Stewards/Confirm/2016/Ruslik0

< Stewards‎ | Confirm‎ | 2016

Ruslik0Edit

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

English:
  • Languages: en-3, ru-N
  • Personal info: This is my fifth confirmation since my election in the February 2011. I think that during the fifth year as a steward I became more active than in the previous year despite (or may be due to) concurrently serving as a member of WMF Election Committee and later in the year as a member of Scholarship Committee, and I believe that I still remain useful to the the Wikimedia Community. In the past year as before I have been answering userrights, bots rights and global rights requests. I have been working to help users to rename, merge or otherwise unite their accounts as well as to help with local administrative tasks including updating old local javascript code. I still have a lot of enthusiasm for this role and wish to continue to serve as a steward. I hope that the community will support me. Thank you.
italiano:
  • Lingue: en-3, ru-N
  • Informazioni personali: translation needed
español:
  • Idiomas: en-3, ru-N
  • Información personal: translation needed
русский:
  • Языки: en-3, ru-N
  • Личная информация: Это моя пятая конфирмация с тех пор как я был избран стюардом в 2011 году. Я думаю, что в течении пятого года в качестве стюарда я увеличил свой уровень активности по сравнению с предыдущим годом не смотря на то (или возможно благодаря тому), что я одновременно был членом Комиссии по выборам, а в конце года также членом Комитета по стипендиям, и я всё ещё считаю, что остаюсь полезным Викимедийному Сообществу. В прошедшем году как и прежде я занимался управлением правами пользователей, правами ботов и глобальными правами. Я помогал пользователям переименовывать и иным образом объединять их учётные записи, а также помогал с решением локальных административных и технических проблем включая обновление локальных java скриптов. У меня ещё остаётся немало энтузиазма к исполнению обязанностей стюарда и я хотел бы продолжить свою службу в качестве стюарда. Я надеюсь, что сообщество поддержит меня. Заранее спасибо.
Deutsch:
  • Sprachen: en-3, ru-N
  • Informationen zur Person: translation needed
Nederlands:
  • Taalvaardigheid: en-3, ru-N
  • Persoonlijke informatie: translation needed
বাংলা:
  • ভাষা: en-3, ru-N
  • ব্যক্তিগত তথ্যাদি: translation needed

Comments about Ruslik0Edit

  •   Keep, ok. --Vogone (talk) 14:24, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep, trusted & active. No concerns at all. --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:28, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep--Syum90 (talk) 14:54, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep, he helped me rename my username according to the rules. --Kosta1986 (talk) 15:10, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Remove Does useful work but I feel that sometimes their attitude is causing issues. Surely there are better ways to communicate with people than at [1] and there seems to be significant issues with their understanding of AAR [2] (note conversation at Коваль@uk.wiktionary) and a lack of willingness to look into situations (see [3] and [4]. Stuff like this affects the effectiveness of all stewards and their ability to work together. --Rschen7754 15:45, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
The problem is that when your request an account to be locked it is your responsibility to provide sufficient evidence that this should be done. You failed to do this. Just providing a link to a page on enwiki does not by itself constitute such evidence. Ruslik (talk) 20:21, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
On that page are all the other accounts that were globally locked, and you can look at their contributions and figure out why they were locked. What more could you ask for? --Rschen7754 01:16, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
This is the question of priorities. Should I spend my time answering the vast majority of well articulated requests? Or should I spend my time trying to understand why some accounts should be locked and whether they should be locked at all when the requests' author failed to provide the necessary information? Ruslik (talk) 20:17, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
If you don't have the time to look into something, or aren't familiar with it, then leave it for another steward. It's as simple as that. --Rschen7754 01:12, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
No, I will ask a question which is also very simple. Ruslik (talk) 17:33, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep--Emergency doc (talk) 16:25, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep--Vituzzu (talk) 16:42, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Neutral Not satisfied with the response here. But, he is trusted and active. --Mathanaharan (talk) 17:25, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep--BRP ever 17:30, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep Alan (talk) 18:13, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep Armbrust (talk) 19:21, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep Ajraddatz (talk) 20:30, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep Miniapolis 22:02, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep--White Master (es) 23:24, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep --Az1568 (talk) 03:02, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep --Hedwig in Washington (talk) 03:30, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep Very well. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:40, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep Reasonably active and I like his steward work. — T. 07:23, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep --Laurent Jerry (talk) 10:10, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:59, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep Jianhui67 talkcontribs 15:48, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep rxy (talk) 16:23, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep. Good steward. On a personal note, I'd only suggest that you take the points raised by Rschen7754 into account. RadiX 19:44, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep MoiraMoira (talk) 19:51, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep.—Teles «Talk to me ˱C L @ S˲» 19:59, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Support Русскоязычный стюард нужен...--6AND5 (talk) 20:32, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep.--Draa kul (talk) 22:11, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep Sufficiently active, benefit to steward corps, no reason to consider removal. -- Avi (talk) 22:30, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep good job --Yogesh Kavishwar (talk) 04:28, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep --Kolega2357 (talk) 11:39, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep --Cvf-ps (talk) 12:57, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep Oleg3280 (talk) 13:03, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep --Uğurkenttalk 16:58, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep Widr (talk) 17:06, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Remove There are cases of serious harassments and stewards do nothing about it. In fact, they are OK with it. --Auvajs (talk) 04:35, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep INeverCry 23:56, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep -jkb- 08:10, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Neutral --Snaevar (talk) 18:47, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep --Melos (talk) 12:44, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Remove I do not just enter into a dialogue with this person , and came to the conclusion that he was afraid to make a responsible decision. If on one side of the scale will be the development of Wikipedia and the other bureaucratic rules that Wikipedia itself recommends ignored in such cases , he would choose the latter.--AryanSogd 15:26, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
    This refers to this discussion where I denied a request for the bureaucrat access because there was no community consensus for it. Ruslik (talk) 18:10, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
  • I have twice received the administrator flag both times for 6 months. When I protested , the stewards explained to me that our society is too small to have a permanent administrator. At the end of the term , I was approached by Stewart and warned that if there is a desire to continue to work as an administrator , you must again pass a vote, and if I can convince the stewards , that our society is increased, then the flag will be available on an ongoing basis. Recently, You assigned administrator flag on a permanent basis to one participant, whose community is half of our. Having legitimate questions.
  1. What rules do you personally guided, and what rules governed the rest of the stewards?
  2. For you as a steward , there is such a thing as mere participants and selected participants? Thank you for attention,--AryanSogd 13:11, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
    Sorry, I see no evidence that your community was larger. You had only four votes on 8 June. Ruslik (talk) 19:46, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
    At the beginning of our dialogue , you have brought a link where the steward summing up said that the community is small, since the number of active participants 61. By the way, you yourself talked about this ibid. For this reason, Ibrahimjon did not get the bureaucrat flag. If I understand correctly, it is for you, the community - is the number of votes, and with five votes of the community may be obtained from the stewards the necessary tools on a regular basis!? Thank you.--AryanSogd 05:40, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
    Five votes is the threshold when I begin to consider the permanent adminship but it really depends on the quality of votes. For bureaucrats it is much larger: at least 15. Ruslik (talk) 17:18, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
    Thank you for your direct answer . A negative vote on changing positive   Keep up the good work! --AryanSogd 18:26, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep Matanya (talk) 18:45, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep--GZWDer (talk) 19:28, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep Afil (talk) 21:22, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep --Рулин (talk) 00:03, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep. Matiia (talk) 19:06, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep Contributions to en.wikiversity within a year! --Marshallsumter (talk) 18:27, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep Trusted and active. Trijnsteltalk 22:56, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep--Jusjih (talk) 01:38, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep - A certainly active and helpful steward. Without him, we'd probably have a rather backlogged request for bot rights. Your work is appreciated! -Barras talk 19:28, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep - Trusted, highly active, does good work. - Taketa (talk) 10:38, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
  • KeepMarcoAurelio 16:10, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Remove --DerekvG (talk) 18:40, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep - Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:40, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep --DangSunM (talk) 20:34, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep Trusted and active. ~ Nahid Talk 17:12, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep --Zyephyrus (talk) 18:25, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep MBisanz talk 13:59, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep Elmie (talk) 20:35, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
  •   Remove --Holder (talk) 19:53, 25 February 2016 (UTC) Putting obstacles in the way of small Wikipedias.
  •   Keep -- Wagino 20100516 (talk) 03:28, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep -- trusted user--Biplab Anand (Talk) 17:37, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep - Trusted and active in bot requests, where relatively few stewards work. --Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 19:12, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep Quiddity (talk) 19:15, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep Renamed me. ~Cybularny Speak? 21:47, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep Active on permission requests --Shanmugamp7 (talk) 06:50, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
  •   Keep Ruslik0 is active and he also tackles areas that are often not getting as much attention as they could. Snowolf How can I help? 07:38, 28 February 2016 (UTC)