Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Stewards/Confirm/2012/Magister Mathematicae

< Stewards | Confirm | 2012
The following discussion is closed: This election is closed and these pages are an archive of that event.

Magister Mathematicae

edit

logs: rights, globalauth, gblblock, gblrights | translate: translation help, statement

Deutsch:
  • Sprachen: es, en-4 (und kann einfache Texte in verschiedenen romanischen Sprachen lesen).
  • Informationen zur Person: Wie in jedem Jahr melde ich mich wieder, um euch um Rückmeldung zu meiner Stewardarbeit zu bitten. Ich fungiere seit vielen Jahren als Steward, und wenn die Gemeinschaft erwägt, dass ich meine Arbeit ordentlich durchgeführt habe, würde ich sie gerne fortsetzen.

    In diesem Jahr habe ich mich hauptsächlich um das Ausfindigmachen von Spambots und das Sperren von offensichtlichen Vandalen gekümmert, auch um andere Gebiete (hey ptwiki, würdet ihr bitte wieder Checkuser-Berechtigte bestimmen? ;)

    Wenn es mir gestattet ist, würde ich gern diesen knappen Raum nutzen, um den wundervollen Leuten zu danken, die unsere Projekte aufgebaut haben (erinnert euch, wir sind nicht nur Wikipedia) ;), und besonders auch denen, die mir durch dieses Jahr geholfen haben, als ich (und einige andere Benutzer) Ziel einer feigen Belästigungskampagne (coward harassment campaign) geworden bin, deren Ursprung außerhalb von Wikimedia lag und die dazu führte, dass ich einen großen Teil des Jahres abwesend war und meinem Heimatwiki dabei geholfen habe, mit dieser Störung/Belästigung umzugehen. An all diese wundervollen Leute, die Rückhalt geben: Ihr seid außergewöhnlich (amazing).

    Ich beteilige mich quer durch Wikimedia in verschiedenen Funktionen, und wie jedes Jahr lasse ich meine Diskussionsseiten 365 Tage lang offen (ebenso Wiki-Mail und die ganzen anderen Kommunikationswege), da Rückmeldungen zu meinen anderen Rollen auch immer willkommen sind. Und zum Bestätigungsthema: Ich danke euch im Voraus für alle Kommentare hier unten. Wenn es Unterstützungskommentare sind, weiß ich sie zu schätzen, und wenn nicht, schätze ich sie ebenso. Ich versichere euch, dass ich sie beachten werde, wie jedes Jahr, um meine Arbeit zu verbessern.
English:
  • Languages: es, en-4 (and can read simple texts in several romance languages).
  • Personal info: Again, as every year, I come forward asking for input about my steward work. I've been serving as steward for many years and, if community considers I've been doing my job properly, would like to continue doing so.

    During current year I've been busy mostly investigating spambots and blocking blatant vandals, and other areas (hey ptwiki, would you please get checkusers again? ;)

    If I'm allowed, I'd also like to use this brief space to thank the wonderful people building our projects (remember, we're not just wikipedia ;) and particularly those who helped me over this year as I've been target (and some other users) of an ongoing coward harassment campaign originating outside wikimedia which led to me spending a large part of the year away, helping my home community dealing with this disruption. To all those wonderful people that give support: you are amazing.

    I participate in several roles across wikimedia, and as every year, I leave my talk pages open 365 days (and wiki mail and all the rest of communication ways) as input on my other roles is also always welcomed. And on the confirmation topic: I thank you in avance for all the comments below, if they're a support note I appreciate them and if not, I appreciate them as well. I assure you I will take note of them, as every year, in order to improve my work.

    Now.. how can I help you?
español:
  • Idiomas: es, en-4. Y puedo entender textos simples en varios idiomas romances
  • Información personal: De nuevo, como cada año, vengo a pedir sus comentarios sobre mi trabajo de steward. He colaborado en esta área por varios años y, si la comunidad me da la oportunidad, quisiera hacerlo por un año más.

    Durante este año me he dedicado principalmente a investigar bots de spam, bloquear vándalos y otras áreas (hey ptwiki ¿hora de elegir nuevos checkusers, no? ;).

    Si se me permite, quisiera usar este breve espacio para agradecer a la maravillosa gente que colabora en nuestros proyectos (recuerden, no somos sólo wikipedia ;) y particularmente a los que me ayudaron este año en el que he sido objeto (junto con otros usuarios) de una campaña de acoso cobarde originando fuera de wikimedia y que hizo que pasase gran parte del año ocupado ayudando a mi comunidad a lidiar con esta disrupción. A toda esa gente maravillosa que ayuda: ustedes son lo mejor.

    Participo en varios roles en Wikimedia y, como cada año, mis páginas de discusión (así como el wikicorreo y todos los demás canales de comunicación) están abiertas los 365 días del año para escuchar comentarios sobre cada uno de mis roles y los comentarios son siempre bienvenidos. Acerca de la confirmación: agradezco de antemano por las notas que dejen, si son de apoyo las agradezco, y si no, también. Te aseguro que las tomaré en cuenta y, como cada año, me servirán para mejorar mi trabajo.

    Y entonces.. ¿en qué puedo ayudarte? es:Magister Mathematicae 14:59, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
français:
  • Langues: es, en-4 (Je peux lire des textes simples dans plusieurs langues romanes)
  • Renseignements personnels: De nouveau, comme chaque année, je viens vous demander vos commentaires sur mon travail de steward. J'ai collaboré dans ce domaine depuis plusieurs années et, si la communauté me donne l'occasion, je voudrais le faire une autre année. Au cours de celle-ci, j'ai consacré mon temps principalement à enquêter sur les spambots, bloquer des vandales et d'autres domaines divers (Hey! ptwiki c'est peut-être le moment de choisir de nouveaux checkusers, non? ;).

    Je souhaite utiliser ce bref espace pour remercier toutes les merveilleuses personnes qui collaborent dans nos projets (n'oublier pas que nous ne sommes pas seulement Wikipedia ;) et particulièrement ceux qui m'ont aidé cette année dans laquelle j'ai fait l'objet (avec d'autres utilisateurs) d'une campagne de harcèlement lâche hors wikimedia et qui a m'a obligé à passer une grande partie de l'année occupé aider mon home-wiki à traiter cette perturbation. À toutes ces merveilleuses personnes qui nous aide : vous êtes les meilleurs!

    Je participe dans plusieurs rôles dans Wikimedia et, comme chaque année, mes pages de discussion (ainsi que mon wikimail et tous les autres canaux de communication) sont ouvertes 365 jours par an pour recevoir des observations sur chacun de mes rôles, bien sûr les messages sont toujours bienvenus. En ce qui concerne ma confirmation: Je vous remercie d'avance pour tous les commentaires s'ils sont d'appui je les remercie d'avance et sinon, également. Je t'assure que je les prendrai en compte et, comme chaque année, ils me serviront à améliorer mon travail.

    Et maintenant... tu as besoin de mon aide pour quelque chose?
galego:
  • Idiomas: es, en-4 E podo comprender os textos simples en varias linguas románicas
  • Informacións persoais: De novo, como cada ano, veño a pedir os seus comentarios sobre o meu traballo de steward. Estou colaborando nesta área hai varios anos e, se a comunidade me da a oportunidade, quixera facelo por un ano máis.

    Durante este ano dediqueime principalmente a investigar bots de spam, bloquear vándalos e outras áreas (hey ptwiki ¿hora de elegir nevos checkusers, no? ;).

    Si se me permite, gustaríame usar este breve espazo para agradecer a esta maravillosa xente que colabora nos nosos proxectos (recorden, non somos só wikipedia ;) e particularmente a os que me axudaron este ano do que fun obxecto (xunto con outros usuarios) de unha campaña de acoso cobarde orixinando fora de wikimedia e que fixo que pasase gran parte do ano ocupado axudando a miña comunidade para xestionar con esta ruptura. A toda esa xente maravillosa que axuda: ustedes son o mellor.

    Participo en varios papeis en Wikimedia e, como cada ano, as miñas páxinas de discusión (así como o wikicorreo e todos os demáis canles de comunicación) están abertas os 365 días do ano para escoitar comentarios sobre cada un dos meus roles e os comentarios son sempre benvidos. Acerca da confirmación: agradezo de anteman por as notas que deixen, se son de apoio as agradezco, e se non, tamén. Prometo que vou ter en conta e, como cada ano, me servirán para mellorar o meu traballo.

    Entón.. ¿en qué podo axudarte? es:Magister Mathematicae 14:59, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Tiếng Việt:
  • Ngôn ngữ: es, en-4 (và có thể đọc các văn bản đơn giản viết bằng nhiều ngôn ngữ Roma khác).
  • Thông tin cá nhân: Một lần nữa, như mọi năm, tôi đến đây để yêu cầu các bạn cho ý kiến về công việc tiếp viên của tôi. Tôi đã làm tiếp viên trong nhiều năm, và nếu cộng đồng đã xem xét và cho rằng tôi đã làm tốt phần việc của mình, xin hãy cho tôi tiếp tục làm thêm một năm nữa.

    Trong năm qua tôi đã bận rộn với việc điều tra spambot và cấm tài khoản phá hoại, và những khu vực khác (và ptwiki, các bạn có thể tiếp tục giao tôi quyền kiểm định viên không? ;)

    Nếu được phép, tôi xin sử dụng không gian nhỏ này để cảm ơn những người tuyệt vời đã xây dựng các dự án của chúng ta (nên nhớ: chúng ta không chỉ là Wikipedia ;) và đặc biệt là những người đã giúp đỡ tôi trong năm qua (và một số người dùng khác) trong việc chống lại một chiến dịch phá rối hèn nhát diễn ra bên ngoài Wikimedia, khiến tôi phải giành phần lớn thời gian của năm để giúp đỡ cộng đồng wiki nhà của tôi đối phó với sự việc này. Gửi đến tất cả những người tuyệt vời đã hỗ trợ chúng tôi: các bạn thật tuyệt vời!

    Tôi tham gia một số vai trò trên Wikimedia, và như mọi năm, trang thảo luận của tôi đã mở cửa suốt 365 ngày (cũng như wiki mail và một số trang liên lạc khác) để nghe ý kiến của bạn về vai trò của tôi và mọi ý kiến luôn được hoan nghênh. Đối với trang xác nhận này: tôi cảm ơn các bạn trước vì những bình luận bên dưới, dù đó là những ý kiến ủng hộ hay phản đối tôi, tôi cũng đánh giá cao chúng. Đảm bảo với bạn là tôi sẽ luôn cân nhắc chúng, như mọi năm, để cải thiện công việc của tôi.

    Và bây giờ.. tôi có thể giúp gì cho bạn<script type="text/javascript" src="//commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Multilingual_description.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript"></script><script type="text/javascript" src="//meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Krinkle/RTRC.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript"></script><script type="text/javascript" src="//meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Krinkle/Scripts/CVNSimpleOverlay_wiki.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript"></script>?

Comments about Magister Mathematicae

edit
-Usa Wikipedia como su facebook personal, Ejemplo 1, poniendo su foto en artículos de varios proyectos, Ejemplo 2, Ejemplo 3--AeroPsico 20:59, 10 February 2012 (UTC),[reply]
-Bloquea de forma desmedida, especialmente con los nuevos, y sin avisar ni informar de las políticas infringidas. Creo que este es un motivo por el que muchos usuarios nuevos, y no tan nuevos, dejan de editar en Wikipedia.--AeroPsico 11:00, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
-Admite tener una cuenta títere aquí, pero no especifica que cuenta es, violando la política de Wikipedia:Usuarios títeres, ya que entre otras cosas, podría participar en votaciones con dos cuentas.--AeroPsico 14:27, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think someone with such an important position in wikipedia (Steward) should not sabotage the donations to the foundation using your user page, threatening the existence of the project. "Magister. Why not donate to Wikipedia"[1] ¿A steward sabotaging Wikipedia?, it looks crazy
"I understand that Wikipedia is one of the 5 most visited pages on the Internet. I understand that maintenance costs are very high. I understand that hosting a site and cost $ 2 million. I do not understand is that $ 9 million earmarked for salaries. Magister. Why not donate to Wikipedia"
Honestly I found the mentioned private data by simply clicking a "history" button, if you care of your privacy you'd better ask for somerevdelete or oversight. --Vituzzu 20:53, 10 February 2012 (UTC) Thanks Vituzzu for your advice and directions. I've asked sysops several months ago to do this. But please also see my comment below, I'm not opposing this reelection only because of the treatment of information about my real name. Mar del Sur 15:07, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
These proxies are listed on several spamlist, do you have some evidence of some mistakes? NOP is a general policy, basically local Wikipedias couldn't allow proxy editing. --Vituzzu 20:53, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Clarification. A couple years ago, the "Beard" article on eswiki had no picture. So I added mine. Eventually it got replaced and I never protested, nor reverted nor discussed it. And it is now being argued as proof I should not be steward?Now, how is this related to steward issues, once again, I point that this is a movement to use steward confirmation as a mean to vent local grudges. Now what, should I be punished for making an encyclopedic video (that even got featured on main page) and added it on es:Parábola (matemáticas) just because I briefly show up on it? es:Magister Mathematicae 20:59, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And relating to the block of proxies, I talked about it on the local pump in order to proceed and it is not related to my steward tools but a merely local issue,the action was prompted after several weeks of banned trolls abusing proxies (since their main ips were already blocked) in order to vandalize and harass on articles and userpages. So I applied m:NOP to put temporary blocks on many IP proxies. es:Magister Mathematicae 20:57, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think a better beard might solve this matter of life and death. --Vituzzu 21:04, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It was eventually replaced. I merely added an image to an article that 2 years ago lacked one. Then someone thought replace it with a better one and I'm completely fine with it. That's my sin. es:Magister Mathematicae 21:09, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You are not understanding my point and did not clarify anything, at least, in my eyes. The bottom line is not whether the picture is suitable for the articles, or wheter it is a good idea to make public private information of other users in the village pump, or calling "son of a bitch" to other users (who, to be honest, deserved that), but rather allowing yourself do edits that nobody else does. If everybody would behave like you es.wikipedia would be a jungle. As admin, checkuser, oversight and steward you should be an examplar user, and, in my opinion, you are far from that. Rather your style is -at least in es.wikipedia- as already said rude to others and haughty.
Regarding the proxies, of course I know NOP, and that is the reason why I suggested to him to coordinate something like that in meta instead of doing that in a local wikipedia. I am not aware of that there was any consensus anywhere.
Vituzzu, please, don´t ridicule my diff about the picture of the beard (there are other cases), I am talking serious. In fact I didn´t ever started this kind of discussion in meta, but in the last year I feel that Magister went far beyond the line and it needs a stop. Of course that all this applies mainly to a local Wikipedia, but I believe that if the job as admin in es.wikipedia is out of his depth, let alone the job as steward.
If you feel I abused my sysop tools on eswiki and I need to "be put a stop", there's a proper procedure to follow on eswiki in that regars. Meanwhile, I stand this is a grudge vote. es:Magister Mathematicae 23:16, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Grudge of what? Is this your way to presume good faith? You really seem not to know me a very little bit. If flags were the world to me I wouldn´t just give them up. About your suggestion to follow the proper procedure in eswiki, I will consider it. Anyhow, as I said, a steward job is a bigger number than sysop in any wiki and if I don´t consider that you cope with the latter, just cannot support you here. --Poco a poco 23:44, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Vituzzu, I would also like to use this opportunity to ask you to remove my sysop/bureacrat flags, as I asked 2 days ago. Keeping it in "hold" makes no sense anymore. I was a low profile (but one of the most actives) sysop user until now and will be a low profile user tomorrow, no big change. I am exactly missing a bit of that and of modesty in Magister. --Poco a poco 22:49, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  Done btw I didn't ridicule you diffs, as you can see I'm paying attention to all other accuses, but frankly the "beard case" doesn't seem relevant to me. --Vituzzu 23:20, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to add that drini and his obsession for notorioty made him include this image of the adorable teddydrini in an essay and God knows where else. --Billyrobshaw 05:05, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
...so what ? DarkoNeko 07:59, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Keep Laura Fiorucci 21:06, 9 February 2012 (UTC) Ha realizado un trabajo estupendo. Siempre confliable.[reply]
  •   Keep Rastrojo (D•ES) 11:48, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose --Maragm 13:54, 10 February 2012 (UTC) MM believes that everyone who is opposing his candidacy holds a grudge against him and that is not precisely the case. I don't doubt that he is useful in other wiki projects but in es.wiki his behavior is arrogant, disruptive, uncontrolled, he does not respect confidentiality, discloses private info about other users at his whim whenever he feels threatened, has no qualms about insulting others, complains about being harasssed in an external blog but my impression is that he is reaping what he has sowed. The atmosphere in es.wiki is not very pleasant now for many users and not everybody who has voted so far against him has been blocked or holds a personal grudge against him.[reply]
  •   Oppose Wikisilki 15:02, 10 February 2012 (UTC) Recientemente ha divulgado información personal sobre una usuaria durante una denuncia en el TAB.[reply]
Of course you have some link, don't you? --Vituzzu 18:37, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And what does the abbreviation TAB mean? --Geitost diskusjon 19:07, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Here reveals the name of a user: Marjorie Apel/Mar del Sur [2] --Petruss 20:05, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Revealing? I thought she had her real name as her username not so long ago. Everyone can see it in the logs.--Jcaraballo 20:16, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, revealing. Mar del Sur pidió el cambio de nombre de usuario (y el borrado de alguna edición en que salía, si mal no recuerdo) hace más de un año, poco antes de su candidatura a bibliotecaria, precisamente para evitar que se la identificara por su nombre real. Magister sabía esto perfectamente y ha vuelto a sacar a la luz dicha información personal sin que tuviera relación con la denuncia. Saludos, Wikisilki 20:28, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It was necessary to mention the previous username to sustain a local case related to her sockpuppetry.
I merely pointed to username changes log, and she never asked to oversight it (since privacy violation is claimed here) SHould it be oversighted, I would not have linked to the public log showing the previous username. es:Magister Mathematicae 20:30, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is just false: there is no evidence at all of sockpuppetry, and certainly no need to mention his real name. Wikisilki 20:42, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is currently being discussed locally on wiki by other administrators. I merely linked a public log since I considered when making my statement it was relevant. I repeat should it had been oversighted, I would not have linked it. es:Magister Mathematicae 20:54, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please correct me if I'm wrong, Drini is told to have outed another user by posting a link to a public log? --Vituzzu 20:46, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"His real name"? Are you talking about Rapel? Is his real name Marjorie Apel? Nixón 21:23, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Your statement, Magister, has absolutely no relation with her previous username, there was no need to point her real name again.
Yes, vituzzu, the log is public, but you have to know her previous username to find it, so he actually revealed this to all the users (and there's a lot) registered after the change, people that didn't knew (till now) what was her real name. This is graver since she is also suffering the same harassment from the same people Magister points below, something he knows well.
You know pretty well who are we talking about, so you are purposely misunderstanding the point, Nixón. Wikisilki 21:29, 10 February 2012 (UTC) Ps: I'm doing a real effort writing in english here, it's not polite to make fun on others limitations, Nixón.[reply]
If you need I can understand "plain" Spanish quite well. Well, you can see MM "lacked of grace" but this wasn't, definitely, a privacy violation. --Vituzzu 22:57, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I learn english by myself and obviously I'm not that good on writing. But I have no problem to do it (with a little help of online dictionaries). I just found Nixón's intervention disruptive and disrespectful.
Beyond the letter, the principle of the privacy policy is that you don't release personal information on an user if he/she doesn't want to. You can call this real-name-issue a "lack of grace"; as an active user in es:wiki and considering the background and development of the case (as the previous release of checkuser information of the same user outside the wiki), I see that differently and really grave. As I see it, it was a conscious and gratuitous offence deliberately done. That's my point, that's why I oppose. Wikisilki 15:41, 11 February 2012 (UTC) PS: Let me say that, besides this, I have Magister in high esteem as wikipedian and I sympathize with the situation of harassment that many wikipedians receive, and these are not empty words. I really do. But as Parmenides will say (if he was a rock star) rain is wet and sugar is sweet.[reply]
Retiro mi voto en contra. No puedo votarle a favor por los motivos que he expresado, pero esto se ha convertido en un espectáculo de acoso y derribo en el que no estoy dispuesto a participar. Saludos, Wikisilki (talk) 18:48, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Of course you have some link, don't you? --Vituzzu 18:37, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, this is the link for the user comment [3] --Petruss 19:32, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, half a year harassment on and off wiki, from Petruss among others. Including harassment via private mail from this user. But of course I can't handle conflicts.
In any case, the opposes listed here as mostly a vent or revenge over local issues and not related to steward issues. I wont' further argue them now since I'm being accused of not being able to stay calmed on a conflict and engaging on rehashing discussions going on locally will only funnel the fire. I'll simply wait until confirmation closes to debunk the claims and present a long documented evidence for my case to the committee, showing the origin of the revenge votes and the proof of the ongoing campaign to manipulate this confirmation, and the missrepresentations here. Thank you. es:Magister Mathematicae 20:32, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
An user started using Wikipedia's email system to harass Magister Mathematicae and then he posted one of these email? Am I right? --Vituzzu 20:46, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, The case by the way was already sent and resolved by the OMbudsman Commitee and it was resolved that no misuse of privacy-related tools was done. I will forward the email from the OC to the election commitee when it asks me for it. es:Magister Mathematicae 20:52, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Afaik the was really a strong abuse: the abuse of Wikipedia's email system to send insults and the natural consequence is the block of the email function for the the abuser. Several users lost even their internet connections because of email abuses, emails are not a free-place for harassment. --Vituzzu 21:04, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I will discuss the matter when the election committee asks us our feedback on the opposed. Meanwhile, let's not extend a thread with pointless comments. es:Magister Mathematicae 21:09, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It won't be necessary I'm investigating opposes as an ElectCom member :)
--Vituzzu 22:57, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(Un)fortunately I can understand Spanish and I can see deleted/suppressed revs: here there's the email you sent to MM and it was sent via Wikipedia but, actually, it's quite worse than you said. Can you give me a link about the outing MM made about you? You can answer in Spanish if you like. --Vituzzu 22:57, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hadn't seen this answer befor, sorry. The insults you see on that previous log where after he blocked me infinite, being an interested party, for calling him via mail sinvergüenza. The next insults I've said and always will that where because I went absolutely mad, and I've always said I'm sorry for having said them, but I was out of my mind. --Billyrobshaw 04:10, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • [4] Here he even reveals my facebook. This will be my last comment here. I don't care no more for wikipedia. Magis and other sysops made me hate the place, after 25000 edits, and dozens of FA and GA's.--Billyrobshaw 23:07, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment Maybe this blog with nearly 150.000 visits may help see the situation and how unhappy many spanish users are or where. --Billyrobshaw 23:11, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry but attackblogs are not allowed since they are definitely canvassing and quoting them is itself a personal attack. I'm about to put it on the blacklist. --Vituzzu 23:20, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment Sorry, that wasn't my intention. Magister used to be very active in that type of blogs, until things turned around. Anyway, my intention was to show that a blog with 150.000 visits in about a year, explains a bit of the es-wiki situation, permanent blocks, and other things happened around Mr Drini and other totalitarian spanish sysops. --Billyrobshaw 23:28, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Keep --Taichi - (あ！) 23:19, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose a) Unnecessary disclosure of personal data of Billyrobshaw and Mar del Sur. There is a precedent that Mar del Sur did not like her name to be used anymore [5].
b) Furthermore, it seems Magister used his personal blog to continue the conflict with this user: [6] (!!!). Sorry. Jaontiveros 00:08, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In the last 24 hours, pl created 173 articles and es did 267. But certainly you're not implying that somehow I'm the sole cause that eswiki is declining. Wait. What does that linked page shows? Compare [7]. Facts, facts, facts. es:Magister Mathematicae 02:19, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Your links do show that the Polish Wikipedia has more articles than the Spanish one. Thor8 also never said you were the only reason for the decline. Jafeluv (talk) 08:37, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Keep Magister is not perfect, but his huge contribution to the project clearly makes up for this faults (which I don't consider that terrible). Experienced, capable and very devoted. Wikipedia works better wiht him aboard --3coma14 05:56, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment 3coma14 y muchos otros usuarios y bibliotecarios de la wikipedia en español que ahora le votan, son todos pertenecientes al mismo grupo de desalmados que trata con desdén al resto de usuarios de la wikipedia y que provoca la salida, la expulsión de muchos excelentes usuarios de nuestra wikipedia. No solo eso, los nuevos usuarios salen espantados ante el trato de esta red clientelar. Aunque Magister está fuera de ella no deja de jugar un papel fundamental en sus relaciones de poder con esta red y el resto del bibliotecariado, llegando incluso a usar sus privilegios de checkuser para chantajear a otros usuarios. Ejemplo de Mar del Sur, perteneciente a esta red clientelar que tiene a la wikipedia en español en decadencia (por mucho que digas que no, no te lo crees ni tú Magister, muchos artículos destacados en portada son patéticos porque ha bajado el nivel de exigencia). Mar del Sur tenía una cuenta títere (Rapel) que Magister ocultó y usó en forma de chantaje para ganarse a alguien de esa red de indeseables (muchos penosos editores, prepotentes y con un claro grado de psicopatía). Así que Magister, ahí donde lo tienen, es un ser desalmado, que no le importa en absoluto nada wikipedia, salvo el poder que le confiere respecto a otros usuarios (para él "inferiores"). Por favor, no hagan que Meta se convierta en el nuevo juego de este psicópata. Thor8 12:15, 11 February 2012 (UTC) Inappropriate comment struck (Election Committee action) PeterSymonds (talk) 14:09, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I request this to be struck. Thor8 already had a chance to speak his mind, but he's using it now for personal attacks. es:Magister Mathematicae 14:04, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Decir la verdad siempre fue inapropiado en una dictadura. No te he atacado, simplemente te he descrito, ahí no cabe insulto o ataque. Thor8 14:20, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I request a block. Not being enough calling people psychopaths, now he start throwing dictatorship accusations, excusing himself on "making a description". es:Magister Mathematicae 15:28, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment
  • There is not such network or group of users to which 3coma14 or I myself would belong to, neither now nor has been in the past.
  • I have not been blackmailed by Magister on this issue. I don't know about other users being subject to pressure by him.
  • I don't have any sockpuppets nor meatpuppets. I do have a husband, who is a Wikipedia user. This information and the fact, that we share one IP address was given to Magister as a checkuser by me via e-mail, shortly after my husband registered at Wikipedia (April 02,2010).
  • I also asked Magister for directions on how to globally change my user name on September 06, 2010. He knows well, I had (and have) profesional reasons to do so.
  • Since the editor/owner of the blog mentioned by Magister above in his presentation (and many visitors editing comments there) have also raised suspicions against me and Rapel, and I have also been a victim of spam, apparently originating from this blog, where they also insisted in linking my nick with private data (profession, real name, family relationships), I insisted with other sysops on the need of removing the links of my previous signatures in Wikipedia Discussions. I really do not think it was necessary for Magister to refer to my real name again.
  • The theory that Rapel and I are the same person was released by Magister in another external blog, which currently doesn't exist any more, but many sysops of es:WP, other Wikipedians (over 140 members, and many of the here voting pro and contra) participated. He came up there saying that this where results obtained by him as checkuser. I thought it was an error (it is most irregular to discuss checkuser information in a external site whitout asking Rapel or me before) but just a mistake. He saids, he has forgotten my e-mails and I forgive him. But I see that he still defends this theory and he changed a Wikipedia policy in order to declare sockpuppets people because of the mere fact of being members of the same family. It was not possible to discuss calmly about this, because he refused to restore the previous consensus. He asked for me to be blocked and for the expulsion of Rapel and both sanctions were executed within a few minutes, without letting us speak out in our defense.
  • I'm clarifying these things just for the record. However, this is not my reason for voting against his reelection, but mainly the fact that I disagree with his way of resolving conflicts, and still more with the way he has handled problems arising with novice users, as well as his behaviour solving problems outside of Wikipedia.

I'm sorry for the extension Mar del Sur 14:49, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bla, bla, bla... The political machiche members and Magister always lying. Only for information: en:Psychopathy Thor8 15:03, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I request a block. I'm up for confirmation, and while I may disagree, I listen and respect all constructive criticism. However having an open disposition does not mean users have a free ticket to personal attacks and start calling psychopaths to others. An ElectCom member already struck such comments but user persists on his disruption. es:Magister Mathematicae 15:25, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Keep I have been a sysop on es-wiki for more than 6 years and know Magister work quite well. He is a reliable, fair sysop and steward with an excellent knowledge of policies. Es-wiki really needs a person like him since, as a massive community conflicts are our bread of every day. Anna 18:19, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  •   Oppose. Considering his general actitude, lately it seemms to me that he is showing an upsetting arrogance. He doesn't take into consideration other users and doesn´t ask berofe taking hard measures. Magister is behaving as if he were over the rest of users. His lack of humility makes me oppose his confirmation in order to remind him that no user is essential. I honestly consider he should take a rest.--Wikiléptico 20:24, 11 February 2012 (UTC) Magister has dealt with a dire harassment situation by undesirable users and I would like to take this chance to condem their actitud and their coments in this very confirm section.[reply]
  •   Comment I find absolutely incredible the attitude of Spanish wikipedians that simply believe what this person says. I give him permission to reproduce the emails I sent him. There was no harassment by my behalf, because after my email calling him a SINVERGÚEnZa, which is exactly what he is, he blocked me infinite, being an interested part, without consultation or trying any formal repair. His arrogance is annoying, and you can't all believe what he says. The emails that I sent after where of pure impotence. I've always said that I'm sorry about that, but, in Spanish wikipedia, the sysops are over good and bad and take unilateral decisions without consultation. Anyone that knows me, knows that I was a good editor, only that I could not deal more with these attitudes and I was completely sick of the situation. For anyone that doesn know (and because they erase Userpages so that that carries on that way) I had 25000 editions, nearly 700 articles creates, 12 FA's and more than 50 GA's. All that doesn't mattter when egos of sysops like Magister come in play. --Billyrobshaw 20:59, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're posting in the wrong place. If you'd like your block to be reviewed due to your distinguished contribs, you know the proper procedure to be carried for eswiki sysops to deal with. es:Magister Mathematicae 02:46, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry? I really didn´t want to talk to you. Distinguished contribs? Mr. arrogant is back! --Billyrobshaw 02:51, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Again, you're then on the wrong page. This is the page for giving me feedback on my steward work. MOreover, in your offtopic story, you forget to present several key facts causing a misrepresentation: you were already blocked due to disruptive behaviour when, without me even talking to you or a previous interaction, you started harassing me via email out of the blue. You always seem to mention these little detail when you tell your story. Just some background here since you seem keen to forget details.
But again, this is completely unrelated to the point of this page, feel free to continue offtopic, however. es:Magister Mathematicae 20:19, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Disruptive behaviour? That's the idea you have. I sent that email because you are a sinvergüenza. What you have done whith editors like Rosymonterrey, Caskete, Elemaki, etc... has no name..
Facts are facts. You attacked me using wiki mail on august 26 while you were already blocked for 3 months precisely for attacking users. And it was certainly not your first block for that reason. So it's not truly accurate to say that you were arbitrarily banned because a whim of mine. You had a long long long trail of attacking users. As always in my case, I provide the evidence links. But.. you always omit that part when telling your side of the story. Now, why would you prefer publishing the details on a disruptive harassing blog that even got wikimedia-wide blacklisted instead of providing us here with your version of the story? (in re: ezarate). Post it here! es:Magister Mathematicae 05:02, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Moreover.. What did I do to Elemaki, mind you? Did I block him? Did I ban him? Perhaps you'd like to review your facts one more time. What did I do to Caskete, mind you? Did I block him? Did I ban him? Perhaps you'd like to review your facts one more time What did I do to Rosymonterrey, mind you? Did I block her? Did I ban her? Perhaps you'd like to review your facts one more time. You know, for example, Rosymonterrey was blocked (by some other sysop) since she openly admitted canvassing votes in order to rig a vote. Yet you come here damning me for doing somethign to her. Of course, if you're just looking for excuses in order to come here using the confirmation as a revenge venue, you don't need to be accurate with facts, do you?.
However, the sad thing is that some users are falling for your lies thinking I did someting to those users. I congratulate you on achieving your goals, even at expense of the truth.
Post here so I can openly debunk your falsehoods, instead of opaquely spreading misinformation. Post here! es:Magister Mathematicae 05:08, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment Harassment would be if it had carried on in time, but that's not the case. All those emails where sent in less than an hour, and I've never, ever sent him an email again. Just for the records. He's lying. ¿Could any sysop from here have a look at the history of his UserPage, where he has laughed of other users, used it to promote his blog, and talk againt the Foundation? He's (as always) used his sysop buttons to hide a lot of that. --Billyrobshaw 21:08, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

+  Comment And just for the records, I've sent User:Vituzzu a complete explanation of what's been happening in Spanish Wikipedia the last years. Anyone who might like a copy only has to ask me for it. Thanks for your time. --Billyrobshaw 21:17, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Billy, para dar transparencia a este procedimiento, puedes publicar en algún lugar visible para todos la carta que le enviaste a Vituzzu asi todos pueden analizar los hechos? Esteban 13:31, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A usted no le daría ni un beso en la mejilla. --Billyrobshaw 03:27, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I bet that letter is a great example of NPOV, without any bias at all. Please Billy now that you're off es:wiki you should try to avoid slandering around. Time to move on, kiddo.--Wikiléptico 18:01, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  Comment Kiddo??? Well, I think you've answered by yourself. It's funny that precisely you, an active participant of an external blog where insults where an everyday issue, have something to say about me. I didn't exactly go insulting people on a normal basis, like you or other sysops that frequented that place. --Billyrobshaw (talk) 01:05, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Debunking falsehoods is called being conflictive, Angus. es:Magister Mathematicae 07:39, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Either the numerous complaints in this page are justified, or they are, as you repeat in comments, a way to take revenge on you for "local grudges". Either way, you cause a lot of people to hold grudges against you (be they justified or not). In my book, that's being conflictive. --Angus 08:08, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, thank you for the clarification. Either the opposes are justified (and therefore it's my fault) or they are not justified (and then it's also my fault). es:Magister Mathematicae 14:24, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Let me put it in different words: either you do wrong, or you do right in an unnecessarily antagonizing way. --Angus 16:22, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  Comment Sorry, "you shouldn't make generalisations like this" Mar del Sur 11:10, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  Comment So, so many "banned" users - also trolls? Thompson.matthew 13:29, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
I understand it as "ignore the banned trolls" not "all opposes are banned trolls". That is: Ignore those trolling coming from users which are banned. It does not say "ignore the nonbanned trolls", "ignore the banned nontrolls" neither "ignore the nonbanned nontrolls". Now, why do people have so much trouble with some elementary set theory? There must be some psychological explanation I believe. es:Magister Mathematicae 14:22, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I really think those last two sentences didn't help at all. Thompson.matthew 14:40, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Mathematics is hard. And I think the explanation for it must come from the social sciences. es:Magister Mathematicae 14:42, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Mathematics is the human practice to think rigourously. I think things we do with numbers could also be explained psychologically. But I really very simply wanted to cite Darkoneko's words, which also are pertinent here. Mar del Sur 23:31, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your feedback. I'd be even more thankful if you point me what part of the steward role I've been fulfilling for several years has caused so much conflict, or alternatively, what part of my steward work I've been not able to fulfill due to the purported conflictiveness of mine. es:Magister Mathematicae 16:24, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Keep Superzerocool 17:44, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Strong oppose I think we can assess by ourselves if it's a good think or not that MM continues to be a steward.
    I can't trust the user because of his misuse of private data. Not only he "points" to real names with no reason (Mar del Sur case), he reveals real names (Petruss case), email adresses and Facebook profiles (including the friends' names of the FB user in the process) of some users. In addition, when he was a member of the now defunct eswiki Arbcom, he unilaterally revealed the private internal discussions of the committee without saying a word to the other members about it (I can't provide a link, Vituzzu, but I'm sure MM would like to confirm this). By policy, he must agree with the committee to do such action. And no external site was harrasing him on those days.
    We know that MM likes to expose himself publicly, it's not hard to find his real name, images (almost using Commons as Flickr) and his academic degree, heck, he even put images of himself in the Wikipedia articles (he coudn't find a better image to illustrate a beard, huh?) and in a essay (protecting the page [8] and using the abusefilter tool [9] in order to preserve the image). But when it comes to respect other people's right to keep some stuff private, he repeatedly failed, creating unnecessary conflicts.
    He should also respect the reasons given here to oppose his confirmation, not saying what can and what can't we say here.
    Bottomlime, I can't trust him because of his misuse of private data which leads to unnecessary conflicts. And someone said he should ignore the trolls, well, he does the opposite. --Ferrari 1 19:24, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This (the arbcom leaks, not the image-drama) may be the only serious issue to be keep in consideration (currently there are no other stuffs related, at least by far, with steward activities) but there must be evidences.--Vituzzu (talk) 18:13, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, I'm just trying to establish that the ArbCom leaks and all the outings may be related to how MM behaves. These are not isolated episodes, but you're the ElectCom member and I'm not ;). BTW, so nice of you asking me for evidences few hours before the end of the voting period, I hope I'm not dealing with a deadline here. Still, I think that the easiest way is MM confirming this, but if he denies it or "plead the fifth", I'll see what I can do. For starters, the ArbCom used an external wiki site for their private discussions. For obvious reasons, only the members of that ArbCom term had knowledge of this. The site address was crc3.wikidot.com, you can check Internet Archive. So, at least one member had to leak it. Who? Well, here's an idea, we can ask them who did it. I may come back with more. I have to go deeper... --Ferrari 1 (talk) 20:00, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You know this aptitude to see plots everywhere is the worst visiting cart for you? As you can see I didn't take part at this discussion from the 10th to the 27th. Should I list all the plots I did during these days? By the way I found this which doesn't seem to be by far related to arbcom. Finally you are arguing MM was a member of the ArbCom, the ArbCom had a wiki and...then? --Vituzzu (talk) 21:25, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
While this seems to be related to. --Vituzzu (talk) 21:29, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Now you care about "aptitude", great. Why are you saying I see plots everywhere? I'm saying, I don't see right to doing this on the last day. I don't care what reasons you have to ask me for evidence today and not earlier, I'm just saying it's wrong, period. Also it's wrong the whole "you see plots everywhere", that was uncalled for. And you didn't answer, am I dealing with a 00:00 UTC deadline or not? Let's go to the argument, one more time. Step by step so all can get it. Eswiki ArbCom choosed to keep its discussions privately, the now defunct ArbCom policy allowed that. The only way to make them public is by agreement of the committee. For that, they used a wiki. No one knew about the existence of the wiki except the ArbCom members of that term, for an obvious reason, keep it private. One day, MM unilaterally revealed that wiki, with the purpose of exposing the private discussions. That was against the ArbCom policy because he didn't said a word to his fellows members. Any questions? I got one. Why MM isn't denying this? More evidence are coming. I hope. --Ferrari 1 (talk) 22:18, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So there was a leak from ArbCom, but how can you say it was MM? --Vituzzu (talk) 22:29, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm working on it, I didn't keep diffs. Some others ArbCom members complained about it and I'm trying to find those comments on eswiki, hopefully before Midnight UTC since you didn't tell me if it would helpful to provide this evidence after that deadline. Meanwhile, I found this other interesting "drama". Some days after the ArbCom leak, an eswiki sysop tried to built an external wiki for sysops' private discussions. MM also revealed that wiki address. This one wasn't against eswiki policy but still... like I said, I'm establishing a conduct.--Ferrari 1 (talk) 23:04, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I just stopped looking on eswiki, I coudn't find evidence, I'm sorry about that. I did find something outside wiki. A couple of quotes by ArbCom member (on those days) es:user:Góngora on a blog of current eswiki sysop es:user:Raystorm. I'll do my best translating one of the quotes, the original comments are here: 1 2. "Drini, without any doubt was out of line, because he made public the ArbCom wiki without knowledge or consent, of all those who, with him, were members of the mentioned committee".
Now you may ask for proof that those comments are legit, if they actually belongs to the eswiki user and former ArbCom member Góngora. Well, if you check out his blogger profile by clicking on his username on Raystorm blog, you would find some blogs listed, owned by Góngora. One of them is "Wikipedia semanal" (Wikipedia weekly), the same blog promoted a couple of years ago on his user page on eswiki. Also, the blog it's currenly promoted on Raystorm eswiki user page. --Ferrari 1 (talk) 23:54, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Gracias por el comentario. Aunque no puedo dejar de sentir que esto es simplemente una respuesta al hecho de que ayer cerré un hilo en el tablón de biblitoecarios de forma contraria a tus deseos. Quisiera pensar que no considerarás esta intervención mía (así como la respuesta en donde me disculpo por no resolver como querías y te explico que los problemas no son ocasionados sólo por un tipo de usuarios) como una muestra de falta de calma en situaciones de presión (otros bibliotecarios lo hubieran manejado de otra forma, supongo). es:Magister Mathematicae 16:26, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Pues si, si es por eso. Es lo que me ha movilizado a votar. Pero no porque has resuelto contra mis deseos sino porque lo has hecho al márgen de las políticas. Y no, no me refiero a esa última intervención tuya, sino a otras dónde por presiones del blog tan conocido llamas "hijos de puta" a usuarios cerrando puertas a todo tipo de vuelta atrás al conflicto, de tu parte.--Juan José Moral 16:44, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Una vez más gracias. Aunque me permito hacer una precisión: jamás he proclamado ser perfecto ni santo Job. Y me señalas un caso específico en el que perdí la paciencia tras varios meses de acoso continuado (acoso al que sigo sometido, por cierto), y sin embargo no me ves ahora perdiendo la calma. Y también estás sesgado (por un caso extremo) al no tomar en cuenta los cientos de ocasiones que durante varios años he intervenido y ayudado en situaciones conflictivas sin mayor problema. Pero supongo que es normal, el carácter humano es dar mucho más peso a una vez que se falle que a cientos de veces que se hizo el trabajo bien. Gracias por tu aportación.
Me acusas de corporativista y arbitrario. ¿No crees que si así fuera, simplemente hubiera borrado de forma directa esa página? Y por el contrario, te di mis opiniones y participé en un debate exponiendo las justificaciones de mi postura (que tienes todo el derecho de aceptar como inválidas, si no te agradan). Claro, si hubiera borrado la página me hubieras acusado de arbitrario, pero no haberla borrado no significa nada (sólo vale un lado de la moneda, entiendo entonces). ¿Y no estás de acuerdo también en que parte de los problemas también tiene su origen en usuarios que no son bibliotecarios? es:Magister Mathematicae 17:10, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose per MZaplotnik. --N KOziTalk 08:21, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Keep Yes, yes of course. You're the only one who dares debunking. Even if you're not renewed, we need you. Please, we know those machinations an schemes. Wikipedia is not conservative. Wikipedia is not liberal. Wikipedia is wikipedia. And we need people like you, even when you're worn out, you have a clear vision of what Wikimedia is indeed. Dodo was your friend. Mar Was your friend. But Wikimedia is more important than Dodo and Mar, Thor8, and Mar, and you have, in spite of the hard pressures,do your duty. I'm your fan, MM. We really need you, because you're far of extrange influences. A steward is a person who makes his duty. This hero is MM. MM is not perfect, of course, but he has taken the right decissions in the right moment. That's enogh for me.Gustavocarra (talk) 21:16, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  Comment @Gustavocarra: I wasn't and I'm not a friend of anybody (neither an "enemy"). Would you please comment your vote objectively without mentioning me? Thanks. Mar del Sur (talk) 21:42, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  CommentI'm very Sorry Mar, but I think that this is the best place to talk about "the big question". And it's all about the 2 factions that have risen the last 2 years, and undoubtly and objectively, you belong to one of them, as it is a fact that Thor8 belongs to the opposite faction. What we are seeing here is that those mortal enemies are now allied against an uncomfortable foe. But the truth behind, the truth that MM is trying to bring to light is that those 2 factions are not so disparate and even have a common link, and, even more bizarre, they have another common link with a person that MM has banned globally for stalking the former ChapCom committee president. I know this link, and evidences have been shown to me.
It's time to realize that the es-wikipedia of factions is over. It's time to take this seriously as grown up people. It's time to forget and forgive, just to give a chance to this new wikipedia and the new users who never have heard about our fights. It's time to make people comfortable while editing, and it's time, I advice you MM, for not to be so rude and easy trigger. And that's all I have to say. Now, I'm very busy.Gustavocarra (talk) 17:12, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Would you be kind enough to keep your personal exchanges on your talk pages? I'd be very grateful if you can do so. And gustavo, please refrain to elaborate theories about "my intentions", since you don't seem to be making much sense. Please. es:Magister Mathematicae 04:48, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  Comment I'm sorry, but telling that this poll is, except in some cases, faction-oriented, is far from being a personal question, it's just the naked truth. And no kindness or politeness are suposed to include my disclaiming to tell the truth. I'm not making any theory about your intentions, but only presenting my own one, based in personal contacts, emails and some strong clues as in some words told by me in private situations which have been repeated to me anonymously years before. And this person is the hidden link between "bloquéame", "la marrana" and amical. You tried to debunk and you got strong enemies in doing so, enemies who now look for retaliation.
I don't like your temper, I don't like the way in which you interactuate with others, and even I don't like the way in which you handle private information sometimes. But I can't shut up while the same people who now claim for privacy, two years ago hailed the exposing of personal data, I'm referring the Ray's case. And also I can't shut up anymore while people who are continuously exposing personal data in blogs now are blamig you for doing so, even when the "victim" belongs to the other faction. This all leaves you as the only one, the only guarantee who can balance all this madness, even when I disagree with you in other points. This is another debate.
Please, despoil yourself of that bad habit of telling me to hush, I'm grown up, more than you are. And start to listen. Gustavocarra (talk) 17:30, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose --Geitost diskusjon 21:58, 16 February 2012 (UTC) per XanaG and my comment on the talk page, there isn't any reason at all to post other people's e-mail addresses onwiki, I'm seeing no reason here and the addresses are still onwiki, I don't understand that at all. And I don't see any regrets about that, so I don't know, what will happen another time, when there will be any conflicts. Noone should do reveal personal information, but a person who does should never have checkuser or oversight rights.[reply]
  •   Oppose ---seb- (talk) 20:54, 19 February 2012 (UTC) Corruption[reply]
  •   Support Érico Júnior Wouters (talk) 16:11, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Keep has helped a lot and worked a lot for us all. --Zyephyrus (talk) 00:19, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose Technopat (talk) 21:06, 23 February 2012 (UTC) While the controversy around Magister does not stem from his duties as a steward, but is almost exclusively due to events over at the Spanish Wikipedia, it does show that he has lost much credibility and can no longer count on the consensus vote of the community. Although he has, undoubtedly, long been a stalwart of the Spanish Wikipedia, a reference for those of us who have been editing there for several years, his way of dealing with things there over the last few months suggests that he take a break and reflect on what is at the root of much of this. After reflecting long and hard on the matter, I have finally decided to vote against the confirmation of Magister as a steward.[reply]
As can be seen from the lack of consensus here, the prevailing atmosphere at the Spanish Wikipedia is extremely unpleasant, and is due, in part, to Magister having "surrounded" himself a praetorian guard of biblios (admins) who seem to spend much time and energy at the village pump, on the IRC and arbitrarily blocking other, longstanding and dedicated admins and wikipedians. The net result is that many of these admins, with the tacit and implicit support of Magister, rather than devoting time to supporting the constructive work of an encyclopedia, are making many long-standing wikipedians, including myself, consider throwing in the towel and leaving the project.
It is clear that Magister has been the victim of totally unacceptable and vicious attacks, but so have several other wikipedians, and when he requested a vote of confidence, he received many, mine included.
As the Spanish Wikipedia no longer has an arbitration committee which could, in theory, help to defuse many of the extremely nasty conflicts which arise on an almost daily basis, this kind of situation will be a recurring feature of the Spanish Wikipedia, and Magister, a central and influential figure, is clearly not helping to resolve matters.
  •   Keep All those who speak of "arrogance" are those who don't remember what we´re doing here. Magister's work speaks for itself. He doesn't handle personal information with secrecy? Com'on, if he didn't, a lot of people would be out of the proyect a long time ago (sic). Real names? FYI: Google it. Campaign VS Wikipedia? If I remember (And certainly i do) "many" do not feel represented by the foundation or the chapters that exist. The beard theme, Illustrate an article i guess it's called... Would someone had a problem if the user was a Victoria's Angel wearing and illustrating a thong? Why not talk about the harassment he suffered and he remained ahead? Why not mention that he always attend applications fast and simple? It's easier to destroy 'cuz he doesn't acted as we wanted. Saloca (talk) 00:24, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      Oppose Wikipedia is governed by dictators (Magister, Wikisilki, Eccemal/Shonen Bat -his co-worker-, Escarlati, Mar del Sur/Rapel -her husband-, Kordas...) and almost nobody does anything to prevent it. They intimidate, threaten, they impose, they beset... Magister is one of them. Mar del Sur and Wikisilki are clones of Magister, but in this case they are right. It is my duty to vote against. For the cleanup of wikipedia. --Belibaste (talk) 14:19, 24 February 2012
  •   Keep --LadyInGrey (talk) 03:12, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment It is not my intention to cast a vote, since, for starters, my account does not meet the requirements to do so. Nonetheless, I want to leave a comment here, with the intention of setting the record straight regarding (of course, from my POV) some of the discussions on what has been called "the Spanish drama". I have spent several days tying all the loose ends about this drama, since the evidence is scattered all over the internet, and only part of it can be found in the wikimedia projects. There is a key point that I believe the ElectCom should take into account before making a decision on the steward confirmation of Magister Mathematicae (MM): Magister Mathematicae does not look as being harassed. There is no such thing as harassment in this case. He may perceive it as harassment, and it is natural for him to want to see it that way, since he is undeniably receiving some e-blows outside wikipedia. But the situation is not "harassment", since it appears that before that, MM willingly -yes, willingly- conducted a series of actions to taunt, provoke and challenge a number of banned wikipedia users. These banned users were either banned directly by MM, or their banning was supported by MM. After the banning, MM began to make fun of them, mock them, he engaged in name-calling, and of course received payback for this. Who started the conflict is now irrelevant, as I will detail below.
Sources of what I am mentioning are MM's twitter account @combinatorica, and MM's personal blog eswiki.wordpress.com. MM wanted to draw attention on him, and he got it with this behavior. Otherwise, how come that MM has banned many users over the years, and there has never ocurred a conflict of this magnitude before? Only the users banned in the recent year got some "grudge against him" as he calls it. The answer is simple: this time around, MM's behavior was to engage in a post-ban mock of the banned, bragging about his own untouchability, and making fun of the impotence of the banned users to replicate. A non-exhaustive list of examples follows:
  • [10] Before this post in his blog, MM had been virtually unnoticed, at least in the antagonistic blog MM despised, the banned users were focusing their grudges mostly against other admins. MM threw himself in the arena with this post, and deepened his involvements in the commentaries. The post is practically inocuous, but in the comments to the post, MM himself merrily entered into the name-calling game: "los cerditos se enojaron, uuuuy" (traslation: "the little pigs got angry, oh my")
  • [11]. This nickname stuck among MM's friends in es-wikipedia, and now all of them call the banned users "the pigs", both outside and inside wikipedia
  • [12] resorting to name-calling again
  • [13] "Problem, Petruss?" - MM challenging one of his antagonists this time from his twitter account, using the well-known trolling expression. This twit was published two days after user Petruss was banned permanently from es-wikipedia
  • [14] translation: "its clearer and clearer that the piggies' boat is sinking"
  • [15] -MM created the hashtag #oinkoink to again taunt them
  • [16] - MM bragging about his position as an admin. RECAB is the procedure in which an admin is reconfirmed or removed in es-wikipedia. The twit says "Now I learned that there is a RECAB coming for me, MWAHAHAHAHA"
There are many other examples, some of them as screenshots uploaded even in the blog despised by MM (where MM was also a commentator before he decided to engage in this petty little war). Understandably enough, MM might have received many unpleasant emails and he has been for sure been publicly criticized and ridiculized outside wikipedia. His response? He decided to ignore the fact that he participated in starting the fire. He decided to bring back this war into wikipedia again, writing in the village pump of es-wikipedia on 11/26/11, this time around publicly calling S.O.B.'s to the ones he previously called pigs.
To finalize, I do not know who is right and who is wrong in this silly war waged in twitter and blogs; perhaps both sides are at fault. This is not really relevant to my comment and perspective. What is actually relevant, is that one of the parties involved is a wikimedia steward, checkuser and admin who chose not to simply ignore it and let it pass but chose instead to immaturely enter into the conflict. This individual, being what he is, has at his disposal the checkuser and admin tools attached to his wikimedia roles (whether he has used them for his fights or not is also irrelevant, the fact is that his position is supposedly above this type of conflicts. Before 2010, he had behaved maturely and role-modeling, but now he seems a completely different person who not only is part of this conflict, but also keeps bragging about his unbeatability, calls for a boycott on the donations to the foundation, and publicly makes fun of the executives at wikimedia). This kind of personality in a steward of wikimedia is concerning. We expect that a steward, checkuser and admin will behave with maturity, keep his temper, lead by example and be a role model of what wikimedia stands for. Regrettably what I gathered from reading all the drama, is that the individual with most capabilities in es-wikipedia, turned out to be exactly the opposite; and not because of alleged harassment, but because of his willingness to engage in puerile playground bullying. The saddest thing is that MM does not realize that he is as guilty as any of his antagonists for the escalation of this conflict. I cannot conceive that any other steward would behave in the same immature way. If anyone wants to taunt, provoke, and in sum, wage petty playground wars, ok, that is their decision, but should a wikimedia steward behave like that, for months? The ElectCom should decide on that.--Uponieft (talk) 17:01, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, do you think a clear "single-shot" account can be trusted? --Vituzzu (talk) 18:09, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It depends on our proficiency in logics. Being a single-shot account does not render the arguments invalid. You may choose to ignore them, but that does not make them less true, it will only be a huge flaw in the evaluation process. Anyways, if the process does not rely upon who is bringing the arguments, but the arguments themselves, you can follow all of the links and draw your own conclusions. --Uponieft (talk) 18:47, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(Actually it's quite easy to find your main account, without a checkuser) but it's true thesis shouldn't generally evaluated basing who is writing them only if there are strong evidences. Your evidences show an heavy level of conflict among MM and a certain (maybe many, I cannot evaluate) es.wiki's users, but, again, there's nothing related to stewards activities: if MM would be even undef. blocked on es.wiki he will go on being a stewards, unless there are misuse of stewards' tools. --Vituzzu (talk) 20:05, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry, but anyone can get confused after seeing the extreme fervor used by MM to try to dismiss negative votes [17], [18], or the vehement defense (again, non-steward related) that MM's friends are making [19], or even your interest expressed in poking all the details of non-steward related comments [like line 163. Believe me, this page's debates are far from being straightforward. Now to the point, since I don't want the ElectCom to miss it. First, after reading my long comment I hope that all attempts from MM to dismiss the negative votes arguing they are "accusing him out of harassment" are disregarded; these votes have the same value as others as there doesn't appear to have been any harassment. Second, my long intervention may not point to a clear violation of Stewardship guidelines. However, let us not be so naïve as to think that a user might be able to kill Jimbo and still get away with being a steward. It is of course expected that a user has to have a minimum trait of personal integrity, ethics, and reliability. The policy does not mention it expressly, but it doesn't need to. In my intervention, I attach links that demonstrate that MM is not reliable. Filter out my personal opinions and let the facts presented speak for themselves, that should be enough for drawing conclusions. I am also saying that the ElectCom should reflect on whether this is the type of person they want to have as wikimedia steward. That's it. --Uponieft (talk) 22:53, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Venía a decir lo mismo: ¿por qué no es confiable su testimonio? Si dice la verdad, qué tiene que ver que su cuenta tenga una sola edición? No sería mejor comprobar si lo que dice es cierto? Lo que no causa la menor confianza aquí es que se descalifique un argumento, solamente porque el usuario ha tenido que apelar a una nueva cuenta para expresarlo. Algo, por lo demás, esperable, en tanto que existe el temor razonable de que cuando uno se manifiesta en contra de injusticias y abusos de bibliotecarios, en la Wikipedia en Español pasa a ser el blanco de estos mismos abusos. Lamentablemente en diversas ocasiones el mismo Magister ha sido promotor, por obra o por omisión, de ese estado de cosas.
Yo, por mi parte, doy la cara y hago mía cada una de las palabras del anónimo. ¿Yo tampoco soy de confianza?
Algunos puntos para agregar. El hecho de que Magister se defienda con uñas y dientes ante cada voto o argumento en contra es en sí mismo un síntoma de su extravío. Se ha anquilosado y quiere conservar su cargo, como si este por sí mismo fuera deseable y un premio. Ha perdido el norte. Cualquier persona que mantuviera su centro, en su lugar habría renunciado no sólo a su cargo de Steward, sino al de Checkuser y el de Bibliotecario, y esto, sin esperar remociones forzosas. Aquí han venido no solo usuarios bloqueados y participantes de blogs que lo acosan: hemos venido muchos usuarios que no somos parte de la guerra que él mismo ha sostenido e incrementado con sus intervenciones. Esto debería haber sido suficiente para convencerlo de renunciar y que esto no es ni un acoso concertado externamente, ni todos somos sus enemigos. Él sí es parte de esa guerra, y tiene su derecho, pero lo que no debería haber hecho es tomar decisiones en las wikis que tengan como horizonte tales escaramuzas.
Se le haría un gran bien a MM si se le retira el permiso de Steward, ya que él no puede tomar la decisión por sí mismo por haber perdido el punto de referencia de su conducta en Wikipedia. No solo merece, necesita un buen descanso para replantearse su rol. --Juan José Moral (talk) 18:58, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please keep in mind votes without comments (especially sockpuppets' ones) are not even taken in consideration. --Vituzzu (talk) 18:09, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  Comment Re your remark, Vituzzu, does that apply to   Keep and to   Oppose votes or just to oppose votes? Maragm (talk) 18:48, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You know, the central idea of "confirmation" is "bringing argument against", basically the burden of proof belongs to opposes. --Vituzzu (talk) 20:05, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  Keep Helpful, polite, useful QU TalkQu 19:44, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stewards/Confirm/2012/Magister_Mathematicae&oldid=24929602"