Translate this page at Template:Steward confirmations.


The 2019 steward elections are finished. No further votes will be accepted.

Stewards (2019 Confirmations)

The 2019-20 Confirmation will begin on 8 February, and will finish on 28 February.

The 2019-20 Steward Confirmations are an opportunity for the Wikimedia community to comment on the performance of existing stewards. To make the process as smooth as possible, the confirmations are organized as follows.

To comment, please log in with an account that has edits (on any wiki) before 8 February. During the 2019 Elections, please mention if you are comfortable or unhappy with the use of steward tools of any of the people listed below and why.

After the election, stewards (including the newly-elected ones) are invited to review the confirmation comments and to give their impression of the outcome (consensus to confirm/remove etc.) on Talk:Stewards/Confirm/2019 for every steward who stood for confirmation. Of course, they are not required to do this for every candidate and will be especially careful to do it regarding someone about whom they expressed strong opinions in the confirmation. Non-steward comments are welcome outside of the "Final Decision" section, subject to the usual expectations of civility. Confirmation discussions will last one week after the appointment of the newly elected stewards. This may be extended to two weeks for one or more confirmations at the discretion of the Election Committee if the committee believes further input is required before concluding. The Election Committee will close these discussions and implement the outcome (which also means making a decision in non-obvious cases).

All stewards elected before February 2019 will undergo this process.

See also:

Purge the cache of this page?

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

<2019 (translate this) not available, displaying English (help us translate!).>
  • Languages: ko, en-3
  • Personal info: Hey, I'm revi. I have been doing lots of things this year, including familiar stuff of SRP (and SRGP/SRB), Global Rename business, as well as locking LTAs and spambots and pushing myself into unfamiliar areas with SRCU. I have been taking care of SRCU request for zhwiki (after their local CU permission was removed by WMF Office action), though I have to accept I probably have burned out handling their request by end of year and had to take break from SRCU to recover myself. I also respond to Oversight requests and other enquiries sent to OTRS.

    This is my first confirmation as a steward, and I look forward to continuing the same work in 2019 as I did in 2018, if the community wishes so.

    Full disclosure

    I still work for / provide service to the WMF (see my SE2018 statement), but my contract is scheduled to end sometime this year. (Note that it can be extended.)

    — regards, Revi 11:45, 19 January 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments about -revi edit

  • What does that even mean? I have no problem with descriptions without diffs in confirms since so much activity takes place on IRC, but they actually need to be descriptive unless the person isn’t a native English speaker, so it’s difficult to go into detail. You appear to be a native speaker, so there’s no excuse. If I had to bet, Leaderboard, this is yet another revenge vote because -revi was the one who told you that you couldn’t keep your failed RfCU open indefinitely until it hit 25 supports. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:19, 9 February 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@TonyBallioni: What nonsense. Since when did my failed RfCU (Requests for CheckUser on en.wikibooks) have anything to do with this? I don't even recall him saying this in the first place. This is not a revenge vote, and please don't jump into unsubstantiated conclusions, thanks. Leaderboard (talk) 09:48, 9 February 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You haven’t explained what your vote means. I’m going to assume my guess here is right. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:44, 9 February 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@TonyBallioni: Your guess has gone horribly wrong. Well, my concerns stem from Cohaf's note about handling CU requests. I noticed that he entirely stopped continuing a CU request simply because one user made somewhat inappropriate comments about him. While I do not condone the other user's attitude - they did deserve a block - it was poor of him to leave the request in an unfinished state for many days to the determent of the community. I also don't see him handling any further requests. Even on IRC, I noticed that his attitude is slightly condensing at times. Leaderboard (talk) 16:06, 9 February 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah, so “Neutral because revi doesn’t like putting up with borderline racist comments.” That makes your revenge vote seem even pettier. Thanks for clarifying this to everyone. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:10, 9 February 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
if you wish to read my response, it is. Collapsed for neatness.--Cohaf (talk) 16:50, 9 February 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(Edit conflict.)Leaderboard I beg your pardon, while I'm not especially pleased with how revi process zhwp SRCU speed, it is slow, it's not until the extent I will abstain my support. At times it is frustrating to wait for 6 - 7 days and this I must say. However, most of the other occassions other stewards will step up to help. I also note that revi doesn't have CU experience before Stewardship, hence, there is some learning curve and we should give the allowance. For the 2 incidents, one is over #wikipedia-zh (that was immediately needed as socks are out every time - he acknowledge he'll do it but didn't). However, the impact was minimal, as the CU is just for a range block to stop the socks from appearing. The socks are easily DUCKable. And in the end the master did use IPs to edit too - and we rangeblocked that and hence, it's a meh. In addition, do note that request came at 2AM local time for revi and it's reasonable for him to wish to rest and not do such CUs. Another occasion is the zhwikiversity case where he ask me to do a discussion which I don't see a need, that can be done immediately IMO. For that particular CU you referenced, I made remarks there and I have nothing more to add. Data was on CUwiki and while it may not be the best approach he could have taken, I will not fault so greatly (as it is once - off, if repeated that's another story). Revi has handled more than 50 CU requests before that and I feel that amount is fair enough. Other than those, he's still a fine CU working at SRCU and other immediate requests (such as potential compromised accounts) he did it. I hope this explains. --Cohaf (talk) 16:23, 9 February 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

<2019 (translate this) not available, displaying English (help us translate!).>
  • Languages: en-N, fr-1
  • Personal info: Hello community! For the past year, I have been active in responding to cross-wiki and long-term abuse, addressing checkuser requests at SRCU, addressing requests for permissions at SRP, responding to email on the stewards' OTRS queue, and responding to multiple emergency situations involving account compromises. I have the capacity and interest to continue in these areas over the next year, with the community's permission. While my IRC availability has gone down, I remain available via email, discord, and my talk page. As always, please feel free to ask questions or leave constructive criticism. Regards, – Ajraddatz (talk) 19:09, 3 February 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments about Ajraddatz edit

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

<2019 (translate this) not available, displaying English (help us translate!).>
  • Languages:
  • Personal info: I've been a steward for almost 8 years now and have worked with my colleagues on dealing with spam, disruptive individuals, and other issues. I plan to continue helping the Wikimedia Foundation wikis with my tools this year as well.

Comments about Bsadowski1 edit

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

<2019 (translate this) not available, displaying English (help us translate!).>
  • Languages: pt-N, en-2, es-1
  • Personal info: Hello everyone. I was elected in 2017, this being my second confirmation. I've continued dealing with cross-wiki vandalism/spam/LTAs and processing steward requests. I would like to continue serving as a steward for another year if I still deserve the confidence of the community. Suggestions on how I could improve my contribution to the Wikimedia movement are always welcome. Thanks for considering and don't hesitate to ask questions. Defender (talk) 19:50, 24 January 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments about Defender edit

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

<2019 (translate this) not available, displaying English (help us translate!).>
  • Languages: de, en-3, grc-3, la-3, es-1
  • Personal info: It's been more than 11 years now that I serve as a steward. In the last 12 months I couldn't hold the same activity level as before because I got some new reseponsibilities at work which reduced my free time, and shifted my focus to Wikimedia Commons (in almost all of October, I had almost no connection in Buenos Aires while taking photos for the Youth Olympics). Nevertheless, I am still active in the areas which I engaged before, mainly anti-vandalism activities which includes checks on loginwiki, and IP blocks and account locks. Beyond logged actions, I try to be responsive on IRC, at mailing lists, and steward phone calls; I also handled some OTRS tickets but not as many as I wanted to. Besides that, I was working on a couple of banners in the last year.

    Knowing the development of the role of Wikimedia Stewards pretty well due to my long-term committment, I also try to explain to the Wikimedia public wherever possible what it contains and how they can help. I'd like to continue with all these activities at least in the same way as before and look forward to your feedback.

Comments about DerHexer edit