Wiktionary:Requests for permissions/Archive 6

Requests for adminship

User:Goldenburg111

They're is a big need of administrative cleanup here, exactly 20:29:29, there has been 3 speedy deletion requests that has not been deleted here. Many admins here are to busy doing other work at other wikis, so I thought I can fill in and make a few cleanups. I currently have rollback rights here, I am a "valuable" editor at Wikiversity (I can show you a link if requested), I am kind and I always believe in new starts and I acknowledge mistakes in the past. I am an administrator on 10 wikis on Wikia and crat on 5 of those wikis. What I believe is that me becoming an administrator would not hurt the community here. Also, I am a bureaucrat and admin at the Orian Test Wiki and Test Wiki sysop. Thanks! --~~Golden_burg111 20:32, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn --~~Golden_burg111 00:54, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Eurodyne

I was told by User:Brett to go ahead and request adminship and see what happens. Wiktionary has few administrators with not many of them active. I am an active editor here who understands all of Wiktionaries policies and how Wiktionary works. I have created over 70 entries here and think the sysop tools could be useful. I have asked for deletion of a few pages here and also done very little counter vandalism work. I promise never to misuse this right as administrators are a tool not a power. Eurodyne (talk) 13:56, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral. Good contributions here but too many issues in enwiki. Sorry. Jianhui67^{talk★contribs} 15:07, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, can't support someone who has had so many issues in enwiki. Appreciate the good contributions, but I think you need to contribute a bit longer without the sysop tools before I can support. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 18:32, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm not sure if we can welcome an admin that is blocked on enwiki. Sorry. George.Edward.C (talk) 18:48, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have worked out my issues on enwiki. I have been making great contributions every where else and showing that I can be trusted. Eurodyne (talk) 23:35, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose While Eurodyne's edits here seem to be mostly fine, I do not think he or she is experienced enough to be trusted with these rights. He may be able to identify spam and vandalism correctly, but the issues on other wikis are concerning. If he/she continues to make good contributions to this wiki, then I might support in the future. PiRSquared17 (talk) 04:58, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose Per PiRSquared17 --Pratyya ^(Hello!) 10:14, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn Will come back later when I have more "experience". Eurodyne (talk) 04:21, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Eurodyne (2)

I requested adminship about a month and a half ago and withdrew my request due to my issues at enwiki. I was also somewhat new to this wiki. My previous rfa can be found above this one. I am one of the most active editors here with 500+ edits in the past 2 months. I edit here about everyday now trying to improve this semi-dead wiki. I have created well over 100 entries here and think that sysop could help me. I have tagged a good amount of articles for deletion and done a little countervandalism work here. Whenever I edit here, I don't find too many sysops around so being able to do admin tasks around here could be useful. Thanks for your consideration! Eurodyne (talk) 04:02, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support. --Brett (talk) 06:46, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I opposed last time because Eurodyne did not have enough experience. Since the enwiki block has been lifted and the candidate is more experienced, I support. PiRSquared17 (talk) 22:04, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support I have seen a lot of good work from Eurodyne. Jianhui67^{talk★contribs} 05:06, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This user, while he is gaining experience very quickly, still needs a bit more experience before I can support. Furthermore, this RFA is too close to the previous one. I'd like to see this user wait a bit longer before requesting the mop again. Another thing to point out is that this user didn't know the formatting conventions until fairly recently, and while this doesn't have to do with any administrator rights, I find that this is a very good thing to have. Also, only two vandalism reversions in the past month, and the fact that this user only joined the site on the 22nd of August makes me not want to support this candidate at this time. Hopefully, you understand my concerns. Razor flame 13:13, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Closed as successful.--Brett (talk) 07:18, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all of you guys! Eurodyne (talk) 18:16, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

<---5 days isn't enough time to close an RfA. Minimum is a week, so this should not have been closed yet. Razor flame 05:55, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not to mention that in a case with that few actual !votes, one week should really have been the minimum time before closing the request. Furthermore, when negative comments are raised, it is probably a bad idea for a crat who commented himself to close the request as it surely can't be called a clear cut case. I wouldn't care in really clear cut cases, but this one was probably not really good handled. (Not saying the user should have been promoted or not, just saying that the whole closure was handled rather poorly, imo.) -Barras talk 20:00, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, I have no relationship with Eurodyne at all, no conflicts of interest. Secondly, the wiki is tiny, and the result is really of little consequence to anyone. I'm afraid I just don't see this as an issue.--Brett (talk) 07:51, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This looks like more than 5 days to me. According to the signatures, it was 6 days. From the 27th to the 2nd. For Brett, it was a week since he was in an earlier time zone than I am. He then closed the request. Eurodyne (talk) 16:00, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for bureaucratship

None at this time

Requests for autopatroller

User:Goldenburg111 (talk)

I would like to request autopatroller rights since:

Made nearly 20 good quality entries. (Complimented by an administrator here, thanks!)
I know what the autopatroller rights is, these rights are given to users to patrol edits. This tool is useful to me since (No offense) I am the most active here and I create entries here everyday.
I have sysop rights on two wikis (Test Wikis) and bureaucrat rights on 1 wiki (Test Wiki). I have sysop rights on 10 different Wikia Wikis and 5 wikis which I have bureaucrat rights on.
I have rollback privileges here.
I am a constructive editor at Wikipedia (Anti-Vandalism), Wikiversity (All around work) and Meta-Wiki (Anti-Vandal work).

Thanks! --Goldenburg111 (talk) 22:12, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't see that wrong, but have a look at my recent fixes to your articles. Those were just a few minor fixings right now, I would've to look at my old contributions to tell you exactly what is probably missing. On this project it is not the number of creations that really matter, it is the quality. Better create one or two complete articles instead of incomplete or even incorrect ones. I really don't want to discourage you! All edits to this project are really appreciated! However, from what I looked at right now in the last few minutes, I just don't think that you are yet ready for autopatroller right. Please poke me in a few days again about it, so I can reconsider this request. Warmly, -Barras talk 23:12, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No problem Barras, I'll just look at your recent fixes. --Goldenburg111 (talk) 23:17, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for applying. Regarding on solely what you put above, I would like to point out a few things:

We (or maybe just me) don't really care about user rights that you hold on other wikis. You can have the record for the most number of user rights held on other wikis, but they don't have any effect on whether your application gets approved or rejected. Rights here are earned through mutual respect, not through the respect people give you outside of the community.
For this application in particular, autopatroller right has got nothing to do with the number of anti-vandalism work you do. It is the quality of entries that you churn up with that matters.
You are the most active here? Have you seen this? :D

I shall leave this request open as we slowly work towards improving the quality of entries that you create. If you are out of ideas on what words to define, here is a good list. Cheers. --Hydriz (talk) 12:56, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Barras, Hydriz, is this application still going? I have improved two more entries, please take a good look at them... --~~Golden_burg111 17:25, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why exactly do you want to be an autopatroller? You do not create so many entries that it is a problem to patrol them manually. PiRSquared17 (talk) 02:39, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a final decision? I have a good knowledge about entries on Simple. --~~Golden_burg111 20:43, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: created entries: list. PiRSquared17 (talk) 02:36, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want a final decision, then as of right now it is

Not done as per what Brett and myself fixed on your last two creations. Also as what pir^2 said, you don't create much anyway, there is no real need for that tool now. -Barras talk 13:19, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Barras, I wanted this request to have a final Decision. And as for PiR, I may answer his question in IRC or maybe at his simple wiktionary talk page. --~~Golden_burg111 14:11, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for rollback

User:Enfcer

Enfcer · (talk · contribs · deleted · cross-wiki · count · pages created · auto edits · logs · block log · rights log · google (assign permissions)

Current member of SWMT, active vandal fighter on simple.wiki and have helped with spam reverts and such on simple.wikt, rights will make it easier to revert vandalism. Enfcer (talk) 05:24, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Hydriz (talk) 05:36, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:TCN7JM

TCN7JM · (talk · contribs · deleted · cross-wiki · count · pages created · auto edits · logs · block log · rights log · google (assign permissions))

After the recent storm of vandalism from that 76 IP, I thought I'd request rollback here. I've had some experience in vandalism reversion here. I revert any of it that I see, but most of the time I either don't see any or am beat to reverting it. I think I've shown that I'm capable of using the rollback privilege correctly on Wikimedia wikis, though; I currently have it on three wikis: the English and Simple English Wikipediae, and Wikidata. I hope that you will trust me not to misuse the tool here. T C N7JM 05:21, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds ok.

Done -Barras talk 08:55, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Umafiy

Umafiy · (talk · contribs · deleted · cross-wiki · count · pages created · auto edits · logs · block log · rights log · google (assign permissions)

I am planning on staying super active here on simple wikit. I understand the difference between vandalism and good faith edits as well as when to use rollback.

Rollback should be used only to:

Revert edits in your userspace, Revert obvious vandalism, Revert changes you made, Revert edits by banned users, and to Revert widespread edits

It should never be used: In an edit war, To revert good faith edits (the undo button should be used), Revert for fun

Umafiy (talk) 00:04, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Brett (talk) 00:35, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for removal of rights

User:TBloemink

TBloemink · (talk · contribs · deleted · cross-wiki · count · pages created · auto edits · logs · block log · rights log · google (assign permissions)

Please remove the rollback tool as it is rendundant and unneeded. Thanks. TBloemink (talk) 08:32, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Hydriz (talk) 10:30, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]