 19:34, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Trijnstel, could you explain why you consider both of these cases to have been emergencies? The dewiki community did not share this judgement. Also the criticism wasn't so much that Eptalon did something that local Checkusers would have done as well, but the clueless way in which he/she tried to reign in in a very complex and high profile case whose eventual completion triggered wide media coverage in German media for weeks and months (this section alone lists 20 press articles).
And yes, we are all human and mistakes happen, but what is important is an ability to learn from them. Contrast this case, where I was happy to vote "support".
I don't question Eptalon's good intentions, but one of the most powerful user rights in Wikimedia projects should not be handed out based on AGF alone. There is a myriad of other ways to contribute which do not require the same level of diligence. Regards, HaeB 22:22, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]