Stewards/Confirm/2015/Shizhao

Shizhao

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

English:

Languages: zh-N, en-1, ru-1, ja-0
Personal info: ~~This steward did not create their confirmation page before the start of the comment phase. Page created on behalf of the Election Committee by Snowolf~~
Sorry, recently too busy :(, I forgot steward confirm time.
I have been a steward since late 2005. In the past year, I processing requests in SRG and SRCU, block OP etc. I would like to continue to serve the wikimedia project community as a steward for 2014. Thank you for your past support.
--Shizhao (talk) 12:43, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

italiano:

Lingue:
Informazioni personali: translation needed

español:

Idiomas:
Información personal: translation needed

русский:

Языки:
Личная информация: translation needed

Deutsch:

Sprachen:
Informationen zur Person: translation needed

Nederlands:

Taalvaardigheid:
Persoonlijke informatie: translation needed

Comments about Shizhao

Remove No reconfirm statement, low activity level Universehk (talk) 03:16, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove Unfortunately no reconfirm statement. Vogone (talk) 18:02, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral awaiting statement, although I have always felt that those who do not create their confirmation statement send a bad message, Shizhao has, to the best of my memory, always created their statements and so I think it best imo to wait and see what they have to say. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 18:06, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:15, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove Alan ^(talk) 18:32, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No statement, and repeated use of OS on their homewiki. I did not find their explanations particularly satisfying, and they did it once again after that discussion. Given previous objections to their use of CU on their homewiki before, I don't see that we have any other option left. Remove --Rs chen 7754 18:37, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove, inactive concerns. Thanks for your service! Érico Wouters (msg) 19:08, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral --Uğurkent^talk 19:37, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove Eurodyne (talk) 19:58, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove - no statement --Rax (talk) 20:23, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove due to lack of reconfirmation statement. Armbrust (talk) 22:15, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove no statement--DangSunM (talk) 23:08, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep~~{{rm}} per no statement being created.~~ Per statement and activity levels. Green Giant (talk) 23:11, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~{{neutral}} per Snowolf — NickK (talk) 23:36, 8 February 2015 (UTC)~~ Keep, ok, I see a statement, quite strange to see a user who was active and made steward actions but forgot about confirmation, but in my view the level of activity is ok for keeping steward rights — NickK (talk) 09:30, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove Inactive, no confirm statement as well. --Atcovi (talk) 23:39, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
remove, unfortunately. —DerHexer (Talk) 01:36, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Good bye, sorry for my only oppose vote, 10 years is enough imo, and seems you have problems between you and Hong Kong people? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:43, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

* Neutral This user is more active than Jyothis, Mardetanha, Pundit, Ruslik0, Snowolf and others. but I will wait for your comment. Jusjih will become another steward speaking Chinese.--GZWDer (talk) 01:52, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep ("Keep" added 10:10, 13 February 2015 (UTC)). Shizhao is our longest-serving steward, having first been elected in May 2005. I note that Shizhao has been active on this wiki and zhwiki as recently as 10 minutes ago, so I am surprised that they have not written a statement. ~~However I suppose we have to take this fact as an intention to resign, which is quite unfortunate.~~ This, that and the other (talk) 01:52, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- So also @Shizhao:.--GZWDer (talk) 02:01, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. No statement is surprising. Keep Please write the statement on time next time. 下次请按时书写陈述。--Jusjih (talk) 03:44, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral as the intention is not clear, no doubts about engagement, skills, etc. though. Pundit (talk) 07:33, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose White Master (e s) 09:16, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove due to inactivity sadly --Herby ^{talk thyme} 09:45, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove largely inactive. Ajraddatz (talk) 09:59, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove, inactive. Changing to Keep. Please be more active. Matanya (talk) 11:52, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Since he make a comment, I decide to vote Keep.--GZWDer (talk) 12:46, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I've always found Shizhao a hardworking user and I see it as a plus that he wishes to continue for the tenth year. Trijnstel_talk 13:33, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Long service and also a diligence steward. --minhhuy ^(talk) 13:51, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - Southparkfan 19:37, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Not sure if those above voted Remove because there was initially no confirmation statement or because the user posted it late. If it's the latter then that's just being petty. Active and hard-working. Gets my approval.--Xania (talk) 00:14, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep INeverCry 06:56, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Geagea (talk) 21:10, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep --Az1568 (talk) 06:48, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep What! Are we going to be such formalists that we will fire a steward merely for failing to create a reconfirmation blurb?! ... I am disappointed. Tempodivalse [talk] 01:35, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Altamel (talk) 05:13, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- with my respect and admiration, even despite the failure in maintaining against red tape. Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 13:31, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Jianhui67^{talk★contribs} 05:32, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove Marcus Cyron (talk) 21:15, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove per above Grind24 (talk) 23:13, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove Inactivity. Widr (talk) 11:13, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- At least he is more active than Pundit, Ruslik0, Snowolf and others.--GZWDer (talk) 12:43, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - Not necessarily as per toollabs:meta/crossactivity/Shizhao:

family	wiki	last edit	last log (bureaucrat)	last log (sysop)	Local groups
mediawiki	www.mediawiki.org	2014-10-23 15:36			autoreview
wikibooks	zh.wikibooks.org	2014-12-16 02:26	2013-05-09 00:55	2015-01-04 01:40	bureaucrat, import, sysop
wiktionary	zh.wiktionary.org	2015-01-16 02:18	2014-07-10 01:45	2014-11-26 01:29	bureaucrat, import, sysop, transwiki
wikiquote	zh.wikiquote.org	2014-04-22 03:01	2013-05-09 00:56	2013-05-09 00:56	import
wikisource	zh.wikisource.org	2015-01-26 02:05	2013-05-09 00:56	2013-05-09 00:56	import, sysop
wikipedia	ru.wikipedia.org	2011-01-25 06:19	2012-04-16 06:11		uploader
wikipedia	de.wikipedia.org	2014-04-10 03:24			editor
wikipedia	fi.wikipedia.org	2005-03-04 11:18			autoreview

--Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:22, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Remove He „would like to continue to serve … as a steward for 2014“. It's a little bit late for that by now … Someone who takes that little interest in cooperating with the community in the first place that he does not care to create any confirmation statement at all and then presents this one-liner that has probably just been copied over from the last confirmation without even bothering to change the year does not earn my trust – neither personally nor technically. Sorry. Troubled @sset ^{Work • Talk • Mail} 12:39, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral JoshuaKGarner (talk) 19:37, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep He is active enough. Kroji (talk) 20:40, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Tony Tan⁹⁸ · talk 21:59, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove I'm not convinced that he ever understood that (and why) acting on one's homewiki as a steward is very problematic. --თოგო ^(D) 16:07, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove Inactivity. --Berlin-George (talk) 22:45, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove Thanks for your contributions. Please focus more on your local wikis in your limited time.--Lt2818 (talk) 14:49, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove Most serious vandal in zhwp. Baycrest (talk) 09:38, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral --Tremonist (talk) 16:56, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Weak remove. I'm not really happy with !voting for removal, but I expect stewards to have a better understanding of their own fundamental policies and to be able to learn with mistakes. Shizhao is here for sometime and I still see misuse of steward's tools in homewiki, despite same problems in the past. I also would like to see any participation on discussions. Thanks for your work anyway.—Teles «Talk to me ˱_{C L @ S}˲» 17:24, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove Unprepared for confirmation. StudiesWorld (talk) 11:21, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral -- Wagino 20100516 (talk) 08:37, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, activity is somewhat low but acceptable.--E8xE8 (talk) 11:40, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral — billinghurst sDrewth 11:45, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, trusted member. - Mailer Diablo (talk) 18:24, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral ///EuroCarGT 01:52, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Remove~~ Obviously, it's neither appropriate nor necessary to keep this problematic sysop. He already abused the power granted by Wikimedia and made lots of troubles in the past years. He has been recalled by zhwiki community for 7 times! Is there any other administrator of any wiki project breaking his record? He was accused of violating policies and guidelines, plagiarizing, distorting when translating, ever creating many accounts, wrongly revert repeatedly, deleting articles or files without neutrality (or not avoiding conflicts of interests), controversial blocks, political screening, using bots beyond consensus and authorization, lack of communication, threatening to leak privacy of other users from meta access which cause serious safety concerns, etc. Some even believe his account is not only controlled by himself. How come he can stay in the position? Voters deserved to know important information concerning these legitimate doubts. Wish the problem cannot be solved in zhwiki can be reviewed, discussed, and solved by the global community this time!--ChrishrursdssPDK (talk) 07:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- You are not qualified to vote.--Antigng (talk) 08:42, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - For me, this vote sounds very qualified - not allowed to vote is different to not qualified! Marcus Cyron (talk) 09:01, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - Please note this section is called "Comments about Shizhao". I do not believe any account is prohibited to comment on a different user's work. Whether a comment is taken into account for the reconfirmation process is an entirely different question. Vogone (talk) 20:47, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    - Indeed, eligibilty criteria for steward elections do not apply to confirmations. Any comment by anyone is welcomed. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 20:57, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      - Why eligible accounts cannot vote No here? Or why qualified editors cannot have accounts to vote No here? Because unjust and excessive retaliation was or will be the consequence (it's not difficult to provide "reasons" to kick you out by certain zhwiki sysop). When power highly concentrates, when a steward and some other administrators with different power and access actually form a clan, like Communist party, not a few editors with contribution , different opinions and moderate or minor mistakes already forced to leave forever (some are clearly not necessary) while some even more rogue users who "correctly" follow the power stay happily. Sadly, it's the real situation in zhwiki recent years. It could be worse and worse if without attention or intervention from international participants and the Wikimedia Foundation. How many confirm him really know what kind of editor he is? I just see reluctant colleagues mobilized, power followers, and who saw things may not that important for an open system and Wiki's goal. There are issues much more critical than personal convenience. Almost 10 years is long enough, especially when there is no high approval rating for this controversial account. Remove the burden and make user with special power accountable is healthy for the development and reputation of Wikimedia.--ChrishrursdssPDK (talk) 06:51, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        This is your first edit on the entire project, which indicates a possible w:WP:COI or w:WP:SOCKPUPPETRY.--Antigng (talk) 07:02, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        So are you.--ChrishrursdssPDK (talk) 07:04, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        Really? I'm active on zhWP and enWP.--Antigng (talk) 08:24, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Fine by me. Trusted user and very experienced. Glaisher (talk) 16:56, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep --Zyephyrus (talk) 21:18, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- Sidelight12 03:26, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove per inappropriate use of global lock 2 weeks ago on an account and without providing any rationale to justify the use. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 02:14, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove Strong POV in exercising his administrative power in zhwiki, and proven to be an unpopular administrator, and already had seven polls on revoking his administrative power.--Leeyc0 (talk) 04:00, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove Inactivity at here, Often against POV at Chinese wikipedia.Tvb10data (talk) 04:37, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove Power abuser. I think he should go back and reflect on what he had done in the past, and once he better understands his role, maybe we can have him back. Ernestnywang (talk) 05:13, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove He should put more affect in order to maintain his stewardship.—An Macanese 07:38, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- A lot users are canvassed to come here. [1][2][3]--GZWDer (talk) 09:44, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thanks for that reminder but I have to state that I only found that "canvass message" in the history of my talk page. It was deleted before I noticed there was an edit on my talk page.Merci —An Macanese 17:34, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remove-Tim仔 (talk) 12:15, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]