Wikivoyage:User rights nominations/Archives/2019

User:JakeOregon
This user has been around for some time and is willing to become an admin, per User talk:JakeOregon. He has been a good user and example since he signed up and has the qualities we would want for a Wikivoyage admin. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 01:10, 10 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Support ARR8 (User talk:ARR8 | Special:Contributions/ARR8) 01:12, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Support. Yes indeed. He and ARR8 have both been extremely helpful, active users and haven't shown any indication of being anything but trustworthy. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:04, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Support He's been quite helpful! Mbrickn (talk) 02:19, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Support JakeOregon has been a great, dedicated editor who will help Wikivoyage further with the mop. Gizza ( roam ) 03:15, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Support Sure! -- ϒψιλον (talk ) 07:48, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment - I am not too familiar with Jake's contributions, so I had a look. In his most recent 1000 edits (i.e. roughly since he was made patroller), there are very few talk page contributions, and zero contributions to pages like the pub. In my view, an admin must take part in such discussions regularly both so that they are visible and credible to the community, and also so they themselves can maintain a solid and current understanding of policy.


 * Secondly, there is a lack of reverts in Jake's history - this may be considered a positive, as it shows a constructive, rather than combative, approach to edits. On the other hand, in this period of high vandal activity, I would have liked to have seen some use of his patroller tools against vandals. That is the bread and butter of being an admin, is it not? All the successful adminnoms that I have seen here have been for users who were already engaged in admin-like activities prior to nomination. I can see little evidence for this from Jake.


 * None of this is to detract from Jake's excellent contributions to article space; he's clearly an active, committed Wikivoyager and, like the rest of you, I have no doubts about his trustworthiness.


 * So, put me down as on the fence. I can't support this nom with the information I currently have, but I could be persuaded by some of you who have shown faith in Jake, and also by Jake himself. What would he do with the admin tools?--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:01, 10 February 2019 (UTC)


 * I think this is a question for you, JakeOregon. What would you expect to do with admin tools? Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:18, 10 February 2019 (UTC)


 * JakeOregon is a prolific contributor, which is commendable, but that alone does not a good admin make. Indeed, I've yet to see anything from this user that indicates any real interest in doing anything at Wikivoyage other than adding content. In his contribution history I'm seeing next to no activity in projectspace or on talk pages, as ThunderingTyphoons already said, and furthermore I'm also seeing one particular bad habit that indicates a fundamental misunderstanding of a core Wikivoyage policy: virtually none of the listings he's added include any blurbs in the "comment=" argument, or anything other than contact information and URLs where applicable. Policy, of course, says that we're supposed to provide information to the listings we add in order to contextualize them within our coverage of the destination or topic and explain their significance, rather than simply feed readers bullet-point lists of POIs with only addresses and contact information attached. I'd love to see Jake on our admin team someday, but not yet, and frankly we've got a ways to go before we can confidently talk about such a promotion. I'd need to see him demonstrate an interest in and propensity toward engaging and collaborating with other editors, and I'd need some sense of how familiar he is with site policy: the aforementioned habit of adding naked bullet-point listings may be an indication of larger deficiencies in that area or it may be a fluke, but given the aforementioned lack of contributions anywhere other than mainspace, we can't know for sure. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 23:36, 10 February 2019 (UTC)


 * I'm not yet convinced by the "not yet" arguments, because from what I see, this is still a trustworthy user. But I will take a quicker look at his contributions and consider whether I should change my vote. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 01:23, 11 February 2019 (UTC)


 * I'm now changing my vote to not yet per User talk:SelfieCity. I plan to close this nomination in the near future. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 01:47, 11 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Result: nomination unsuccessful; the user has decided that he does not want to become an admin. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 01:48, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

User:ARR8
This user has accepted this nomination; see User talk:ARR8. A trusted user with a good record and good contributions, including some improvements to the listing editor we use. A few months ago, ARR8 felt it was too early to become administrator, but with the user's great record, I think we're now all ready to make a new administrator out of ARR8. I support making ARR8 an admin and, judging from User talk:ARR8, it's clear that others will also be quick to support this nomination. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 19:27, 2 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Support -- ϒψιλον (talk ) 19:35, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
 * ARR8 has my support.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 19:58, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Support -- WOSlinker (talk) 23:03, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Support. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:18, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Support Ground Zero (talk) 00:07, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Support ARR8 has been an excellent editor since joining Wikivoyage. Gizza ( roam ) 06:05, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Support --Traveler100 (talk) 18:04, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Support wholeheartedly. A more-than-worthy addition to our admin team. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 18:19, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Support--JakeOregon (talk) 23:47, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Definitely -- Matroc (talk) 17:10, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Support. May he be very welcome to the frontline. Ibaman (talk) 17:17, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Support. --Inas (talk) 22:51, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment: could we wait on this nomination just a couple more days? I do not intend to oppose the nomination, but there is an issue brought up at User_talk:ARR8 that I think needs to be addressed before ARR8 becomes an admin. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 14:55, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Support. ARR8 is a great editor. It seems to me a minor disagreement over section header formatting is not a concern at all. —Granger (talk · contribs) 15:29, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, I misunderstood the concern. As I have stated on User talk:ARR8, since that is such a minor issue, I think the nomination should go ahead now. From the original comments on that talk page, it seemed to be a very serious concern, which is why I took the action I did on this page. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 17:31, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I was the one who raised that issue with ARR8, but it is not a big issue, and I continue to support his/her nomination for admin. Ground Zero (talk) 17:43, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

User:ARR8
request for interface-admin rights

The norm for this type of request seems to be a self-nom, so I have opened one.

I have done much interface-related work on Wikivoyage. Much of this has been by proxy, as a peek at the bottom of User talk:WOSlinker will exemplify, since I cannot edit many of these files without this user right. I ask for this right to make it easier to do some of the work I already do. In the past, this has included, among other things, substantial additions and fixes to the listing editor, and an almost complete rewrite of much of the main page code to make it work better on mobile. Some other such tasks are listed at UX Expedition.

I think the record also shows that I do not make changes to these parts of the site without consensus, and I believe I have been open to questions/suggestions about interface changes. When I make strictly-technical changes, I take great care to make sure nothing changes from the point of view of editors or users.

Sometimes I have inadvertently introduced bugs while making interface edits. Some number of bugs is unavoidable with technical work, and having this right would in fact make it easier to undo these bugs quickly.

There are some minor bug fixes I would like to implement now, and I think I have bothered the current interface admins enough :). Thanks for your time. ARR8 (User talk:ARR8 | Special:Contributions/ARR8) 18:31, 4 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Support. This user has certainly earned our trust, and we could always use more hands on deck when it comes to this kind of technical work. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 18:38, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Support. Definitely trustworthy. Ground Zero (talk) 18:43, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Support Let's give ARR8 whatever rights he needs; I might be wrong but I don't think we have very many voyagers who know coding well. --Ypsilon (talk) 19:21, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Support - always does a good job. --Traveler100 (talk) 19:42, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Support. I don't think I even fully understand what you say you're doing, but whatever it is, I'd like you to be able to do it unimpeded. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Abstain. To be clear, I am not opposed to this nomination, but because of what took place at Travellers%27 pub I do not feel I should give an opinion on this matter. However, it is always good to see users get more involved in the project. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 20:34, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Support. I have full confidence in ARR8's technical abilities and judgement. —Granger (talk · contribs) 07:20, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Support. WOSlinker (talk) 14:12, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Support - Gizza ( roam ) 01:41, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Result: Nomination successful. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:25, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

User:Bigpeteb
I noticed that (s)he's been an active contributor, and has been doing a lot of janitorial work, particularly on the English language varieties and Japan articles, and has also reverted vandalism. Therefore, I'm proposing that this user be given administrator tools to be able to do a lot of this stuff more easily. I'm not an admin so don't take my word for it, but I'm sure (s)he would be a good addition to the team, if (s)he is willing. The dog2 (talk) 17:29, 6 June 2019 (UTC)


 * That's an important question. User:Bigpeteb, would you be willing to serve as an admin? Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:07, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Preemptively, I'm going to voice some hesitation. Bigpeteb's record as an editor in mainspace is exemplary, and he's also shown himself willing to engage with the rest of our editor community on talk pages when the need arises. But his contribution history in projectspace is almost nonexistent. This is an important barometer we use to suss out how good of a handle a prospective admin has on policy. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 22:00, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
 * What about giving the user patroller status for now? --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 03:01, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Let's wait and see if he wants to be a patroller. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:46, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Agreed. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 04:36, 7 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Well, I'm flattered and honored by the suggestion, and by the confidence everyone has in my ability to contribute positively. But I think I have to agree; I've mainly just been an ordinary contributor who's been vigilant in helping to maintain a number of pages I have a personal interest in or knowledge of. For me, WV is just something to do when I have a bit of free time at work. 😒 I really can't commit more time to WV than what I already put in, and I don't think administrator status is something I would really make much use of. Patrolling, I could probably do, although again since I can only manage small bits of time here and there, I'm not sure there would be too many edits for me to patrol that someone else wouldn't take care of first. --Bigpeteb (talk) 16:10, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying. We can give you patroller status if no-one objects. No vote needs to be taken to approve a nomination for patroller, though. I'll just wait 24 hours to see if anyone has any hesitation about granting you that status. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:30, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Done. I think we can archive this nomination now, unless anyone else has any quick remarks for whatever reason. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:53, 8 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Result: Made a Patroller, not an Admin. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:17, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

User:traveler100bot
This is a bot I control to do mass edits using AutoWikiBrowser. Request to temporarily give it admin rights so that I can edit protected user pages (most of which are User:(WT-en) pages). Intention is to replace all the individual 305 user language templates with the #bable module. --Traveler100 (talk) 07:09, 2 June 2019 (UTC) Can we get this activated? Should be able to get this done over the weekend. --Traveler100 (talk) 01:27, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Support. Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:50, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Support per reason stated. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 14:08, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Support. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 22:01, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Support Ground Zero (talk) 22:09, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Support The dog2 (talk) 22:10, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I have a vague sense that 7 votes are needed, but that could be wrong. What's the minimum number of votes for this kind of nomination to be successful? Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:38, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Consensus from the community, including at least two administrators, after 14 days of discussion. Nurg (talk) 09:30, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Is there any minimum number of users needed to amount to a consensus? Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:56, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Not that I can find. The last paragraph in the green header above just says consensus, and Administrators says consensus, including at least two administrators. Nurg (talk) 08:05, 14 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Support. On the bot's user page, I see it's been used for other tasks in the past. It can be useful to have a bot here on Wikivoyage with administrative privileges (if there isn't one already), not only for the babel templates but also for future situations where a large number of protected pages need to be edited. Ypsilon (talk) 05:58, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
 * This is a bot that I control, and I already have admin privileges. Just want to keep these edits separate from my normal edits. Bot has already run over all user pages that do not have admin protection on. Those that are left are mainly WT users and a few admins that have close of page because of vandal targeting. --Traveler100 (talk) 20:18, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Point well taken. I'll promote the bot if no-one objects within 24 hours. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:28, 13 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Traveler100, I've made the bot an admin. You said make it an admin temporarily but didn't give a number or days, weeks or whatever, so it's an admin indefinitely. I can change that if you like, or you can just contact me whenever you'd like me to end its admin status. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:57, 14 June 2019 (UTC)