Wikisource:Administrators

From Wikisource
(Redirected from Wikisource:Administrator)
Jump to: navigation, search
Administrators
This page provides information on the English Wikisource's current administrators (see also multilingual admins and the software's list of admins). For an historical list of all admins with links to their relevant election and confirmation pages, see the Admin Archives Timeline.

See also:

Current administrators[edit]

Administrators are given access for one year per the Restricted access policy. Regular votes are held to confirm each user's status. Other languages indicate the areas in which the administrators might be able to converse with outside project members, or help provide public domain translations.

Username Other languages Next Confirmation Other access
AdamBMorgan German (basic), Polish (learning) 2018-06
Angr German (fluent), French (intermediate) 2018-06 mul.ws admin
BD2412 French (basic) 2017-10 enwp admin, enwikt admin, enwq admin & crat
Beeswaxcandle 2017-10
Beleg Tâl French (intermediate), Latin (basic) 2018-08
Billinghurst 2018-10 admin: commons, enWP, meta, mw, global sysop see all
Captain Nemo Japanese (learning), Russian (fluent) 2017-10
Charles Matthews French (intermediate), Russian (basic) 2018-03 enwp admin
Clockery Malayalam, Hindi (intermediate) 2018-06
Dmitrismirnov Russian 2018-05
Doug German, French (basic) 2018-10 mul.ws admin and importer + others see all
EncycloPetey Spanish (intermediate), Latin (intermediate), French (basic), German (basic), Ancient Greek (basic) 2018-04 enwikt admin, species admin
GrafZahl German, French (basic), Latin (basic) 2017-11 administers admin bot TalBot
Hesperian 2017-10 bureaucrat, admin@commons, admin@en.wp
Hrishikes Bengali, Hindi, Sanskrit (basic) 2018-04 Commons filemover
Ineuw Hungarian, Hebrew, French (intermediate) 2018-08
John Vandenberg 2018-08 mul.ws admin
Jusjih Chinese (Mandarin, traditional, simplified), French (intermediate), Korean (learning) 2018-08 mul.ws admin and importer + others see all
Kathleen.wright5 2018-05
Londonjackbooks 2018-04
Mpaa Italian 2017-12 bureaucrat
Mukkakukaku English (fluent), Spanish (fluent), Polish (conversational), French (basic), Serbo-Croatian (very basic) 2018-02
Phe French 2018-03 mul.ws admin
Prosfilaes Esperanto (basic) 2018-03
Prosody 2018-04
Samwilson PHP, Javascript, Lua 2018-06 WMF staff (as SWilson (WMF))
Spangineer Spanish (advanced) 2018-10
Tarmstro99 2018-09
Yann French, Hindi (intermediate) 2018-08 mul.ws admin
Zhaladshar German (basic), Latin (basic) 2018-08 bureaucrat
Zyephyrus French, Latin, Ancient Greek 2018-06 mul.ws bureaucrat

Confirmation discussions[edit]

Restricted access depends on the continued support of the community. This may be tested by a vote of confidence, in which a simple majority (50%+1) must support the user's continued access for it to be retained. (What access a discussion concerns should be explicitly noted in the discussion's introduction.) Any user may propose a vote of confidence, but at least three established users must support the need for one before it can be called. Such a proposal is made automatically one year after the last scheduled or called proposal (concerning all restricted access).

In the case of an unscheduled (called) proposal, the user may not use the restricted access for any non-trivial action at any time until the vote is closed. A bureaucrat will eventually archive the discussion and, if so decided, request removal of restricted access by a steward.
 —Restricted access policy

BD2412[edit]

Admin since September 2015 (see previous discussions), currently active (contributions · logs · count · crosswiki · crossactivity). BD2412 will be reconfirmed automatically unless at least three established users oppose, which will trigger a vote of confidence with decision by simple majority.

Beeswaxcandle[edit]

Admin since May 2011 (see previous discussions), currently active (contributions · logs · count · crosswiki · crossactivity). Beeswaxcandle will be reconfirmed automatically unless at least three established users oppose, which will trigger a vote of confidence with decision by simple majority.

Captain Nemo[edit]

admin since August 2015 (see previous discussions), currently inactive (contributions · logs · count · crosswiki · crossactivity). Captain Nemo will be removed automatically unless a simple majority of established users support continued access.
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportIneuw talk 06:02, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Zyephyrus (talk) 06:04, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose solely on the ground of inactivity per WS:AP. No problems from my perspective with regaining the tools upon return. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:06, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Because inactive since 2015. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:44, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for long inactivity.--Jusjih (talk) 00:54, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - I have no concerns at this point that maintaining this adminship would lead to any kind of problems, but I would like to hear from Captain Nemo about whether he actually wants to remain an admin on this project. BD2412 T 01:17, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
  • N gone. <shrug> — billinghurst sDrewth 14:28, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Hesperian[edit]

Admin since January 2008; bureaucrat since September 2011 (see previous discussions), currently active (contributions · logs · count · crosswiki · crossactivity). Hesperian will be reconfirmed automatically unless at least three established users oppose, which will trigger a vote of confidence with decision by simple majority.
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportIneuw talk 06:02, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Zyephyrus (talk) 06:04, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:37, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support BD2412 T 22:51, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:44, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportHrishikes (talk) 01:49, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Provisionally Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose bureaucrat's flag but support administrator's flag. Why mix bureaucrat's confirmation here? If any administrator is also a bureaucrat or checkuser, each restricted access should be separately confirmed. Mixing up may look suspicious as manipulating the process to avoid losing any bureaucrat while I see no bureaucrats' action after 14 May 2017. [1] To support continuing any bureaucrat, please do it separately with no more mix up with administrator's flag.--Jusjih (talk) 23:40, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
    • The most recent test of community consensus on splitting confirmations is here; feel free to start a new discussion if you think consensus has changed. Hesperian 00:29, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
      No change from me. Splitting as you have done is sufficient. Personally I don't like voting against a person 'crat's flag because you don't like crats. Please have that discussion separately to the community rather than be divisive, noting that I would still favour our retention of that right. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:36, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Regretfully Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. I find this deleted edit troubling, particularly coming from an administrator. Spangineer (háblame) 12:54, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
    • It's not the best moment, but we all occasionally need to blow off steam. Doing that through a posted-and-deleted rant is not nearly as bad as doing that through some abuse of the admin tools, which didn't happen here. BD2412 T 21:13, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
      • What was worst about it, and the reason I deleted it, was it was too broad: I intended to have a crack at a specific small number of people who are continually inconsiderate in the way they go about their business here, and thus negatively impact others' enjoyment of the site. But when I realised that others, not of that small number, who were just trying to help, might think it was directed at them, then I was ashamed of myself, and deleted it. No, not the best moment. Hesperian 00:56, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
      @Spangineer:: Thanks for pointing out a controversy, so now I Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose both bureaucrat and administrator flags. Gotcha.--Jusjih (talk) 02:06, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
      @Jusjih: What is "Gotcha" about? I have much more sympathy for an uncharacteristic—albeit honest—venting of a deep frustration than I do for one who revels in so-called "controversy" (unless I misunderstand). Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:02, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
  • YesY without hesitation — billinghurst sDrewth 14:28, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support both flags —Beleg Tâl (talk) 03:22, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
    • To @Spangineer:, @Jusjih: and to the community in general, Under the circumstances, I don't think that there is anything wrong with venting one's feelings once in a while. It was done, get over it and move on. I happen to be sympathetic and understanding of Hesperian's frustration about others' attitude towards his favourite project. It would have been a far better contribution to his efforts "by those others" if his proofread pages would have been validated. — Ineuw talk 06:01, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
  • @Ineuw: That's fine; I understand that position. And I appreciate Hesperian's frustration, and the hard work that he has put into this project. But I do not believe that such an extremely aggressive response was appropriate, even if it had been clearly restricted to only those people that were causing the frustration. Hesperian, you, and others seem to disagree with me on this. Personally I prefer to participate in environments in which such attacks are not tolerated, but others prefer a more sympathetic approach. That's understandable, but it doesn't change my regretful oppose. Spangineer (háblame) 12:43, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — I trust that they'll make the right decisions for the project in their capacities as admin, bureaucrat, and editor. Prosody (talk) 06:13, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Nominations for adminship[edit]

Older nominations are archived.