Wikiversity:Candidates for Custodianship

From Wikiversity
(Redirected from Wikiversity:RFC)
Jump to: navigation, search
Green check.png This page documents an official process on English Wikiversity that has wide acceptance among participants. When editing this page, please ensure that your revision reflects consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page.
Shortcut:
WV:CC


Instructions[edit]

Please add your request for custodianship (or other staff positions) below. Include a short summary of why you think you should be given the privileges and please refer to your involvement in other Wikimedia projects. If you have sysop/bureaucrat status at a sister project, please indicate so as well.

In a wiki, trust arises from good editing of webpages and "good editing" is what advances the project. If you have a record of good editing then you are likely to be trusted and be granted the tools to protect pages from vandalism and block vandals and delete useless pages. Having those tools really just means you have to do more work -dull and boring work - for the community.

Please place candidate requests or nominations on a subpage and transclude it here.

Requests and Nominations for Probationary Custodianship[edit]

Notes
  1. Registered users can both request custodianship, or be nominated for it by others. Candidates that have not accepted a nomination, or have failed to secure a mentor within one week are archived as incomplete.
  2. See MediaWiki Administrator's Handbook for some details on what options are available for custodians.
  3. Candidates can request a mentor from those listed at Wikiversity:List of custodian mentors; the requested mentor must agree.
  4. Candidates: please respond to any questions from the community about your wiki editing and wiki participation.

Guy vandegrift (talk | email | contribs | stats)[edit]

I'd like to nominate Guy vandegrift for probationary custodianship. Guy is a prolific editor at both Wikiversity and Wikipedia, and active at Wikibooks and Commons. He has shown a consistent interest in improving Wikiversity, interacts well with other users in support of their project ideas, and has always been willing to accept constructive criticism in return. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 17:24, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Questions[edit]

Comments[edit]

Custodians willing to mentor[edit]

I am willing to mentor. Guy has indicated his willingness / acceptance at [1]. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 17:24, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

YesY Done[2] - Guy vandegrift is now a probationary custodian. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:34, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Nominations for Full Custodianship[edit]

Notes
  1. Candidates for full custodianship are listed here by their mentor after the one month probationary period. Do not add self-nominations to this section (use the section of this page Requests for Custodianship).

Ruy Pugliesi (talk | email | contribs | stats)[edit]

Hi everyone!

I am applying for probationary custodianship on enwikiversity. My contributions mainly focus on countervandalism work over here.

I am already experienced with administrative tools on Meta-Wiki (where I am mostly active) and on other content and non-content projects, like ptwiki, hiwiki, mediawiki, testwiki and strategywiki. I'm also a global rollbacker.

If I may, I would like to have SB Johhny as a mentor. =D

Regards, Ruy Pugliesi 13:35, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Questions[edit]

  • In what ways do you consider your administrative experience at Meta-Wiki to benefit participants at Wikiversity?
As a cross-wiki vandal/spam fighter and a sysop on several projects, I think I have enough administrative experience for dealing with vandals and other maintenance activities. I have learned from my experience as a SWMT member how to establish a appropriate course of action in a great variety of situations. Ruy Pugliesi 15:44, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
  • What do you consider appropriate actions for vandalism at Wikiversity?
First of all, we should leave the vandal a warning message and let him aware of to what policies he is not following. Otherwise, further violations may incur a block. Ruy Pugliesi 15:44, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

-- darklama  13:50, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

  • Would you mind starting a blog? If not, why? What do you think about tasks for custodians as mentioned here?
Seems to be interesting. However, I think I wouldn't have enough time to concentrate my efforts in such kind of activity due to my cross-wiki work over all Wikimedia projects. Ruy Pugliesi 13:39, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
  • Which learning project/resource do you like at Wikiversity?
Mainly Computer Science, Communication Technologies and Linguistics. Ruy Pugliesi 13:39, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
  • Which one do you want to improve with your contributions?
Possibly Linguistics and Computer Science. However, as I said above, my contributions mainly focus on countervandalism work and other administrative tasks. Thanks for your questions. Ruy Pugliesi 13:39, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat + Identi.ca 14:01, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

  • How do you redirect a vandal's energy and enthusiasm?
  • How do you transform a vandal into someone that creates and participates in courses?
  • Do you think volunteering to be a mentor for vandals would be a good use of your time?

-- darklama  14:31, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Answers (1, 2 and 3):
Redirecting a vandal's energy and enthusiasm is something hard to do, but it's not impossible at all. Sometimes, vandals represent the "dark side" of good faith editors who became disappointed with things that occured a long time ago. I venture say that "mentoring" may be the key word here. We can always show them how interesting a wiki can be by bringing up unexplored things to do in a project.
Can I think of volunteering to be a mentor for vandals? Maybe. I am already experienced with mentoring a reformed vandal/sockpuppeter on Portuguese Wikipedia. He actually did some positive contributions after my mentorship. I think that everybody should be given a second chance to become a positive contributor and edit freely. Thanks for your questions. Ruy Pugliesi 13:39, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Comments[edit]

Custodians willing to mentor[edit]

Given his experience (especially as part of strategywiki), and Draicone's recommendation, I'd be more than happy to mentor. --SB_Johnny talk 07:56, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Probationary custodian period started[edit]

YesY Done -- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:00, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Recommendation for full custodian status[edit]

Ruy may have set a record for longest probationary custodianship. His mentor was SB Johnny, who intended in November 2011 to make the recommendation,[3] but it didn't happen. In September 2013, Jtneill asked if Ruy was still interested.[4]. Ruy missed the question, so nothing happened. Seeing the open candidacy, I checked with Ruy, and he was still interested, so I also checked with SB Johnny.[5] He responded that he "should have time in the next few days." Apparently not, so I'm going ahead. This is now my recommendation, but I assume that SB Johnny will approve.

Ruy has not been highly active on Wikiversity. He was almost inactive in 2014, but at the beginning of this year, started using tools more extensively. He is an expert Wikimedian, and was recently elected as a steward. Best of all, he has apparently grasped some of the Wikiversity community's traditions, that make this place special, with low conflict. His having the tools has never been a problem. I disagreed with a speedy deletion of his recently, and requested he undo it, and instead move the page into user space, and he immediately did that. (The deletion was within reasonable discretion, and it is only that we have better ways, sometimes.) I have no hesitation in recommending Ruy for permanent custodian. --Abd (discusscontribs) 00:25, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Discussion and questions[edit]

Questions to and discussion of the candidate.

I have no doubt from the votes so far that he should be elected, but I have no idea of how I should vote. Most of his work here was before my time. I could look into his activities elsewhere and make an "informed" decision. But with such obvious support that seems like a waste of my valuable time. Not voting signals apathy, voting "neutral" signals doubt, and voting "yes" signals knowledge that I do not possess. One of these choices probably follows convention, but I don't know which one it is. If there is no convention, I think the proper thing to do is vote neutral and explain why.--Guy vandegrift (discusscontribs) 00:15, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Guy, your choice is reasonable; however, you might also consider this part of your education as a probationary custodian. You may, as a custodian, need to make assessments of users. You can see his actions in the logs, as well as contributions (linked above at the top). The most important logs would probably be the block log and the deletion log. As well, you may look at his User talk page and see how he handled questions or issues. The thing I would worry about the most in a custodian is someone who has a strong personal agenda different from the welfare and consensus of the community. It's always possible the rest of us missed something. If you decide to look, tell us what you find! Most of Ruy's activity is global, and you can look there as well. Thanks. --Abd (discusscontribs) 00:28, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I can, should and will do these things.--Guy vandegrift (discusscontribs) 06:00, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Voting for full custodianship[edit]

Discussions are archived for review purposes. Please start a new discussion to discuss the topic further.
Discussions are archived for review purposes. Please start a new discussion to discuss the topic further.

Nominations for CheckUser[edit]

Notes

CheckUsers are required to follow Wikimedia Foundation's CheckUser policy, including requirements for gaining access to the checkuser tools.

  1. Candidates must be 18 years of age or older, of legal age in place of residence, be familiar with Meta:Privacy policy, and supply identification to the Wikimedia Foundation.
  2. Candidates must have 70-80% agreed consensus or more and a minimum of 25-30 votes in support by local community members. Following this, permission must be requested from the Wikimedia Foundation. Projects must have 2 or more check users, or none at all.

None at present.

Nominations for Bureaucratship[edit]

None at present.

See also[edit]