Open main menu

Requests for global rollback permissions

Global rollback for Hazard-SJ

Hello, as stated above, I'm User:Hazard-SJ. I am a member of the SWMT, and keep an eye in #cvn-sw. As a person who enjoys fighting vandalism, I would be well aided globally by having the global rollback right to continue my task of trapping and getting rid of vandalism. Thank you.  Hazard-SJ  ±  05:00, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

  • I think you lack experience in the cross-wiki antivandalism battle. I only see 39 edits in content projects outside your home wikis (where you already have local flags). I would tend to oppose for the moment, but support in some time. Savhñ 07:15, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
  • I see no evidence of cross wiki work - almost all edits are on main projects not smaller wikis so I would say "no" at present. --Herby talk thyme 16:12, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Zero crosswiki work, doubts about maturity of user etc. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 16:15, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
    Please explain where you see "no crosswiki work", because I have many crosswiki contributions.  Hazard-SJ  ±  20:38, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
    here Seb az86556 21:26, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
    Yes (thanks) per that link - there really are very few contribs to smaller projects. --Herby talk thyme 08:02, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
  •   no I honestly don't feel the candidate actually understands the role of global rollbacker. Where are the number of vandalism reversions that would justify this tool. It's mostly used on languages completely unlike the English one, and takes some experience with the undo button before I'd feel comfortable with GR being granted to Hazard-SJ. fr33kman 21:57, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose Per above. Trijnstel 09:57, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose Per Savh. Vaibhav Talk 10:37, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
I think this request is a bit premature. The user is advised to acquire some cross-experience before reapplying. Ruslik 07:56, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Global rollback for Addihockey10

Hello there; I'm User:Addihockey10 and I've been around SWMT for a while now; you can usually find me lurking in #cvn-sw keeping an eye out for crosswiki vandals. I have 10500 edits on enwiki; and around 12500 globally; and I think having global rollback will aid me in my vandal combating efforts. Thanks! Addihockey10 19:27, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

  • Support, why not - Hoo man (talk) 19:33, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Surely. Nice countervandalism work. Ruy Pugliesi 19:38, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
  •   Question: I don't see much cross-wiki vandalism here, only you creating everywhere a user page. Or do you have lots of deleted contribs? Trijnstel 19:49, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
    I do mark alot of pages for with {{delete}} if they're simply nonsense or new page vandalism; maybe 100 and a bit? But that's one of the things I watch in #cvn-sw. Addihockey10 19:53, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
    But for that you don't need the rollback bit. Savhñ 07:08, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
    While I don't need the rollback bit for that; it's still vandalism fighting. If I know how to combat vandalism; rollback would be a good tool to revert the cross-wiki trolls etcetera; at the moment I'm being loaded up with scripts for deletion tagging and the like around all wikis to be more efficient. As said below; some of them won't be clearly marked as undos/reverts. Addihockey10 15:48, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Support, as user has given much needed and appreciated crosswiki countervandalism help.  Hazard-SJ  ±  04:54, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Neutral, although I trust the user, I don't think he needs the flag yet, as I see little undo's in his global contributions. Savhñ 07:08, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
    Some of the reverts I've done aren't clearly marked as so if there are multiple revisions needing reverting I just end up editing the last clean revision and saving it; just mentioning it. Addihockey10 15:07, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
  •   strong yes I've worked with Addi for some time over at simplewiki and handlinlg xwiki requests. This is a tool he needs, badly. I'd also encourage him to consider global sysopship as well. fr33kman 15:43, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Neutral Per Savh. Trijnstel 09:56, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Trusted User. Vaibhav Talk 10:36, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
      Done no problem here. Ruslik 08:00, 5 August 2011 (UTC) Reopened by Fr33kman
  • Support Why not? --WizardOfOz talk 16:53, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Since this has now been re-opened, I can drop in the neutral I've been thinking about for the past days (I was actually between oppose and neutral, but I am not quick to either rubberstamp or oppose.) The reason for my skepticism is based on the obvious lack of x-wiki edits, coupled with a general sense of fairness: I remember other requests that were denied for exactly the same reason, sometimes in a landslide of opposes. It becomes more and more difficult for me to see some sort of "system" here. Seb az86556 22:39, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Aye — GR is no biggie, as the candidate does good work now and have no really concerning issues to oppose. — Tanvir | Talk ] 00:06, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
  • OK — trusted user, I think that the only fact that he is requesting the flag proves that he needs it. -- Quentinv57 (talk) 14:25, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
    • Hm. We should give every flag away casually, on the "he says he needs it"-basis... Seb az86556 22:47, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Comments

  Comment — Although, the user have my support here, but why this request was marked as done in less than 3 days? I see 5 supports and 2 neutrals which come to a support percentage of 71%. I would say, it is not a clear consensus where we usually expect 75-80% support for admin tools. I know GR has no admin privileges, but it is not like local rollback either. We need to establish a consensus, and there was/is no hurry. — Tanvir | Talk ] 07:20, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Neutrals are not counted into the result. So, there was 100% support as nobody opposed. As to the timing, the last comment before I closed the discussion had been made almost a whole day before. The discussion basically ended on 4 August and there was no chance that the result could be any different. Ruslik 08:16, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Note: Neutral votes are being counted everywhere Rusik, In sysop votes and even in steward polls, because it helps to understand how many people are doubtful about the respective candidate. — Tanvir | Talk ] 15:08, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Can yougive a specific example where they were counted? Ruslik 04:39, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
But there were still scope for discussion you know? 2/3 days is not enough to close a brand new request anyway. — Tanvir | Talk ] 08:30, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Well, as said above there was no discussion for a whole day before my closure. So, I doubt there was any scope for discussion left. Ruslik 08:39, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
I would like to point to this discussion and I agree with Tanvir. I would have waited a little bit before granting the GR-flag. Trijnstel 13:37, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
It has always been done after about 5 days, sometimes earlier, sometimes later, but 5 days is the norm. fr33kman 14:08, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
There was the risk of incoming oppose-votes so it had to be closed early. Seb az86556 21:50, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
A "risk"? What do you mean with that? Does he have enemies? Trijnstel 21:57, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Enemies? Are we using war-terminology now? Is that what an oppose means these days — "enemy"? Seb az86556 22:11, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
No, that's not what I meant. I mean, you are talking about "a risk of incoming oppose-votes", so I'm curious what that risk is and why. Trijnstel 22:16, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Seb az86556, you have just said that the steward acted in bad faith, by granting this flag too early so the result would be different from community intention. It should never be done without something to prove it. There is no reason to bring this kind of false argument.” Teles (Talk @ C S) 23:15, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Alright. What could be another reason? Convince me. Seb az86556 23:49, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Another reason for what? I'm sorry, but you are the one that needs to convince everybody that the steward acted in bad faith. I guess the reason you are asking is that he believes that enough time passed and the request has enough support. If his beliefs are wrong, you are free to disagree, but there is no need to accuse him from doing something wrong on purpose. If you think this was a fast approval just like others said above, it is ok (me too), but your argument is clearly (and unnecessarily) disrespectful... not to say it is serious enough to demand more substancial proof before accusing him.” Teles (Talk @ C S) 00:24, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
You can take that stance regarding any vote or election that is closed early. And I will take mine. Let's take this to the talkpage to prevent this from happening again. Seb az86556 00:32, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
I feel a need to comment here; I had not been in contact regarding closing my request as   Done before consensus had been made with User:Ruslik0. Yes he closed it prematurely but people make mistakes. Although Ruslik0 is a steward; he still manages to remain human. I have to say that I'm a bit insulted that you suggest that for the sake of Ruslik0 and myself; but I can see why you might think that. I have to admit that when I came online to check up to see if there were any questions I was a bit shocked when it was marked as done :-P Addihockey10 17:31, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Bit late, but here's my 2c. This is not a landslide request - concerns have been raised, even though they were not enough for the people to oppose. I personally would have liked to see this request go on a bit longer, and would also like to express my neutrality on this request, per lack of global countervandalism activity expressed above. Ajraddatz (Talk) 04:29, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Reopened. This RFGR was closed too early, I hereby reopen it for 48 hours, and have removed the flag from Addihocey10 (to whom Ruslik owes an apology. fr33kman 15
45, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Just would like to comment here; I don't think it's worth keeping it open for specifically 48 hours. In that time; it's unlikely that SUL and luxo will be fixed anytime soon so I'm willing to having it open another 48 hours AFTER the tools become available again if reasonable. (I don't want this to be open for a month now ;) ). Addihockey10 16:39, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
  Comment Therefore we can use CentralAuth --WizardOfOz talk 16:48, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Well we could; but I do have a number of non-reverting contribs. I think it's best I just copy-paste my crosswiki activity onto maybe a subpage in my userspace. Addihockey10 16:51, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
  Comment An early/invalid closure, also precludes that there are people who know the candidate and his edits but were just waiting to make their minds up. fr33kman 16:56, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
I started a page here; it's not done but it's a start. Addihockey10 17:17, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
TBH I think I'll comb them once I have a better tool :-) Addihockey10 17:48, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

  Done Correct period of time, user promoted fr33kman 23:13, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Global rollback for Reder

I work in many wikis, My home wiki is the Tarantino wiki where I have around 10000 edits, but I usually work aslo on the Italian and Emiliano-Romagnolo wikis. I keep an eye also many small wikis, where I help to fight vandalism where there are no active communities. I'm an admin on the Tarantino, Sango and Srnanantongo wikis and on the Kyrgyz wiktionary. I'm also a test-admin on Incubator and an autopatroller user on Meta. I'm a member of SWMT for more than a month. I have more than 12500 edits globally; and I would like to have global rollback rights to give a bigger aid to fight the vandals. --Reder 21:18, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

  • Not enough actual countervandalism experience globally for me to support, sorry. Looking through your recent global contribs I can only see three reverts. Ajraddatz (Talk) 21:58, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi, many of my reverts were done on pages that were later canceled, the greatest example is nap.wiki, full of obsolete entries (about 30,000) reverted and later completely eliminated with the help of a global sysop. Same thing on several entries in other smaller projects. --Reder 23:34, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Little cross-wiki antivandalism activity. Hi, Reder. I see you apparently do a great job on some wikis, but this tool is used mainly on wikis outside of those wikis you edit more. It is used to undo vandalism and we need to see if you are used with that by checking the reverts you already done, for example, on wikis you don't speak the language. In fact, this tool was created to make faster those edits that were already done without it. So, I hope you keep interested on reverting vandalism on small wikis and, after more experience on that, I can support a future GR request. Regards.” Teles (T @ L C S) 22:45, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
I used to work on wikis where I don't speak the language, but you can tell that I focus on some projects on particularly like the three (sg. and srn. wikipedia and ky. wiktionary) where I'm an admin, but sometimes I also keep an eye on other projects. I'd like to become a global rollbacker in order to provide greater support in the fight against vandalisms. I know what are the tasks of a global rollbacker, but if you think that is too soon I'll return in the future with more experience. ;-) --Reder 23:34, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose Concerns with limited x-wiki counter-vandalism work. Sorry, FASTILY (TALK) 06:04, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose Good work on roa-tara wiki, but still you need to do some more x-wiki counter-vandalism work, i will recommend to stay on SWMT for some more time. Email Vaibhav Talk 06:38, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Lack of cross-wiki experience. --Mercy 20:48, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose Would like to see a bit more x-wiki edits. Perhaps next time. --WizardOfOz talk 20:59, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
    •   Not done At this time, there does not exist a consensus of Wikimedians to afford Reder access to the global rollback maintenance toolset. Reder should view these responses as constructive criticism, and work on addressing the issues which the global project members believe are necessary for global rollback, and hopefully, the next request will be met with approval. Thank you very much, Reder, for volunteering your services. -- Avi 15:57, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
No problem, it will be for the next time. I'll try to improve my job even more. Thanks anyway ;-) --Reder 22:16, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Global rollback for Gfoley4

Hello, I'm Gfoley4. I am an active member of the SWMT for a few months now and I can be found on #cvn-sw and #wikimedia-stewards often. Global rollback would make my life easier as it would allow for faster, one-click vandalism reversions. It would also allow me to bypass entering in "CAPTCHAs" when reverting page blanking. I am an Administrator on the English Wikipedia for 5 months and have reverted many instances of vandalism there. Thank you for the consideration. —Gfoley Four— 18:30, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

  • Support, no issues here. I've seen him around and he does a good job. Ajraddatz (Talk) 20:26, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Lack of cross-wiki experience and limited language abilities. --Mercy 20:46, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose Like above, would like to see a bit more edits. It will be nice if you would use at least en summary if reverting questionable edits. --WizardOfOz talk 21:01, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
    • On that particular edit, I first thought it was unconstructive but I realized after I undid it that it wasn't obvious and I promptly undid it. It was a mistake. —Gfoley Four— 21:09, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
      • I saw what you have done, and there is nothing wrong to make mistake which can be reverted. It happens. But what I mean is using summary. If you already have make a mistake, a simple sorry (mistake...) in the summary will let the people know what you are doing at all. Bswiki have FlagedRevs as extension, therefore every summary is helpful for patrolers. --WizardOfOz talk 21:53, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
        • Noted. —Gfoley Four— 21:54, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose clearly not a suitable candidate. Seb az86556 21:24, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
  • OpposeLittle work outside en wiki. Email Vaibhav Talk 12:47, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Rollback is no big deal. Assume good faith everyone. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:20, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
@Fastily Rollback is not a big deal but many wikis (like mr wiki) are very conservative with the action of users with global rights specially when vandalism is a little disputable. I would recommend Gfoley4 to stay on SWMT for some more time and reapply. Email Vaibhav Talk 15:47, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
Oh, this looks like the opposite of how things should be. Are you seriously advising Fastily and people here about what rollback rights are? I know you know everyone so well that you vote for around here and are so experienced in SWM (sarcasm) but this seems soo odd. Sorry, if this feels like a trolling comment but I think gfoley4 is a good guy and deserves better than to be told to seek experience from a person with less experience and time than him, I just had to say it guys.Theo10011 16:17, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
@Theo10011 I am not giving experience to either Fastily or to Gfoley4, and i can't even. I am just expressing my views. However, at last it depends on the consensus. Email Vaibhav Talk 11:07, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
You seem to have a problem understanding me, I never said you are giving experience, I said you are advising("recommend Gfoley4") people with far more experience and time(Gfoley4, Fastily) than you to get more time ("stay on SWMT for some more time and reapply"). Second, you should actually read what CONSENSUS means on English Wikipedia, it mostly covers the editorial process, you might be confusing it for community consensus which steward seek locally when making decisions. Theo10011 04:40, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Rollback is no big deal. Theo10011 16:37, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose - in a general way, rollback is no big deal, but historically, there has to be a clear need for it. — Kudu ~I/O~ 00:19, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
    There is a clear need for it; Gfoley4 has been active in global countervandalism for about three months now. How would you know, anyways, since you aren't active in it? Ajraddatz (Talk) 00:20, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  •   Support Of course. Addihockey10 00:25, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  •   Support; I know Gfoley4 from the English Wikipedia and I've seen him active in countervandalism. He has shown competence and a good understanding of policies. More than happy with this request. PeterSymonds (talk) 07:53, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Support because you seem to be well-meant, and rollback is no big deal as said above. Nevertheless, if you could create your user pages on project you use your global status to redirect them to your meta user page, it would be better. The same if you could add a short summary, when you're undoing edits that are not evident cases of vandalism (example [1]). Thanks for your comprehension, and good luck for the future. -- Quentinv57 (talk) 08:06, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Neutral Though I'm sure Gfoley4 can be trusted with global rollback, I'm not convinced he really needs it atm and has enough experience for it. Trijnstel 18:25, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Neutral I'm convinced that Gfoley4 is trusted with the global rollback toolset, however, I am not convinced that he has enough x-wiki experience. Please continue doing good work, and request again in a month or so :) TBloemink 18:34, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Support per PeterSymonds. Rollback is not a big deal. We would surely benefit from him having the flag. Ruy Pugliesi 18:48, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry but now now. I can't see "heavy use of the revert" in many wikis, as per policy. Not that what he's done til today is bad, but I'd like to see more countervandalism work before granting this. -- Dferg 19:55, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Comment: for those supporting "because global rollback is no big deal" I may disagree and say that it's no valid argument, outside current global policy. -- Dferg 20:13, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
      Comment I believe that global rollback is no big deal myself; but that's an opinion. What matters is this user lurks in #cvn-sw; he has my complete trust; and my RFGR was a little bit based on the same thing. I didn't have that many crosswiki undo's; but once I got the flag I have used it many times since then. Gfoley4 is a great user and having him become more active with the GR flag will be an asset to our current #cvn-sw team. Addihockey10 23:58, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  •   Comment I know Gfoley socially as well as an IRC operator, and an en.wp admin. He has my trust with GR, I do think that he is being held up for far more scrutiny here than even an RfA. I do think that it is harder to get good x-wiki experience without GR, I am more than willing to give him a chance to prove his worthiness here. His vandal-fighting work on enwp alone qualify him more than enough for GR in my book. Theo10011 04:32, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
    •   Not done There does not appear to be a consensus to allow GFoley access to the Global rollback maintenance toolkit. Hopefully, acting on the advice given in this request will serve to allow GFoley to round out his/her wikimedia experience and allow for the next request to acheive consensus. Thank you very much for volunteering. -- Avi 02:29, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Requests for global sysop permissions

Global sysop for Omkar1234

I want to have global sysop rights. Omkar1234 10:27, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

  • You have absolutely no experience needed for a Global sysop. I recommend to read the policy and withdraw this request. You are welcome to participate with the SWMT. Savhñ 10:55, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
I agree with Savh, however, you can learn more about fighting vandalism by working on SWMT. Email Vaibhav Talk 11:49, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

  Not done. Sorry, you have no experience. --Mercy 17:51, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Global sysop for Addihockey10

Greetings. I'm Addihockey10 - English is my native language and French is my second language. I've been in the Small Wiki Monitoring Team for quite awhile now, and feel ready for the global sysop bit. Like current global sysops User:Hoo man (at the time of his appointment) and User:Ajraddatz I do not have sysop on any local content wiki; and was advised by many users to get local sysop on a content wiki before going for global sysopship. Therefore mistakenly I had gone for adminship on simple wikipedia but I had not been active enough there to have a decent use for the tools. I find that my main project at this point is now SMWT and global counter-vandalism/spam. I believe that not having local sysop on a content wiki I'm not active on won't impede my ability to use discretion as a global sysop - as Global sysop says, global sysops are here to perform antivandalism and routine maintenance on small wikis. You can find me in #wikimedia-stewards as Addihockey10 or Addi|afk usually if I'm online on IRC. My request for global rollback was a couple weeks ago, as beforehand I had primarily worked only in speedy deletions in #cvn-sw and had no use for the global rollback bit. If you have any addition questions feel free to ask me here, on my talk page or IRC - whichever is most convenient. Thank you for your kind consideration. Addihockey10 06:23, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Note: Addihockey10 served as temp admin on Tibetan wikipedia to delete massive copyright violations (see meta logfile). Another temp admin on Belarusian wikipedia (see meta logfile). a×pdeHello! 07:34, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  •   Support --N KOziTalk 06:24, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Most edits are creating own userpage and js. No sysop-experience. Moreover, previous requests and edits show that user does not quite understand the limits of "maintenance" within the scope of global sysop-rights. Seb az86556 06:40, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
    I believe I understand the limits of a global sysop concerning maintenance of small wikis; where have I gone too far as an editor? Addihockey10 06:46, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
    See Savh below. Seb az86556 10:57, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  •   Aye. He does a lot of CVN works. Also asked to GSes and stewards to nuke pages and blocks in emergency situations. Also asked them to do regular maintenance jobs in small wikis with 1 or 2 or no active sysops. As we already have GS who don't have local sysopship in any wiki and the policy don't let us not to recruit such active users. So why shouldn't we have him in the team? — Tanvir | Talk ] 06:57, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Although I'm still convinced that any experience of local adminship on a decent sized project will help, Addihockey10 proved his reliability →   Support a×pdeHello! 07:46, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  • This is now a Strong Oppose, user is obsessed to get admin rights somewhere, after 3 unsuccessful RFA's on enwiki (1, 2, 3) and one just ended on Simplewiki, and flag collection was already mentioned in his last request. This is less than a month (25 days) after his GR request, when I did not support nor oppose due to lack of experience in cross-wiki vandalism fighting. See also his previous request for temporary global sysop. Still, if there's consensus to promote to GS, I want to recommend the user not to hide (Revdel) spam, as that doesn't show transparency towards the local communities, as you did one one of the two projects where you have adminrights. By the way, why did you ask to have your rollback bit removed on enwiki? Savhñ 08:57, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
    I don't personally consider myself "obsessed" with having extra tools if I feel like I'm going to put them to good use. Latest RfA on enwiki was nearly a year ago; and the latter was explained above in my original statement. I wouldn't usually hide spam but in this case I didn't want some user to stumble upon it and visit the spamvertised site. I asked for my rollback bit to be removed on enwiki because I rarely used it there anyhow; and I rarely edited there recently and also because it was redundant to the global rollback bit. --Addihockey10 09:35, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
Obsessed is probably not the correct term, but I do mean something such as hat-collection. Savhñ 11:42, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - concerns with experience and behaviour, per Savh. Sorry. -- Dferg 09:42, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose Sorry but per concerns above. --WizardOfOz talk 10:59, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Lacks sufficient experience which is evident from an eagerness to collect rights. Addihockey has good intentions and I'm sure wants to use these tools well, but it's better to slow down and get used to some duties before rushing to get more, especially when you don't need these rights (the simplewiki admin request for example). Moreover, lack of adminship on a larger project is another concern. Also, I don't see sufficient activity in crosswiki antivandalism for this right. Don't take this as an "I'll never support you" comment, I'm willing to support once I see sufficient activity and a bit more experience. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 11:03, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
    • Also, sorry, I did see your PM to me few days back, and meant to suggest that you run later, but could not reply as my connection timed out. I wasn't online the next day and I totally forgot about replying... :/ Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 11:03, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Definitely will like to see him with more experience. Email Vaibhav Talk 12:30, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose Per concerns above mentioned. Trijnstel 15:11, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Savh's "hat collecting" concerns. I found the candidate's simplewiki RfA to be with poor judgment, and I would not trust this user or think that he is ready as a global sysop. Logan Talk Contributions 18:49, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Addihockey10 is a nice guy, and while I don't want to assume bad faith and say that he is just hat collecting, there is some strong evidence to support that claim. While I'd like to believe that he would do well with the tools, I also have absolutely nothing to base that off of since he has 0 admin experience. I know that both myself and Hoo man passed similar requests with limited WMF admin experience, but we also had vast experience in global countervandalism - something which I don't see here. More important, though, is the precedent that this request would set if it passed. We have enough real enwiki rights collectors coming here for global rollback and the occasional global editinterface; we don't need them going after global sysop too. Ajraddatz (Talk) 18:53, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
    Comment to Addihockey10 - You seem to have asked quite a few people about whether or not you should apply for global sysop. In general, a good candidate for these rights is able to gauge when a good time to file a request is without anyone else's input - but that comes with lots of experience in global countervandalism. Ajraddatz (Talk) 18:57, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  •   Support This is all getting rather silly. I've only seen him do good work. Theo10011 21:14, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  Comment: What exactly is "silly" here? Other's comments? Can you, please, clarify? Thanks.” Teles (T @ L C S) 05:00, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  Comment "Silly" is my personal opinion of these votes which are becoming more stringent (Global sysop might require that much scrutiny but I contest Global rollback requiring the same attention). If you care to read the note above, you will read "This is not a vote", almost everyone here has voted to some extent. I am not talking about Addi's case here individually but the general lack of good faith that's been purveying these global requests. I know several people who got through earlier with these requests with far less scrutiny, people who were generally active on cvn and nothing more- that is what I meant by silly. I know how hard enwp's RfA process is so I don't count his failed RfAs against him, I do however, consider his track record on cvn and those concerns value higher to me than the RfA record. I can understand Savh concerns about him and other people's perspective but I have also worked with Addi on ten wiki and other places, from my past experiences, I wanted to support him even if he doesn't get the flag here. Theo10011 17:49, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above, unfortunately. Concerns with the lack of local sysop flag. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:30, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Neutral I don't want to put one more opposition as I think that Addihockey10 is well-meant and did a good work on the SWMT (even if it was not very long). But I think that more local sysop experience is really needed. I'm not really comfortable with arguments like "hat collections", as I have personally been attacked in the past with such arguments, and let me tell you people that it is really disgusting when you really come to help. For me, if he failed three times to get adminship on en and simple, it should be dealt locally. But I understand that when I saw his SUL and I saw that he is still a sysop on "outreach", on "test" and on "tenwiki" and has done a very few sysop operations there, I wonder myself why he requested more status if he can't handle those he already got. Addihockey, I would advise you to stay a bit longer in the SWMT team, to prove that you're really here to help (even if it's hard, just a matter of trust) and to begin by handling your local sysop responsibilities, or to request desysop if you don't wish to use them. Sincerly, -- Quentinv57 (talk) 07:57, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  Comment - Those wikis don't really require sysop maintenance other than the occasional speedy deletion etcetra therefore most users won't have many sysop actions because there aren't any to perform. I still keep my flag on tenwiki in the case of spam and all that; and I just noticed that someone had given me sysop on outreach. Addihockey10 16:52, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
Ehm.. it's not really "just" as you know for at least a month that someone gave you sysoprights on Outreach Wiki, according to this. ;-) Trijnstel 16:57, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
I had just noticed 14:05, 22 March 2011 Frank Schulenburg (talk | contribs) changed group membership for User:Addihockey10 from (none) to administrator ‎ (Trusted user) at the time of my first action :-P. Addihockey10 17:07, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

  Comment - Sorry to all for not replying to anything yesterday; I had a bad case of the flu and it was a case of what goes down must come up; I'll be active today though. Addihockey10 16:34, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

After consideration, it has become apparent that I do not yet have sufficient experience to become a global sysop yet and I wish to withdraw this request. Thank you. Addihockey10 08:33, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Closed as not done per Addihockey10's comment above. -Barras 08:45, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Requests for global editinterface permissions

Requests for global IP block exemption