Jump to content

Wikiversity:Candidates for Custodianship/MathXplore

Add links
From Wikiversity

MathXplore (talk • email • contribs • stats • logs • global account)

Discussions are archived for review purposes. Please start a new discussion to discuss the topic further.
Very strong support from the community. Closed as successful --mikeu talk 14:30, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]


I'd like to nominate MathXplore (who has been a curator since Jan 29 2023) as a custodian. This wiki is in need of more active custodians. MathXplore has been one of a small handful of curators/custodians doing most of the maintenance work (from what I can tell) recently. They obviously know their way around a wiki, with very good technical knowledge and a level head in communicating and decision-making. I think the community can trust and benefit from MathXplore having custodial tools. @User:MathXplore feel free to add anything else you think is relevant. Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 03:38, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination was accepted at special:permalink/2611262#Custodianship. For previous experiences with advanced permissions, I have global rollback (m:Steward_requests/Global_permissions/2023-03#Global_rollback_for_MathXplore), Simple English Wiktionary admin (wikt:simple:special:permalink/516047#Requests_for_adminship), and English Wikiversity curator. I look forward to helping with non-controversial (revision) deletion tasks (but also handling refunding requests if applicable) and checking deleted contributions to identify xwiki or long-term abuses. I appreciate your consideration. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 07:34, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What's global rollback and why is there a Simple English Wikipedia and Wiktionary, but no, for example, *Simple Italian (for example) Wikipedia and Wiktionary? Username142857 (discuss • contribs) 15:13, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Global rollback is the ability to use rollback at all Wikimedia projects. Please see m:Global rollback for their guidelines and policies. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 01:39, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We have Simple English Wikipedia (simplewiki) and Simple English Wiktionary because there is an agreement to keep these projects open. For simplewiki we have m:Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Simple English Wikipedia, m:Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Simple English Wikipedia (2), and m:Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Simple English Wikipedia (3). For simplewikt, please see m:Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Simple English Wiktionary, m:Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Simple English Wiktionary (2), and m:Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Simple English Wiktionary (3). In general, opening or closing a Wikimedia project requires global agreements. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 01:54, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For simple Italian, I do not recognize any valid proposals or agreements to open them (no page found on Meta-Wiki). Situation is similar for other languages, the proposals were rejected (m:Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Simple German 4, m:Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Simple Spanish 4, m:Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Simple Latin). MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:00, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

What's a curator? What's a custodian? Username142857 (discuss • contribs) 14:28, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikiversity:Support staff (which has links to Wikiversity:Custodianship and Wikiversity:Curators.)--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 20:21, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for the candidate

  1. Your Userpage says you have a native understanding of both English and Japanese. I don't remember ever seeing anyone else who displays such an unusual claim. Would you please explain how you achieved this distinction? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (discuss • contribs) 00:05, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I just studied harder than others. Please note that nobody is allowed to skip English lessons in my locality (w:English-language education in Japan). I had more English lessons than Japanese literature classes. In university, many textbooks were written in English. I'm not surprised to see bilingual speakers, and I have met various bilingual users (including those with different language combinations) at Wikimedia projects. In my opinion, being bilingual is neither unusual nor extraordinary. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:47, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Unless you grew up with both languages, surely at least one of them will be a second language? Also, why would Japanese (I assume) universities use textbooks written in a foreign language? Username142857 (discuss • contribs) 15:20, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I have been studying English since kindergarten. In other words, I have grown up with both languages. I believe that people can use 2 languages (or maybe more) fluently just like they are using 2 hands in their life. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 01:41, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Please note that there are not enough Japanese textbooks for all academic subjects (especiallly those for higher grades). If there are no available Japanese textbooks, then using English textbooks will be an alternative option. In addition, some universities may have different language preferences (such as international universities, classes including foreign students, classes taught by non-Japanese teachers, etc.), if there is any reason to use English, then the textbook may be English. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 01:45, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  2. How responsive do you plan to be to members of wikiversity. I am curious because I have tried to communicate with you on your talkpage at Wikiquote and found you be "the strong and silent type". I am curious to find out if it is only me, or is this your normal mode of communication. Ottawahitech (discuss • contribs) 00:28, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    At all Wikimedia projects where I'm active (including Wikiversity), I always try to provide an answer within a reasonable amount of time, just like I answered your previous question above. I also plan to do so in the future at Wikiversity. On the other hand, I sometimes try to make my responses shorter to avoid w:Wikipedia:Wall of text and make things easier to understand. I apologize if my previous responses did not satisfy you. Please let me know if I have answered your question or not. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:53, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for asking, yes you have answered my question. I would like to add that even thought this is the first time I am participating in a wikiversity Candidates for Custodianship I have participated in similar discussions on the WikiMedia-projects, so have no idea what to expect. For example it is not clear to me:
    • When is this discussion expected to close?
    • Is there a limit to the number of question each participant may ask?
    • Who will make the final decision
    • Will the decision be based on a numerical count of votes, or will it be base on Wikiversity:Consensus.
    I also have some off-topic comments regarding your answers here, but I will share those with you on your user-talk-page if you are interested. Ottawahitech (discuss • contribs) 22:05, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (About discussion closure date) According to Wikiversity:Custodianship#How_does_one_become_a_custodian?, "After one week of evaluation, a bureaucrat will make the final decision based on the arguments provided in the discussion." (special:permalink/2608768#How_does_one_become_a_custodian?). In other words, the CFC will end after one week from the start of the discussion. In general, many discussions about advanced permissions (including adminship) require one week for discussion. While Wikiversity:Custodianship seems to be partially outdated (referring to probationary custodians that no longer exists at here), I believe this point remains valid. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 03:01, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (About question number limits) I have not seen any documented limit to the number of questions each participant may ask at WV:CFC or Wikiversity:Custodianship. Maybe we don't have such a rule. Anyone is welcome to provide information if I have missed anything. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 03:04, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (About the discussion closer) According to Wikiversity:Custodianship#How_does_one_become_a_custodian?, "After one week of evaluation, a bureaucrat will make the final decision based on the arguments provided in the discussion." So the discussion closer will be our bureaucrats (please see Special:ListUsers/bureaucrat and Wikiversity:Bureaucratship). At all Wikimedia projects, only bureaucrats can make non-admins to admins. In other words, only bureaucrats can enforce the results of RFAs. Usually, a bureaucrat who has not been involved in the voting will close the discussion. On the other hand, we have only 3 bureaucrats and 2 of them are not active. Please see special:permalink/2530298 for a Wikibreak declaration from one of our bureaucrats. Please also note that the currently most active Wikiversity bureaucrat is the nominator of this discussion. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 03:11, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (About the basis of the final decision) The latest instructions at WV:CFC do not mention any number of votes. I think it is reasonable to expect decisions based on Wikiversity:Consensus. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 03:14, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (For any other comments beyond the scope of this CFC) You are welcome to visit my user talk page, or you can use Wikiversity:Colloquium if your comments need the community's attention. Please note that once the CFC has been closed, the CFC page may be (fully) protected to save the whole discussion. If you have anything else to say after the CFC, please consider using my user talk page, the colloquium, or any other relevant discussion venue. If there has been any failure to answer your questions, please let me know as soon as possible. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 03:22, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  3. How will being a Custodian change your daily schedule. You are already contributing thousands of edits a month to many wmf-wikis, so how will you manage the load of your new responsibility? How will you deal with the side-effects of being more visible, such as being the target of unhappy community members who use colorful language (and more). I believe you are currently an administrator on one wiki, but I think(?) the simple-wiktionary is smaller than en-wikiversity, do you plan to continue there as well? Ottawahitech (discuss • contribs) 16:21, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (About daily schedule) As curator, I always have to request custodian action (WV:RCA) when there is something that I cannot do, and wait until the arrival of our custodians. Being a custodian means I may not need to wait for them. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 01:57, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (About activities outside Wikiversity) I indeed have many edits at many WMF-wikis every month. On the other hand, many of those edits are semi-automated (Please see w:WP:TW, w:WP:HC, w:simple:WP:TW, m:SWViewer, commons:Help:Gadget-Cat-a-lot, m:User:Syunsyunminmin/SReporter.js, and m:User:Xiplus/TwinkleGlobal for the tools that I'm using). In other words, the many edits outside Wikiversity do not require an enormous amount of time, so the impact on my Wikiversity activity status is limited. Therefore, I do not see any obstacles to my Wikiversity participation. If needed, I can close some non-Wikiversity tabs and concentrate here. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:08, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (About how to deal with unhappy community members) It depends on how they are unhappy. If they are unhappy with non-controversial simpler things (such as those listed at category:Wikiversity FAQ), I might be able to handle them. If they're unhappy with complicated or controversial things (for example, somebody is unhappy with something but others say they are OK with that), they should be handled by multiple custodians/curators or the community rather than myself. If they're unhappy with things I don't understand, then I will find somebody who knows better than me (for example, there are some Wikiversity subprojects in which I have limited involvement, such as Wikidebate and WikiJournal, and things like these may happen in these areas). MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:24, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (About colorful languages) We have our policy (Wikiversity:Civility), so our reactions should be based on this documentation. For obvious and serious colorful languages, WV:REVDEL will be applied quickly. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:27, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (About Simple English Wiktionary) I have neither declared nor decided to quit any WMF projects. I plan to continue Simple English Wiktionary contributions as long as possible. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:29, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  4. You can already delete pages as a Curator. What will you be able to do in addition as a Custodian and how do you plan to use those abilities? Ottawahitech (discuss • contribs) 16:21, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (About deletions) Indeed, I can already delete pages as a curator (WV:CUR/D). In other words, curators can only delete pages, they cannot delete revisions and logged records. Custodians can also handle revision deletions (WV:REVDEL), and I plan to handle these as instructed. For contentious cases, I will discuss them with other custodians. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:34, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (Editorial restrictions) These are only allowed to custodians (WV:CUST/B), and Wikiversity:Blocking policy will be applied. Again, for any kind of contentious cases, I will discuss them with other custodians. For those who are very well-known for evading blocks and/or global locks (such users can also be found via w:WP:LTA and w:WP:SPI archives, etc.), I believe I know what to do. I have a history of reporting such users to WV:RCA (https://xtools.wmcloud.org/topedits/en.wikiversity.org/MathXplore/4/Request%20custodian%20action) and m:SRG (https://xtools.wmcloud.org/topedits/meta.wikimedia.org/MathXplore/0/Steward%20requests/Global). I think these can explain my policy understanding. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:47, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (Additional info for editorial restrictions) We are smaller than enwiki, and we have fewer vandals than them. Blocks are sometimes needed, but I don't think they will be needed everyday like enwiki. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:50, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (About IP blocks) In the past I have requested various IP blocks including IP range blocks (w:Wikipedia:Blocking_IP_addresses#Range_blocks) at WV:RCA, m:SRG, etc. but I don't have absolute certainty about how long the block should be, and how the block range should be set. I have nothing more than generic understanding (start the block with shorter term, extend blocks when persistent, etc.) and recently learned about w:en:User:TonyBallioni/Just block the /64. For anything I'm not sure about IP blocks, I will discuss with other custodians or anyone else who has more knowledge than me (but for ongoing violent vandalism cases, I may consider to activate blocks with the minimal term and range). Checking IP block settings by other admins in other projects might be a useful reference when handling open proxies (m:No open proxies). If applicable, directly reporting IPs to m:SRG instead local actions can be accurate than my decisions. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 03:17, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (MediaWiki namespace edits) These are only allowed to custodians, etc. (WV:CUST/MW). The most common one that I see is the update of MediaWiki:Sitenotice, just like it was updated for the CFC announcement. For non-controversial MediaWiki:Sitenotice edit requests, I look forward to handling them. As mentioned above, if there is anything unclear to me, I will ask questions to other custodians before any actions. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:54, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (About the frequency of MediaWiki namespace edits) In my opinion, the frequency of MediaWiki namespace edits is very lower than block requests and deletions. I don't imagine that I will be handling such requests in every week, but I will try to check if there is anything that I may need to help. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 03:22, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (About non-custodian MediaWiki namespace edits) I forgot to mention this in above. m:Stewards, m:global sysops, m:global interface editors, and Wikiversity:Interface administrators can also do this. Unless those causing obvious and serious errors, I have no plan to reverse or override their actions. They are users that have technical experiences that I don't have, I believe their actions can be trusted in many cases. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 03:29, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (Others) In above, I have answered about common custodian actions that I previously requested to WV:RCA. For a complete list, please see Special:ListGroupRights#sysop. There are many uncommon custodian privileges included there, and I don't think I will be using them in a near future. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 03:01, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Do you plan on obtaining other so-called hats shortly? Ottawahitech (discuss • contribs) 16:21, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Maybe yes, but I have not decided when to do so. Please see w:simple:special:permalink/9412939#RfA for an example. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 01:46, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  6. What in your opinion are the most pressing needs of en-wikiversity in general? Ottawahitech (discuss • contribs) 16:21, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think additional vigilence is needed for the detection of unnoticed issues. As curator, I have already deleted many pages that remained for years despite clearly fitting to WV:CSD. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 01:49, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We are having a lot of discussions about deleting pages. My question to you is simple. Do you accept the following statements to adequately describe Wikipedia's deletion policy? (I am not asking whether you support or oppose such a policy for Wikiversity.) Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 02:08, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes. I have no compelling objections to the description. I believe that similar practices also exist at other versions of the encyclopedia and their sister projects. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:17, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (Suggestion of possible re-writing) On the other hand, if I were the author, I may want to make the descriptions shorter. For example, we have "widespread agreement among group members ... (or) ... General agreement among the members of a given group or community". If I were the writer, I would write this as "Reasonably explained endorsements without any compelling objections". I think this can include both cases above. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:21, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry to clutter up the page with this, but I just dealt with a deletion request that described the page as "spammy generic text with little to no actionable advice". The page was written by User:Dave_Braunschweig. It wasn't that great, but it wasn't that bad either.Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 02:28, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Spammy pages (including spam links, aiming to sell things, etc.) should be handled via WV:CSD, but I don't think the author will do things like this. If it is not clear spam, then we should check if it is "little to no actionable advice". Currently, I cannot view deleted contributions, so my following answers may not have complete accuracy. From now on, I assume that the request means the included advice seems to be unrealistic (cannot be moved into action=unactionable). If there is no advice from the beginning, then this will fit to WV:CSD (No educational objectives or discussion in history). If there is any advice, then this may avoid speedy deletion (if it can be considered to have educational objectives, but this will depend on the context of the given advice). In general, borderline cases like "wasn't that great, but it wasn't that bad either" should be handled via PROD or RFD when the PROD has objections. As a Wikimedian, I always tried to use existing and documented speedy deletion reasons when requesting speedy deletion, and I never used the speedy deletion procedure to make a brand new reason for deletion. On the other hand, when I found a page that may require deletion but not fit the existing and documented speedy deletion reasons, I always used PROD/RFD. For a full record of my speedy deletion tasks, please check my deleted contributions at Wikiversity, w:simple:User:MathXplore/QD log, and w:User:MathXplore/CSD log. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:44, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I have never observed User:MathXplore attempt to delete a page that was not a clear violation of what is allowed on Wikiversity. The first reason for deletion listed at Wikiversity:Deletions#Speedy is "lack of educational value". While that might be a good reason to delete, the reason may not be clear to all concerned. Resolving such disputes does real harm as valuable time is wasted while essential maintenance tasks remain undone.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 22:46, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for the feedback. I recognize the emergence of speedy deletion requests based on educational values. As I previously mentioned in special:diff/2593762 (Wikiversity:Request_custodian_action/Archive/25#A_prolific_contributor_of_pages_that_belong_in_userspace), educational value may depend on academic level and grades. For example, undergraduate basics can be advanced topics for high school students. In addition, evaluation of educational value will require expertise, but we don't have experts for every academic discipline in our support staff team. I don't think deletions based on educational values are problematic (they can be better in some cases, especially those closer to other reasons). On the other hand, I have not seen a documented agreement about deletions based on educational values. All I know is that the community has accepted deletions based on the (non-) existence of educational objectives (which is currently documented at WV:CSD). Actually, declaration of the (non-) existence of educational objectives may sometimes require expertise, but I think this easier than evaluating educational values. Declaring the (non-) existence of educational objectives is a "yes or no" question, evaluating educational values is a more complicated question. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 03:04, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think all dispute resolution efforts can be labeled as a waste of time (exceptions include w:Wikipedia:Gaming the system, w:WP:IDHT, w:WP:BATTLE, etc.). Of course, if disputes can be avoided from the beginning, that would be the best situation. I also agree that essential (and non-controversial) maintenance tasks should not remain undone. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 03:24, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (Further suggestions for a better description) I think w:Wikipedia:Deletion_process#No_quorum (also known as soft delete) cases are missing in the provided description, sorry if I missed something. Adopting or not will be the community's decision. Once the current discussions have been resolved, we may also want to discuss about soft deletions. I think my suggestion above can include soft deletion cases. I hope this can help the community. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:26, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (Further readings that might be helpful) w:Wikipedia:Deletion_guidelines_for_administrators#Rough_consensus and w:Wikipedia:Silence and consensus (Wikipedian essay) are documentations related to my statements above. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:29, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's deletion policy

If we follow Wikipedia's deletion policy, the burden of proof lies with those who wish to delete. In the following quotations from Wikipedia and Wiktionary, with the bold-faced fonts added:

That same page takes it one step further: Not only do you need a consensus, but you typically should have no doubt about said consensus:

The hard part is deciding what a consensus is. Wiktionary gives us two definitions:

While Wikipedia has a lengthy discussion about different forms of consensus, the lede states:

Comments

Custodians willing to mentor

I am willing to mentor, although with MathXplorer's extensive wiki involvement on Wikiversity and elsewhere, I don't expect much mentoring will be necessary. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 03:38, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree to the mentorship, thank you very much. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 07:02, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Outcome

I think it would be good to close this nomination since it has been ~2 weeks, the discussion seems to have quietened, and there seems to be strong consensus. Mu301, ideally, can you close as the only other active bureaucrat ATM? Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 03:20, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see [1] --mikeu talk 14:34, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity:Candidates_for_Custodianship/MathXplore&oldid=2618175"