Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Meta:Requests for adminship/Ochilov 3

< Meta:Requests for adminship
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a closed Meta-Wiki request. Please do not modify it.

Ochilov (3)

edit

Hi! I have been wikimedian for more than 1.5 years with a significant effort in Uzbekistan Wikimedia movement and Esperanto-speaking community in Wikimedia and I request adminship here because I find it helpful in my work of combating vandalism and doing maintenance. In my previous request I was told that I must start doing maintenance before becoming an admin and not after I became one. Now I have more than 100 deletion requests and more than 50 rollbacks(I suppose). I also welcome Matiia to the discussion. Yes, I remember that I have been told to make my work few more weeks, but I'll be better having the adminship now so the recent changes feed will be cleaner ;) --Ochilov (talk) 19:02, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Support. Farsizabon (talk) 19:07, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • {{oppose}} I prefer a longer history of reverting vandalism/spam imo --Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 21:58, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    He has over 2000 edits here in year and a half, this is more than a lot of previous admins had when they went in for an RfA. A Long history or edit counts alone, should not be used to judge a candidate's merit. Also, admin rights here aren't a "big deal", we generally try to be supportive and inclusive, unless there are reasons to the contrary. You are of course entitled to your opinion. Regards. Theo10011 (talk) 22:18, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd like to protest the "no big deal". In this wiki adminship gives access to systems like the spam, title and mass message; among others, which if used wrongfully or maliciously can cause a big mess. That said, yeah, it's not like becoming a congressman, but adminship comes with a responsability. In here, I feel this responsability is a little higher since you're volunteering to work in the coordination wiki which has those powerful systems. This is about your statement above and not about Ochilov himself. You are of course entitled to your opinion too :-) Best regards. —MarcoAurelio 23:07, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Convincing argument :-) But alas, I'm neutral because of points made out by MarcoAurelio. --Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 00:12, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
MarcoAurelio, I already have MassMessage access and didn't use it to spam ;) --Ochilov (talk) 12:04, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I really hate to do this... but honestly your comment and points made by Natuur12 and Stiensplitter just make me feel like this isn't a right time. So I'm Oppose Oppose. I'm sorry. --Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 17:11, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support I've seen him do good work around here, seems like a good contributor. Ochilov, I've seen your previous RfA's, please don't get discouraged, keep up the good work, and if you succeed please try and remain consistently active here. Good luck. Theo10011 (talk) 22:18, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your last request was 2 weeks ago. What could possibly have changed in that time? Ajraddatz (talk) 22:29, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral I agree with Theo above in that Ochilov seems to be a good contributor. It is IMHO, and I appreciate Ochilov trying to work and in general I think he is now doing a good job. Also his language skills are interesting. However I have few objections that prevent me from supporting right now. There were some concerns raised in your last RfA, which was less than a month ago I think you have not properly addressed, mostly those of not being active enough in general maintenance to need the tools. While your history of deleted contributions might give another impression, in fact only 6 (and from this present year) are main namespace deletions, the others being from empty and/or useless categories (which is a backlog not much people take care of to speak on his favor). His edits on Meta namespace are rather low too. I've recently witnessed cases such as in here where he's exposed potentially oversightable content publicy. I have opposed for less in other candidatures, which is something I assure you I do not enjoy doing. I'll stay neutral for now because I think there's room for improvement, and because I think Ochilov may be a good administrator in the future. Please keep up the good work and stay with us. Of course this is my very personal opinion. Best regards. —MarcoAurelio 23:07, 6 January 2016 (UTC) (in edit conflict with Ajraddatz).[reply]
  • Support Support - We can see from his edits in the past year that he is pretty much dedicated for the movement.--Satdeep Gill (talk) 02:53, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support. Ilya Drakonov (talk) 07:13, 7 January 2016 (UTC).[reply]
  • Support Support --ITPRO.UZ (talk) 07:38, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Oppose Concerns about the competence of this user 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, ... --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:24, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Steinsplitter:, the last one was more than a year ago when I was a newbee, others except the first one are not related to the sysop's work at all. By the way, I feel like you are stalking me on most of my requests. Seriously. --Ochilov (talk) 14:00, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Your comment speaks for itself. If you run for RFA users might check your contribs. Defending the own position with argumentum ad personam is not the behavior i except from an administrator. --Steinsplitter (talk) 16:19, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support. --A.I. (talk) 14:07, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support Good work in eowiki --Taken by ocean (talk) 14:08, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support --Agilight (talk) 14:12, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • {{neutral}} because I feel this is too soon after the previous RfA. I am with Ajraddatz. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 15:19, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    I am seeing bad communication skills here. I am sorry but I think I have to Oppose Oppose. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 02:02, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support. Kotika (talk) 18:47, 7 January 2016 (MSK)
  • Oppose Oppose - Per Steinsplitter and partly per MarcoAurelio. Also, the way Asian Month was spammed makes me fear that this user lacks "community management skills". And last but not least, acusing an editor of stalking during a RFA without backing it up with evidence is a no go. Natuur12 (talk) 16:34, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Steinsplitter's rationale had nothing to do with my adminship. Community management skills does not apply here as well as WAM spamming because I was not responsible for resolving it at all - I was busy with coordinating WAM in ruwiki, eowiki and uzwiki simultaneously. Please, comment here only those situations which can affect my sysopship and combating vandalism as sysop in particular. Admin rights are just tools, why to remember every my fault, not connected at all or slightly connected with admin tasks? For example: Steinsplitter pointed that I lack in knowledge of renaming user - admin can not rename users. There also has been a point that I wanted to make a bot which could help TA doing maintenance, I just needed a little more time to make it better. How does the will of making Meta-Wiki better, turned to oppose? I completely do not understand you points here, guys. I just want to help out here with maintenance and combating vandalism and I think I am doing right. My other work does not apply here. Please, consider this. Thank you. --Ochilov (talk) 17:14, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now you are trying to censor future comments? This goes directly against our open culture. But if you insist I can mention a couple of relevant cirteria. After your last post we can add a lack of self relfection, making excuses and trouble using logical arguments to the list. Natuur12 (talk) 17:26, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ochilov are you sure that all users voting in Support are really considering only relevant to adminship stuff as you wish it? :) --Base (talk) 21:05, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn by user.--Syum90 (talk) 07:55, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Meta:Requests_for_adminship/Ochilov_3&oldid=15216331"