Wikivoyage:User rights nominations/Archives/2018

User:ThunderingTyphoons!
When ThunderingTyphoons! was nominated 4 years ago (see Administrator nominations/Archives), it was felt by a number of voters that he should spend more time as a user and participate more widely across different areas of the site. I think you will agree that he has done so: [https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/ThunderingTyphoons! user contributions]. He has been extremely helpful, and he has agreed to take up the broom and dustpan if we choose to give him those tools. I think you'd all agree that we could profit from another trusted user having the tools to combat spam and vandalism, and that ThunderingTyphoons! is a trusted, proven Wikivoyager. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:08, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. I'm kinda surprised to learn that TT is not an Admin - how on Earth?? May he be very welcome on the Admins' bandwagon. Ibaman (talk) 11:21, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. Sure! --ϒpsilon (talk) 11:37, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. Also surprised s/he's not an admin. Let's fix this oversight. Ground Zero (talk) 11:45, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Support Pashley (talk) 11:57, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. Will be a worthy addition to our admin team. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 16:27, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. Nurg (talk) 23:46, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Support - Andrewssi2 (talk) 03:58, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Support Agreed with Ikan Kekek --Inas (talk) 05:17, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Support -Shaundd (talk) 08:02, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Support Jianhui67 (talk) 14:40, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment Thanks to everyone for expressing their opinion. 14 days have passed since the nomination, and with more than 7 votes in favor and none opposed, I will change ThunderingTyphoons!' status to administrator. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:57, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

User:Yvwv
Yvwv has been a great contributor to all facets of this site since January, 2013; see user contributions. I wouldn't be surprised if most of you think he (I think Yvwv is a man?) is already an admin; I actually didn't realize Yvwv wasn't an admin myself until I checked his status a few days ago. I believe that all users who are familiar with Yvwv's edits have confidence in him as someone with a clear record of working to improve the site and readily collaborating toward that aim (so not at all intemperate or likely to do rash things with admin tools). Yvwv has indicated that he would accept a nomination for admin. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:12, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the confidence. For the record, I am male. /Yvwv (talk) 00:21, 9 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Support as nominator. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:12, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Support --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 21:30, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Support Gizza ( roam ) 21:49, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Support Ground Zero (talk) 21:54, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Support I am one of those that thought he was already an admin. DethDestroyerOfWords (talk) 21:58, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 22:39, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. If Ikan Kekek offers you a mop and bucket, you're ready to scrub.  --Inas (talk) 22:47, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the confidence. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:51, 8 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Support Drat70 (talk) 00:52, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Support, of course. --ϒpsilon (talk) 05:28, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Support &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 06:00, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Support Pashley (talk) 09:34, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment - 15 days have elapsed since the nomination, and as there are a sufficient number of supporting votes with no opposition, Yvwv's status will be changed to Administrator tonight. Thanks to all who voted and expressed their opinions. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:41, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

User:Jay Jay Marcus Keize13
I nominate myself for being an Administrator of the English Wikivoyage. I understand the policies and guidelines of wikivoyage, and what is expected of Administrators. I have done quite a lot of reverting vandalism, spams, and edited articles that needed attention. I think the Administrator rights would be excellent in my hands—I could get a hold of tools, and do more in reverting vandalisms, and helping Wikivoyage to grow. I am very dedicated to Wikivoyage, and is oline almost every day. Thank You. Jay Jay Marcus Keize13 (talk)


 * Not yet. Before handing out the sysop tools, we really prefer to see a more extensive edit history. That said, you've had a good start here at Wikivoyage - you'd be encouraged to try again in a few months after you've got more experience under your belt. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 14:31, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I think Jay Jay looks a very good candidate for admin-ship, and agree with Andre that we can make a better determination in a couple or a few months. Ground Zero (talk) 14:59, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree with you guys on all counts. Jay Jay, you may be an excellent admin candidate in a year or so, but not yet. Have patience. And here's a relevant thread on my user talk page. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:35, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I have to agree with the prevailing consensus that it is too soon in your Wikivoyage career to be considered as an admin. Besides, there are other ways to be more active within the community besides being an admin. If you'd like to become more involved in the running of the site, why not take part in more policy discussions, both at the pub, and elsewhere? Doing so will certainly make you a better candidate for admin-ship in the future. Your contributions to the travel guide are certainly impressive though. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 01:19, 24 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Result: not yet. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 15:23, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

User:SelfieCity
I nominate SelfieCity who has contributed in the following ways: Ground Zero (talk) 02:26, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) Has been a registered contributor since 15 Dec 2017, with 2000-2500 edits
 * 2) Has learned our policies quickly - in the discussion on deleting the Esperanto phrasebook, s/he based his/her arguments on Wikipedia policies
 * 3) Has a history of significantly expanding articles, contributing to policy discussions, nominating an article as a Destination of the Month and actively participating in discussion of other DotM noms, and combating vandalism/spam by alerting admins
 * 4) Has a demonstrated ability to work with the community.
 * I thought I was the one who posted about that rule for VfD first. Anyway, I support the nomination and would trust SelfieCity to use admin tools wisely. Ground Zero forgot to mention that SelfieCity has stated a willingness to serve in this capacity (see his user talk page). Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:50, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. Quickly understood the conventions of Wikivoyage and has made plenty of constructive contributions. --Traveler100 (talk) 10:34, 31 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Support. Trustworthy contributor and patroller. Ibaman (talk) 11:44, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. Pashley (talk) 13:19, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Support seems like a good and capable candidate Chetsford (talk) 22:06, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I have thought long and hard about whether I should post my thoughts here, because I personally like this user very much, I admire the enthusiasm and dedication s/he has shown thus far in improving the site, and I think s/he will eventually be a very good candidate. And I don't want to dampen that enthusiasm or for anyone to doubt that I'm one of this users' biggest fans. But being honest about the situation, I have to say at this point SelfieCity is just too green, and some of his/her comments e.g. on various DotM nominations as well as premature VfD nominations for such articles as Salsa dancing in Latin America indicate that s/he needs to get more of a feel for the finer points of policy. I would highly encourage a repeat nomination once s/he has a little more experience under his/her belt, but at the present time, in my heart of hearts I have to vote not yet. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 15:01, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree with AndreCarrotflower here. I think SelfieCity has made great contrbutions and I appreciate positive and collaborative attitude. But the recent deletion nomination of a photo hosted on Commons is the most recent of several things that convince me that  yet have a solid understanding of how things work on Wikivoyage. SelfieCity has become a valuable contributor and I'm sure  will be a good admin in a year or two. But not yet. —Granger (talk · contribs) 01:50, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * After reflecting on this a bit more, I have to agree with Andre and Mx. Granger. Understanding the deletion policies and where files are hosted are important things for an admin to know. SelfieCity, if you continue working tirelessly and demonstrating your passion towards the project, you will be an admin in no time but for now I have to say not yet. Gizza ( roam ) 03:03, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment: an administrator does not need thorough understanding of all of our rules. I am still learning how things work here, as in SelfieCity. I would bet that some of the other 14 active administrators would feel that they still have much to learn here. I think that Wikivoyage would be strengthened with more administrators. Of the active editors we have now, SelfieCity is the most committed, and the one who has been involved in the widest range of Wikivoyage activities. Over the next 1-2 years, we can expect that some of our group of 15 will leave or find that they have less time to spend here. Expecting administrators who know things thoroughly and don't make mistakes may limit us to a very small group. Ground Zero (talk) 03:19, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment The folks saying "not yet" have made a good point. Let's give him more time to learn about things like deletion policy and slush this nomination for now.  Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:47, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Fair enough; as much as I hate to say not yet I do expect candidates show a basic awareness of the history of the project so as to avoid an obvious 'faux pas' in handling sensitive issues. K7L (talk) 02:48, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * In view of the content of the discussion in the Pub, I definitely oppose this nomination for now. While I believe SelfieCity has good intentions, that stuff is very serious. I suggest waiting a year or so before we revisit this nomination. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:49, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Not yet. I would like to see SelfieCity develop more experience at WV first. Nurg (talk) 04:00, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Ikan Kekek. As someone who took part in the migration and got legal threats from Internet Brands, I deem the relation to WT a very serious issue that can't be taken as lightly as the candidate does. --Alexander (talk) 17:04, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I would personally say that, at the moment, (while this is somewhat hard to say being the candidate) I would agree with the not yet for my nomination. Recent developments have shown that there's still a lot more I need to know about this website, its general policies, its history, where to contribute and where not to contribute, and those kinds of issues before becoming a administrator of the website, which in de facto is like being on the website's leaders. I still need to a lot more understanding and learning on a lot of these issues, and that I'm far from Wikivoyage's greatest editor/contributor. After all, I've only been active on this website for a couple months in total: the end of December and since April, I think. Selfie City (talk) 00:49, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * There's a lot you still need to learn, but maybe not as much as you think. The fact remains that you've made more progress in your first four months than almost any other Wikivoyager I've seen. I hope you don't let the results of this nomination get you down too much. The philosophy here is "plunge forward", and built-in to that philosophy is the understanding that new users will inevitably make mistakes, that oftentimes the best way to learn is through one's own mistakes, and that it's virtually impossible to make a mistake on this site that's not fixable. You're a valuable contributor, Selfie City, and one thing Wikivoyage needs is more of those. I look forward to seeing you nominated again soon. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 02:23, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Nomination withdrawn' at nominee's request. Ground Zero (talk) 18:54, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Not yet. I wouldn't rush such a nomination, since Selfie City has only had half a year to gather experience on WV which might be too short to understand the numerous sensitivities on WV. I personally don't see involvement with WT as an issue. I'd prefer to see Selfie City renominated in about half a year time, coinciding with their first anniversary on WV! ArticCynda (talk) 08:35, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * In response to AndreCarrotflower, part of the reason I said what I said was to throw out any chance of my nomination now so we can get back to contributing for 6 months - year. Selfie City (talk) 13:25, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

User:Libertarianmoderate
Libertarianmoderate (talk) 23:14, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I have helped combat Telstra and the Fuerdai vandals.
 * I've contributed to policy discussions and made multiple proposals.
 * I've worked with the community since day one.
 * Been a contributor since May (almost 4 months)
 * I've made 716 edits and written countless articles.
 * I have at least a half-decent knowledge of policy.
 * Yes, let's get this out of the way. I was blocked one time. But I've more than made up for it in my efforts to combat vandalism. User:ThunderingTyphoons trusted me enough to give me the link to none other than the account creation log.


 * Oppose, speedy archive - not nearly enough experience or familiarity with policy. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 23:17, 2 August 2018 (UTC)


 * I would say not yet. Give it a bit more time. As you say Libmod, you have a "half-decent knowledge of policy". While nobody is expected to have perfect knowledge, it should be good enough to handle most situations an admin is likely to come across. Also the block and evasion (creating another account) was too soon. And there was the random comment about SJWs on the pub. We've had people on both sides of politics make irrelevant comments and derail discussions on what should be about travel into politics, and in doing so distracting many people from our ultimate goal of making the best travel guide in the world. Gizza ( roam ) 00:09, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Also, not yet. I give him/her lots of points for enthusiasm and spirit, but would be better tempered with some more experience and knowledge. Ground Zero (talk) 01:59, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose, as noted an enthusiastic start but does not yet understand a majority of conventions of the site. For example currently 13 article that have incomplete definitions or lacking templates created recently by this user. --Traveler100 (talk) 05:45, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose per others. Demonstrate for a year or more that you're a great trusted user. So far, your early history here, while enthusiastic, has been checkered. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:56, 3 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Result: not yet, speedy archived. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 03:00, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Andree.sk

 * Has been very active with clean-up of listings for well over a year. Is knowledgable and active editing templates and module code, a skill in short supply here. I would like to tighten edit rights on some templates but still allow Andree.sk to continue editing them. --Traveler100 (talk) 09:25, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I understand completely. Are you saying you'd like to restrict the editing on some templates to administrators only, and therefore, we have to grant Andree.sk admin status to continue editing them? What about Patroller? Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:58, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Another solution would be good. Do we have another level apart from autopatroller? There are some templates that call templates that call templates and modules that creates a situation a minor tweak to a low level piece of code would change every article page on this site. SOme of these are open to all users to edit, although a closed a few down the other day. If I go into change protection level for a page, options are "Allow All Users", "Allow only autoconfirmed users" and "Allow Only Administrators". Would like to protect a page from confirmed users but acceptable to a few named users. Only way I know is to make them administrators, but open to other suggestions. --Traveler100 (talk) 10:07, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia has a "template editor" user right for this exact purpose (w:WP:Template editor). I'm sure we could set it up here if we wanted to. —Granger (talk · contribs) 10:18, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * If I look at w:Special:Listusers on Wikipedia the "Group" pulldown box has a long list of permissions, including "template editors". If I look at Special:Listusers here, the "Group" pulldown box is missing many of those permissions; there is no "template editors" listed. Do we need  in the server's configuration file to do this? K7L (talk) 15:23, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Looks like a good method. as the only bureaucrat on this site, I assume you would have to set this up.--Traveler100 (talk) 10:45, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm also a bureaucrat. As I said, there is a status of Patroller. It's distinct from Autopatroller. My question is, would it provide sufficient tools and permissions to enable Andree.sk to do this editing? Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:36, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * What's wrong with creating a new group of user-rights? Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:48, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * It requires an edit to a configuration file on the server, which would have to be done by a Wikimedia system administrator with 'shell' access. As we don't have that level of access, we'd need to get consensus here and open a ticket - odds are WMF would make the change, not sure what the leadtime is on such a request (and no, the patroller and autopatrol tags have nothing to do with 'editprotected'). K7L (talk) 21:00, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Raised ticket T198056. --Traveler100 (talk) 16:27, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm a site requests volunteer (which means, I'm able to do this change for you). Who should be able to add/revoke the templateeditor right? Without explicit consensus, only stewards will be able to do it (which is 100% not wanted). Ping me please in your reply, or post it to Phabricator. I don't watch this page. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:16, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Martin Urbanec, admins? Or if that's not possible, bureaucrats? Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:29, 9 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Support. I believe User:Andree.sk has shown to possess the technical skills required though his numerous contributions to templates and modules, most notably those related to public transport. ArticCynda (talk) 08:40, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Just here to say 'thanks for the nomination', honor! :-) Seems the outcome will be different though - but in any case, I think in the foreseeable future I wouldn't have time to do any administration stuff anyway (unless explicitly asked). I'm mostly interested/busy with the technical stuff around here, rather than spam-monitoring or welcoming/tutoring new users :) But maybe that's what WV needs though, up to you to decide... cheers! Andree.sk (talk) 19:22, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Resolved - There is now a new user group - template editor, and a new new article protect level - Allow only template editors and administrators. --Traveler100 (talk) 09:35, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Super! Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:18, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

User:WOSlinker
request for interface-admin rights

I've made changes to MediaWiki:Common.css in the last couple of years, so I'll apply for this right. -- WOSlinker (talk) 06:30, 1 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Support. Unquestionably trusted. Thanks for all your help to date. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:49, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support - active, constructive, responsible . --Traveler100 (talk) 05:42, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support no doubt will put the interface-admin rights to good use. Gizza ( roam ) 13:03, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support per above. --Rschen7754 04:22, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. It's not often that a self-nomination is as unquestionably deserving as this. You'll make a great addition to the motley crew. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 14:53, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 15:05, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support --ϒpsilon (talk) 15:20, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. Ibaman (talk) 17:04, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support Pashley (talk) 19:18, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support Ground Zero (talk) 00:38, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Result - Approved. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:51, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Atsirlin
request for interface-admin rights

I open this request based on the ping here. As all of you know, I am not active on English Wikivoyage, for a long time and for a good reason. Nevertheless, I am watching the site and occasionally edit the interface, especially when it comes to maps and other features that are used throughout different language versions of Wikivoyage. That said, I am ready to continue with this activity, and will be happy to introduce any changes that the community agrees upon. I am watching the wiki on a daily basis and always come when you ping me (like WhatamIdoing just did). On the other hand, I give no promise for becoming a more active contributor at English Wikivoyage, and I will have no problem to close this request if there are enough "local" people interested in becoming interface editors here. --Alexander (talk) 21:32, 31 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Support: You are trusted, regardless of your feelings about English Wikivoyage. Since you'd like to have the power to help, we should give it to you, IMO. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:48, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 15:05, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. Thank you for putting yourself forward. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 15:13, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support --ϒpsilon (talk) 15:20, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. Long-time trustworthy user. Ibaman (talk) 17:04, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support Pashley (talk) 19:18, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Question - What should we do? Normally, noms are open for 2 weeks and I believe it's customary to expect 7 "support" votes if there's no opposition. However, this looks like a consensus. Would anyone else like to voice an opinion about this nomination? Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:55, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. Likely a formality as this is just giving admins access that they've always had, but I guess that makes seven? K7L (talk) 05:00, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Do we all have such access? If so, I don't know. Anyway, thank you, and to be fair, since this nom has been left open so long, I'll leave it open another 24 hours or so, in case someone wants to object. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:02, 28 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Result: Approved. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:36, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Mx. Granger
Mx. Granger has been updating listings for over two years now. Has also requested deletions and reverted vandalism. I think would benefit from having some more tools available to do those things directly. -- WOSlinker (talk) 13:15, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
 * If Granger wants this nomination, I definitely support their candidature. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 13:33, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Wait a minute, Granger's not already an admin? Let's fix that. Support. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 14:22, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support, of course. ϒpsilon (talk) 14:42, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support, for sure. Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:40, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support, they'd do a good job. K7L (talk) 16:43, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support Pashley (talk) 19:18, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. Since I'm not an admin myself I wouldn't normally vote here, but this is a user who definitely should have the administrator tools. SelfieCity (talk) 20:18, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
 * All users have every right to vote on admin noms. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:26, 27 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Support Ground Zero (talk) 00:38, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support thought Mx. Granger was already an admin. Gizza ( roam ) 05:48, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. Totally. Solid contributor. --Traveler100 (talk) 10:10, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. Most definitely. The dog2 (talk) 00:00, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Result: As more than 14 days have passed with a unanimous vote of support, the nomination has been successful. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:38, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

User:LPfi
I am not keen on doing patrolling work, so thought I'd have little use of admins' tools – until yesterday morning. It seems I am sometimes here when few others are, so without too much extra work I might be able to sometimes be useful. I have not been combating vandalism and spam, and I do very little of that work at sv-wp, where I have been an admin for a long time (my main contributions as admin there are page moves), but I might do it at times. I also do not have an extensive knowledge of the policies, but I think reading up before doing anything foolish will be no problem for me (I have made active work on them back at sv-wp, and I will honour the differences). Although I have followed policy discussion and admin work only from aside, my contribution in discussion at the pub hopefully show I can handle working with the community.

I will probably be mostly offline the rest of this week, but I thought I'd better start the process immediately anyway.

--LPfi (talk) 16:57, 8 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Support. I think you're selling yourself short. I feel like you've demonstrated a good knowledge of Wikivoyage policy. However, you also know how to find out about anything you're not sure of. More importantly, I think it's clear you can be trusted with admin tools. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:25, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. I see you've been here and active since the WT/WV split in 2012 so you've had plenty of time to look around, find where the toilets are tucked away on the main floor, familiarise yourself with policy and how everything works around here and make some good contributions. Don't sell yourself short. :) K7L (talk) 02:09, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support - it would be good to have LPfi able to handle vandalism and other issues that arise. Ground Zero (talk) 04:51, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support agree with above. Gizza ( roam ) 06:20, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * LP would like to be an admin? Support! ϒpsilon (talk) 08:21, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 08:25, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. Ibaman (talk) 14:30, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 14:41, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support ARR8 (talk) 03:06, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support —Granger (talk · contribs) 07:27, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Confirmed by unanimous vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:21, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

User:AndreCarrotflower for bureaucrat
Over at Wikivoyage talk:Administrators we're in the midst of checking on the status of inactive administrators, and a while ago ThunderingTyphoons said something along the lines of even if we give these folks the courtesy call letting them know their sysop tools are in danger of getting pulled, we still need a bureaucrat to commit to following through. That problem has since been solved, but his comment inspired me to go through the logs and see how many bureaucrats we have - and to my surprise, Ikan Kekek is the only one who is more than marginally active. I think for safety's sake, we ought to have multiple, so I'm putting myself forward as a candidate. You guys all know me: I've been around Wikivoyage a long time, I'm active as all get out, I've taken a leadership role in many different arenas from dotm to vandalism abatement, and back in 2013 you found me trustworthy enough to serve as an admin. So let's hear if we're ready for me to take the next step. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 14:57, 25 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Support with no reservations. Ibaman (talk) 15:02, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * SUPPORT!!! --ϒpsilon (talk) 15:24, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support with enthusiasm.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:07, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. I'm glad you're volunteering for this. I fully agree that we could use another Bureaucrat, so that we have a better chance of promoting (demoting?) Admins in a timelier fashion and also for the occasional de-sysopping. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:09, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support, of course. Thank you for volunteering. Ground Zero (talk) 18:43, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. Ikan's active, LtPowers might have made ten edits in the last four months. We need two active bureaucrats but for some reason it's getting harder to find good people willing to slave away on this. Andre would do a fine job. K7L (talk) 18:54, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support, having two active bureaucrats is important for the stable operation and independence of the wiki. --Alexander (talk) 18:55, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support without hesitation. Enwikivoy has grown to a point where we need more bureaucrats. Gizza ( roam ) 22:38, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. I've thought that he should be administrator for some time. Otherwise, we're more or less with one active bureaucrat. I also think DaGizza, Pashley, GZ, and Traveler100 could be considered as more potential bureaucrats in the future if we need more people as bureaucrats. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk | contributions ) 22:46, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support ARR8 (talk) 03:06, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support WOSlinker (talk) 22:09, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes OhanaUnitedTalk page 07:35, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. I don't think we could wish for a more suitable candidate. Thank you for wanting to take on this responsibility. JuliasTravels (talk) 16:05, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

I believe the nomination period is at an end with unanimous support (congratulations in order). Now who is going to do the honours? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 19:50, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Yep, agreed. Ikan Kekek, how soon would you be able to make AndreCarrotflower a bureaucrat? --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk | contributions ) 00:44, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I do not have that power. I think we have to petition a steward to do that. I know some stewards patrol this site for vandals now and then. I think Vituzzu is one of them, but I can't find his/her user page. Anyone know offhand the names of stewards to contact? Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:56, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Bureaucrat says that a bureaucrat is a user who has the technical ability to promote other users to administrator or bureaucrat; there is a list of flight attendants stewards at Stewards if you need them. K7L (talk) 02:49, 10 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Are you sure you don't have the ability to do it? According to Bureaucrats, you should be able to. You can try at Special:UserRights/AndreCarrotflower. —Granger (talk · contribs) 03:58, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm shocked, but yes, I was mistaken and actually was able to do it! Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:28, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

User:SelfieCity
As most of you know, this is my second nomination. The first was back in June, when I was nominated by User:Ground Zero. However, since then, I've done quite a lot of work from being janitor to reverting edits by vandals. Also, User:Ikan Kekek today said on my talk page that he would vote for me as admin now. So I'm putting myself forward and re-nominating myself to be an admin. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk | contributions ) 23:49, 28 October 2018 (UTC)


 * SelfieCity has come a long way since his first nomination. I already expressed my support for him on his talk page - in fact, IIRC it was me who first broached the topic of re-nominating him - and I certainly am willing to support him officially. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 23:53, 28 October 2018 (UTC)


 * SelfieCity has made himself very valuable to this project and I believe he's established his trustworthiness. I'd be pleased for him to have admin tools to help swab down the deck and keep the sails up. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:10, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. today and always, proactive and indefatigable about improving the travel guide. Ibaman (talk) 00:19, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support SelfieCity has always been a tireless worker but now has the nuanced understanding of WV's history which was one of the concerns expressed by people in the first nomination. Definitely ready now. Gizza ( roam ) 01:11, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I am very happy to see this re-nomination. SelfieCity has learned a great deal over the past months and will be an excellent admin. Support. Ground Zero (talk) 04:14, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support SC has over the last months been active and shown great interest in different types of administrative tasks, and I believe he knows the policies and customs well, so sure, he gets a support vote from me. ϒpsilon (talk) 18:12, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment: I currently have about 9,000 contributions. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk | contributions ) 00:16, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support Andrewssi2 (talk) 00:50, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Not yet. I think SelfieCity needs to learn still more about WV's policies and practices. Two months' ago they tried to move a page by doing a cut and paste - see here. SelfieCity is well-intentioned and enthusiastic, which is all great - just needs to be even more familiar with things. I have hesitated to say "not yet", because I don't like to discourage well-intentioned editors. To avoid discouraging, I was going to suggest that SelfieCity be given some other tools as an intermediate step, but I see that they have already been given Patroller rights recently, and I support that. Since then, I see they have accidentally used the "rollback" button on mobile, and are trying to avoid doing so again - so perhaps further reason to exercise caution and give them more time to practise with a few tools first. Sorry, SelfieCity - but do keep learning. Nurg (talk) 01:38, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I think it may be worth clarifying that, during my first nomination in June, it was stated that we should wait 6 months–year before another nomination. I was planning to renominate myself around January 2019, but the nomination was brought up earlier &mdash; I think it was October of this year. However, objections were raised, but at the end of last month the person who raised the main objections stated that they would now support my nomination. Therefore, I nominated myself.


 * So that is why I nominated myself. By no means do I blame those who raised objections for this current situation. I am willing to go either way with this nomination, but I encourage those editors who voted support before to review my comment and Nurg's comment and re-evaluate. That way, we can decide the nomination one way or the other. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk | contributions ) 03:01, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I have struck out my comment about the rollback accident. I do not use the mobile version and did not know that its user-unfriendliness leads to accidental rollbacks. Nurg (talk) 08:27, 10 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Not yet. I didn't want to be the one to do it, but my main objection is - why so soon? SC was only given patroller rights a week before the nomination. When the nomination began, he'd only patrolled 7 mainspace edits. Now that I check again, he's done a few more, but it's still very little. Shouldn't some time be spent with the patroller tools first? ARR8 (talk) 03:25, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I think some of us need to think about whether we're holding prospective admins to an unreasonable standard. "I see they have accidentally used the 'rollback' button on mobile". "He's only patrolled 7 mainspace edits [since becoming an autopatroller a week ago]." With all due respect, are you people joking? I've been an administrator for going on six years and, barring some massive sea change in the consensus, I'll be taking a step up to bureaucrat in a few days. Seven mainspace edits patrolled is seven more than I've done in the last week. And I still do accidental rollbacks from time to time. It's got nothing to do with poor judgment and everything to do with the user-unfriendliness of the mobile version of this site. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 03:48, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I also continue to make rollback errors, and I do not know all of our policies well. I will continue to learn, as SelfieCity is doing, and apologize where I make mistakes, as SelfieCity does. We don't have a lot of active administrators, and that puts a burden on us. We could use more help, and SC is absolutely the right person for the job. Ground Zero (talk) 03:58, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Support just. Activity and enthusiasm, no question there. Has a few times not fully understood policy or technical topic and jumped to conclusions. But on the whole as come a long way in a short time and we are all still learning and make mistakes. As the main point of admin is blocking and cleaning up after vandals, is not about being a badge of merit, and we need more help in this area on balance I think this is a good idea. --Traveler100 (talk) 09:55, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
 * By my count, we have 16 active administrators to monitor a 24-hour-a-day site. Ground Zero (talk) 11:11, 4 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment. Most people don't get patroller status; they go straight to admin. I was given patroller status because at the time Ikan Kekek still had some concerns related to the previous nomination. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk | <font color="Olive">contributions ) 14:38, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Support - While I understand some of the concerns about the user's freshness, we do actually need more of our active contributors to take on the admin's toolkit. The site is growing faster than I've ever seen it, so our cohort of admins must do too. Since some of our long-term users have repeatedly turned down the opportunity, we need to look to newer members of the team for help. In SelfieCity, we have an extremely active, enthusiastic, and trustworthy editor who has shown continued capacity to quickly learn from his mistakes and improve even more. He shows every sign of good faith in everything he does, and has in my view demonstrated commitment to Wikivoyage. Most importantly, he actually wants the job! And at the end of the day, there's nothing an administrator can do which can't be undone in a few minutes, and this will only get easier with the addition of a new bureaucrat any day now.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 15:37, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment - I haven't changed my mind. SelfieCity has been so active that his learning curve has been compressed to such a degree that what he did a few months ago is almost irrelevant, and I'm grateful to him for being willing to pick up a mop and pail. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:38, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. From my limited interaction with this individual, he seems to be courteous and knows what he's doing. <b style="color: #0000FF;">OhanaUnited</b><b style="color: green;">Talk page</b> 03:38, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment - I'd like to hear from those who voted not yet to see if they have been persuaded by the responses to their reasoning, and whether they would be willing to reconsider? So that's directed . We don't need unanimity of course, but it would help to know if you thought your concerns had been addressed. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 15:17, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes and no. There were some good points raised, but, precisely because we don't need unanimity, I'd rather keep my 'vote' the way it is. I want to make it clear that I have thought about this. For me, more important than janitorial work for an admin is their role in representing the site to new editors. I acknowledge that having more administrators would be helpful, but I think mistakes and learning experiences should be had while not serving as a model and potentially misleading new editors, and I predict that a few more learning experiences are in store for SC. ARR8 (talk) 18:39, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * If the nomination passes (and if it remains with only two "not yets" and no "nevers", I consider it has sufficient support), I would congratulate SelfieCity and say, "You'll be fine with the admin tools as long as you are cautious and use them in line with policies." However, I am not sure whether caution is part of SelfieCity's nature. Am I misjudging perhaps? Nurg (talk) 03:01, 9 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Question: I'd like to ask those of you who don't support making SelfieCity an admin: If we hold off now, how much longer would you like to wait before reconsidering? Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:31, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't support holding off now. The concerns expressed by the minority here are not only overblown, but they betray a fundamental misunderstanding of what exactly the roles and responsibilities of an admin are, to such a degree that I think both "not yet" votes ought to be rejected as lacking policy-based rationales. Specifically, there's nothing written in our policy that says admins are representatives of the site or liaisons to new users or anything like that, nor is that true de facto. On Wikivoyage there are quite a few editors, such as Ypsilon and K7L just off the top of my head, who are not admins yet are active and prolific enough for new users to seek them out for assistance. There are also quite a few administrators who are inactive or borderline inactive and thus cannot really be said to have any role on Wikivoyage at all, at least currently. As for SelfieCity's alleged recklessness, we are forgetting just how little actual, irreparable damage can be done with admin-level sysop tools. The question is not whether SelfieCity will misuse the tools; if it were, every admin who's ever mistakenly hit the rollback button ought to be desysopped. The question is whether he will do so in bad faith. And I think the obvious answer to that question is no. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 19:20, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Ikan. I have no specific period in mind. Are you thinking that with the two "not yets" we are below the bar for consensus? Nurg (talk) 09:12, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * No, we probably have consensus, but I'm happy to hear the "not yets" out. If you aren't sure what could satisfy you, though, I wouldn't see a point in suggesting we wait for x amount of time and reconsider. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:21, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure on a specific period. I would have had fewer reservations with the original planned January date, but it seems ridiculous to think a two-month wait would make any difference now. If I were to call for more than that, I don't think anyone would agree, since so many editors think that now is fine.
 * Briefly, regarding the points raised above: Wikivoyage admins are de facto representatives of the site. How is a new user supposed to tell the difference between a prolific user and a barely-active one? They're new. ARR8 (talk) 16:34, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

It's 14 days, as of now. I think we have a consensus. But if others would rather keep debating, let's try to wrap it up soon.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 21:08, 11 November 2018 (UTC)


 * My count is 10 supports, 2 not yets, and 1 neutral (me). Two of the supports are bureaucrats, the rest are mostly admins, and of the not yet votes I believe one is an admin and the other is a fairly new user. Votes don't mean everything; it's consensus that counts, but this is a general picture of it all as I see it. --Comment by <font color="Olive">Selfie City  ( talk | <font color="Olive">contributions ) 21:14, 11 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment: I want to say that I do understand the reasoning of the "not now"s. However, since there's no clear roadmap for how to accommodate you guys, other than by withdrawing this nomination indefinitely, the only solution seems to be to make SelfieCity an admin and see how he does. I think it's quite unlikely he'd do anything malicious with admin tools. If he should do anything rash, we could always reopen this discussion at that time, though I hasten to add that most types of rash actions aren't likely to lead to immediate de-sysopping.


 * I'd suggest keeping this thread open for another 24 hours in case anyone else wants to comment. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:07, 12 November 2018 (UTC)


 * I'm okay with that. --Comment by <font color="Olive">Selfie City  ( talk | <font color="Olive">contributions ) 02:15, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Ten people support and two have reservations, wishing that the renomination had not come so soon. That is a high level of support (albeit not unanimous, as it might have been 6 months or so after the previous nomination). I have already said that I consider the nomination has sufficient support and I interpret ARR8's remark that "we don't need unanimity" to mean they think similarly. Fourteen days have passed and I see no need to wait. Congratulations SelfieCity, you'll be fine with the admin tools as long as you are cautious and use them in line with policies. Would a bureaucrat please hand out a mop to SelfieCity. Nurg (talk) 10:28, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
 * My thoughts exactly. ARR8 (talk) 14:48, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

✅. Welcome aboard, SelfieCity. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 15:37, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --Comment by <font color="Olive">Selfie City  ( talk | <font color="Olive">contributions ) 17:50, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

User:JakeOregon for Patroller
This is not an admin nom, just that Jake is a very active and helpful editor who would like to have the ability to roll back vandalism with one click, and although we have more admins now, there are still times when no admins are active and Jake is. If you look at User talk:JakeOregon and his user contributions, I think you'll find him trustworthy, and I doubt this nomination will be controversial but thought that since the status of Patroller comes with a couple of tools, going by the book means making a nomination here, though not necessarily waiting 14 days if a clear consensus develops more quickly than that. Do you agree that Patroller noms should be put here, or is that unnecessary?
 * Support as nominator. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:35, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't think a patroller nomination is necessary. We didn't have one for SelfieCity two weeks ago. You didn't hold one for me or Hobbitschuster a couple of years ago. That said, I support Jake's nom.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 19:57, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Agree with TT but of course I support if we're going to do a nomination. I brought up something similar for User:K7L, but I can think of at least one more person who is a trusted user on Wikivoyage who doesn't have patroller status. We should use this status for people who don't want to be an administrator but are trustworthy. --Comment by <font color="Olive">Selfie City  ( talk | <font color="Olive">contributions ) 20:17, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I thought we did have one for SelfieCity. We never have noms for Autopatroller, but I'm unclear about Patroller because it's a much newer designation, or at least wasn't used on this site until more recently. I'll start a thread on the talk page, so we can determine whether a nom is needed for this status. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:37, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I guess this thread isn't necessary. I'll wait a few hours, and if there are no other comments, I'll just make the change. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:27, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Moved here. I'll flip the switch right after I finish posting this sentence. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:21, 19 November 2018 (UTC)