Project:Requests/User rights/A7x

User:A7x
I'd like admin tools to clean up vandalism and help with any maintenance issues here. I'm a trusted and established user in several major Wikimedia projects. I also have a long experience in reverting vandalism, and I am a rollbacker in the English Wikipedia (link), Simple English Wikipedia (link) and Commons (link). In addition, I am also a sysop and bureaucrat at the Test-Wikipedia (link), another "backstage" Wikimedia project. My motive for requesting the tools is for reverting vandalism, although I'll exercise caution when using the tools. I could also do some maintenance to the project, should the need arise. — stay ( sic ) ! 05:28, 9 July 2011 (UTC)


 * In general, if users want adminship here to combat vandalism, I'd like to see a history of combating vandalism here. —Emufarmers(T 17:35, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, I see your point. But then can I at least have editor or reviewer rights in here? It could be useful to me. — stay ( sic ) !  20:33, 10 July 2011 (UTC)


 * How could they be useful to you? —Emufarmers(T 05:56, 11 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Well technically speaking, an editor is someone who has the ability to be autoconfirmed, have their own edits automatically marked as patrolled, patrol recent or new changes, and see unreviewed pages. A reviewer includes the former plus being able to mark, or validate revisions as "quality". I think a user who is established and deemed trustworthy in several other projects, is qualified to be trusted to have editor or reviewer rights here as well. On the English Wikipedia, in addition to rollback, I am autopatrolled, a reviewer, and a filemover. And on Commons, I am also a rollbacker, patroller, and filemover. — stay ( sic ) !  23:44, 14 July 2011 (UTC) (P.S. Sorry for the delayed response, I was caught up with something in real life. :-P)


 * Technically yes, but we aren't a flag factory here, we will give rights to those that can show why/how they would need/use them. Peachey88 01:53, 15 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Take Two?
 * I wonder if I could revive this request and maybe take another shot at it. The last time I requested rights, it was at a ill-prepared moment and I was gone after a few days. Now that I'm back, this time I want to specifically request editor rights only. Looking through the archives, it appears that most requests were granted without asking many questions. Also after taking a look at Project:Requests/Header, there is actually no formal requirement for admin or editor rights. All I've to do is be persuasive and seem trustworthy. That being said, I mentioned before that I am trusted and have been granted flags in several projects. See my interwiki matrix for proof. Regarding the editor bits, the level of trust needed seems no higher than being granted rollback or (auto)patroller rights. I'll also mention that I'm currently a sysop plus bureaucrat on the Test Wikipedia, which is according to Meta, another "backstage" project like this one, so I have experience and knowledge about the extra tools and what they're for. I hope you can take this into consideration. Kindly, — stay ( sic ) !  02:11, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * You have ZERO useful edits on this wiki. You haven't edited anything - you don't need editor flag, you haven't reverted a single vandalised page - you don't need to be an admin. Note that this wiki is not understaffed and we typically don't promote professional flag hunters just because they've shown some interest in this site. Max Semenik 02:41, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * If so, then how come there are several admins with only a small number of edits? For example, User:Ral315, User:Phil Boswell, User:Pinky, User:Misza13, User:Midom, User:Matanya, User:Mardetanha, and User: Kalan all have less than 20 edits, and yet they've been promoted. Also I've noticed that a several users have been unilaterally promoted to adminship without any formal procedure, and their only rationale being that they are admins/crats on other projects. — stay ( sic ) !  03:41, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Our policies change over time, at the current stage we don't really want to give out sysops unless the person can really give a good example as to why they need it. From the examples that you showed:
 * User:Ral315 and User:Phil Boswell: given in 2007
 * User:Pinky and User:Misza13: given in 2008 and are developers
 * User:Kalan: Given in 2008 to do translations
 * User:Midom: From 2009 and is a developer and works for the foundation maintaining the database systems
 * User:Mardetanha: given in 2009 the user is a steward - Note: Mardetanha resigned as a steward on July 12, he is now global sysop - TBloemink 09:07, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * User:Matanya: although given in 2011 is trusted by a local 'crat
 * Users who are developers (have svn commit access for core (/phase3/)) are generally given admin here if they request with no questions asked. Peachey88 07:09, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * So from what you're saying, sysop is only granted to developers and anyone whom a local bureaucrat wants to promote? If so, then you might want to reedit the wording of the header. It can be quite misleading, especially since it sounds like you're in the process of "hiring" admins, and the term "trustworthy" is ill-defined and too ambiguous. Btw, I want to restate this request is for editor, no longer for sysop. Regards, — stay ( sic ) !  08:29, 12 August 2011 (UTC)