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.


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]

  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)



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)

Abd (talk | email | contribs | stats)[edit]

If implemented, this will begin my fourth period as a probationary custodian. For reference, see

I have often written that I don't need custodian tools to work on topics of interest to me, here. That remains true. I can request deletion with a template or undeletion on a custodian's talk page, as examples, and this is normally handled quickly and easily. However, I have, more often recently, come across situations where it would be substantially more efficient if I had the tools. I will avoid anything controversial as to tool usage. Once again, I consent to the [[../Standard stop agreement]], (this permanent link), which will serve pending development of clearer policy. --Abd (discusscontribs) 17:05, 10 May 2015 (UTC)


  • What pushes you to candidate again and again, even you had no support from the community?--Juandev (discusscontribs) 14:39, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, Juandev. On Wikipedia, it's "admins for life" because it is believed that any admin who actually does the job will attract negative comment. There is some truth to that.
I made the request because I see work that I can do. It is not controversial work (or if it was controversial at one time, it is no longer.)
I have not asked for tools since 2011. I had lots of support then, definitely not "no support." I agreed to "permanent probationary custodianship" to avoid useless conflict. I am not, here, going over what happened then, not unless necessity arises.
My being a custodian is not a necessity, but custodianship policy, as it was established by the founders, and was unquestioningly accepted for years, is very important.
This is not a request that, by policy, should be controversial, nor is "consensus" required: a mentor agrees and a 'crat implements. It has been that way for many years. The safeguard is that a 'crat would not implement a harmful probationary custodianship, even if a mentor supports. Our policy deliberately allows renewal of probationary custodianship.
What happened almost four years ago should be irrelevant. What matters is the mentor and the supervising community. --Abd (discusscontribs) 16:12, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Abd, what you have you learnt from the three previous probationary custodian periods that you think can make you a better Wikiversity custodian? Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:18, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Patience. --Abd (discusscontribs) 12:04, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Can you elaborate on how patience would make you a better custodian? -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 13:59, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Since you ask .... In my previous periods, I treated probationary custodianship as if it were being a custodian responsible for site maintenance and keeping Wikiversity safe for users. for a time, in fact, I was doing almost all the regular custodial work. When there were serious issues requiring immediate custodial attention, in a very few cases (two), I treated them as emergencies. See the draft Recusal policy before it was gutted. In particular, the "emergency" section. I followed the draft policy I had written.
In another case, I waited 10 days to undo a block placed by a custodian, in my view contrary to policy and necessity. (And I still followed recusal policy, immediately referring the matter to the community.) Because there are now multiple active custodians, and as a probationer, I would instead make a request for action on RCA, the unblock not being an emergency. Not being a ratified Custodian by vote of the community, I would not have the level of granted authority needed for that action. Patience. Trust the community. --Abd (discusscontribs) 15:36, 18 May 2015 (UTC)


  • I really recommend against going through with this again without a consensus being sought ahead of time. A 4th go around would amount to making even more of a mockery of the process than the 3rd go around did. --SB_Johnny talk 01:02, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
    • I agree; I'm not inclined to switch on custodian status for a 4th probationary custodianship period unless there is community consensus to do so. This could be done in a separate section below and advertised via Colloquium and sitenotice. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 23:27, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Custodians willing to mentor[edit]

Candidate, please indicate here if you accept one of the above custodian mentors:

  • I accept Marshallsumter as mentor. I invite all custodians and Wikiversitans to support and guide me through this process. --Abd (discusscontribs) 17:05, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Nominations for Full Custodianship[edit]

  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)


  • 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 + 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)


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]


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]