text:
Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Removal/ShakataGaNai

Case justification
I am Rschen7754, an admin for 2.5 years at the English Wikipedia and a confirmed user here at Wikinews (I did stuff relating to the US election). I indefinitely blocked a user known as Freewayguy at the English Wikipedia. This user has gone to Wikimedia sites that I edit and don't edit and made death threats against me - so much so that my username was added to the new page title blacklist by the stewards. He has been blocked on several wikis indefinitely (including commons, english, simple english, spanish, meta, italian, japanese, korean, chinese, german, whatever nl stands for...). This (NSFW) has the gory details.

That all to say that User:Freewayguy hit here tonight. I went into #wikinews and asked for an admin to indefinitely block this guy. ShakataGaNai was extremely rude and only blocked for 72 hours. I told him to look at the global contributions list, and he blatantly refused to do so several times. I was then blocked from the channel. User:Daniel, another administrator, is able to confirm this (as he talked to this user personally), as may others who can view channel logs of the channel at the time. Those in #wikipedia-en-admins may be able to confirm this as well through secondhand knowledge.

I don't know what the standards here are for adminship; I do know that this may have resulted in loss of sysop status at the English Wikipedia - and we don't even have a page for this. This user was extremely incivil and would not take input. Blocking me from the IRC channel for making the request for the blocking admin to look at global contribs was way out of line. This user has been making death threats against me; the fact that this user could not (and has not) been blocked indefinitely is despicable. --Rschen7754 (talk) 08:37, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Comments

 * - I was not on IRC at the time so I cannot speak to what happened there (I am not even sure if we could take formal actions on-wiki based on something that happened on IRC). But perhaps could comment on this. I extended the block on  to indef, based on vandalism, socking, and intimidating behavior/harassment on this project, in addition to this history of cross-wiki intimidation and harassment. I do not think  should be desysopped based on the evidence in front of me, which is only the stuff that has happened on-wiki itself. Cirt (talk) 09:02, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Death threats should be taken up with civil authorities (i.e. police). en.WP checkusers will generally handle issues like this and pass sensitive information on for you, in some cases their judgement will be to take it up with the abusive user's ISP and get them warned/disconnected.
 * I can make no comment on the IRC discussion, I did not see it, but your comment indicates you persisted in demanding your chosen action be the one taken. If that was seen as being disruptive, I would expect you to be booted/banned. Incidentally, actions on IRC have absolutely zero bearing on the wiki. It is not an official WMF communications channel, and thus calling for de-sysop based on comments or actions there is pointless. de-sysop can only be based upon actions on this wiki. You have shown no evidence to support your crusade. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:29, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

 * I was asking him to look at some evidence across Wikimedia - a reasonable request. I don't see the problem with that. --Rschen7754 (talk) 09:43, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * If it amounted to asking for someone to be persecuted for actions elsewhere then it is, in my opinion, a form of vendetta. Many users find they don't fit in on one project but can move to another and be productive. You certainly would not be happy were I to take your actions here as justification to call for you to be desysopped on en.wp, and I see little difference between that and what you're doing here. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:48, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Uh, he (Freewayguy) made death threats against me. Every other wiki he did this on indefinitely blocked him. Also, some (Simple and test) indefinitely banned him even though he did nothing wrong there simply due to what he did on other sites. Considering that he did make threats on Wikinews... --Rschen7754 (talk) 09:56, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * This discussion isn't about Freewayguy, and I'm not going to be distracted by that anymore. I looked at the global contributions and didn't see one credible death threat, just a messed up young kid being a dick. So, state your case against ShakataGaNai or I will delete this RfDA as a waste of the Wikinews community's time. Hint: You're supposed to provide proof of abuse of admin privileges. --Brian McNeil / talk 10:14, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Making poor judgment calls can be grounds for desysopping as well. This was a bad call. Admins are supposed to be civil to the community - this one clearly wasn't. I gave the simple request for him to look at global contribs - he said he didn't need to. Nobody has addressed my concern regarding that. --Rschen7754 (talk) 10:19, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * He didn't need to; he's a volunteer like the rest of us. Doing harm on the project may be grounds for desysopping. Failing to do enough good (not failing to do any good, but doing less than enough good) is not grounds for desysopping. I imagine he didn't feel like investigating any further, and that's okay; you can ask someone who is willing to investigate further. Editors are valued for the work that they do choose to do. You can't force a volunteer to act. Sorry. WODUP  11:11, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * When you block someone, you take responsibility for the block. Failure to evaluate a block you just made is a serious concern. Being careful when you block and not looking at all the evidence is a serious concern. Moreover, admins are allowed to make mistakes (I've made several!) but not being willing to correct them is a serious concern. --Rschen7754 (talk) 11:34, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * ←When you block, you take responsibility for that block, absolutely. In this situation, it was a good block, but one that should have been set not to expire. Failure to re-evaluate a block is serious, yes, but I haven't seen anything to suggest that ShakataGaNai refused to re-evaluate the situation. I don't know what was said on IRC, but this edit shows me that ShakataGaNai was at least willing to review the user's behavior after the block expired and indef block then if necessary. As for looking at all of the evidence, I don't know what ShakataGaNai saw that made him know that a block was justified, but I assume that when he saw that there was enough to warrant a block, he blocked. That's it. This goes back to ShakataGaNai possibly not doing enough, but he hasn't abused the tools. Thankfully, absolute perfection isn't a requirement to be a sysop as I've made a few mistakes on enwiki, too. Your last sentence implies that ShakataGaNai wasn't willing to correct this mistake of underblocking the user, but doesn't allow for the possibility that he didn't see it as a mistake. If he didn't (absent evidence to the contrary, I'm assuming good faith), given the harassment and threats, I would see that as a lapse in judgement, but this one incident doesn't warrant desysopping; admins are allowed to make mistakes every now and then, but consistently poor judgement is how to lose the bit. Lastly, I'll note that your complaint was that the block wasn't long enough, that the offending user wasn't going to harm anything for three days, and that there would have been plenty of time during those three days to bring it to WN:AAA. From what I've seen, ShakataGaNai should not be desysopped. WODUP  16:30, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Hello. Like Rschen7754, I am more of a Wikipedian than a Wikinewsie, but I do have an opinion here. I don't see how the behavior Rschen7754 described (rudeness on IRC and banning from a channel) would result in a desysopping on enwiki like xe says it may. Add to that the fact that actions on IRC usually don't have consequences on wiki and that ShakataGaNai did at least block the user, and I can't conclude that the user should lose the bit. Also, it should at least be noted that User:Freewayguy has now been blocked indef.  WODUP  09:37, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I have asked on the checkuser-l mailing list if Rschen7754 has made any effort to get these death threats into the hands of the police, or his ISP. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:39, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I have sent an email to Mike Godwin directly, as he will need to approve it (from past experience working with him on legal issues involving checkuser). Daniel (talk) 12:29, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

 * Do the parties in dispute agree that IRC logs should be disclosed to the community? --Brian McNeil / talk 11:58, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

 * I just spotted all the activity on this page in RC so thought I'd take a look. As others have noted, there isn't a great deal on Wiki to suggest this user should have their admin rights removed. However, I would most definitely strongly disagree with the comments by Brianmc and DragonFire1024 which seem to completely dismiss the behaviour of users on IRC as being relevant to whether they should have admin rights on Wikinews. We don't give users admin rights simply because they can press buttons, we do so because we trust their judgement. If, as is being suggested, this user has simply ignored suggestions and acted inappropriate in booting someone from IRC then this has to be taken into account in assessing their judgement. The removal of admin rights is simply based upon community consensus. There is no requirement that only on Wiki actions have to be taken into account and nor should there be. It is perfectly possible for a Wikinews admin to harm the project by bringing it into disrepute or whatever without doing anything on Wiki. That doesn't mean they shouldn't loose their admin rights. Not having being in the IRC channel however means it isn't possible for me to comment as to whether the users actions should result in their admin rights being removed. I would welcome the publication of any IRC logs that are available though. IRC logs being kept private only serves to protect the guilty, it doesn't benefit the community as whole. I am slightly disappointed at the way in which Rschen7754's concerns have been branded a "crusade". Adambro (talk) 12:52, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree to some extent. But IRC is not WN, just like WN is not WP. The actions of users in IRC usually does not reflect their actions on Wiki. With that said, we really cannot force anyone on IRC to follow or abide by the policies of WN on IRC. We just have to assume good faith. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 13:03, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * As you note, what people are prepared to say on IRC is different from what they are prepared to say on Wiki. Ultimately though, unless people are trying to claim to not be those chatting on IRC under their Wiki username, they are still the same person and I cannot possibly agree that the community shouldn't be able to judge an admin by their comments on IRC. Whenever and wherever someone identifying themselves as a Wikinews admin comments, there is the potential to bring Wikinews into disrepute and so all Wikinews admins, and other users for that matter, have a responsibility to behave in an appropriate manner elsewhere. If they fail to do so then I don't wish for them to be associated with Wikinews in such an obvious way as adminship. No one should feel untouchable simply because they don't actually behave inappropriate on Wiki. You don't suddenly stop being a Wikinews admin when you're not on Wikinews. Adambro (talk) 13:28, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * After a session on IRC this morning I expect IRC logs to demonstrate that Rschen7754 was being irritating and pestering about what I consider a perfectly reasonable decision. I note Rschen7754 hasn't given permission for his side of the IRC logs to be released per my request. --Brian McNeil / talk 14:47, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * If Freewayguy is such a problem across many Wikis and issuing death threats, why wasn't a global block requested? --SVTCobra 15:29, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Apparently a couple stewards mulled this idea over - but as the user does not have a SUL account, the stewards would have to force merge SUL, and then global block the whole SUL account, and they did not want to do that - but you would have to check with a steward to actually get some hard data on their thought processes on that one. I think it may be a good idea in this situation. Cirt (talk) 15:47, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Requested at Steward requests/Global. Cirt (talk) 16:06, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

 * I have never heard of anyone at enwikipedia being desysoped for being rude and/or banning someone from a channel on IRC. That's simply not true.  File a Request for Comment or something else, but this is just ridiculous. Cary Bass (talk) 16:57, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

 * This silly frankly. However, the disturbance on Wikinews started when 75.47.208.145 began removing legitimate edits made by Freeway guy and issuing block warnings and demanding, without explanation, a block of a user who was in good standing on Wikinews. I do not know if that IP was Rschen7754, but the IP was name dropping (see diff). It is no wonder that ShakataGaNai may been a bit impatient or even discourteous on IRC, given the rude way Wikinews was introduced to problems with Freewayguy. There is a right way to notify Wikinews of potential cross-wiki problem users, and the way this was done was not the right way. A simple note on WN:AAA would have sufficed. --SVTCobra 18:05, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually I thought 75.47.208.145 was Rschen at first. It wasn't until much later after much digging that I realized there were 3 IP's from 75.47.X.X involved with this user.  Though at the time, "Rschen" was on (IRC) from another IP address all together (in fact through WebIRC).  I had no way to verify who any of the IP's were (or if they were the same user) other than the IRC IP and the on wiki IP were both EXTREMELY persistent.  In fact the first time I got confirmation that he was _actually_ involved was when he post the request for de-sysop.  (Note: No for defense, just explaining what I saw) -- Shakata Ga Nai  ^_^ 18:18, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Looking at everything, I think it might be best to bring this issue to the Arbitration Committee. There is several issues here: First, several IPs were essentially harassing Freeway. Second, Freeway's comments on Rschen7754. Thirdly, the IRC conversation. Lastly, we have this request, which in my mind is petty and could be a form of harassment on Rschen7754's part. --PatrickFlaherty (talk) 18:31, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * This is someone I've encountered on en:wiki who has problems with communication skills and is generally difficult to deal with. 72 hours isn't something I'd overturn for a first instance.  If the problem recurs in this manner, wouldn't cut much slack. Durova (talk) 19:43, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * As a colleague of Rschen7754 on enwp, let me lay out the situation as I understand it:
 * The 75 IP is a persistent anon user that has edited enwp for quite a while. Recently he was blocked by me for a couple months for incivility but has been evading the block and so the timer has been reset several times. As far as is officially known the 75 IP is not related to any other established account on Wikipedia (he has started his own accounts to circumvent the block, though).
 * Freewayguy is an editor on Wikipedia whose poor grammar and carelessness with regard to facts served as a net deficit to enwp. In other words, he didn't officially violate any policy, but we discussed things with some uninvolved admins, and all agreed that the amount of time it takes to clean up after his article-space contributions was too great as to warrant him still being on enwp. Rschen and I asked him to clean up his act and warned him. When Freewayguy persisted in editing and introducing new errors into the encyclopedia, Rschen blocked him. Upon review 3 uninvolved admins upheld the block.
 * Freewayguy then began editing other wikis, starting at commons and expanding to other language Wikipedias, editing his own and Rschen's userpages with the death threats and general nonsense. I personally thought most of it was amusing, but Rschen is treating it more seriously, because he lives in a county neighboring that of Freewayguy. I believe the proximity between the two editors is why Rschen is playing it safe and taking things seriously. Scott5114 (talk) 20:05, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * - After looking at the logs posted by I can understand if SGN got a bit annoyed at  for his lack of patience and over-persistence in IRC. Probably Rschen7754 should have dealt with this more formally instead of IRC - contacting a steward, and privately emailing a local checkuser to this project. I don't see anything blatantly wrong done by SGN, though perhaps he could have just given Rschen7754 advice to do that - seek out a steward or en.wikinews checkuser to email privately about it. But certainly no grounds for desysop based on what is there in the logs. Cirt (talk) 21:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * But a block from the channel and a refusal to check the global contribs? That's what gets me. --Rschen7754 (talk) 21:42, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * - Further, we now have (7) unanimous people weighing in as "Oppose" for this proposal of desysopping - perhaps it would be best at this point in time to close this discussion a bit early? Cirt (talk) 21:35, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed. This bullshit has wasted enough of people's time and attracted anonymous trolls from Wikipedia. A block on a /16 had to be instituted because of the fight being imported from Wikipedia. --Brian McNeil / talk 21:41, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Bawolff ☺☻ 21:46, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Wow. Some thoughts and opinions on this
 * Actions have a very limited impact on your status on wikinews. If someone is doing something stupid on 'pedia, and comes over here, we'll going to watch them more closely, but it is doubtful we will block them unless they are doing something extremly stupid
 * Death threats are an example of something extremly stupid. It may warrent an automatic block here, but should be investigated before hand and disscussed to make sure that they are the same person, etc. This is something that should be formly brought up with administrators, not casually on irc
 * Actions of admins on other places do affect what happens to them on wikinews, if it relates to wikinews or you're threatening a wikinewsie. (per BP) + It seems common sense if admins are bashing wikinews, etc outside wikinews, thats not good
 * Therefor if you are being extremely stupid outside of wikinews [which includes irc], it will catch up to you here, but you have to so something very very stupid
 * demanding an admin do something is just generally not a good idea. If you believe an admin has not given you proper attention, ask someone else to review
 * We don't de-admin people for not doing enough. We really, as a general rule, do not deadmin people. You'd have a case if the admin was making the death threats, but saying that the admin did not do enough, when your side of the story is disputed, is not going to work unless you have a really good case [which you don't]
 * You have been very agressive in demanding this [based on your comments here] which counts against you.

Statement by administrator in question

 * from the prisoner Hey! I have to say for the record, for all the crazy things I've done - I never thought the first time someone actually filled a request for de-sysop would be because I _didn't_ block long enough.  But what the hey, amusing either way.  As for IRC logs... publish away!  In fact I have a copy from my buffer.  I even want to release the part after where I talk to DanielB about it and drop my fascade of being nice.  -- Shakata Ga Nai  ^_^ 17:01, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Logs of the first section have been posted. User:ShakataGaNai/IRC Logs 2008-11-20  -- Shakata Ga Nai  ^_^ 21:26, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Votes
Note that support indicates you agree the administrator should lose their privileges. Oppose means you believe they should retain them.

 * Frivolous case that should be speedily removed from this page. No evidence of abuse of administrative privileges. Appeals to take into consideration IRC not accepted on Wikinews. Based on standards of Wikipedia, this is not Wikipedia. --Brian McNeil / talk 12:22, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I have to agree with brianmc on this one. IRC is not enforceable in terms of WN policy. If it was, then we'd all be in a lot of trouble. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 12:24, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * - Per my comment, above. Cirt (talk) 14:00, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * - Per my comment, above. Cary Bass (talk) 16:59, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * see my comments. --SVTCobra 18:06, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Doesn't appear that ShakataGaNai did anything wrong or broke policy. Seems to be a baseless request. --PatrickFlaherty (talk) 18:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * If it's so bad Rschen7754, allow the log to be posted. The fact that you are not OK with the log being posted, while SGN, gives me a good idea of who might be at fault. Anonymous101talk 18:47, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Give the guy a chance. He hasn't responded to the thread since Brian asked for the logs. It is early morning for the user (PST), so they could be at school/job/etc. -- Shakata Ga Nai ^_^ 18:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I do give permission for my part to be posted; you'll have to ask Daniel about the rest. --Rschen7754 (talk) 21:23, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * - riiiiight. -- Sken   my talk 21:16, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * - there is not anywhere enough evidence to support deadmin. at most, an investigation into conduct of admins might be warrented (but at first glance i do not feel you have enough for even that). Bawolff ☺☻ 21:46, 21 November 2008 (UTC)


text:
Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Administrator/Tempodivalse

Want to see if I can get into this early. I know I've been here for only three weeks, but I have amassed over 1300 edits since then, about 900 of which are in the main article namespace, a number that is higher than that of some administrators. I also have 3500 edits at the English Wikipedia, and have been there for half a year. I thought that I could simplify things a bit if I had sysop status (if elected, I'd mainly do things like correcting mistakes in archived pages, tackling the archive backlog, and deleting nonsense pages). Thoughts? ♪ Tempo Di  Valse ♪ 17:03, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Questions

 * - If you successfully become an Admin, will you help out with admin tasks such as archiving articles older than seven days, proposed deletions and closing deletion discussions? Cirt (talk) 18:06, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I think that's already answered in the nom. --SVTCobra 18:12, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Just to clarify, yes, I will help out with those things. ♪ Tempo Di  Valse ♪ 18:40, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay thanks. :) Cirt (talk) 19:07, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments

 * We need more votes! ♪ Tempo Di  Valse ♪ 21:35, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Votes

 * Tempodivalse has proven himself an excellent contributer over the last few weeks, and, with his edits on WP going back much longer, I already trust this user, although the lack of experience has concerned me, I am leaning towards support. Anonymous101talk 17:21, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Tempodivalse is a strong editor and clearly the tools will be useful to him. I understand the concerns that he might not have the length of time that is usually asked of admin candidates; however, I feel that he is is such a good editor here and at Wikipedia, that he can be trusted as an admin. --PatrickFlaherty (talk) 17:29, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * - Good contributor, but first contribution here was 21 November 2008, would like to see a history of positive contributions to this project for a bit longer track record than that. Certainly could support in a couple months or so if same types of positive work here continues. Cirt (talk) 18:04, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Tempodivalse is an invaluable contributor with a very high work-rate. I do not want to discourage him or her. However, Tempodivalse is just getting familiar with the Template messages and I would like to see Tempodivalse around a bit longer before the tools are bestowed. --SVTCobra 23:56, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Too soon. -- Shakata Ga Nai ^_^ 08:06, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * PS. I dislike people stealing my name coloring. Confuses me.  Leads to people getting accidentally banned. -- Shakata Ga Nai  ^_^ 08:07, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * potential to make a good admin, just applied a few weeks too early. --Brian McNeil / talk 11:31, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * no doubt a fantastic contributor, but I echo the above comments - I just feel it's too early. Keep it up and you will be elected with no hassle in the new year. -- Sken   my talk 14:18, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

NOMINATION WITHDRAWN I'll try again in a month or two. ♪ Tempo Di  Valse ♪ 15:28, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Closed as withdrawn by the candidate. Cirt (talk) 21:15, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text: Comments:Western Australian court to set precedent on the burqa


text:
Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Administrator/Gopher65

Gopher65
has been a great contributor to Wikinews since July. He has made over 1100 edits since then and does just about everything including copyediting, reviewing, adding new materials to developing articles, and is also a great reviewer. Gopher65 has created several articles but also has been involved in template designs. I believe the project would benefit by having Gopher65 as an admin. --PatrickFlaherty (talk) 00:20, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Questions

 * Do you accept this nomination? --PatrickFlaherty (talk) 00:20, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * He's on wikibreak, but it looks like he accepts the nom from this diff. ♪ Tempo Di  Valse ♪ 15:29, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I accept. I don't return home until Jan 4th, so I may not reply until then. Gopher65talk 14:38, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * - If you successfully become an Admin, will you help out with admin tasks such as archiving articles older than seven days and Proposed deletions? --PatrickFlaherty (talk) 00:20, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I can be an anally organized person, so I would certainly help with archiving and closing DRs, time permitting. I can't promise I'd singlehandedly archive everything of course;). Gopher65talk 14:38, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Do you currently, or have you ever, had the intention to take over the world, and establish yourself as the autocratic dictator of the world?Bawolff ☺☻ 01:26, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * If so, is this simply the first step? Bawolff ☺☻ 01:26, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * One of my long-held goals is to take over the world for all hyper-intelligent genetically engineered gopher-kind, stopping both Brain the mouse and Snowball the Hamster in the process. You should all thank me for this service (and bow). Gophers will be far more benevolent masters of the world than our mouse or hamster brethren. Gopher65talk 14:38, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments

 * - Three votes before user has stated whether or not they will accept the nomination - this should really wait. Cirt (talk) 01:44, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * User is away until Jan 6, so yeah, we should probably wait t'll he is at least here. Bawolff ☺☻ 13:26, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Agree w/ . Cirt (talk) 04:30, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Nom accepted. Cirt (talk) 15:04, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It's been over a week now since the nom. Shouldn't this be closed already? ♪ Tempo Di  Valse ♪ 15:46, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Votes

 * as nom. --PatrickFlaherty (talk) 00:25, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * All hail to our new overlord Gopher65. Bawolff ☺☻ 01:27, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * --♪ Tempo Di  Valse ♪ 01:32, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * per nom and answers to the questions. Cirt (talk) 15:05, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * no issues Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 16:14, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Narf! --TUFKAAP (talk) 16:36, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 21:19, 3 January 2009 (UTC)


text:
Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Bureaucrat/TUFKAAP

TUFKAAP
Currently, we have 3 active bureaucrats. Overall, we have 7, four are inactive. I've been around for a few years... as in Wikinews' first year... 2005. I wouldn't mind taking on the small but still important tasks bureaucrats have, as such, I'm going to nominate myself. --TUFKAAP (talk) 02:18, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Questions

 * Do you feel there is anything that needs to be done as a bureaucrat? Basically is there any specific reason as to why you nominated yourself, other then to help? Bawolff ☺☻ 02:45, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * No and no. --TUFKAAP (talk) 04:35, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Comments

 * Technically we were started in November 2004 (but 2004 doesn't really count as a year). :P Bawolff ☺☻ 02:36, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Of course, I guess I should have clarified that 2005 was Wikinews' first full year. Since 2004 was more or less two months, and most of the time spent in beta. --TUFKAAP (talk) 02:41, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Votes

 * Generally . My only concern is that I'm not sure more beurrocrats are needed. I see no evidence of back logs (maybe bots, but i think that is a result of the bots approval process than any fault of the beurocrats). I definitly trust TUFKAAP to fulfil this role. Bawolff ☺☻ 02:41, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * - I was actually thinking of nominating the other day, disappointed I did not get the opportunity but I am glad he decided to put himself up for it. TUFKAAP is already trusted as a sysop for a longtime, and will continue to serve the project well in this added capacity as a bureaucrat. Cirt (talk) 05:21, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * - we do not really need more bureaucrats, but if TUFKAAP wants to be one then I see no reason why not to give him the flag. --Cspurrier (talk) 19:21, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * TUFKAAP will make an excellent bureaucrat as he is a great admin and editor. --PatrickFlaherty (talk) 19:28, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I actually feel that while not vital, one more bureaucrat would be a better number, just to make sure we always got one handy. TUFKAAP is a great candidate and has my full support. Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 19:39, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 12:27, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Daniel (talk) 04:26, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * --Brian McNeil / talk 08:05, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: It has now been over seven days since this discussion started, with unanimous consent in support. I think it can be closed as successful and the candidate promoted. Cirt (talk) 18:00, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

 * I withheld from voting; thus I close this with promote Brian | (Talk) | New Zealand Portal 07:23, 7 February 2009 (UTC)


text: User talk:Llucasll

title: User talk:Llucasll


text:
Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Removal/Ironiridis (admin)

Ironiridis
User hasn't edited in 14 months to now, and if we exclude the one-off edit in December 2007, for 16 months total. Propose desysopping for inactivity.

I have left a note at Ironiridis' talk page regarding this request and also sent an email linking to this discussion.

Regards, Daniel (talk) 11:39, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Comments

 * - It has been over seven days, and this appears to be unanimous consensus to remove rights. Any objection to closing and making a note for the Stewards at Steward requests/Permissions? Cirt (talk) 01:53, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Already done. -- ♪ Tempo Di  Valse ♪ 03:50, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * User de-sysoped (diff). -- ♪ Tempo Di  Valse ♪ 20:51, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Votes

 * as nominator. Daniel (talk) 11:39, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * per nom. Cirt (talk) 21:29, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I disagree with the idea of desysopping for inactivity. Inactive admins do no harm. WN:IP is not policy and was widely opposed in April 2007. --SVTCobra 22:03, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, but the practice was widely supported in December 2007/January 2008 (more recent than your archaic discussion link), and resulted in numerous desysoppings for inactivity (Requests_for_permissions/Archive_3). So linking to a nearly-two-year-old discussion in such a fashion is distinctly misleading to those not aware of the history of RfDA's. Daniel (talk) 23:43, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes and no. Some of those desysop requests succeeded and others failed. One of the successful ones was because the user responded saying 'remove my admin rights'. Either way, it was never made policy, and I disagree with it in principle. --SVTCobra 23:53, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I won't oppose, if the user doesn't want the admin status. --SVTCobra 23:07, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

 * They dont need the mop & bucket if they aren't using it. Let's give it to someone else who will. -- Shakata Ga Nai  ^_^ 00:58, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Remove the bits. Users don't presently contribute and keeping them on clogs up the lists. Cary Bass (talk) 02:04, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * as per the reason given by Cary with no prejudice against restoring rights if requested. I don't think it is desirable to have a ever growing list of users with admin rights who haven't edited in years. I trust that anyone who the community has considered mature enough to have admin rights won't be offended by finding they've been removed if they haven't edited for a very prolonged period. Adambro (talk) 15:17, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * - I have supported the inactivity policy for a while but recently I reconsidered my opinion. Its not like there is a limit to a maximum number of admins we can have and I have no reason to doubt that our (now inactive) admins cannot be trusted to edit effectively. I think we should not de-admin unless the admin is causing problems. Thanks, Anonymous101talk 20:22, 13 February 2009 (UTC) Although I oppose WN:IP, I have changed to support as ironiridis has said he supports his de-adminship. Thanks, Anonymous101talk 20:34, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I say we switch this over to speedy. Iron himself is ok with this  -- Shakata Ga Nai  ^_^ 20:23, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I am generally in favour of de-sysopping people who have been inactive for a prolonged period. From a tinfoil hat/security perspective, the more admins there are, the more accounts to try and crack the passwords of. Inactive accounts make the most obvious targets. --Brian McNeil / talk 10:48, 14 February 2009 (UTC)


text:
Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Removal/Tomos (admin)

Tomos
User hasn't edited in 13 months to now. Propose desysopping for inactivity.

I have left a note at Tomos' talk page regarding this request; he does not have a valid email address confirmed so I was unable to notify him of the discussion using that.

Regards, Daniel (talk) 11:39, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Comments

 * Shouldn't this be closed, considering that it has been a full week since the request was posted? -- ♪ Tempo Di  Valse ♪ 17:38, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed. 5 for remove rights, 4 opposing that, seems this could be closed as no consensus to remove admin rights - any objections? Cirt (talk) 01:51, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ discussion closed. -- ♪ Tempo Di  Valse ♪ 14:19, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Votes

 * as nominator. Daniel (talk) 11:39, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * per nom. Cirt (talk) 21:29, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I disagree with the idea of desysopping for inactivity. Inactive admins do no harm. WN:IP is not policy and was widely opposed in April 2007. --SVTCobra 22:03, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * They dont need the mop & bucket if they aren't using it. Let's give it to someone else who will. -- Shakata Ga Nai  ^_^ 00:58, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Remove the bits. Users don't presently contribute and keeping them on clogs up the lists. Cary Bass (talk) 02:04, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * as per the reason given by Cary with no prejudice against restoring rights if requested. I don't think it is desirable to have a ever growing list of users with admin rights who haven't edited in years. I trust that anyone who the community has considered mature enough to have admin rights won't be offended by finding they've been removed if they haven't edited for a very prolonged period. Adambro (talk) 15:17, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * - I have supported the inactivity policy for a while but recently I reconsidered my opinion. Its not like there is a limit to a maximum number of admins we can have and I have no reason to doubt that our (now inactive) admins cannot be trusted to edit effectively. I think we should not de-admin unless the admin is causing problems. Thanks, Anonymous101talk 20:22, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * per my comment in the earlier vote. --Brian McNeil / talk 10:49, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
 * — I oppose removal for inactivity unless we have some concrete reason for doing so (ie, if we had a set number of admins that we couldn't exceed). Gopher65talk 15:04, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * per the other oppposes -- ♪ Tempo Di  Valse ♪ 16:48, 17 February 2009 (UTC)


text:
Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Administrator/Tempodivalse 2

Tempodivalse
Over the last three months Tempodivalse has clocked up over 1600 edits to Wikinews, worked on many articles, and became one of Wikinews' best editors. He has also tagged many articles for speedy deletion, and this could have been simpler if he had adminship. Thanks, Anonymous101talk 18:53, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Questions/Comments

 * Do you accept this nomination? Anonymous101talk 18:53, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I accept. ♪ Tempo Di  Valse ♪ 20:02, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * We need some more input, it's been almost three days since the nomination, and nobody has voted yet. -- ♪ Tempo Di  Valse ♪ 01:47, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

 * This article was largely written by you., who had never (ever) before edited on Wikinews, put a review on the talk page. He then put the publish tag on the article. Subsequently, you sighted the article, releasing it to the masses. My question to you is: Do you think that this article went through a proper reviewing process with which Wikinews can feel comfortable? --SVTCobra 02:00, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * You are suggesting that I am operating a sock puppet? I can assure you, I would not do such a thing. Tempodivalse is the only account I have ever edited Wikinews with. I only sighted that article because I thought that the reviewer forgot to sight it himself -- or couldn't sight it himself (I saw he was new, and assumed that he was reviewing without editor status and therefore couldn't sight his own edits). This was just a coincidence. Please feel free to checkuser me if you want to verify that the IP addresses behind the two accounts are different. -- ♪ Tempo Di  Valse ♪ 03:22, 19 February 2009 (UTC) Never mind, sorry for the misunderstanding. See my comment below. -- ♪ Tempo  Di  Valse ♪ 17:43, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * No, you misunderstand. I am not accusing you of sockpuppetry. What I was seeking to discover was whether you felt that reviewer was qualified in reviewing the article. In my view, you ought to have reverted the publish instead of "sighting" it. But, that's just my view since it isn't spelled out in policy. You must have noticed that this was a brand new contributor. --SVTCobra 03:52, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * My apologies for the misunderstanding.
 * I do agree that in retrospect, I should have reverted the addition of the publish template, given that the reviewer was brand new. I guess that just didn't occur to me at the time. -- ♪ Tempo Di  Valse ♪ 04:35, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

 * Just wondering, what margin of support does an admin candidacy have to have in order to pass as successful? The policy doesn't seem to be very specific about it. -- ♪ Tempo Di  Valse ♪ 15:03, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Varries (depending on situation, and seriousness of the concerns raised, and really the b'crats have some lee-way), but generally around 70%. So far you're doing good imho. Bawolff ☺☻ 16:53, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It has been a week to the day since this nom opened, I think that a bureaucrat can close it now. ♪Tempo di Valse ♪ 15:02, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * RfA closed as SUCCESSFUL. Thanks to everyone who supported me, I appreciate your trust. ♪Tempo di Valse ♪ 19:45, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Votes

 * - Per nom by . Cirt (talk) 01:56, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * - In regards to svt's concerns - I personally feel since it was the user's very first edit, TempoDiValse should have perhaps asked an univolved party to sight the edit. However this is still a very grey area as to what to do, and I think Tempo's action were perfectly ok. Bawolff ☺☻ 04:33, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * stole my signature color scheme. Still grumpy. -- Shakata Ga Nai  ^_^ 18:41, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, that was just a coincidence. I have had this signature for ages on Wikipedia, before I even registered with Wikinews. (The grey box is a new addition, though.) -- ♪ Tempo Di  Valse ♪ 20:43, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Goddamn kids and their multicoloured signatures! Every byte is sacred, every byte must be saved, and if a byte gets wasted, Brion gets upset! :-P --Brian McNeil / talk 18:53, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

 * --Brian McNeil / talk 18:53, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Ed 20:39, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * --SVTCobra 23:32, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * — I'm supporting this to cut down on the number of editprotected requests that I have to wade through. ;o) Now he can do his own protected edits Muwhahahahaha! Gopher65talk 15:53, 22 February 2009 (UTC)


text:
Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Administrator/Red Thunder

Red Thunder
Hello all. I have been a regular contributor here for the past two months or so, and have done peer reviewing as well as article writing. During the year and a half before I became active here, I had over 16,000 edits to the English Wikipedia. I would use the admin tools mostly for archiving, but also for speedy deletion and copyright violations in obvious cases. Thank you. R .T . 12:40, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Questions/Comments

 * Looks like this RfA is ready to be closed, it's been over a week since the nomination. ♪Tempo di Valse ♪ 20:37, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it is fine if RfAs run over for proper vetting by the community. However, Red Thunder seems to have disappeared right after this nomination. --SVTCobra 15:58, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, that was a fault on my part. I didn't put up a template but I've been extremely busy over the past week or so. I confirm that I'm still here. I'll be back to full activity by Monday. R .T . 22:28, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I am now back to full activity. R .T . 15:33, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Votes

 * - Much as I appreciate the article-writing and great contributions you have made to this project so far, two months seems a tad short. Would like to see a bit more activity and history of contributions, perhaps another month or two. Keep up the great work on the project and please think about being considered for nomination again at some point in the future. Cirt (talk) 01:55, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * = changed to Support. Taken some time to look things over a bit more and agree with that this individual is a positive contributor to the project. Cirt (talk) 08:05, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * abstain - Cirt brings up a valid point. Bawolff ☺☻ 04:37, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Dont recognize the name. Plus we dont have that many speedy deletes. -- Shakata Ga Nai  ^_^ 18:40, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * From what I have seen, this user has consistently made beneficial edits, shown a reasonable understanding of policies, and worked towards improving the project. --Brian McNeil / talk 19:04, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * This user can clearly be trusted to be an excellent admin, and we need people archiving. Anonymous101talk 08:47, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * — I'd be inclined to wait another couple months, but I'm not opposed to this user's RfA. Gopher65talk 15:55, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Jacques Divol (talk) 19:38, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * no objections ♪Tempo di Valse ♪ 21:43, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * --SVTCobra 03:05, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Closed as pass, user promoted. Small number of votes suggests we may need to revisit duration of RfAs. --Brian McNeil / talk 18:06, 7 March 2009 (UTC)


text: User talk:Ubinemorum

title: User talk:Ubinemorum


text:
User:Shankarnikhil88/EditCounterOptIn.js

hello. i am now setting up this.


text: User talk:ValeriMT

title: User talk:ValeriMT


text: User talk:Evinlu

title: User talk:Evinlu


text: Comments:Italian senate rejects no-confidence vote against minister


text: Comments:Pakistani President met with protest on fifth day of UK tour


text: Talk:Technical troubles hold up International Space Station repairs


text: Comments:Technical troubles hold up International Space Station repairs


text:
Talk:Bronislaw Komorowski sworn in as president of Poland

A few pre-review comments
Thanks for writing this article. I had a few comments about it that I think should be addressed before it can be reviewed. --Cspurrier (talk) 01:03, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * "The new president had held the post as acting speaker of parliament" can this be clarified? Who are we talking about? What post are we talking about?
 * What political parties are these people members of and very briefly what are these parties' main points? (always important when talking about elections)
 * What is a "reapprochment"? It sounds odd and is probably PR speak (thus not NPOV).

The (supposed to-be) OR

Diego Grez return fire 00:10, 11 August 2010 (UTC)


text: User talk:Med12

title: User talk:Med12


text: User talk:Antonreog

title: User talk:Antonreog


text:
Template:NASCAR

An infobox for and its news. ''Are newer articles not showing? Refresh''

Customize this infobox .

title: Template:NASCAR


text: User talk:Enysuningsih

title: User talk:Enysuningsih


text:
User talk:Cheaps~enwikinews

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Cheaps. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Cheaps~enwikinews that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:15, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 06:29, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Cheaps~enwikinews


text: User talk:Wardhanaagung

title: User talk:Wardhanaagung


text: User talk:Pubai

title: User talk:Pubai


text:
Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Removal/ShakataGaNai (admin 2)

 * Note: Withdrawn by Skenmy, at 19:34, 13 October 2009.

ShakataGaNai has promoted 3 users to Editor status without consensus after the Flagged Revisions RFP policy came into force on the 10th April 2009:
 * 17:07, 23 September 2009 ShakataGaNai (Talk | contribs | block) changed group membership for User:Shoone from (none) to Editors ? (He's trust worthy, I know him IRL. Besides, hes a VERY good c/e'r)
 * 01:35, 21 July 2009 ShakataGaNai (Talk | contribs | block) changed group membership for User:James Pain from (none) to Editors ? (he's been around for, like, forever)
 * 02:53, 4 June 2009 ShakataGaNai (Talk | contribs | block) changed group membership for User:Brynn from (none) to Editors ? (I know her, she's responsible.)

This is clear, consistent violation of a policy that had existed for over a month, nearly two, before the promotions were made.

ShakataGaNai is also a bit too loose with the block tool, in my opinion:
 * 02:00, 29 September 2009 ShakataGaNai (Talk | contribs | block) blocked Rayboy8 (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 48 hours (account creation disabled) ? (Repeated Copyvio.) (unblock | change block)
 * Despite what ShakataGaNai has claimed on IRC, I am only able to find a *single* instance of serious, blockable copyvio before this block. The block itself was unwarranted (per WN:BLOCK - "last resort - efforts to educate must be made first, followed by warnings" - I see one education attempt that was, quite frankly, pitiful.) for the "seriousness" of the offence - a single line that looked similar: . Prove to me that the user maliciously copy and pasted this line into the article and I will concede this point. More often than not, I have studied sources, then written the article and found a few of my sentences have turned out very similar - it's simply not possible to re-write some things, and other times you get a bit of creative block.
 * Related Block:
 * 18:04, 2 October 2009 ShakataGaNai (Talk | contribs | block) blocked Rayboy8 (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 72 hours (account creation disabled) ? (Copyvio) (unblock | change block)
 * This block should have been applied, as it would have been the third serious offence. But 72 hours? Very excessive. "My patience is officially done. These block times are going to start escalating rapidly after this point." is also not behaviour befitting of an admin and bureaucrat on a user's - who has contributed 55 articles - talk page.

The above blocked user is clearly a constructive, helpful user, and we should be encouraging and helpful, rather than slapping him with bans for minor offences. This kind of behaviour is exactly why we have such a notorious reputation outside of our community.

ShakataGaNai is also an extremely hostile, immature, and childish person. Pretty much anyone who has dealt with him on-wiki or on IRC can attest to this. When I brought these comments to him on IRC, with every intention of being constructive, I was met with nothing but criticism and hostility, told I had "some bug in [my] bonnet" and placed on the ignore list, effectively trumping what could have been a constructive conversation. He often posts immature comments - one that springs to mind is the "I CAN HAZ CRATZ" comment on his Bureaucratship nomination. He refers to contributors as "minions", something which makes me consider whether he is a suitable person to have the tools and abilities he has been trusted with. Even as a joke, the comments concern me. ShakataGaNai exhibits classic behavious related to a power trip - something which greatly concerns me. I will not let my home project have one person apply their own agendas here - we follow policy and procedure, not the tempers of one power-tripping admin.

I am extremely hesitant about placing this request for the removal of ShakataGaNai's privilages, and extremely willing and hopeful that I am proved incorrect in my evidence above. I do not wish to disgrace a user in high standing lightly. However, I do not feel that ShakataGaNai exhibits the basic anger management, nor the people skills required to be an administrator or bureaucrat here on Wikinews. I, therefore, request that the Administrator and Bureaucrat flags are removed from ShakataGaNai.

To the judging administrator: I request that simple support or oppose votes are discarded if they are not accompanied by a reason. "as above", or "per username" count as a reason in my opinion. I request this an no-one (including myself) will learn anything without an idea of why people vote in such a way.

Comments

 * - Skenmy says above: ShakataGaNai is also an extremely hostile, immature, and childish person. - This above highly inappropriate comment by Skenmy, posted with no evidence to back it up and amounting to a personal attack - leads one to believe that this is a bad faith request for desysopping. Cirt (talk) 19:27, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I will revise this comment to ShakataGaNai is, in my opinion, also an extremely hostile, immature, and childish person.. Please don't spill this onto my talk page. -- Sken   my talk 19:28, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Please don't make personal attacks against other editors. Cirt (talk) 19:29, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The comment is not a personal attack, it is a reason why I do not feel SGN should hold his privileges. Where can I express this view if not openly and honestly here on my request? -- Sken   my talk 19:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It is a personal attack and it is a wholly inappropriate use of this page. Cirt (talk) 19:33, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Votes

 * as proposer. -- Sken   my talk 19:03, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * - I don't see any discussion whatsoever, let alone dispute resolution, that occurred on Wikinews about this. In any event, some of the points mentioned above might be grounds for approaching the individual at their user talk page on Wikinews to address these issues - and if necessary seek out dispute resolution processes - but moving straight to a desysopping of the user seems wholly inappropriate. Cirt (talk) 19:07, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * SGN is unwilling to engage in discussion, and therefore I am unwilling to chase him for it. Please suggest a viable method of curing SGN's disruptive and inappropriate behaviour and I will pursue it. -- Sken   my talk 19:09, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I checked at User talk:ShakataGaNai, User talk:Skenmy, Wikinews talk:Flagged revisions/Requests for permissions, Admin action alerts. I see no evidence of any attempts at discussion. Cirt (talk) 19:12, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Please read my previous comment. -- Sken   my talk 19:13, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * All I see are vague statements unsupported by evidence or diffs of any kind whatsoever. Cirt (talk) 19:13, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Then please read and investigate the case before commenting. I have spent a significant amount of time on this, and it is clear you have not, with only 4 minutes between my posting and your opposal. If there is a clear indication that SGN is willing to try and change his ways then I am willing to withdraw this to a discussion. -- Sken   my talk 19:16, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No, the burden is on you to show evidence and diffs, especially when requesting that a respected administrator and bureaucrat on this site be desysopped with seemingly no evidence of any on-wiki discussion or attempts at dispute resolution. Cirt (talk) 19:17, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I am not willing to engage in a discussion with a user who is not willing to participate in it constructively. The evidence is all there, right in front of you. Diffs are lacking, I agree, but this can soon be remedied. Read it, and then comment. -- Sken   my talk 19:19, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The so-called "evidence" consists of copy-paste of block and promotion logs. I see zero evidence or diffs of on wiki discussion and/or dispute resolution about this of any kind, prior to this dramatic request for a desysopping. Cirt (talk) 19:21, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * (un-dent) Cirt, I am not an unreasonable person. Suggest how I should go about this and I am willing to reconsider my nomination and take other channels to resolve this. As I noted - this nomination was made with extreme hesitance, and I do not wish to disgrace a user unnecessarily. This is highly unconstructive. -- Sken   my talk 19:27, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree it is "highly unconstructive". It is "highly unconstructive" and causes undue drama to request a desysopping of someone when no on-wiki attempts at discussion or dispute resolution have been made. And that is what I would have suggested. Now I would simply suggest withdrawing the use of this page for bad faith requests for desysopping and using it as one's personal forum to make unsupported attacks. Cirt (talk) 19:28, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Cirt, please do not even for a second consider this to be a bad faith request. I have nothing but respect for SGN and yourself, and I do not wish to disgrace users who have worked so hard for this site. Please suggest an alternative venue, and I shall reconsider my nomination. The seriousness of SGN's abuse is not something I feel I can let go, however, without proper discussion. -- Sken   my talk 19:30, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I have to agree with Cirt. There should at least have been some attempt to resolve the issues elsewhere, before doing something like this. Couldn't you have left a note at SGNs talk page, noting your concerns? Maybe you two could have resolved it there, instead of coming here first. RfDA should be done only after all else fails, imho. Tempodivalse [talk]  19:32, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * As I have mentioned before, I do not believe SGN to be open to this kind of dispute resolution. As two of my peers have suggested it as an alternative, I am willing to try, as my opinion is clearly clouded. This is a withdrawal of the request - I will be moving to SGN's talk page. -- Sken   my talk 19:34, 13 October 2009 (UTC)


text:
Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Administrator/Millosh

I am mostly active at sr.wn and I am working on its infrastructure. A couple of days ago I am asked to make bots for en.wn. I need admin permissions mostly for page deletion because of dealing with bots. As a steward I have necessary permissions, but I need community consensus to use them. So, both options are good enough for me: (1) to have local admin permissions or (2) to have approval from the community to use my existing admin-related permissions which I have as a steward. --millosh (talk) 11:13, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Comments and questions

 * Since you're trusted as a steward, and can take admin rights, the only other thing is editor rights. Administrators are generally trusted to handle these and it's effectively automatic with admin. As you are not too involved in the daily work on enwn with these tools are you happy to forego peer reviewing articles? Obviously, if you see vandalism, it's better you can revert to a sighted version where one exists. --Brian McNeil / talk 12:36, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Any technical work which I am able to do is not a problem. As I am working now on bots for en.wn, I am watching en.wn RC more often; so, if I see any vandalism, I'll revert it, as well as I may help with blocking [obvious] vandals and spammers. At the other side, my involvement at the most of Wikimedia projects is structural, which means that I am not an editor anywhere in the narrow sense. Even thou I wanted (and I want) to make interviews and to participate more in writing, I don't have enough of time for that (actually, I've made less than 10 real stories in Serbian since I've started to take care about sr.wn in 2007). In other words, I am good as a bureaucrat and not so useful as a journalist or encyclopedist. --millosh (talk) 15:18, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Votes

 * Thoughtful and well-presented response to my question above, already trusted to manage bots, and has privs elsewhere. --Brian McNeil / talk 15:39, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * he can't do any more damage than he already is. -- Shakata Ga Nai  ^_^ 15:42, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * giving him +sysop locally. – Juliancolton  | Talk 19:42, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * , per . Cirt (talk) 19:57, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Tempodivalse [talk]  20:19, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 *   Tris   20:33, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Adambro (talk) 07:53, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * we trust him with the tools as a steward, no reason to not give him them locally. --Cspurrier (talk) 00:32, 11 October 2009 (UTC)


text: User talk:DJ LEX CF

title: User talk:DJ LEX CF


text:
Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Removal/Mass De-Bot'ing (September 2009)

Mass De-Bot'ing
Here's the deal, I was looking at our bot list and noticed a bunch of bots are inactive. Since bot edits are hidden by default, I think we should remove the bot flag for those that don't need/use it. If they become reactive, we can give them back their flag very easily. Every bot on this list hasn't edited this year. If you have a reason to keep a specific bots flag, say so, otherwise this is a "1 for all" vote. -- Shakata Ga Nai ^_^ 01:38, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * - Hasn't been used since 2005. Additionally it's stated purpose is fixing double redirects which is handled by ZacharyBot.
 * - Hasn't been used since September 2008.
 * - Hasn't been used since 2007. Seems to be a predecessor to CalendarBot.
 * - Hasn't been used since May 2008. We do the archive process by hand now.
 * - Hasn't been used since August 2008. It's job was replaced by MelancholieBot. (I also asked Bawolff, he said fine).
 * - Never used.
 * - Unused since 2007. Seemed to be used for Archiving.
 * - 4 Edits in 2007.
 * - Last used December 2008. Was for cs: Interwiki links.
 * - 3 Edits in 2007, last used activly in 2006. Was for pl: interwiki links.
 * - Last used in 2005.
 * - Last used in 2007. Fixed double redirects which now is handled by ZacharyBot
 * - Last used in 2005. Functionality replaced by AdambroBot
 * - Last used in September 2008. Did some interwiki & image replacement.

Comments

 * I note that also has administrator status. Perhaps it should it be desysoped, in addition to de-bot'd? Tempodivalse  [talk]  01:49, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I missed that, but I full agree. If he needs it back, it can be given easily enough. -- Shakata Ga Nai ^_^ 01:51, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Alexbot is actually blocked as well. Bawolff ☺☻ 20:58, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Votes

 * -- Shakata Ga Nai ^_^ 01:38, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * the de-flagging of each of these bots. --SVTCobra 01:40, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Most of these bots are now redundant as they have been replaced by other, more active bots which do the same tasks. The majority of these will likely never be used again, and the few that will can easily go through the bot process again. Tempodivalse [talk]  01:49, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * per Tempo — Gopher65talk 02:03, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * - Seems uncontroversial. – Juliancolton  | Talk 02:54, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Calebrw (talk) 19:56, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * No need for unused privs Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 19:58, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Seems reasonable. Cirt (talk) 19:59, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * sensible preemptive maintenance. --Brian McNeil / talk 21:17, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

 * ✅ All listed bots deflagged, after unanimous support and no objections in about seven days. Tempodivalse [talk]  12:52, 16 September 2009 (UTC)


text: Category:Successful requests for de-bot

title: Category:Successful requests for de-bot


text: User talk:Nascar1995

title: User talk:Nascar1995


text: User talk:Dylansucks

title: User talk:Dylansucks


text: User talk:Blaqksheep

title: User talk:Blaqksheep


text: User talk:Superthingsoncups

title: User talk:Superthingsoncups


text: User talk:মুয়াখখেরুল ইসলাম

title: User talk:মুয়াখখেরুল ইসলাম


text: User talk:Si Ayoub

title: User talk:Si Ayoub


text:
Uproar over light sentence of Hong Kong judge's niece

August 9, 2010 was sentenced to one year of probation and a fine of 8000 Hong Kong with her driving licence suspended for assaulting a police officer and drink-driving. According to the judge,, the light sentence is due to the defendant's mental illness. Both the police and the public have criticized the light sentence. Bokhary is the niece of Hong Kong judge.

The police urged the Secretary for Justice to review the sentence. said that Yuen should reconsider the sentence. Politician 'called for clarification over sentencing standards', according to .

Police Inspectors' Association chairman Liu Kit-ming said that the police were worried about this case as well as future treatment of such cases. He also said that the case may give the impression that the rich are punished less severely in court. 'We are not pointing at Bokhary nor do we hope she can be imprisoned. What we are concerned about most is guidelines for similar cases,' said Liu.

Around 300 citizens took to the streets to protest against the light sentence. They wore black shirts, symbolising 'the law of Hong Kong is dead'. The organizer of the protest, an student named Lo, said that the sentence was unjust and that it was 'hard to believe that there was no [translation missing]'. The protest was criticised by founder, who was a barrister himself. He believes it would lead to the fall of Hong Kong's orderly justice system and the rise of mob rule.

Lee went on to say that her mental illness was not discovered until the most recent sentence. He believes that going to prison will only worsen the situation and that Bokhary should be treated, not imprisoned. Bokhary's lawyer, Peter Duncan, denied that the light sentence was related to Bokhary's wealth. Yuen said that a jail term would 'destroy the rest of the defendant's life'.


text: User talk:Ifasten

title: User talk:Ifasten


text:
Thread:Comments:Hiroshima marks 65th atomic bombing anniversary/forget manicheism

One shouldn't try to define whether Japan's population (or from any country) deserved an attack or were the so called "poor people". Declaring such statements would only reflect an ignorant point of view where complex situations are reduced to black or white problems, or the "bad guys" against the "good ones" which does nothing but remind us of a Disney's movie.

The truth is, just as the article reports it, that more than 140 000 civilians were killed using nuclear bombs that made no distinction between women, children, babies, doctors, workers, people that supported the Empire or those who were against it; sportsmen, gardeners, nothing. These people were killed within the span of an eyeblink and thousands that survived it suffered from the nightmare of radioactivity. The only thought of this happening 65 years ago makes me shiver and cry. I would say the same thing if such a disgrace had happen to Americans, Iraqis, Chinese, or people from no matter which country.

We are no one to decide the faith of an entire population even if the mastering of fundamental forces may give us the illusion that we are becoming God. Despite the great technology that requires the development of weapons of mass destruction, they approach us more to an ape than a civilized man. What a sad paradox.


text: User talk:Compuglobalhypermeganet

title: User talk:Compuglobalhypermeganet


text:
Thread:Comments:Pressure mounts against Florida church plans to burn Quran/Bad Behavior

You just don't burn books. There's pretty much nothing I agree with in Mein Kampf, but I would never dream of just burning it. Books aren't meant to be burned.


text: User talk:Dmrockpower

title: User talk:Dmrockpower


text: User talk:Ainur-r

title: User talk:Ainur-r


text: User talk:Ahmeddubai

title: User talk:Ahmeddubai


text: User talk:Tcelletni

title: User talk:Tcelletni


text:
Thread:Comments:Pressure mounts against Florida church plans to burn Quran/Bad Behavior/reply

But they are made of paper, and paper burns so well. Didn't you see The Day After Tomorrow ?


text: User talk:JohanSteyn123

title: User talk:JohanSteyn123


text:
User talk:Cadogan05duke

Hello,

Your recent contributions are considered to be spam and have been reverted or deleted. Should you believe that your contributions are not spam, please argue your case on your talk page, or in WN:ALERT.

Further spamming may result in your editing privileges being removed. Please contribute to Wikinews in a constructive fashion instead.  Sken   my talk 09:02, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Cadogan05duke


text: User talk:Knthanhkim

title: User talk:Knthanhkim


text:
Thread:Comments:Pakistani President met with protest on fifth day of UK tour/Thanks for the Placards

They are a real bonus to the style of the article, FireLyte--spyre. Job well done!


text:
Thread:Comments:Western Australian court to set precedent on the burqa/A cultural issue going to far

That is what this is, I hope for the future that we can look past our cultural differences and actually see one another's faces.


text: User talk:Mayramena

title: User talk:Mayramena


text:
Thread:Comments:Technical troubles hold up International Space Station repairs/Space is dying

and soon we wont even be able to go up there without an extensive and expensive clean up of space-junk. Disappointed. :(


text: User talk:Deejayd77

title: User talk:Deejayd77


text:
User talk:78.23.131.23

Hello,

Your recent contributions are considered to be spam and have been reverted or deleted. Should you believe that your contributions are not spam, please argue your case on your talk page, or in WN:ALERT.

Further spamming may result in your editing privileges being removed. Please contribute to Wikinews in a constructive fashion instead.  Sken   my talk 08:59, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:78.23.131.23


text: User talk:Ayoyz 69

title: User talk:Ayoyz 69


text: User talk:Usfamfaar

title: User talk:Usfamfaar


text: User talk:Krishna.sathwik

title: User talk:Krishna.sathwik


text: User talk:RedNacz125

title: User talk:RedNacz125


text: User talk:Dragon Man Joshua

title: User talk:Dragon Man Joshua


text: User talk:Alex167

title: User talk:Alex167


text: User talk:Ranjit m74

title: User talk:Ranjit m74


text: User talk:Marmouse999

title: User talk:Marmouse999


text:
Talk:Uproar over light sentence of Hong Kong judge's niece

Translations
Providing the translations as usual. . Kayau (talk · contribs) 10:55, 9 August 2010 (UTC) ✅, i think. Kayau (talk · contribs) 01:58, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
 * http://hk.news.yahoo.com/article/100808/4/jl8f.html
 * Around 300 citizens, because they were dissastisfied about the court's earlier sentence of [Kemal] Bokhary's niece's police assault case, wore black shirts symbolising 'Hong Kong's law and order is dead', and marched from the Legislative Council building to the chief executive's residence I'm too lazy to figure out its name in english to protest... (and guess what, the sentence isn't even finished yet!)
 * Organiser Mr Lo who studies at year three of the IVE, stresses that the protest is not just against the Amina [Bokhary] case, but against the entire legal system of Hong Kong. 'The repeated sentences (yeah, I'm just translating it DIRECTLY! :P) reveals the problems of (some term whose meaning I'm not sure) and injustice... it's hard to think that is not present...
 * http://hk.news.yahoo.com/article/100808/4/jl8e.html
 * Martin Lee: If the judge says, because of the society's trends, although he thinks his verdict is correct, but the Secretary of Justice tells me to review the sentence, then I will put Amina to jail, and many people will think he's doing good, and will applaud, but please think a bit more: this is harmful to Hong Kong's rule of law. (Another long sentence!)
 * Martin Lee: This will lead to mob rule, people will take the law into their own hands, this will me a really 'big wok' (ie a large problem)... Apart from the law, what else can Hong Kong rely on?
 * Lee agrees that not jailing for third offence is 'unusual', but he was told by the media that her metal illness was not discovered until the third offence... if she is sent to jail, won't her situation worsen? How will that benifit the society? He said that, if he were the judge, he may have reached the same sentence as Yuen.

Comment
There's a bit in the last paragraph about a mental illness, but that's not explained anywhere else... what mental illness? Philippe (WMF) (talk) 02:02, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing that out. I meant to say something about it in the first paragraph, but I probably forgot to merge it during the edit conflict with Sonia. I'll add it back. Thanks again. Kayau (talk · contribs) 05:25, 10 August 2010 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Muali~enwikinews

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Muali. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Muali~enwikinews that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:22, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 06:34, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Muali~enwikinews


text: User talk:Hoaigiang nguyen

title: User talk:Hoaigiang nguyen


text:
Thread:Comments:Ahmadinejad criticizes Paul the octopus/Comments from feedback form - "What do you think of this page..."/reply (24)

I think the comment does violate no. 2, because vulgarity is only used for two purposes: 1) to be friendly with someone else; 2) to attack someone. Number two is surely the case here.


text: User talk:Deafheartily64

title: User talk:Deafheartily64


text: User talk:Mayazcherquoi

title: User talk:Mayazcherquoi


text:
User:Sahim

Hello!

Welcome to my user page.

For talk with me, please click here.

title: User:Sahim


text: User talk:Alexortizg

title: User talk:Alexortizg


text: User talk:Morail

title: User talk:Morail


text:
Thread:Comments:US unemployment rate remains unchanged at 9.5% in July/Comments from feedback form - "yes this is really happen in t..."/reply

Will discuss not need me engine error has provoked places that are insight into U, S, and A!


text:
User:Morail

Hello everybody! My name is Marco, I'm currently working at Fondazione Bruno Kessler in Trento, studying Wiki's dynamics and social interactions.

title: User:Morail


text:
Thread:Comments:Pressure mounts against Florida church plans to burn Quran/Bad Behavior/reply (2)

The atheist said he didn't want to burn the Bible.


text:
Thread:Comments:Pressure mounts against Florida church plans to burn Quran/Bad Behavior/reply (3)

Ha ha, yeah. But I still like you comment.


text: User talk:Tranquangtuyen281992

title: User talk:Tranquangtuyen281992


text: User talk:It's2am

title: User talk:It's2am


text: User talk:Huycuongvnh

title: User talk:Huycuongvnh


text: User talk:Drwilson225

title: User talk:Drwilson225


text: User talk:Chimera 193

title: User talk:Chimera 193


text:
Papua New Guinea Culture and Tourism minister charged with attempted murder

August 9, 2010

Police in Papua New Guinea have arrested the Culture and Tourism Minister, Guma Wau, and charged him with attempted murder. The host of 's Pacific Beat programme, Firmin Nanol, reported that the minister was charged and detained for an hour before being released on bail in connection with the shooting of a 50 year old man on June 13.

Minister Wau has said that he was driving through Kerowagi district when the road was blocked by local tribesmen who refused to let him pass, and as a result of this, he fired his pistol to break the crowd up. One of the bullets strayed and hit a local man, 50 year old John Agaundo, wounding him.

Police in Chimbu have confiscated his pistol for examination. Minister Wau is due to appear before Kundiawa District Court today.


text: User talk:Riteshtewary

title: User talk:Riteshtewary


text: User talk:Banee K

title: User talk:Banee K


text: User talk:Clothears-2

title: User talk:Clothears-2


text: User talk:ناصر الشمري

title: User talk:ناصر الشمري


text: User talk:Budy yanto

title: User talk:Budy yanto


text: User talk:Citedindex

title: User talk:Citedindex


text: User talk:Denisyouzan

title: User talk:Denisyouzan


text: User talk:Ankitanand8888

title: User talk:Ankitanand8888


text: User talk:Kamalvinay45

title: User talk:Kamalvinay45


text: User talk:Nurdiyanto

title: User talk:Nurdiyanto


text: User talk:Hkh222

title: User talk:Hkh222


text:
Template:Macau

An infobox for and its news. ''Are newer articles not showing? Refresh''

Customize this infobox .

title: Template:Macau


text: User talk:Treelet

title: User talk:Treelet


text: User talk:TriiipleThreat

title: User talk:TriiipleThreat


text: User talk:MR.HJH

title: User talk:MR.HJH


text:
German mosque used by September 11 militants closed

August 9, 2010 German authorities have closed a in  that 9/11 plotters used for meetings, because authorities fear that it is being used again by  extremists. The Taiba mosque, formerly known as the al-Quds mosque, was raided, closed and the association that runs it was also banned. Police officers confiscated computers and other material.

"We have closed the mosque because it was a recruiting and meeting point for Islamic radicals who wanted to participate in so-called jihad or holy war," Frank Reschreiter, a spokesman for Hamburg's state interior ministry, said. The spokesman also said that this was the first time the mosque had been shuttered and that for "quite a long time" it had been closely examined and watched by intelligence officers.

A May report by the Interior Ministry also said that the mosque "remains the central attraction for the Jihadist scene", and a 2009 Hamburg intellegence report stated that many people involved with the Taiba mosque had been getting training by radical Islamic groups, including a group of 11 people who traveled to military training camps at in March of last year. Their militant group had been formed at the mosque, and the report stated that "a very important factor for the radicalization of the group members was certainly their joint visits to the mosque."


text: User talk:Ashleystep06

title: User talk:Ashleystep06


text: Category:Hamburg

title: Category:Hamburg


text: Talk:Papua New Guinea Culture and Tourism minister charged with attempted murder


text: Comments:Papua New Guinea Culture and Tourism minister charged with attempted murder


text:
User talk:Yamariel

Blocked
Temporarily blocked, for disruptive editing. -- Cirt (talk) 19:08, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm being miss treated.... it is bias from Diego Grez... and friends.
This other article doesn't even have not nearly as many sources as I have site... so its obvious that my article displays more information on the subject and is neutral reporting.... even my opinions are backed up by sources.
 * No, you are the one who is not respecting Wikinews' policies. Firstly, you can't write editorials/opinion texts here. Secondly, articles can't be signed. Thirdly, you were "vandalizing". Diego Grez (alternate account) alt. talk 19:20, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Diego you should be ashamed of yourself... this is a clear abuse of power. First you accuse me of being Sam Santiago and get one of my past edits deleted, then you with bias attempt to block my article on Wikinews which was much much more sourced than the other you claimed it was coped from; and plus you got whoever to restrict me from editing or disputing these bias actions through proper channels. Now you're trying to get a page deleted on me that is perfectly sourced as well. Well its time for me to take my case on you to the high people over these admins you're controlling.
 * "neutral reporting... even my opinions". Oh dear. You don't seriously expect us to believe you aren't a troll, do you? Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 19:21, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

 * We do not permit editorials, opinions, smear-jobs, or other such idiocy. Might I suggest you carefully read all the above policies linked-to in the above welcome template. Otherwise, ... We can yank the welcome mat out from under your feet very quickly. -- Brian McNeil (alt. account) /alt-talk • main talk 19:30, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * First, the article I wrote on Wikinews isn't an opinion piece... every statement has come from another source outside my own... if you read the sources completely you can see that. I just put a personal touch to the article to help give it favor outside the rest. Technically the statements were also proposed by Betty Liu on Bloomberg's "In the Loop" today... I could have stated that point but I was thinking the same thing when she said it. But for the sake of whatever the policies might believe is a purely neutral prospective I could change it to what I just said and add the source. But this page shouldn't be label an editorial for one opinion at the end of the article. And I certainly shouldn't have been restricted editing access to a page I'm suppose to be responsible for changing.  That is without doubt a sabotaging move...--Yamariel (talk) 20:57, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No personal touch. Just state the facts. Is that too hard to understand? No opinions whatsoever. Neutral plain facts only please. Get it?  — fetch · comms  21:02, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Who the hack are you? Didn't I just see you on Wikipedia? Look if we talk about facts then what I wrote basically still is very good.  Even the opinion can be revised to reflect Betty Liu's question rather than my own... but all of this drama seems very much like over kill... and bias from my point of view.--Yamariel (talk) 21:25, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Repeatedly removing valid tags is disruptive. If you don't understand them ask. We don't bite - until you get disruptive. Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 21:09, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Well actually I thought you were some kind of sock of Diego... and if you notice I placed whatever was there with the review tag that the page asked me to place there after making edits. I really didn't think a review from whoever you are would come so quickly, but when I saw Diego in the mix I assumed bias intent from you...--Yamariel (talk) 21:25, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

 * Btw, who's Miss Treated? It's a duplicate article, so policy dictates it won't be published. — Mike moral  ♪♫  21:31, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Mike this isn't a duplicated article... I wrote this article with my own two hands early this morning while watching Bloomberg... I spent the rest of the time finding good sources, including waiting for Bloomberg to post the day's news. I didn't plan to put it on this particular news source but I thought I'd give it a shot... and actually it shouldn't be this much of a hassle.  If someone wrote on the same topic that shouldn't be too surprising because it's a big story now.  HP stock is still falling and their exec. need to pick a new CEO fast in order to settle fears.  Meanwhile the woman at the center of the storm is now saying she's sad he was fired... which I find funny... but I didn't put that in the article because then it would become an editorial.--Yamariel (talk) 00:14, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Mikemoral means there is another en.Wikinews article about this news event, Hewlett-Packard CEO Mark Hurd resigns after sexual harassment investigation, which is older than yours. The two articles will need to be merged if they are not on separate be equally valid news angles. -  Amgine | t 00:18, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I just read that article and it's last week's news... it only talks about Hurd leaving HP... the angle of my story is on the aftermath of the event... which is the fall in HP's stock due to investor lost faith in the company, plus I end with very current news with is the question of potential replacements and the company's desire to head in a new direction... these two articles may be related, but they are not the same.--Yamariel (talk) 00:31, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Additonal source
I noticed that one of my sources were removed for whatever reason... --Yamariel (talk) 00:44, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Mispublish
Hi. Don't put the publish tag on articles you've written. That template is designed to be added to an article by an authorized peer reviewer (uninvolved with the article) when they publish it. --Pi zero (talk) 01:15, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Yamariel


text:
Template:Apple

 * Newsroom
 * Style Guide – how to write
 * Content Guide – what to write

es:Plantilla:Apple

title: Template:Apple


text: User talk:Akhilsunnithan

title: User talk:Akhilsunnithan


text: User talk:Shnk.manipal

title: User talk:Shnk.manipal


text: Talk:Apple executive leaves company after iPhone 4 antenna issues


text: Talk:German mosque used by September 11 militants closed


text: Comments:German mosque used by September 11 militants closed


text: User talk:Djarya86

title: User talk:Djarya86


text: User talk:Johnsunys

title: User talk:Johnsunys


text: User talk:Brunoalaraujo

title: User talk:Brunoalaraujo


text: User talk:KnuxD

title: User talk:KnuxD


text:
User:KnuxD

On me
Hello I'm KnuxD

title: User:KnuxD


text:
Thread:Comments:German mosque used by September 11 militants closed/Now a mosque close to the sight of the Twin Tower Disaster?

I can't believe we are even debating whether or not we should let them build a mosque in NYC.


text:
Actress Patricia Neal dies aged 84

August 10, 2010

, an -winning actress, died at 84 of lung cancer at her home in, Massachusetts, United States in the presence of her family. "She faced her final illness as she had all of the many trials she endured: with indomitable grace, good humor and a great deal of her self-described stubbornness," said her family.

Neal won an Academy Award, or Oscar, for her portrayal of a middle aged housekeeper in the 1963 film . In 1965, she suffered a series of strokes but later returned to acting, earning an Oscar nomination for her performance in  and three nominations.

Her filmography includes ' (1949), ' (1951) and  (1957). She also played the role of Olivia Walton in  (1971).

She married in 1953 and they had five children, of whom one died of measles at the age of 7. They divorced in 1983 when she came to know of his affair with her best friend.

"Frequently my life has been likened to a Greek tragedy, and the actress in me cannot deny that comparison," she said in her 1988 biography, As I Am.

The Patricia Neal Rehabilitation Centre in Knoxville, Tennessee, U.S.A is named after the actress and looks after people suffering from strokes and spinal cord and brain injuries. Knoxville is also the place where she grew up.

title: Actress Patricia Neal dies aged 84


text: User talk:BejokeUp

title: User talk:BejokeUp


text: User talk:MsMeasures

title: User talk:MsMeasures


text: User talk:Paedia editor

title: User talk:Paedia editor


text:
User talk:218.186.8.235

--Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 17:44, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:218.186.8.235


text: User talk:Inception.library

title: User talk:Inception.library


text: User talk:Kurd moh

title: User talk:Kurd moh


text: User talk:Lambeth1661

title: User talk:Lambeth1661


text: User talk:Translationlaw

title: User talk:Translationlaw


text: User talk:Keralavarma

title: User talk:Keralavarma


text:
Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Administrator/Computerjoe

I'd like to nominate Computerjoe for sysop status. Over the past few months, he's become an accredited reporter, has written and reviewed many articles, welcomed new users, and is a useful Wikinewsie in general. I think he'd be able to help out the project well with these extra tools. Tempodivalse [talk]  20:01, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Comments and questions

 * Do you accept the nomination? Tempodivalse [talk]  20:01, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the nomination. I accept. Computerjoe 's talk 09:00, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Votes

 * as the nominator. Tempodivalse [talk]  20:01, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Assuming he accepts. I thought he was one already. We don't exactly need more admins, but nonetheless an extra helpng hand is always welcome and the user can be trusted. Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 20:08, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I can see he is a helpful and willing user, and hopefully these traits will stick when adminship almost certainly comes his way. -- Sken   my talk 20:23, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * pending acceptance of nomination. – Juliancolton  | Talk 20:37, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * now nomination is accepted. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:38, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * , helpful and valued contributor to the project. Cirt (talk) 10:43, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * --Jcart1534 (talk) 23:04, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * --   Tris   18:52, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Shiny! -- Shakata Ga Nai ^_^ 17:35, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * --Adambro (talk) 15:44, 16 August 2009 (UTC)


text:
Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Administrator/James Pain

He's been around for like, forever. He does the audio news. -- Shakata Ga Nai ^_^ 01:38, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Questions/Comments

 * How the hell did you manage to hang out here for 2 years and not get admin'd? -- Shakata Ga Nai  ^_^ 01:40, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I guess I just made myself unintentionally unnoticeable. Over the past few months college has sapped away my time which harmed my activity but I was still hanging around in my procrastination periods. Thankfully college is no more and I have freedom. So right places at the wrong times is my guess. --James Pain (talk) 01:47, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * To be accurate, James Pain really only became active on August 10, 2008. So it is more like a year. --SVTCobra 21:41, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Cobra is quite right, I was hanging around IRC from time to time but it was then when I thought I knew enough and kicked up the nerve to start editing and doing something. I had the time so I thought why not, about a month later I started doing Audio Wikinews. I'll stop since this could easily turn into a autobiography. --James Pain (talk) 21:51, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Votes

 * Omnomnom -- Shakata Ga Nai ^_^ 01:38, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey, what you been doing James?!    Tris   07:17, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * --Brian McNeil / talk 08:19, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Blood Red Sandman (Talk)   (Contribs) 12:02, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure you do great work, but I don't visit the audio news that often, so I'm not the position to make a proper judgment. Cheers, Van der Hoorn (talk) 13:45, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * No issues with this user. --SVTCobra 21:43, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Computerjoe 's talk 20:19, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
 * – Juliancolton  | Talk 20:37, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
 * --Jcart1534 (talk) 11:34, 27 July 2009 (UTC)


text: User talk:SILIGURI 007

title: User talk:SILIGURI 007


text:
Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Bureaucrat/Tempodivalse

One of the first editors that I encountered when I started to frequently edit here was User:Tempodivalse. I've seen them be an active part of the community here, fulfilling a range of roles from deleting articles to archiving them, to promoting and welcoming users.

I believe Tempodivalse can be trusted with bureaucrat rights and as such it is a pleasure to be the nominator. Computerjoe (talk) 22:21, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Questions/comments

 * Do you accept the nomination? Computerjoe (talk) 22:21, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * wow, I wasn't expecting this at all! I'm honoured you think I would make a good bureaucrat, and I humbly accept. Thank you. Tempodivalse [talk]  22:53, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: Link to user's archived RfA, ended 19 May 2009. Cirt (talk) 23:29, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: Link to user's archived second PfP, ended 23 February 2009 as successful. Calebrw (talk) 04:03, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: Link to user's archived first PfP, ended 13 December 2008 as withdrawn by the candidate. Calebrw (talk) 04:03, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Should your RfP be successful, would be be available on IRC on a more frequent basis so that if a problem arises that only a 'crat or admin could solve, you would also be available to help out. Obviously you are on top of Special:RecentChanges, so not much slips past you, however, somethings are discussed on IRC that are not always put on the Wiki. Calebrw (talk) 04:22, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Meh. I've been on the irc a few times before, and it seemed to me as if it is mainly used for informal chatting that isn't always very relevant to on-wiki matters, and there's not frequently much discussion about anything important, wiki-wise. If administrator or bureaucrat action is needed, then it would be just as easy to make a request at WN:AAA instead, where administrators will be sure to see it and probably react just as quickly. Right now, the only times I use irc are: for second opinions when I'm unsure of what to do when making a decision, and for alerting reviewers of breaking news that's just come up. Hope this answers your question. Tempodivalse [talk]  13:51, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It does. Thanks. Calebrw (talk) 22:33, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I'm most likely going to be without access to a computer for the next several weeks, starting with next Sunday or so. I should be able to return to Wikinews only in early August (but I promise to return to full activity then). Thus, if everything goes as scheduled, this request should close before I have to leave, but if, as I suspect, it will run overdue past one week, then I won't be able to answer any questions that users will ask me at that time. Tempodivalse [talk]  20:23, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

 * How long do these usually last? – Juliancolton  | Talk 20:37, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The guideline calls for one week, but since we are small they usually take two weeks. This one has gone longer, perhaps because the steward/bureaucrat has not noticed it or is waiting for Tempo to return from break. --SVTCobra 21:25, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Votes

 * as nominator. Computerjoe (talk) 22:21, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * - Good faith positive contributor, should do fine with the added tools. Cirt (talk) 23:29, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Having interacted with this User on multiple occations, I can say that Tempo is a great contributor and has done excellent work as an Admin and have not reason to believe he would do good work as a Bureaucrat. I do have one question above, but the answer will not affect my vote. Calebrw (talk) 04:20, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * based on positive interactions at other projects (and here, as well). – Juliancolton  | Talk 21:07, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I of course believe this user is responsible enough to be given access to these tools. As a minor note theres not really much need b'crats. In the time i've been a bureaucrat, I have only ever had an opportunity to use the tools once (today actually. this comment would sound much better if i made it yesterday ;). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bawolff (talk • contribs)
 * I think Tempo is a great contributor, but we have recently elevated several people to bureaucrat, I don't think there is a need. --SVTCobra 00:43, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * per SVT. I feel we have plently to 'crats already and there is no need for any more. Brian | (Talk) | New Zealand Portal 10:57, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure i completely understand. I agree we don't have a need for another bureaucrat, but what harm do you see in having more of them? Tempodivalse [talk]  13:44, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * If I saw harm, I would have voted oppose and not neutral. --SVTCobra 00:05, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

 * A user who has only been active here since November 2008 and an admin since February this year, wouldn't be very high on my list of candidates suitable for bureaucratship I'm afraid, even considering the excellent contributions. Adambro (talk) 12:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * per SVTCobra and Adambro. --Brian McNeil / talk 13:15, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * -Don't know if they're needed but as a reliable contributor who writes articles-why not? Dotty•• |☎ 19:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Nothing personal, but I feel there is no real need for any more Bureaucrats. It's tools for the sake of tools, IMO, and while we have active Bureaucrats who are managing the workload, there is no need for any more. -- Sken   my talk 16:44, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
 * What harm do you see in having additional bureaucrats? I would think having more bureaucrats would be a good thing, because there would be a higher chance someone is available if something comes up requiring a 'crat. Tempodivalse [talk]  16:59, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Tempo makes a good work here! Vitorbraziledit talk 03:48, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * There is no harm in having another bureaucrat and there is no reason why Tempodivalse shouldn't be one. --PatrickFlaherty (talk) 05:32, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I trust him with extra tools. It wouldn't hurt to have a lot of 'crats, in my eyes, as long as they're all good for te job.  hmwith τ   22:16, 15 July 2009 (UTC)


text: User talk:Harry Wyder

title: User talk:Harry Wyder