- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a closed Meta-Wiki request. Please do not modify it.
Ending 21 March 2019 01:01 (UTC)
Hi. I'm currently a limited admin (expiring in less than 2 weeks) and would like to go for full adminship. While work on abusefilters have been slower than expected due to higher than expected false positive rate and requirement for consensus, I've nevertheless implemented a couple of changes on that, and have also improved some system messages (sometimes by importing).
However, I also want to use my tools to block, delete pages (the latter of which I've found myself tagging more recently) or execute other actions, which makes me go for full adminship. Thanks. Leaderboard (talk) 01:01, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose I think this is too soon - the "requirement for consensus" issues you have run in to is something that is needed for many admin actions, and I think you need more experience determining what type of things should be discussed first, as well as how to ensure that technical changes you are implementing are well tested prior to being disruptive. — xaosflux Talk 13:23, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- Placeholder but I think this RFA is a little too soon by itself. I am a regular editor in small wikis with temporary adminship, usually we start re-election one week before access will expire. Will consider more but I still appreciate Leaderboard passion for the project. What they did is out of good faith and wishing to improve the project but there are some issues. Will consider more before !voting. Thanks for willingness to serve.--Cohaf (talk) 14:33, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- On your request a couple of weeks ago, I suggested that I would support full adminship. I've been a bit concerned with your approach to some filter modifications since then (per Xaosflux), and I would like to see more evidence of collaborative work before supporting full access. – Ajraddatz (talk) 16:42, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Ajraddatz: How can I show more 'collaborative' work beyond what I am already doing? Leaderboard (talk) 22:41, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- 1) Don't take such drastic actions without consulting people, such as some of your changes to the abusefilters, and 2) don't be aggressively defensive in your responses when people take issue with your work. Point 1 is something that will come with better understanding of the community norms on Meta, and that will come largely with more time and experience. Point 2 is tricky for everyone, but you should work on ensuring that your responses are aimed at de-escalating situations rather than inflaming them. – Ajraddatz (talk) 22:52, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Ajraddatz: Thank you for your responses. For part 1, I think I've admitted my mistake on that and now seek consensus before trying drastic changes. I'm finding Part 2 a bit tricky to understand - could you show me some examples so that I can correct it in the future? Thanks again. Leaderboard (talk) 22:57, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- A good example is your reply to Nihlus below. He obviously has no time for you or your application - what purpose is there in replying to him at all? His views aren't shared by others here, at least not to that extent, and the way you responded will either solicit a more hostile response or no response at all. In situations outside here where you do need to respond, taking a different tone would be helpful. – Ajraddatz (talk) 23:06, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- Strong oppose Absolutely not. It is clear you have used your progression of rights in order to continue gaining more rights. The overstepping and mistakes on the filters, the obvious rush to gain more rights here, and the glaring inexperience with sysop rights elsewhere clearly leads me to oppose. I would be more comfortable removing the rights you have rather than giving you more. Nihlus 17:01, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Nihlus: Your stinging comment ("inexperience with sysop rights elsewhere") is quite inaccurate and I would like some explanation regarding that - considering that I've a fairly unblemished record elsewhere. Yes, my rate of applications is fairly rapid; but is that really something against me? Leaderboard (talk) 22:41, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose I have concerns about the behavior that the user has had during the time he has been a limited administrator, due to this, it is not possible to support at this time. —AlvaroMolina (✉ - ✔) 21:44, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
@AlvaroMolina: Can you provide some examples of when I was inappropriate in any of my responses? I want to be friendly, and am usually very careful in maintaining that. Thanks in advance.
- Oppose. I'd prefer some more extensive meta work and adminship experience from a Meta administrator hopeful; not now but I'd be happy to support in the future. Hiàn (talk)/editing on mobile account 21:53, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- "more adminship experience" Why would my existing experience be inappropriate? Leaderboard (talk) 22:41, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- My comment was probably on the vaguer side - I don't doubt your existing experience on whatever projects you are a sysop on, but I do believe (given recent events) there is much room for you to improve before taking on another admin role. Hiàn (talk)/editing on mobile account 23:33, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Request withdrawn I'm not proceeding any further. Will work on resolving the concerns, even through I personally disagree with the opposes' views, while thanking them for voicing their opinion. However, I'll respond to the comments up to now and would welcome further discussion on this elsewhere.
The changes I have done were done purely in good faith and were consistent with what I did on other projects with positive outcomes. When users started to complain that I had not obtained consensus, I (in my view) did the right thing and reversed the changes and went slowly after that, obtaining consensus wherever possible.
Sorry again if I've been a hinderance to the community. As usual, feedback on my conduct or work is welcome at any time. Leaderboard (talk) 22:41, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- Not done. Matiia (talk) 00:11, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
- The above request page is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Comments about this page should be made in Meta:Babel or Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat.