Wikipedia talk:Administrators

From Wikipedia, a free encyclopedia written in simple English for easy reading.

Contents

[edit] Miscellaneous comments

Sorry, that was just temporary sysophood to delete crap and block user. I am no more sysop now. Sorry for intruding. Cheers. Anonyme 06:08, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

You may have noticed that I have not been doing much here recently. I am sorry for this. I have just had a lot of things I've needed to do. I have also made less contirbutions on English Wikipedia in this time. I am just letting you know, I will contribute when I can.
SimonMayer 20:24, 9 May 2004 (UTC)

Please make link to meta This unsigned comment was added by Suisui (talk • contribs) 12:39, 14 June 2004.

[edit] interlanguage chain en:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship

[edit] Bad title(s)

  1. [[Wikipedia:]]
  • Please contact a developer to clarify how to rename the page(s) and / or if the page(s) should be deleted. Best regards Gangleri 11:09, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Rfa page?

Is there an RFa page here?-- 贡献 Chat with Tdxiang on IRC! 07:54, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

You are on it's talk page. -- Psy guy 13:07, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Archive

I think we should archive all current issues and requests before 2006. They certainly aren't current anymore, and they are just taking up space. --Cromwellt|talk|contris 02:49, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

I just came to say hello. I am sure this wikipdia will also become very big. All the best! --Bhadani 16:26, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Request for removal of tag

Hiya, could I humbly ask that an admin please remove the AfD tag at Elonka Dunin? It looks like the consensus is to keep the article [1], but the tag's still been there for over two months. :/ --Elonka 06:39, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the tag for you. Billz (Talk) 06:46, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Votes

I think that it'll be weeks, if not months, before we get to 25 votes. I don't mean that there is a rush, as there isn't, but I'm still wondering if anyone else thinks the requirement should be lowered to 15. Other opinions? Also, when will Psy Guy's rfa end? Does he need 25 supports as well? Picaroon9288|ta co 00:17, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

It isn't our rule, it's the Foundation's and we can't change it (although I did nag one of the stewards). That only applies to CheckUser though, adminships are much easier. Archer7 - talk 16:51, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I would have supported someone - but, I am so new here with hardly 1200 edits and few weeks of experience. Please guide me. Thanks. --Bhadani 17:51, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

If you're not familiar with CheckUser, see the meta page for an overview. We need two admins to have CheckUser or there will be no-one. So if you agree with both nominations, vote support on both. If you decide that I'm evil and should be eaten alive by wild boars, you can suggest a better candidate (although they will have to accept the nomination). Of course, if you think we don't need CheckUser or we aren't the right people for the job, don't worry about voting oppose. Archer7 - talk 18:38, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
I am afraid that the bear shall eat me? Ha ha ha ha. Ok. I will decided soon. --Bhadani 17:26, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Archer7, was that a "don't bother voting oppose because only support votes are counted" or a "don't feel bad if you vote oppose, even though you're voting against me"? I'm pretty sure they're both true, but I just wanted to clarify. --Cromwellt|talk|contribs 12:58, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
It was a 'It's important to vote oppose if you mean oppose'. - User:Archer7

[edit] System Admin

I would like to be a system admin. however, i am not a very good contributer, as often my articles contain some personal opinions because thats how i wrote for about all of my life. if you have anything to tell me, go to my talk, jamierules. oh if you fins any fult ith my artiles, tell me, also, using my talk. i will try to continue to contribute. bye for now;)

  • With only 13 edits and 5 to the main namespace, there isn't enough time to see your performance. You also started editing 2 days ago. Try again when you have a few more months of experience. :)--Tdxiang @ 02:14, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Also, you need to be familiar with MediaWiki, which you aren't, at this point of time. Sign your name, please, by adding ~~~~ at the end of every comment you make. You must also be a trusted member, capable of fighting vandalism and helping out with articles. Your recent edits, however, showed slanted points of view. Try to make your views remain neutral, okay? Good luck.--Tdxiang @ 02:17, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Admin abuse

I know enough english to say I see absolutely no reasonable reason for which Netoholic would have blocked M7. Any such move, whatever the project, qualifies as an abuse of sysop power in my opinion. I consequently removed Netoholic bureaucrat and sysop status on simple (done on meta) today. It is up to this community to see if these should be restored or not. Sorry about that. Anthere 22:00, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Apparently, I am being held to much higher standards than many other administrators on other wikis. Would you remove the status of an admin on EN over one contentious block? Would you do so without even so much as contacting them? -- Netoholic @ 22:41, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
As I've mentioned on Simple Talk, it's not only that. You've had a long history of cases of uncivility [2][3][4]. Though I do agree that you've contributed a lot to the project, you've been repeatedly told to improve, yet you don't seem to do so. --TBCΦtalk? 20:28, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] en:WP:LEGAL threats by User:Mattyman

Mattyman ▪ talkchanges is continuing to recreate the article Digital mark reader (also Digital Mark Reader) and has also posted a legal threat on Talk:Digital mark reader and Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_deletion#Campaigning_for_justice_among_wikipedia. A swift administrative action (with possible notification of WMF authorities) would be welcome, I suppose. Misza13 21:18, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Obviously a timewaster judging by their contributions, page deleted and user blocked. Archer7 - talk 23:03, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Required % for an RFA to succeed

I know that there is a page in EN that says the percentage that is usually required for an RFA to succeed. It's somewhere around 80-85% if I remember correctly. Where is that information posted on Simple? zephyr2k 16:35, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Anthere suggested on my last RFC on meta to put a 75% threshold for the new bureaucrat elections, and I think that the Stewards will follow her suggestion when asked for flags setting. I understand that it may be preferable that those details are set by each community, but I don't think simple.wikipedia editors have dealt with this, at the moment. May be you can draft a proposal and ask for a short vote here, in order to be sure about the elections to come. --M7 17:07, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Well since this ain't the EN wikipedia, how about we take 60% to 66% since we are short of sysops for the moment. --§ Alastor Moody (T + C) 10:56, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
60% --Vector ^_^ (talk) 11:07, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Other inactive sysops

I saw that the wiki removed five inactive sysops but what are we going to do about another five sysops?

--§ Alastor Moody (T + C) 11:57, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. I'd say demote SimonMayer (to be reinstated if he returns), leave the rest for a while. Although Brion Vibber hasn't done much for a few months, he's always just an email away, which could be useful. Any other ideas? Archer7 - talk 23:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Well oviously. I don't think we should demote Brion VIBBER since he's a developer for the Wikimedia Foundation and by demoting developers is completely different rather than demoting inactive admins and bureaucrats. But if we demote SimonMayer, where are you going to downgrade him to, admin or registerwed user? And I don't know about the 3 other sysops unless I'm more informed. --§ Alastor Moody (T + C) 15:44, 21 November 2006 (UTC)