Talk:Stewards/Confirm/2020

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Main page Stewards (2020 confirmation) talk page
This page allows for general discussion and questions regarding the 2020 steward confirmations.

Final decisions (by stewards)

Confirmation discussions will remain open from 29 February 2020, 00:00 (UTC) till 7 March 2020, 23:59 (UTC). This may be extended to two weeks for one or more confirmations at the discretion of the Election Committee if the committee believes further input is required before concluding. The Election Committee will close these discussions and implement the outcome (which also means making a decision in non-obvious cases).

This page is for steward discussion only. Please do not comment in this box unless you are a steward.

The summaries below provide a very strict overview of the most relevant confirmation comments.

Stewards: Please leave your comments right below the boxes after reviewing the actual confirmation comments and your understanding of relevant policies. You may summarize the confirmation discussions in individual comments, but no overall summary is given.

Status Candidate Notes
   Confirmed
-revi clear consensus
   Confirmed
Base clear consensus
   Confirmed
Bsadowski1 clear consensus
   Confirmed
Defender clear consensus
   Confirmed
DerHexer clear consensus
   Confirmed
Einsbor clear consensus
   Confirmed
Green Giant clear consensus
   Confirmed
HakanIST clear consensus
   Confirmed
Hoo man clear consensus
   Confirmed
Jon Kolbert clear consensus
   Confirmed
Jyothis clear consensus
   Confirmed
Linedwell clear consensus
   Confirmed
MarcoAurelio clear consensus
   Confirmed
Mardetanha confirmed
   Confirmed
Masti clear consensus
   Confirmed
Matanya clear consensus
   Confirmed
Matiia clear consensus
   Confirmed
Melos clear consensus
   Confirmed
NahidSultan clear consensus
   Confirmed
Pmlineditor clear consensus
   Confirmed
QuiteUnusual clear consensus
   Confirmed
RadiX clear consensus
   Confirmed
Ruslik0 clear consensus
   Confirmed
Rxy clear consensus
   Confirmed
Schniggendiller clear consensus
   Confirmed
Shanmugamp7 clear consensus
   Removed
Sjoerddebruin consensus to remove
   Confirmed
Stryn clear consensus
   Confirmed
Tegel clear consensus
   Resigned
Teles did not run for confirmation
   Removed
There'sNoTime consensus to remove
   Confirmed
Trijnstel clear consensus
   Confirmed
Vituzzu clear consensus
   Confirmed
Wim b clear consensus
   Confirmed
علاء clear consensus
Results

The confirmation discussions are now closed. Please check the results right above.

Note
The discussion about Mardetanha was extended to two weeks (until 14 March 2020, 23:59).

For the Election Committee, RadiX 23:43, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

After an extension of the discussion the Election Committee

-revi

Keep Keep: 106 (active / very active / trusted / helpful / friendly / helps in various areas / strong judgement / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 1 (no reason given)
Neutral Neutral: 2

Base

Keep Keep: 50 (active / very active / trusted / helpful / always ready to help / hopes activity increase - user become more active / lower activity in one year is not a problem / deserves another chance / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 7 (no statement / tools have't been used in so long / no reason given)
Neutral Neutral: 1

Bsadowski1

Keep Keep: 68 (active / very active / LTA - spambot hunter / helpful / responsive / very accessible / helpful / always on IRC)
Remove Remove: 2 (no 'language entry' / no reason given)
Neutral Neutral: 0

Defender

Keep Keep: 64 (active / very active / helpful / good efforts / active at counter-vandalism tasks / helpful / no issues / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 1 (no reason given)
Neutral Neutral: 0

DerHexer

Keep Keep: 87 (fairly active / technical skills / no issues / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 1 (no reason given)
Neutral Neutral: 0

Einsbor

Keep Keep: 67 (active in SRP and AAR related tasks / scrutineer for ArbCom elections / good work / no issues / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 0
Neutral Neutral: 1 (no reason given)

Green Giant

Keep Keep: 56 (active in replying OTRS tickets / active in fighting spambots / no issues / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 1 (no 'language entry')
Neutral Neutral: 0

HakanIST

Keep Keep: 65 (active enough / no issues / trusted steward / no issues / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 1 (no reason given)
Neutral Neutral: 0

Hoo man

Keep Keep: 59 (technical skills and expertise / active enough / no issues / 'maintainer of CentralAuth' / trusted steward / no issues / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 2 (no reason given)
Neutral Neutral: 3 (activity level / no reason given)

Jon Kolbert

Keep Keep: 60 (good activity / good and abundant work / a lot of good work / good steward / very active / friendly / trusted / active in IRC/SRG and elsewhere / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 1 (blank statement at the beginning of the confirmations)
Neutral Neutral: 0

Jyothis

Keep Keep: 40 (no issues / polite and positive approach / no issues / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 1 (no reason given)
Neutral Neutral: 0

Linedwell

Keep Keep: 68 (active in SRCU and SRG pages and so on / trusted user / trusted steward / no issues / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 0
Neutral Neutral: 0

MarcoAurelio

Keep Keep: 96 (active in almost every task / one of the most helpful stewards / very active / always helpful / incredibly helpful / reasonably active / active / very active / great work / good technical skills / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 0
Neutral Neutral: 0

Mardetanha

Keep Keep: 91 (trusted user / experienced user / good communication skills / neutral person / there is no evidence for government interference throughout Mardetanha's past-current terms / controversies are based on speculation / there is no wrongdoing / user has never abused his rights / multilingual / user always follows Wikimedia policies / user has not violated any of the community guidelines / cases where state authorities exert pressure on Wikipedia volunteers are quickly noticeable / Mardetanha has assured his account is being operated in a safe environment / there is no connection between Persian Wikipedia and the Iranian government / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 35 (several concerns regarding Mardetanha's involvement with Iranian government and his account security - a session with the ministry of culture, some interviews on behalf of Wikipedia and Wikimedia in the state TV etc / Iranian government's effort to ab[use] Wikipedia[ns] / Iranian authorities could force him to disclose private information / no one living inside Iran is immune to the sting of local government / it's about not trusting Iranian government / not comfortable with someone having this access level in Iran / there is evidence that the Iranian governemnt knows Mardetanha's identity / Mardetanha's personal information is known publicly / government is interested in manipulating Wikipedia)
Neutral Neutral: 8 (same as above / closure of Requests for comment/Do something about azwiki)

  • I'm going to say confirm. I understand some user's concerns, but I think community still trust Mardetanha to be a steward and they think that he can handle it, as he has been doing it for some years. While concerns are valid, if some action should be taken against Mardetanha due to users' security, I think this is something to be handled by WMF, not us. Matiia (talk) 04:22, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Weak confirm Definitely not a clear outcome and I tend to agree with Matiia. This should be handled by the WMF. Trijnsteltalk 12:45, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep I totally understand the concerns of my fellow Wikimedians from the region. I also know the lengths Mard goes to protect his access to the system. Having served together this long - yep, it has been a while :) - and met him in real life during Wikimania, I have no reason to doubt his commitment and his passion to the mission. I am going to stand with the values he bring to the table and the efforts he takes to advance the project in the region where free knowledge is a premium. Thank you for the continued support and please keep pushing further. -Jyothis (talk) 13:11, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Weak confirm, for reasons already given above. Linedwell [talk] 14:53, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't know, I really don't know. I have been thinking about this (spontaneously, though) during Feb. I still don't know what is best for him - he's competent, he knows what they are doing and he has been fine for almost a decade. However contacting those voted to remove them privately to rescind their vote is something that shouldn't have been done, and I also get the point that you should not work with dictators - those who ignores basic human rights. I'm not sure about the result - but I think I should say what my conscience tell me to say, with regret: it might be best for him if he continues contributing without stewards hat. I don't mean it to say Mardetanha's performance as a Stewards was poor or I have grudge on him or something like that - I trust him and worked with him for few years, but I just think given the circumstances (Government knows who he is, which already have a history of doing shits, and that sort of circumstances) it might not be a good idea to continue with the hat which allows lot of PII without being detected. — regards, Revi 15:17, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I do trust you, I know you and know what you have done for Wikimedia. But I do not trust your government. I know you have a safe and secure password, but I also know that if they want to compromise your access, they will find a way. And it won't be visible in logs. To sum up, I think there are two solutions: first, WMF should decide if they are OK with a steward that is known to Iranian government, second, it is up to you. To be honest, you could do a lot to Wikimedia as a global sysop, without access to sensitive data. What is better? Not my decision, but in my opinion there are serious voices to remove. --einsbor talk 19:47, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Weak remove per einsbor - raised concerns are too important for me to vote to keep. I'll be happy to support you as a GS through. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 18:58, 1 March 2020 (UTC) I'm not, however, in a set-to-stone position - and my opinion is probably similar to those who say "Weak keep" here. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:28, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep. I prefer to trust Mard and, if evidence is presented of government interference, ask the WMF to intervene. Same for any of us - all governments may interfere even so called democracies QuiteUnusual (talk) 09:34, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep – Per QuiteUnusual. We are being really naive if we think other governments would never engage in subversive actions. Mardetanha is at no more risk from the Iranian govt than I am from my govt. In all my years of wiki-editing, I have strived to keep my identity as secret as possible, with my real name only being revealed by email to one other Wikimedian (who may or may not be deceased). Despite this, I do not doubt that if the police or intelligence agencies of my country wanted to hack my account or find out my password(s) they could do so quite easily, even if we have strong laws to protect rights. Do you really think they would struggle to find my IP, track my address and turn up at my door? In fact I can almost guarantee that my govt has a secret file about me and how much or how little danger I pose. If we are going to single out Mardetanha, then let’s remove every steward, CU, OS, bureaucrat, and sysop because I do not believe anyone is safe from any government. If there is an issue, it can be dealt with by other stewards and where necessary by WMF Staff. –Green Giant (talk) 22:17, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep. As previously stated, government interference is possible elsewhere. I believe this is a matter of trust and I've full trust in Mardetanha's capability of integrity and discretion regarding advanced rights.--HakanIST (talk) 11:23, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep per QuiteUnusual --Alaa :)..! 12:18, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep. Mostly per above. All of us can be tracked down. We are citizens of our contries, we have contracts with our ISPs, we use mobile carriers, many of us engage in international travel to attend Wikimania and other conferences and so forth. We should not underestimate governments and we should not build illusions that our own governments are nicer. Yes, some would resolve to atrocious acts and some wouldn't, or would not as often, but all of them could potentially find the information we have access to useful. We take the risk and evaluate our own circumstances. WMF indeed might at one point decide that for example stewards from Holy See are to be no more and that would be it, but I do not want the community to set up discriminatory rules ahead of it. That being said, I did not like some thing mentioned, especially the mention of Mardetanha emailing voters, this is a fault IMO, but a minor one for now. --Base (talk) 10:21, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep per QuiteUnusual --Melos (talk) 21:27, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep per QuiteUnusual. -- Tegel (Talk) 19:15, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral Neutral, per -revi and QuiteUnusual. There are some valid concerns for the removal, which shouldn't be discussed publicly, but Mardetanha has been doing an awesome job and is a great help. —Thanks for the fish! talkcontribs 23:14, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep per QuiteUnusual Jon Kolbert (talk) 23:19, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep per QuiteUnusual. Ruslik (talk) 16:04, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed

Most of the stewards who shared their opinion said that they still trust Mardetanha, although some criticized that he contacted afterwards the users not in favor of him. Many stewards shared the view that if it's not safe for him to hold the stewards flag it should be stated by the Wikimedia Foundation.

- For the Election Committee, Stryn (talk) 08:24, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Masti

Keep Keep: 67 (no issues / very active / no issues / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 2 (users' opinion on large IP-rangeblocks / no reason given)
Neutral Neutral: 0

Matanya

Keep Keep: 47 (no issues / technical skills / no issues / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 1 (no reason given)
Neutral Neutral: 1 (no visible contribution)

Matiia

Keep Keep: 47 (helpful / helpful in all areas / reasonably active / competent / no issues / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 3 (meta-only user profile / only dedicated to countervandalism work / biased against large wikis / activity on the lower side / no reason given)
Neutral Neutral: 0

Melos

Keep Keep: 52 (technical skills / 'maintainer of SULWatcher and StewardBot' / no issues / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 1 (no reason given)
Neutral Neutral: 1 (not very active)

NahidSultan

Keep Keep: 57 (good activity / friendly / professional / very helpful / no issues / trusted / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 1 (no reason given)
Neutral Neutral: 0

Pmlineditor

Keep Keep: 41 (no issues / reasonably active / no issues / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 1 (no reason given)
Neutral Neutral: 1 (not very active)

QuiteUnusual

Keep Keep: 40 (no issues / good at fighting spambots / good activity / good work / no issues / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 0
Neutral Neutral: 0

RadiX

Keep Keep: 64 (good activity / active / active in many stewards noticeboards / very friendly / no issues / useful in translating bus tickets; has half decent taste in wine - LoL@Tony! / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 0
Neutral Neutral: 0

Ruslik0

Keep Keep: 65 (fine activity levels / one of the most active stewards in SRP/G/B/CU/GP pages / valuable critical way of thinking / no issues / very active on SRB / trusted user / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 5 (communication concerns / issue towards tolerating breach of global policies)
Neutral Neutral: 2 (not 'in touch' with the community / no reason given)

rxy

Keep Keep: 54 (very active / great ammount of work / lots of behind the scenes work / no issues / no issues / no concenrs / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 1 (no reason given)
Neutral Neutral: 0

Schniggendiller

Keep Keep: 61 (one of the most active stewards / intelligent / kind / very helpful / good humor / no issues / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 1 (no reason given)
Neutral Neutral: 0

Shanmugamp7

Keep Keep: 37 (helpful in stewards requests / fine collaboration with large projects / one of the most helpful stewards / no issues / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 1 (no reason given)
Neutral Neutral: 0

Sjoerddebruin

Keep Keep: 28 (has been active in discussions despite low activity levels / everyone has ups-and-downs IRL / competent / deserves another chance / stays committed to the Wikimedia movement)
Remove Remove: 22 (inactivity / minimal activity levels / too inactive / not very active / has barely used the tools / oversight use on fawiki / no reason given)
Neutral Neutral: 11 (activity concerns / should re-apply in the future)

  • Weak confirm as there is no strong reason to remove, imo. Sjoerddebruin is competent and has taken part in some discussions held in private channels during the past year. He deserves a second chance, although he should increase on-wki activity definitely. RadiX 01:30, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have to say remove, sadly. Activity have been low for 2 years (2018 and 2019) and this year this concern has been shared by many users in the comments, so I feel unable to say confirm. Nothing againt Sjoerddebruin's actions, they were fine. Matiia (talk) 04:55, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove - Described by Rschen7754 and our automatic removing policy for inactivity. --rxy (talk) 07:27, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove Clear case. They are so inactive that they even need to be automatically removed, sadly. Trijnsteltalk 12:44, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove - Purely based on inactivity policy. We appreciate your support even through that. I totally understand the real life challenges and if the individual cannot find enough time to contribute, it is best to give up the bit and come back later when they can. -Jyothis (talk) 13:45, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove, Linedwell [talk] 14:53, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove, clear consensus, --einsbor talk 20:03, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove clear case. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 18:57, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove as per policy--Sakretsu (炸裂) 23:13, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove for inactivity. QuiteUnusual (talk) 09:34, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove unfortunately due to inactivity but with no prejudice to re-applying when able to devote more time. –Green Giant (talk) 22:17, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove per inactivity Face-sad.svg --Alaa :)..! 20:10, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove per consensus --Wim b 11:50, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • BA candidate.svg weak remove. It is an awkward situation, because Sjoerd was basically often present in discussions. I hope you raise your activity and come back. --Base (talk) 10:21, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove per inactivity and I totally agree with what Jyothis wrote above.--BRP ever 04:52, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove, inactive per policy. Stryn (talk) 07:22, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove, inactivity. -- Tegel (Talk) 19:12, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove per inactivity Jon Kolbert (talk) 23:21, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove, due to inactivity. —Thanks for the fish! talkcontribs 23:36, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Closed discussion. Result: not confirmed. RadiX 23:43, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Stryn

Keep Keep: 70 (experienced / trusted / good activity / active in many stewards noticeboards / available on IRC / no concerns / no issues / good user / friendly / competent / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 1 (no reason given)
Neutral Neutral: 1 (no reason given)

Tegel

Keep Keep: 80 (very active / experienced / one of the most active stewards / one of the best stewards / fast at fightening vandalism / good work / no issues / no reason given)
Remove Remove: 1 (no reason given)
Neutral Neutral: 0