Beautiful banners are coming to every article and you can help!
Check out our guidelines and learn how to create your own!

Difference between revisions of "Wikitravel:Administrator nominations"

From Wikitravel
Jump to: navigation, search
(Sabino434: At this time I cannot be certain that granting Sabino434 would be beneficial.)
(Sabino434: don't know)
Line 23: Line 23:
  
 
* '''Why?''' - While they may be an excellent contributor, that does not necessarily make for a good wiki administrator. I see no evidence that Sabino434 even has a need for administrator rights. An administrator needs to interact with other users, collaborate with them on work, foster a sense of community and be prepared to do maintenance work, like nominating pages for deletion, welcoming and challenging users, asking questions, identifying problems with article and fixing them, contributing to policy discussions, reporting bugs, etc. I see none of that. Although Sabino434 has been a registered user since 2006, most of this user's edits are since December 2008. There are no edits to article talk pages, and only one edit to a user talk page other than their own. Also there are few edits to any pages other than those related to phrasebooks. That means there is insufficient evidence for me to judge if Sabino434 would make a good administrator. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that Sabino434 cannot be an administrator - they might be an excellent one - all I am saying is that there is insufficient evidence for me to make a judgement. In some respects, ''Administrator Rights'' are ''unwiki'', so the users that possess those rights should be ones who are able to be trusted with those rights and be willing to be held accountable for exercising those rights responsibly and with discretion. At this time I cannot be certain that granting Sabino434 would be beneficial. - [[User:Huttite|Huttite]] 06:13, 6 November 2009 (EST)
 
* '''Why?''' - While they may be an excellent contributor, that does not necessarily make for a good wiki administrator. I see no evidence that Sabino434 even has a need for administrator rights. An administrator needs to interact with other users, collaborate with them on work, foster a sense of community and be prepared to do maintenance work, like nominating pages for deletion, welcoming and challenging users, asking questions, identifying problems with article and fixing them, contributing to policy discussions, reporting bugs, etc. I see none of that. Although Sabino434 has been a registered user since 2006, most of this user's edits are since December 2008. There are no edits to article talk pages, and only one edit to a user talk page other than their own. Also there are few edits to any pages other than those related to phrasebooks. That means there is insufficient evidence for me to judge if Sabino434 would make a good administrator. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that Sabino434 cannot be an administrator - they might be an excellent one - all I am saying is that there is insufficient evidence for me to make a judgement. In some respects, ''Administrator Rights'' are ''unwiki'', so the users that possess those rights should be ones who are able to be trusted with those rights and be willing to be held accountable for exercising those rights responsibly and with discretion. At this time I cannot be certain that granting Sabino434 would be beneficial. - [[User:Huttite|Huttite]] 06:13, 6 November 2009 (EST)
 +
* '''Don't know''' - I'd like to hear what Fernando himself has to say on the subject. Is there some reason that he needs the admin bit that he's mentioned Andrew out-of-band? -- [[User:Mark|Mark]] 11:31, 7 November 2009 (EST)
  
 
==See also==
 
==See also==

Revision as of 16:35, 7 November 2009

If you believe some Wikitraveller -- including yourself -- should have administrative status, add them to the Nominations section using the template below, along with some supporting evidence as to their experience and comprehension of Wikitravel community policies. After fourteen (14) days of discussion, the user will be granted admin status if:

  • The nomination has been given the support of the community, including at least two other administrators,
  • The user has indicated a willingness to take on the job of administration, and
  • There are no outstanding objections.

Before nominating an individual to become an administrator please understand that being given administrator status should not be seen as a way to reward someone; the admin role simply indicates that the Wikitravel community feels that a user has a good understanding of Wikitravel's policies, the reasoning behind those policies, and has also demonstrated an ability to work well within the community. See Wikitravel:Administrators#Becoming an administrator for more details and conventions.

Nominations

Sabino434

Sabino434 is an excellent contributor, who understands the collaborative processes, versed in Wikitravel policies, and has been contributing since mid-2006. Although his niche is languages and he has greatly improved many of the phrasebooks, I think we should give him sysop status so he can help with some of the janitorial work. -- Sapphire(Talk) • 14:23, 5 November 2009 (EST)

Fantastic work on the phrasebooks. Can't say I've noticed him around the corridors with a mop, though.. --inas 14:58, 5 November 2009 (EST)
It's true that you seem him rarely venture outside the realms of the phrasebooks, but I seem him doing serious mopping up of the phrasebooks. Also, in a recent email, he expressed concern about taking care of some vandalism, which someone else took care, which is why I think he should be given the extra buttons. -- Sapphire(Talk) • 15:30, 5 November 2009 (EST)
  • Not yet. He does absolutely fantastic work, and I cannot stress enough how great it is to benefit from his hard work on Wikitravel. But the main things we look for in nominees are a track record active participation in policy discussions, conflict resolution, janitorial work, clearly demonstrated understanding of our policies and conventions, and how they are formed. Fernando, as excellent as his work may be, has not yet established this track record, so I consider this nomination regrettably premature. --Peter Talk 19:24, 5 November 2009 (EST)
  • Not yet. It's frustrating that premature nominations such as this might result in a contributor feeling that his participation isn't appreciated — as far as I can tell, Sabino434 has done nothing but good work. However, his participation has indeed been limited exclusively to phrasebooks, which are a fairly small portion of the site, and he has never participated in a policy discussion; also, it's hardly necessary to have admin status to participate in janitorial work (everybody gets the 'undo' button) — plenty of non-admins help out that way — and his collaborative work has been limited at best. I have nothing but encouragement for what he's done so far, but this nomination simply hasn't taken the criteria for being an administrator into account. Gorilla Jones 19:25, 5 November 2009 (EST)
  • Not yet. Agree with Gorilla and Peter. However, Sabino434, I would like to hear your thoughts also: are you even interested in becoming an administrator? The extra buttons would not really help at all with phrasebook work. Jpatokal 00:00, 6 November 2009 (EST)
  • Don't Support Judging by the message posted on his/her Talk Page, this user would not (and doesn't wish to) utilize any of the Administrator privileges, which is fine, because as others have stated, the work s/he is doing on the phrasebooks is great! If the user had a change of heart about his/her talk page statement and worked more elsewhere, of course, I could be convinced to change my mind. ChubbyWimbus 00:36, 6 November 2009 (EST)
  • Why? - While they may be an excellent contributor, that does not necessarily make for a good wiki administrator. I see no evidence that Sabino434 even has a need for administrator rights. An administrator needs to interact with other users, collaborate with them on work, foster a sense of community and be prepared to do maintenance work, like nominating pages for deletion, welcoming and challenging users, asking questions, identifying problems with article and fixing them, contributing to policy discussions, reporting bugs, etc. I see none of that. Although Sabino434 has been a registered user since 2006, most of this user's edits are since December 2008. There are no edits to article talk pages, and only one edit to a user talk page other than their own. Also there are few edits to any pages other than those related to phrasebooks. That means there is insufficient evidence for me to judge if Sabino434 would make a good administrator. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that Sabino434 cannot be an administrator - they might be an excellent one - all I am saying is that there is insufficient evidence for me to make a judgement. In some respects, Administrator Rights are unwiki, so the users that possess those rights should be ones who are able to be trusted with those rights and be willing to be held accountable for exercising those rights responsibly and with discretion. At this time I cannot be certain that granting Sabino434 would be beneficial. - Huttite 06:13, 6 November 2009 (EST)
  • Don't know - I'd like to hear what Fernando himself has to say on the subject. Is there some reason that he needs the admin bit that he's mentioned Andrew out-of-band? -- Mark 11:31, 7 November 2009 (EST)

See also

Variants

Actions

Destination Docents

In other languages

other sites