Wikivoyage:User rights nominations/Archives/2021

User:CatDog1234539
I nominate myself for administrator rights.

I am nominating myself because I have made a lot of very constructive edits on the mainspace and I have a good grip on the policies. I also have been reverting vandalism and reporting it to admins as well. Finally, I'm good at working with the community and posting messages on article talk pages for any fixes needed to be made. Thanks! CatDog1234539 (talk) 16:20, 13 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Your help is appreciated, but you have less than 1 month of contributions, and just in the past week, you were involved in some controversy in welcoming new users who hadn't made any edits or whose only edits to the site were vandalistic. Come back in a year or two after you've demonstrated a record of valuable participation in discussions about policy and shown consistent good judgment in your interactions on the site. Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:29, 13 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose per above; also, to nominate oneself to adminship is really unheard of and sounds very preposterous; most Wikivoyage admins were actually invited to the post after a long record of valuable edits. You should strive to attain autopatroller status first, which cannot be simply asked for, must be earned as well. Ibaman (talk) 18:03, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Not yet - Contrary to user:Ibaman's comment, anyone is welcome to nominate themselves, per the first sentence in the green box. However, I agree that you're too new to Wikivoyage to become an admin. You've made a good start, but you need months more experience and a proven track record. Since I can't imagine anyone is going to support your nomination at this time, and there's no point in more and more people piling in with the same answer, I propose that a bureaucrat should close this nomination early, but only with your permission.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 19:09, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Fine I'll come back in a few months. CatDog1234539 (talk) 19:13, 13 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Archived as unsuccessful. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:35, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

User:KevRobbAU
User -.

Reason - KevRobbAU is very experienced and active on Wikivoyage since 2019, engaged in janitorial work in Wikivoyage as the user is frequently on the Travellers Pub. Since this user is currently an auto-patroller now on WV, I think this user would highly benefit these tools. As for the last days, KevRobbAU has been creating a new article for each and every town in New South Wales, which are mostly outlines but still can be used, which compels me to action to nominate.

Thanks, TravelAroundOz (talk) 07:59, 27 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I don't think he's engaged in any policy discussions, and has he said he wants to be an admin? Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:12, 27 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Not sure. But he was involved in the filter discussion; which was one of the major discussions here at my time here at WV. TravelAroundOz (talk) 10:05, 27 February 2021 (UTC)


 * You mean he complained about a filter he was unintentionally caught in. That's not the kind of policy discussion I'm talking about. He simply hasn't been here long enough or engaged in policy and organizational discussions sufficiently to be an admin. I'm very happy to have him as a content-creator, as he's doing a great job at that! If he does want to be an admin, we can reconsider that in a year or so. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:10, 27 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I mean, do what you think what's best. TravelAroundOz (talk) 11:00, 27 February 2021 (UTC)


 * That's really not an argument, and I don't make unilateral decisions here. Look at the text box at the top of his page. I'd ask you two questions: (1) Do you really think he fulfills all the criteria? (2) Are you yourself familiar enough with Wikivoyage policies to have sufficient information, knowledge and experience to be able to determine that he does? It's no disrespect to say that both he and you are doing great content-creation and that neither of you are close to ready to be given moderation tools that need to be used with a longer track record and clear knowledge of Wikivoyage policies. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:31, 27 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Actually, forget about my request. Considering that Kev is blocked on the french wikipedia, let me take back the request. TravelAroundOz (talk) 07:56, 1 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Contributions to fr.wikipedia here. It's unfortunate that he got himself blocked by edit warring over matters of style in a foreign language. I don't think that's all that relevant to his record here, but no-one else has even noticed this thread, so I'll archive it within 24 hours if nothing changes. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:17, 1 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Archived as unsuccessful. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:23, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

User:Antandrus
While he has only around 50 edits on Wikivoyage, he does deal with the trolling history vandal and I think giving the tools so he can block those IP adresses would be greatly beneficial for the entirety of Wikivoyage and the ability to edit the abuse filter would be greatly beneficial as well. Additionally, he's an admin on enwiki so he does have experience of being an admin. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 00:15, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you SHB2000 -- while I accept the nomination, I would completely understand if others do not want me to be an admin here yet -- really, won't hurt my feelings -- but I promise I'd use the tools for good. I seriously need to do some content work here, e.g. on places in the US I know well. If people think I don't have enough experience specifically at Wikivoyage, go ahead and oppose and I'll probably withdraw.

I've been an admin at the English Wikipedia since April 2005. I think I'm one of the longest-term admins still active every day, and I am looking for opportunities to get more involved in other Wikimedia projects. Antandrus (talk) 00:44, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes please, I'd love some more work on the US. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 00:46, 19 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Support as nominator SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 00:15, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
 * do you want admin rights here? We should wait for the user to accept the nomination --DannyS712 (talk) 00:21, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
 * He's Accepted it/ SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 00:47, 19 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Support. I had thought you were a steward and wouldn't need more rights here. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:52, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Support. Their assistance here would be much appreciated. Ground Zero (talk) 02:02, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Support can be trusted with the rights, would be helpful --DannyS712 (talk) 02:14, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Support. Confident that giving Antandrus the admin tools will be a clear net benefit, especially in fighting cross-wiki vandalism. Also good to hear that Antandrus is keen to work on content creation. Gizza ( roam ) 02:52, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Support per nom, though I might like him to make a local userpage. Certainly not going to misuse the tools. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 10:36, 19 April 2021 (UTC) Per TT. Might be oppose, due to how severe the vandalism in question is. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 09:22, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Abstain - I have no reason to doubt Antandrus' trustworthiness, and would like to support, but I'm concerned that his appointment will encourage a lot more abuse from the vandal specifically on Wikivoyage and aimed at its users. It's not his fault, but it seems like wherever Antandrus goes, the vandal follows.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:10, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
 * He abuses User:DannyS712 the same way as well. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 09:24, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
 * And right on cue, I just got an abusive email from user:Naszagrace; I expect some of you did too.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:26, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Me too. Ground Zero (talk) 09:34, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
 * And I think I have a page on wikipediasucks.co now. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 09:33, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Yep, I did as well. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 09:34, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Anyway, I'm creating a new gmail and not publish it on meta. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 09:49, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The vandal's already here, though, and attacked Antandrus here numerous times before I had any idea who Antandrus was. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:52, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Granted. But take a look at today's recent changes to see the volume of edits that SHB2000 and I have had to deal with for much of the morning (UTC). I'm not opposing or criticising anyone else for supporting the nomination, but regretfully I can't do it myself.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 12:43, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Probably more than the amount I revert on enwiki for an hour. I think I used rollback more than ever today. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 12:45, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
 * If it would on balance be more harmful to the site for Antandrus to have an official status here than it will be helpful to have Antandrus' expertise here, we shouldn't give him admin tools. But how do we make that cost/benefit analysis? Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:17, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Well -- do what's best for the project. I'm fine either way you go. -- Honestly, when I started adminning at enwiki 16 years ago I had no idea that an occupational hazard of anti-vandal work was becoming the target of extreme mental illness in the form of a 24/7 stalker. You get to be good at identifying a particular individual, one who takes pride in his ability to pretend to be multiple people, and you may yourself become a target. He was here before I was; I run a routine a couple times a day to find him WMF-wide, and I noticed he was starting to like Wikivoyage. If I become an admin here I'll help remove his rubbish as always; if I don't, I still can, but more quietly. Anyway -- I want to do some work here for reasons utterly unrelated to this irritating problem. Antandrus (talk) 14:46, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I guess I should say this: I'm supporting your nomination specifically so that you can help filter out the abuse. You don't need admin status to contribute here, and under normal circumstances, I'd probably want you to be a regular user here for several months before I'd support this nomination, but we really need all hands on deck. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:25, 30 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Support. Nurg (talk) 10:27, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Support. Ibaman (talk) 00:39, 21 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I was abstaining because I do not really know Antandrus & for about the reasons TT gives above. However, I've now had both an abusive post on my talk page for daring to edit the Smolensk article and several annoying incoherent emails badmouthing Antandrus. I conclude that the vandal here is an utter jerk. Giving Antandrus admin tools might help suppress him, her or them, so the idea now has my full support. Pashley (talk) 08:11, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Actually quite surprised that this was your first email attack. Very sorry to hear this, luckily, you've only got one and I think he's on his 40th now for me. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 12:56, 21 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Question: I guess what I would want to know is whether the quotations in the email sent by the vandal are accurate. Because they are pretty disturbing. Powers (talk) 12:35, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't really know except that he says that what ever I, DannyS712 or Antandrus say, is false (stated in emails). I've been attacked by him 40 times now but he tends to use different email addresses to make the same point. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 12:39, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Chances are they're the inaccurate imaginings of someone with a serious psychological condition. The fact is, you can't know for sure, so you'll just have to decide for yourself whom to believe. However, it is my view that we should do the utmost to keep the tornado of this decades-long dispute at arm's length from this project, hence my abstention.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 12:51, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I've spent some time looking into this to see if we should be concerned about picking sides between Antandrus and the vandal, and no, I have no concerns at all. Antandrus remains an administrator in good standing at Wikipedia despite all of this. The vandal's behaviour demonstrates clearly that they cannot be a constructive contributor here, or to any collaborative project. If I had a neighbour like this vandal, I would sell my apartment and move. There is no reason to believe there is any truth in what they write. Ground Zero (talk) 12:56, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Exactly, you'd sell up and move. You wouldn't invite a person they're obsessed with to join you though.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 12:59, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
 * As others have pointed out, the vandal found us before Antandrus came here. I am sure that if we thought the vandal would leave us alone if Antandrus left, Antandrus would leave, but I think that is a very naive concept. We are stuck with the vandal, and Antandrus is the best person to help us deal with the vandal. Ground Zero (talk) 14:03, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
 * [edit conflict] For 15 years, that's a long time. And I know Antandrus will be resilient with these admin tools, as he's been resilient for the last 15 years. FYI, I would have left Wikivoyage on my Day 1 here if it weren't for one admin. And then there's Antandrus, who's been resilient. (I'm sorry for repeating myself again). And to Antandrus, I have to say, you're probably the most resilient editor on any WMF project. And I'd tell you, if I had a neighbour who was like that, I'll leave the suburb. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 13:00, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you. You know -- I did a bunch of thinking about this last night, as I started to edit some travel-related information to places near where I live, and he predictably showed up to harass me -- he mostly leaves us alone on enwiki now, where I have admin tools. As soon as he shows up I hit him with the flyswatter. He moves on to what he thinks weakly-defended wikis where people don't recognize him (e.g. Wikidata at the moment). I don't know what is in the emails you have gotten recently, but the ones I have seen contain libelous and obscene nonsense, mostly psychological projections beyond my lay ability to diagnose. They're the filthiest things he can imagine, and usually related to something he himself is doing. No, I am not a criminal, stalker, privacy-violator, or whatever else. This guy did, however, spend three years in jail in Chicago for stalking and harassment, including of public figures (a judge, a university administrator). That was the only period in 15 years when he has left us alone. He is not sane, and he has a fixation on a bunch of WMF people who he thinks are responsible for his suffering. We're not. He needs help we cannot provide. Anyway I've probably said too much. I would like to help out here, but honestly I'm more interested in adding content over the long run than in battling one psychotic troublemaker. Antandrus (talk) 14:31, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Agree. But strangely enough, in one of his emails, he sent his own criminal record, and if you want the link, email me as even he deserves privacy. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 21:10, 21 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Support - if Antandrus or anyone else has a long career as an admin on other wikis, there's no reason to believe they would misuse the tools here. If they're familiar with cross-wiki vandals and their MO's on other wikis then that's even better. (15 years of vandalizing wikis really tells everything about the history vandal, apparently the same person we know as the Rocky vandal) Ypsilon (talk) 13:56, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Support I don't actually follow what's going on here but, since I got this email, figured I'll come and look. Antandrus has a long career on other wikis so there isn't likely to any issue with their admin actions. I don't think we should give credence to, or be held hostage by, any editor with a vested interest in keeping them out of the admin corps. --RegentsPark (talk) 15:02, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
 * You're still an admin here. Stop by a little more often if you like. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:40, 21 April 2021 (UTC)


 * support Why not? Cheers, &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 16:55, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Abstain Support He's still not very experienced with Wikivoyage, so I'm not sure if we should wait a while to give him time to familiarise himself with our community conventions. That said, given that he's an admin on Wikipedia, I have no reason to believe he will abuse the tools here. By the way, I also received an e-mail from the vandal in question. The dog2 (talk) 04:26, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The thing is, he doesn't do this on enwiki because he's an admin over there. Hope he stops here after he's an admin here. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 07:40, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Given that I received another e-mail laden with expletives from the vandal, I'm changing my vote to support. The dog2 (talk) 04:48, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * It seems like now every major contributor has had at least one email, of course, there'll be exceptions but this guy stops this wherever Antandrus or DannyS712 is admin. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 06:52, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I would disagree with this. He does not stop just because someone who reverts his edits becomes an admin. Take a look on the Simple English Wikipedia, for example. He continues to edit here even though DannyS712 is an admin. --Ferien (talk) 18:09, 25 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Support, mostly because the repeated email spam I received arguing against them was so unhinged that it's clear I should do the oppose of what they want me to do. Jpatokal (talk) 05:09, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
 * +1 &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 19:07, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Support. I am not usually comfortable with someone having <100 edits to be an admin on a site like this. That being said, it appears from the community that his help would much valued. If you do become an admin, work on the abuse filters, because that's what I think can best help the community. You on your own can only do so much. Also please allow global sysops on this wiki - there isn't a reason not to. Leaderboard (talk) 12:36, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The consensus is clear: it's time to close this discussion and give Antandrus his sysop rights.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 08:54, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Done. Please archive this for me, as I'm exhausted. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:08, 5 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Promoted SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 10:13, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

User:SHB2000
SHB2000 has indicated on their talk page an interest in being an administrator. I believe they meet all criteria, and would make an excellent administrator. They:

1. Have been a contributor for at least a few months
 * They have made 11,000 edits since beginning contributing as a registered user on 25 Jan 2021, but had been contributing for nine months or so before registering

2. Have an extensive knowledge of our policies
 * They have demonstrated their knowledge of policies in particular by mentoring the new Nigerian editors

3. Have a history of article contribution, janitorial work, cleaning up articles, contributing to policy discussions, and combating vandalism/spam
 * They have:
 * created 53 main space articles, 5 of which are guide articles
 * created Barncompasses for many countries
 * participated in and initiated policy discussions such as this one
 * been very active in fighting vandals
 * swept the pub on several occasions
 * signed on as a docent on ten articles

4. Have a demonstrated ability to work with the community
 * They have been an active participant in pub discussions.
 * They have reactivated Australia Expedition

Ground Zero (talk) 18:54, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Support The dog2 (talk) 19:09, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Support It was only a matter of time before this nomination would start. I think SHB is an excellent contributor and a great admin candidate, much better than I. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 20:58, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * SelfieCity, as Ikan said, don't knock yourself. You are certainly a great admin here on this site both janitorial and content wise (especially to Florida articles) as well as helping the team of Nigerian contributors getting started with wikivoyage. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 02:55, 27 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Support. Don't knock yourself, SelfieCity. You're an excellent admin. In terms of this nomination, I'd sign onto everything User:Ground Zero said about User:SHB2000 above. What a great attitude and work ethic he has! Some remarks to SHB2000: When you become an admin, I think you will have to resume allowing IP users to post to your user talk page. Also, try not to let the less-destructive vandals get to you. Remember that Brendan normally uses a single account for 1-2 edits, so it's kind of useless to even block those accounts and definitely not worthwhile getting too upset or attempting to communicate with him, as he'll pay as much attention as a brick wall. And usernames that look like his socks sometimes aren't. We can tell sometimes by observing their editing behavior; other times, we can't, so it's often good to wait a day or so before reverting Brendan-like work that's suspicious but not clearly copyvio or worthless. We look forward to your being able to delete spam and vandalism pages and block users when needed, but don't get burnt out and lean on the rest of us when things are getting too damned annoying for you. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:16, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Support, why not? SHB2000 is of the top contributors here and they've also shown interest in admin-type tasks such as helping out the new Nigerian users, creating barnstars and fighting vandalism. --Ypsilon (talk) 09:34, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Support despite occasional errors. I do not expect admin candidates to have a perfect score, and this user meets my threshold for support. Leaderboard (talk) 10:22, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Support. Intense dedication to the Wikivoyage project, a lot of experience, good attitude. Antandrus (talk) 18:00, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Support for all the above reasons. Wikivoyage is lucky to have someone so heavily involved after only a few months.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 19:49, 26 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you everyone for the support! This does certainly make my week, and it does certainly lift my mood up from yesterday (Covid returned to Sydney - meaning I had to do a 14 hr road trip). I do well accept the nomination, and I hope I can use these tools for the better of the English Wikivoyage. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 00:22, 27 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Support LGTM --DannyS712 (talk) 01:17, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Support. I was thinking of asking SHB2000 soon myself. Agree with pretty much every comment above. Gizza ( roam ) 12:41, 27 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Result: Confirmed by acclamation. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:56, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

User:ArchiverBot
I'm nominating this bot for admin since I realized that this bot doesn't archive to pages that are protected. Therefore, just asking whether this bot should be given admin tools only for the reason of being able to archive protected pages. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:30, 7 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Which pages does it need to archive that are protected? Maybe the protection could be changed to the template editor level on those pages? -- WOSlinker (talk) 09:36, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * My archives are protected from vandalism and threats like this. I could give it temp editor rights for now, but I don't see why not ArchiverBot have admin status here. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:46, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't think it would be good security practise to give ArchiverBot admin rights, if that is only required for archiving one page. Granting a bot admin rights creates a tempting attack point for vandals. I think you need to consider the level of protection on your archive - why does it need more protection than the page it is archiving? Alternatively just archive manually every few months. AlasdairW (talk) 11:13, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * The answer to why is because that guy stalks me (for the last 4 months). In one of them, he wrote [removed as unnecessary]
 * It's why my talk page has been protected for about 3.5 months now, and which all my talk pages across all WMF projects have been vandalised about 80 times by him. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:05, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * It looks like your user page is protected so that only autoconfirmed users can edit, but the archive is protected so that only admins can edit. I don't see the need for the archive to have higher protection. I assume that ArchiverBot is autoconfirmed and so could run if your archive had the same protection as your user page. AlasdairW (talk) 20:45, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I made the bot a template editor, so I'll see how that goes. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 00:53, 8 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose - it's a security risk, and there's no demonstrated need.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 21:34, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose - I agree. I don't think it should be template editor either. –LPfi (talk) 08:46, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - Is there someone (or some help page) who could clarify what rights a template editor has? Is it just the ability to edit pages that are protected ("Allow only template editors and administrators"), or is there something more to it? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:39, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, just edit what pages are protected. Nothing else (or at least, that was all the changes that were available to me). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:43, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for that. I don't think I have a problem with the bot being a template editor.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 10:03, 20 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Support granting template editor rights. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 10:41, 20 August 2021 (UTC)


 * (Non bureaucrat closure) Outcome: Made template editor, not admin. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 23:53, 2 September 2021 (UTC)