This page is semi-protected against editing.

Commons:Administrators

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
(Redirected from Commons:ADMIN)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Translate this page; This page contains changes which are not marked for translation.

Shortcuts: COM:A • COM:ADMIN • COM:SYSOP

Commons guideline.png
This page is considered an official guideline on Wikimedia Commons. It illustrates standards or behaviors which most editors agree with in principle and generally follow. Feel free to update the page as needed, but please use the discussion page to propose major changes.
Other languages:
Commons Administrator.svg

This page explains the role of administrators (sometimes called admins or sysops) on Wikimedia Commons. Note that details of the role, and the way in which administrators are appointed, may differ from other sites.

If you want to request administrator help, please post at Administrators' noticeboard.

There are currently 204 administrators on Commons.

What is an administrator?

Administrators as of December 2021 [+/−]
Listing by language • Listing by date • Listing by activity

Number of Admins: 204

  1. -revi, ko, en-3 (steward)
  2. 1Veertje, nl, en-4, de-1, fr-1
  3. 32X, de, en-2, hsb-1, ru-1
  4. 4nn1l2, fa, en-3, ar-1
  5. 99of9, en (bureaucrat)
  6. A.Savin, ru, de-4, en-2
  7. Achim55, de, en-3, nds-3, la-2
  8. AFBorchert, de, en-3
  9. Ahmad252, fa, en-3, ar-1
  10. Ahonc, uk, ru-4, en-2, de-1
  11. Aka, de, en-3
  12. Alan, es, eu-3, en-2
  13. Alno, fr, en-3, es-2, pt-1
  14. Amada44, de, en-3, fr-1
  15. Andre Carrotflower, en, es-3, fr-3, de-2
  16. Андрей Романенко, ru, en-3, uk-3, be-2, fr-2, lv-2
  17. Ankry, pl, en-2, ru-1
  18. AnRo0002, de, en-2, fr-2, es-1
  19. Anthere, fr, en-3
  20. AntiCompositeNumber, en, fr-2
  21. Arthur Crbz, fr, en-4, es-3
  22. Aude, en, ar-2, de-2, es-3
  23. Benoît Prieur,fr, en-3, pt-2, es-1, it-1, hy-1
  24. Billinghurst, en
  25. Blackcat, it, en-3, fr
  26. BrightRaven, fr, en-3, nl-2, es-2, zh-1
  27. Butko, ru, uk-2, en-1
  28. Captain-tucker, en
  29. Christian Ferrer, fr, en-2, es-2
  30. Ciell, nl, en-2, de-1
  31. clpo13, en
  32. Common Good, en
  33. Cookie, es, en-2
  34. CptViraj, gu, hi-4, en-3
  35. Cromium, en, de-1, fr-1 (steward)
  36. Czar, en
  37. DaB., de, en-1
  38. DarwIn, pt, en-3, es-2, fr-2, gl-2, ca-1, it-1, oc-1
  39. Davepape, en
  40. David Levy, en
  41. De728631, de, en-5
  42. DerHexer, de, en-3, grc-3, la-3, es-1 (steward)
  43. Dharmadhyaksha, mr, en-3, hi-3
  44. DMacks, en
  45. Didym, de, en-2, fr-2
  46. Dyolf77, ar, fr-5, en-2, it-1, es-1
  47. D-Kuru, de, en-2, it-1
  48. Ebrahim, fa, en-3
  49. Elcobbola en, de (checkuser)
  50. Ellin Beltz, en (bureaucrat)
  51. Ellywa, nl, en-2, de-1, fr-1
  52. Emha, de, bar, en-3, fr-1
  53. Érico, pt, en-2, es-1
  54. EugeneZelenko, ru, be, en-2, bg-1, pl-1 (bureaucrat)
  55. Explicit, en, es, ko-2
  56. Ezarate, es-3, en-1
  57. Fitindia, en-3, hi-2, mr-2
  58. Flominator, de, als, en-3
  59. FunkMonk, da, en-4, no-3, fo-2, sv-2, de-1, es-1
  60. Gbawden, en-3, af-1
  61. Geagea, he, ka-3, en-3, ru-1
  62. Geni, en
  63. George Chernilevsky, ru, uk-3, de-2, en-2, bg-1, la-1, be-1, fr-1
  64. Gestumblindi, als, de, en-3
  65. Gnangarra, en, nys-1
  66. GreenMeansGo, en
  67. Grin, hu, en-3, de-1
  68. Guanaco, en, es-1
  69. Hanooz, fa, en-2
  70. Hedwig in Washington, de, en-4, nds-1
  71. Hekerui, de, en-4
  72. Herbythyme, en, fr-2, es-1, it-1
  73. Hesperian, en
  74. Howcheng, en, ja-2
  75. Huntster, en
  76. Indeedous, de, en-3, fr-2
  77. Infrogmation, en, es-1
  78. Jameslwoodward, en, fr-1 (bureaucrat, checkuser)
  79. Jaqen, it, en-2
  80. Jarekt, pl, en
  81. JarrahTree, en, id-1
  82. Jcornelius, de, lt-2, la-2, en-2, pt-2, fr-1
  83. Jdforrester, en
  84. Jean-Frédéric, fr, en-4, es-1
  85. Jianhui67, en, zh-4, ja-2, ms-1
  86. Jmabel, en, es-3, ro-2, de-1, ca-1, it-1, pt-1, fr-1
  87. Joergens.mi, de, en-3
  88. JoKalliauer, de, en-3
  89. Jon Kolbert, en, fr-4, de-2 (steward)
  90. Josve05a, sv, en-3
  91. Julo, pl, en-2, de-1, ru-1
  92. JuTa, de, en-2, fr-1 (bureaucrat)
  93. Jusjih, zh, en-3, fr-2, ko-1
  94. Kaldari, en
  95. Kallerna, fi, en-3, sv-2, de-1
  96. King of Hearts, en, zh-3, es-2, ja-1
  97. Klemen Kocjancic, sl, en-3, de-2, hr-1, bs-1
  98. Krd, de, en-3 (bureaucrat, checkuser)
  99. Krinkle, nl, en-3, de-2
  100. Kwj2772, ko, en-3
  101. Leit, de, en-3, fr-1
  102. Léna, fr, en-3, es-1
  103. Leyo, gsw, de, en-3, fr-3, es-1, la-1
  104. Lofty abyss, en, mt, it-2
  105. Lymantria, nl, en-3, de-2, fy-2, fr-1, zea-1
  106. Magog the Ogre, en, es-2
  107. Mahagaja, en, de-4, fr-2, ga-2, la-2, cy-1
  108. Maire, pl, en-4, es-2, fr-2, de-2, ru-1
  109. Marcus Cyron, de, en-2
  110. Mardetanha fa, az, en-3, tr-2, ar-1
  111. Masur, pl, en-3, de-1
  112. Matanya, en, he (steward)
  113. Materialscientist, en-4, ru-4, nl-3, fr-1, es-1
  114. Mattbuck, en, fr-1, la-1
  115. Maxim, ru, en-3, fr-2
  116. MB-one, de, en-3, fr-1, pt-1
  117. MBisanz, en
  118. Mdaniels5757, en, es-1
  119. MGA73, da, en-3, de-2, no-1, sv-1
  120. Mhhossein, fa, en-3, ar-1
  121. Micheletb, fr, en-3, it-1, es-1
  122. Mike Peel, en, pt-2, fr-1
  123. Minorax, en, zh
  124. Missvain, en
  125. Mitchazenia, en, es-2
  126. Miya, ja, en-2
  127. Moheen, bn, as-1, bpy-1, en-3, hi-1, hif-1
  128. Morgankevinj, en
  129. MPF, en, da-2, de-1, fr-1
  130. Multichill, nl, en-3, de-1, fr-1
  131. Mys 721tx, zh, en-3
  132. Nagy, de, en-3, fr-2, es-1, sv-1
  133. NahidSultan, bn, en-3, bpy-1
  134. Nat, en, fr, gsw-1, pl-1
  135. Natuur12, nl, en-3, de-1
  136. Neozoon, de, en-4, nl-4, fr-2
  137. Nick, en, sco-2, fr-1
  138. notafish, fr, en-4, de-3, es-2, it-2
  139. Nyttend, en, ang-1
  140. odder, pl, en-4, de-2 (bureaucrat, oversighter)
  141. Otourly, fr, en-2, it-1
  142. P199, en, nl, fr-2, tl-2, de-1
  143. Pi.1415926535, en, es-2
  144. PierreSelim, fr, en-3, es-1 (oversighter)
  145. Pitke, fi, en-4, sv-2
  146. Platonides, es, en-2, fr-1
  147. Poco a poco, es, de-4, en-3, fr-2, it-2, pl-2, pt-1
  148. Podzemnik, cs, en-2
  149. Polarlys, de, en-2, fr-1, no-1
  150. Putnik, ru, en-2
  151. Pyb, fr, en-2
  152. Pymouss, fr, en-3, de-2, it-2, he-1
  153. Racconish, fr, en-4
  154. Ragesoss, en, de-1, fr-1
  155. Ra'ike, de, en-2
  156. Rama, fr, en-3, de-2, la-2, es-1, it-1, ja-1 (oversighter)
  157. Rastrojo, es, en-3, fr-2, eo-1
  158. Raymond, de, en-3, nl-1 (oversighter)
  159. Regasterios, hu, en-1
  160. Rehman, en, si-1
  161. Reinhard Kraasch, de, en-3
  162. Rimshot, de, en-4, fr-2, it-1
  163. Romaine, nl, en-3, de-2, af-1, fr-1
  164. Rosenzweig, de, en-3, fr-1, la-1
  165. Royalbroil, en, es-1
  166. RP88, en, de-1
  167. Rubin16, ru, tt, en-4
  168. Rudolphous, nl, en-3, de-2
  169. Ruthven, it, fr, en-4, es-4, nap-4, ca-2, de-1
  170. Sanandros, als, de, en-3, fr-1
  171. Shizhao, zh, en-1, ru-1
  172. Spiritia, bg, en-3, ru-2, mk-2, de-1
  173. Sreejithk2000, ml, en-3, hi-3, ta-1, kn-1
  174. Srittau, de, en-3
  175. Steinsplitter, bar, de-4, it-3, en-1
  176. Stifle, en, ga, fr-2, de-1
  177. Storkk, en, fr-3, de-2, eo-2
  178. Strakhov, es, en-2
  179. TadejM, sl, en-3, de-2, fr-2
  180. Taivo, et, en-3, ru-3, de-1
  181. Tarawneh, en, ar, de-1
  182. Themightyquill, en, fr-2, de-1, hu-1
  183. The Squirrel Conspiracy, en
  184. Thibaut120094, fr, en-2, ja-2
  185. Thuresson, sv, en-3, no-2
  186. Tomer T, he, en-3
  187. Trijnstel, nl, en-4, de-1, fr-1 (checkuser, steward)
  188. Tulsi Bhagat, ne, mai, en-3, hi-2, bh-2, hif-2
  189. Túrelio, de, en-3, es-1
  190. VIGNERON, fr, de-2, en-2, zh-1
  191. Wdwd, de, en-2
  192. Well-Informed Optimist, ru, uk-4, en-3
  193. Wikitanvir, bn, en-3, de-2, as-2, bpy-1
  194. Wutsje, fy, nl, en-3, de-2, fr-1
  195. Yann, fr, en-4, hi-2, gu-1
  196. Yasu, ja, en-2, de-1
  197. Ymblanter, ru, en-3, de-2, fr-2, nl-2, it-1, es-1
  198. Yuval CT, he, en-3
  199. Zzyzx11, en, es-1, fr-1
  200. علاء, ar, en-4, he-1, es-1 (steward)
  201. Abuse filter, (automated account)
  202. CommonsDelinker, (bot) see request
  203. CommonsMaintenanceBot, (bot) see request
  204. KrinkleBot, (bot) see request

The system currently recognizes 204 administrators. If that is not the last number in the scrollable list above, there is an error in the list.

Technical

Administrators are users with the technical ability on Wikimedia Commons to:

  • delete and undelete images and other uploaded files, and to view and restore deleted versions
  • delete and undelete pages, and to view and restore deleted revisions
  • protect and unprotect pages, and to edit admin-protected pages
  • block and unblock users, individual IP addresses and IP address ranges
  • edit less-restricted interface messages (see also Commons:Interface administrators)
  • rename files
  • add and remove usergroups
  • configure Upload Wizard campaigns
  • delete and undelete specific log entries and revisions of pages
  • import pages from other wikis
  • merge the history of pages
  • modify abuse filters
  • not create redirects from source pages when moving pages
  • override the spoofing checks and title or username blacklist
  • send a message to multiple users at once (massmessage)
  • use higher limits in API queries

These are collectively known as the admin tools.

Community role

Administrators are experienced and trusted members of the Commons community who have taken on additional maintenance work and have been entrusted with the admin tools by public consensus/vote. Different admins have different areas of interest and expertise, but typical admin tasks include determining and closing deletion requests, deleting copyright violations, undeleting files where necessary, protecting Commons against vandalism, and working on templates and other protected pages. Of course, some of these tasks can be done by non-admins as well.

Administrators are expected to understand the goals of this project, and be prepared to work constructively with others towards those ends. Administrators should also understand and follow Commons' policies, and where appropriate, respect community consensus.

Apart from roles which require use of the admin tools, administrators have no special editorial authority by virtue of their position, and in discussions and public votes their contributions are treated in the same way as any ordinary editor. Some admins may become more influential, not due to their position as such, but from the personal trust they may have gained from the community.

Suggestions for administrators

Please read Commons:Guide to adminship.

Removal of administrator rights

Under the de-admin policy, administrator rights may be revoked due to inactivity or misuse of sysop tools. In an de-admin request, normal standards for determining consensus in an RfA do not apply. Instead, "majority consensus" should be used, whereby any consensus to demote of higher than 50% is sufficient to remove the admin.

Apply to become an administrator

All intending administrators must go through this process and submit themselves to RFA, including all ex-administrators who are seeking to return to their previous role.

First, go to Commons:Administrators/Howto and read the information there. Then come back here and make your request in the section below.

  • If someone else nominated you, please accept the nomination by stating "I accept" or something similar, and signing below the nomination itself. The subpage will still need to be transcluded by you or your nominator.


Use the box below, replacing Username with your username:

Voting

Any registered user may vote here although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted. It is preferable you give reasons for both Support and Oppose votes as this will help the closing bureaucrat in their decision. Greater weight is given to an argument, with supporting evidence if needed, than to a simple vote.

Promotion normally requires at least 75% in favour, with a minimum of 8 support votes. Votes from unregistered users are not counted. However, the closing bureaucrat has discretion in judging community consensus, and the decision will not necessarily be based on the raw numbers. Bureaucrats may, at their discretion, extend the period of an RfA if they feel that it will be helpful in better determining community consensus.

Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral comments are not counted in the vote totals for the purposes of calculating pass/fail percentages. However such comments are part of the discussion, may persuade others, and contribute to the closing bureaucrat's understanding of community consensus.

Purge the cache Use the edit link below to edit the transcluded page.

Requests for adminship

Vector skin - page not in the watchlist.pngwatch

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Administrators/Archive.

  • Please read Commons:Administrators before voting here. Any logged in user may vote although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.

Christian Ferrer (de-adminship)

Related requests:

Vote

Christian Ferrer (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth)

Scheduled to end: 23:51, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

On November 27, former administrator Rodhullandemu was blocked indefinitely for posting a death threat in a foreign language towards an IP user. Two days later, Christian Ferrer unblocked them after an unblock request was made, despite prior on calling for their unblock, making them performing an involved action, in which was reversed. Since then, they have been relentlessly justifying their actions on the AN boards and shows no remorse, failing to take any accountability in their role as an administrator. Because of that, a discussion was opened regarding their conduct, in which there is "some consensus" for an RfDA where it is discussed if Christian should continue their role as an administrator. 1989 (talk) 23:51, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Remove 1989 (talk) 23:51, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @1989: Why are you voting on your own nomination? Brianjd (talk) 06:26, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    It's common in discussions like this where the nominator will start out the vote, if they so choose. 1989 (talk) 09:56, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol keep vote.svg keep happy to see that he does not conform to groupthink and is bold enough to express his different opinions. Not convinced that their actions were wrong. 4nn1l2 (talk) 00:32, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @4nn1l2 Everyone should be bold enough to express their opinions, including admins. Many users have already expressed controversial opinions on this matter, without being sanctioned for it. On the other hand, Christian has been entrusted with powerful tools, which they misused here, and subsequent comments show no insight into this problem. Brianjd (talk) 06:12, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The original blocking admin has on their user page "Other administrators are welcome to undo one of my blocks without contacting me first if the reason for the block is clear and has been credibly addressed by the user in a public unblock request" [emphasis mine], so COM:BP has not been violated by User:Christian Ferrer. You may disagree with them, I may or may not disagree with them, but it does not mean their action was wrong. There is not only one right course of action in this saga. At least 5 different admins have acted on this incident: 1) User:AntiCompositeNumber blocking the user indefinitely; 2) User:De728631 declining the first unblock request; 3) User:Christian Ferrer accepting the second unblock request; 4) User:Yann reblocking the user for 6 months; and 5) User:Jon Kolbert declining their 3rd unblock request and removing their talk page access. What I can't understand is why only User:Christian Ferrer's action has been under question. Just because of having a different opinion on the matter? Sorry, not convincing to me. I have other concerns too, including the probability of canvassing by some of enwiki users who are not Commons regulars on some of the nastiest forums such as Wikipediocracy, and the inability of Commons not to lose its valuable users over not-so-serious incidents, including, but not limited to, User:Alexis Jazz, User:Zhuyifei1999, User:Majora, User:Fæ, User:Rodhulandemu, User:Jdx, and now User:Christian Ferrer. Commons could and can do better. 4nn1l2 (talk) 07:29, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @4nn1l2 It was hardly clear that the reason for the block was credibly addressed by the user. The unblock rationale consisted of a short phrase that technically promised to not repeat the action, buried in the middle of a large block of text that essentially defended the action. Therefore, your quote does not apply. Brianjd (talk) 08:35, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    "You may disagree with them, I may or may not disagree with them, but it does not mean their action was wrong". Unlike you, I simply see no misuse of "powerful tools". 4nn1l2 (talk) 08:46, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol keep vote.svg keep Obvious nonsense. --jdx Re: 00:54, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I think this vote should be struck in light of Special:Diff/611756910, but I will leave it to somebody more familiar with the procedure. Brianjd (talk) 06:14, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Think again. I'm not blocked here, globally locked nor banned yet. --jdx Re: 06:29, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not going to vote here, but I will note that Jdx has now been indefinitely blocked [1] for incivility and disrupting Commons to prove a point. I believe their vote should now be struck. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 16:31, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    False. When they voted, they were in good standing and subsequent incidents don't count. So the vote is valid and should be counted. 4nn1l2 (talk) 16:34, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Remove Not being willing to listen to consensus is a dangerous characteristic in an administrator - especially when harassment is involved. Christian was given several opportunities to reinstate the block but doubled down and refused to do so. I fear that this will not be the only cowboy unblock. --Rschen7754 01:03, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • As Christian himself said I tried to do the job but I'm far too impulsive and sensible to do properly this job. [2] As far as "sensible", it points to an attitude of "my opinion matters more than all of you". --Rschen7754 01:05, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      Not intended as a rebuttal to your overall point (I'm not much of a Commoner, and thus not going to express an opinion here), but it's worth noting that "sensible" is a common French/English false friend; French speakers often use it in English when meaning to say "sensitive". -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 01:15, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      I think it's clear from the quote itself that "sensible" is an error. It's not clear what the error is, but Tamzin's explanation seems reasonable. Christian's Babel tags say they are fr-N but only en-3. Brianjd (talk) 09:14, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Remove Being unwilling to even consider the possibility you've acted out of line is not an acceptable quality in an administrator. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:10, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Remove - In short I had hoped after a few days Christian would've "seen the light", apologised and reinstated the block but it wasn't to be. Christan has since admitted they're proud of the unblock and stand by their actions[3]. As I said at AN we all make mistakes but sadly this wasn't one (no matter how hard I hoped it was!). Their actions are unbecoming of any admin and as such I don't trust them nor do I hold any confidence in them. –Davey2010Talk 01:25, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep, overreaction... but I hope Christian will reasonably justify his future actions. Additionally, he has nearly 100k sysop actions and the situation here reported appears to be just an outlier. Érico (talk) 02:28, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep I don't think a single bad unblock rises to the level necessary to justify a desysop. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:40, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep, while I don't think that the unblock itself was a good thing (I am very much opposed to having any "unblockables" around and the dehumanisation of IP users and vandals worries me, also I am surprised that "Commons:Do not insult the vandals" is still a redlink as it is a good essay that should be copied here), I do think that their motivation for unblocking was done in good faith as they believed that the block was punitive and not preventative. I simply can't see this as anything other than a good faith action based on what they saw as a block that didn't prevent further abuse as far as they saw, note that personally I would like to see a statement from Rodhullandemu where they would say that they understand that their behaviour was innapropriate as they don't seem to grasp how such a comment could be hurtful to the other human being reading it but Christian Ferrer's conduct wasn't done with malicious intent. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 04:33, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Remove I can accept the arguments made in the previous three votes (the unblock was made in good faith and was out of character). I certainly thing the unblock alone was nowhere near sufficient for a desysop discussion. However, Christian's subsequent comments were appalling. For example, see Special:Diff/610855515 and Special:Diff/611179247 (which I cited at the AN/UP discussion), where Christian demonstrated their continued ignorance of important issues, such as this being about death threats (not vandals) and IP addresses being shared by innocent users. Also see Special:Diff/610855515, where Christian wrote:
    if there is a consensus to begin a desys- process, so then this last one would not be needed as I will give back my tools myself
I think that time has come. Brianjd (talk) 06:26, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep --Achim55 (talk) 08:40, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep --Herby talk thyme 10:03, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep I think the point to criticize Christian is that he failed to admit his unblock is incorrect, which is not good. However, given his past contribution to Commons, a 2nd chance should be given. I hope Christian will learn a lesson from this, and should be more careful when handling disputed unblock request. If the unblock is really difficult to handle, then he should let other admins to deal with that. --A1Cafel (talk) 10:44, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep I normally wouldn't comment in these things, but I do think this is an over-reaction. Yes, I think Christian made some mistakes - that's all been well discussed, so I won't restate any of it here. But outside of this case, I'm seeing a prolific and valuable admin. I'm not seeing any pattern of repeated poor behaviour that would warrant the removal of his admin tools. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:02, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Admins make mistakes, no matter how well thought out the action is. Christian has explained his decision and I can see where he is coming from. Like Boing says above, I am not seeing a pattern that would justify this action Gbawden (talk) 13:25, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep. If people disagree on something, there is no need to worsen this situation by sanctioning any of them. Christian has explained and motivated their action and that is enough. Ellywa (talk) 14:22, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep I agree with Donald Trung and Ellywa. De728631 (talk) 15:24, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep as per Gbawden. --- FitIndia Talk ✉ 22:54, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Symbol keep vote.svg Keep objection to this request. i share the same views with many, that Rodhullandemu's problematic comment was not appropriate, but an adequate and sufficient response to that was to warn him. blocking would be necessary only if he repeats that behaviour. the most he should get was a finite block. but as i told you so, AntiCompositeNumber is a hasty person: Commons:Administrators/Requests/AntiCompositeNumber. here we are, time and effort being wasted over a trivial one-liner from a bad mouth, that's escalated by a hasty sysop, who doesnt back down and deescalate things. Christian Ferrer's undoing of a disproportionate block was justified.--RZuo (talk) 23:01, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@RZuo Christian didn't feel the need to bring AntiCompositeNumber's history into this, and I'm not sure if it's appropriate for other users to do so. Brianjd (talk) 02:21, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Funny how the only person to have opposed ACNs RFA was good ol' Rz him/herself. Nothing like holding a grudge against someone for a solid year. Well least we've stopped beating the same Beeb and Fae drum for the time being. I guess some could say that's "progress". –Davey2010Talk 02:40, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Brianjd and Davey2010: User:Richardkiwi's comment special:diff/611832118 is good for you.--RZuo (talk) 13:16, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@RZuo We live in a free society where you can freely express your opinion but we can also freely disagree with your opinion too. –Davey2010Talk 14:07, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Remove Thinking that you can do what you think, because you are right, is no way to run a project. And he can of course still contribute to the project, just not as an admin. Let him contribute, say, a 6 months time as a normal editor, then we can consider it again Huldra (talk) 23:15, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Remove Be bold and Ignore all rules are not a base for admin-actions. It's one thing to make a point and discuss with others, why a block is wrong or bad, or if you're making a mess of it by unblocking in the heat of a running discussion. Sorry, but your intentions might be good, but you're action(s) were not and even worse, discussing the issue is not possible. When acting as an admins in the heat of the night, you should always accept, that you a) could be wrong and b) even if you're right, the time and action could be wrong. --Mirer (talk) 03:48, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep per above. --SHB2000 (talk) 04:36, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Remove I have no faith in the admins, who use their tools to do of their own will and disregard the community. --Hulged (talk) 05:55, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep per above. Yahya (talk) 10:48, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Reluctant remove. Everyone makes mistakes, and I don't think that one unfortunate mistake should remove a productive administrator. Administrators do make bold decisions sometimes, and in the heat of the moment sometimes get things wrong, particularly when community consensus is unclear. More concerning is that after all this drama, community consensus has become clear against an unblock for Rod, yet I get the impression that Ferrer stands by their actions and would take them again should the situation arise. Willingness to use admin tools against community consensus is not acceptable. -M.nelson (talk) 13:01, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Symbol keep vote.svg Keep per above.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 21:02, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Symbol keep vote.svg Keep That single action doesn't seem as an big treat to the community. Everyone can make arguable decisions (espesially sysops) and this is not a reason to de-sysop a trusted user. This action obviously needs further explaining and investigation but de-sysop request seems as an overreacting. Красный wanna talk? 12:29, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Symbol keep vote.svg Keep as per many of the above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:44, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • We all make mistakes, it is what we do when these mistakes are pointed out that makes the difference. Sadly, Christian has adopted the same sort of attitude as Rod himself, steadfastly refusing to even consider the possibility that their actions were out of line, and indeed reveling in them and even saying they are proud of it. To me this is far more concerning than the unblock itself, if they had since commented that they at could at least concede that there are other valid views of the situation, I doubt we'd be here. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:19, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Off-topic replies
I think that toxic people like you should be blocked on this project. It is ironic that an abuser like you who harassed Fæ and likely caused him left the project is still here and none of our admims told you to get the fuck outta here. --jdx Re: 01:40, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Give it a rest you're beginning to sound like a broken record. Whatever happened with Beeb and Fae is between Beeb and Fae and none of that is even relevant here. (Personal attack removed). –Davey2010Talk 02:00, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Could we please not start making personal attacks? 1989 (talk) 02:05, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, it isn’t between them at all. Actually it is way more serious than the "death threat" recently discussed. --jdx Re: 02:50, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Let's stop the personal attacks, and maybe strike jdx's comments here in light of Special:Diff/611756910. Brianjd (talk) 06:17, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Are you referring to Beeblebrox’es attacks on Fæ? --jdx Re: 06:38, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
None of this has anything at all to do with Fae, but I am used to his proxies attacking me like this. It's what Fae would want. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:17, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
sadly toxic people keep driving out good people like jdx.--RZuo (talk) 23:01, 4 December 2021 (UTC) and Christian Ferrer could have been the next one of those good people as User:4nn1l2 pointed out.--RZuo (talk) 13:16, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I fail to see what part of this comment has anything to do with Christian Ferrer's suitability as an admin, which, again, is the topic under discussion here. Beeblebrox (talk) 06:11, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Beeblebrox Actually, I am tempted to collapse all the replies to your initial comment. Brianjd (talk) 06:27, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@1989: now that my reply is related to Christian Ferrer, care to undo the collapse?--RZuo (talk) 13:16, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Christian has made numerous changes to their statement below, including adding items to the timeline. This is making this page difficult to follow. Even worse, Christian has not indicated that their statement has changed. Brianjd (talk) 13:22, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry but to make this page difficult to follow was not my purpose, quite the opposite. Those two points are important to the timeline and I forgot them. I will try to no longer edit the page, otherwise I will indicate it. Sorry again. Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:31, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Statement from Christian Ferrer
  • Hello, I assume the facts that I am accused of. Just let me telling you the events as I saw them. These are not attempts of justifications.
All beginned with a comment on that talk page (now deleted) made by Rodhullandemu to an IP only acting like a vandal
This have been reported in the Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections by Beeblebrox
The first administrator action was from Yann, and was a good and proportionate reaction, he deleted the comment and warned the user. At this point, and from my point of view, all could have stopped here.
AntiCompositeNumber blocked the Rodhullandemu indefinitely
At least 3 administrators said that the block was not needed or disproportionate: Achim55, A.Savin and me
AntiCompositeNumber, despite the fact that several administrators are claiming that it was not a real threat but a metaphor, continue to talk about true threat and also about a potential history of incivility, or just don't answer.
I concluded that AntiCompositeNumber will not change his mind. I unblocked the user, as regard to his unblock request because:
1/ I was convinced that he was not going to do it again, and our blocks are supposed to be preventive and not punitive
2/ the user gave a good explanation for why the block was inappropriate: this was not a true threat.
Nick opened a topic about me in the Administrators' noticeboard/User problems
Yann reblocked the user for 6 months.
Rodhullandemu made a new unblock request. One can think it is not an adequat, or at least the best, request, but one can also think that frustration, emotion and despair have pushed the user there.
Jon Kolbert declined the request and revoked talk page access.
1989 opened this de-adminship request.
Jdx made voluntarily a similar comment than Rodhullandemu, surely to prove the ridiculousness of the sanction toward Rodhullandemu.
Jon Kolbert blocked Jdx indefinitely
Would I do my unblock again? nothing is less sure, as my purpose was to help Rodhullandemu and to get him out of this. Can you see in that comment a kind of apologie? no apart in the fact I am sorry that for the moment I failed to fight what I see as a blatant injustice. I still think that Rodhullandemu should be unblocked, and warned, thing he was.
Brianjd, above, is right to point that I said "if there is a consensus to begin a desys- process, so then this last one would not be needed as I will give back my tools myself". Furthermore it was not the first time that I said that. However now in front of the accomplished fact, I think it would be innapropriate for two reason 1/ such de-adminship allow to the community to say what it thing about that 2/ this discussion highlight Rodhullandemu case and potentialy its unfair side. Christian Ferrer (talk) 09:46, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • When we know that all this could have stopped just after my point number 3 above, that is just after the first Yann action, this is what we can call a beautiful mess, and surely not a suitable block. Also note that before that event, as far I remember, I never interacted neither with the blocked nor with the blocker. Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:28, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info In the same time that this comment I add the info of the Jdx block in the timeline above. Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:09, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gameposo

Related requests:

Vote

Gameposo (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth)

Scheduled to end: 05:20, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I'm a long-term editor and contributor to Wikipedia. I would like to use several additional features in Commons to expand my activities as an automatically authenticated user of Wikipedia and an administrator of Korean Wikipedia. Gameposo (talk) 05:28, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, no user rights log entries for this user found on kowiki. The user continues to upload copyright violations, and canvassed in these edits.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 11:24, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Probably not qualified to be a kowiki admin anyway: account created < 6 months ago and has only 190 edits. Commons account is only slightly older. Brianjd (talk) 12:02, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Jeff G.. Also, as recently as last month, the nominee posted comments on a DR, marking their edits as "minor", and also responded to the DR on their own talk page, again marking their edits as "minor". The response on their talk page should have been on the DR; another user posted a comment on the DR referencing the talk page. I could go on, but I think their talk page speaks for itself; also, looking through their contributions, I found another one to nominate for deletion as copyvio (includes copyright notice from 1991, claimed "own work" CC BY-SA 4.0). Brianjd (talk) 11:54, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Start with simpler rights. Also there are a lot of things to do, where you don't need any special right. Regards, Yann (talk) 12:05, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Jeff and Brian. User's only been here since May 2021 so that alone is enough to oppose, Honestly not sure if this a serious nom or whether we're all being trolled!. –Davey2010Talk 12:58, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support moral support. Otherwise I'm against as per above comments. Bedivere (talk) 15:26, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Jeff G. --Ameisenigel (talk) 15:49, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lacking necessary experience. --A.Savin 16:27, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for now, no intent posted about what they would do with the additional tools or how it will benefit the Wikimedia Commons. Anyhow, I hope that not passing through this RfA won't discourage you from contributing and that you will seek to help tackle current backlogs and will try again in the future after you've gained more experience and the trust of your fellow unpaid colleagues. Face-wink.svg --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 04:14, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Per above. Would like to see you more involved in tackling the current backlog in other areas before going to RfA. --Hulged (talk) 07:46, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Still have copyvio uploads recently. User is not ready for advanced user level, not to say request for adminiship. --A1Cafel (talk) 10:48, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too early. Not enough experience. Rzuwig► 12:10, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry to pile on, but I agree the candidate lacks the level of experience expected, and I am also concerned by these posts [4][5] where this user is going around asking about how to apply for adminship hours after filing this request. I'd expect that to be something they did before applying. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:48, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beeblebrox It's hard to tell what they are saying, because those posts are very broken English. Hence my suggestion below that they add a Babel box. Note that Jeff G. considers at least one of those edits to be inappropriate canvassing (see their vote above). Brianjd (talk) 03:48, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Brianjd: Both edits, actually.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 12:38, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

In the second example of canvassing offered by Jeff G., this user refers to themselves in the plural. Either they have limited English (in which case they should add a Babel box to their user page, which currently redirects to their user talk page), or we have deeper problems. Brianjd (talk) 12:28, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Brianjd: I agree, but please note that I appreciate being pinged when mentioned (except on my user talk page, where that would be superfluous).   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:16, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for bureaucratship

Vector skin - page not in the watchlist.pngwatch

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Bureaucrats/Archive.

  • Please read Commons:Bureaucrats before posting or voting here. Any logged in user may vote although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.

No current requests.

Requests for CheckUser rights

Vector skin - page not in the watchlist.pngwatch

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Checkusers/Archive.

  • Please read Commons:Checkusers before posting or voting here. Any logged in user may vote although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.

No current requests.

Requests for Oversight rights

Vector skin - page not in the watchlist.pngwatch

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Oversighters/Archive.

  • Please read Commons:Oversighters before voting here. Any logged in user may vote, although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.

No current requests.

See also

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators&oldid=611847464"