Commons:Administrators

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

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

There are currently 263 administrators on Commons.

An admin wielding the mop, a common symbol of administrators

What is an administrator?

Administrators as of February 2012 [+/−]

Listing by language Listing by date

Number of Admins: 263 32X, de, en-2, hsb-1, ru-1 99of9, en (bureaucrat) á, fi, en-2, sv-2 A.Savin, ru, de-4, en-2 ABF, de, en-2, la-1, fr-1 Admrboltz, en, es-1 Adrignola, en AFBorchert, de, en-3 Ahonc, uk, ru-4, en-2, de-1 Aka, de, en-3 Ala z, pl, en-2, ru-1 ALE!, de, en-3, es-3, fr-1, it-1 Alhen, es, en-2 Aliman5040, es, fr-4, de-2, en-1, it-1 Alison, en, ga-3, fr-2, gd-1 Alno, fr, en-3, es-2, pt-1 Alpertron, es, en-3 Amada44, de, en-3, fr-1 AndreasPraefcke, de, en-3, fr-1 Andrew c, en Angr, en, de-4, fr-2, ga-2, la-2, cy-1 AnRo0002, de, en-2, fr-2, es-1 Anthere, fr, en-3 Aude, en, ar-3 Avraham, en, he-2 (oversighter, steward) AVRS, ru, en-2, eo-2 Axpde, de, en-4, es-1, fr-1, it-1, nl-1 (steward) AzaToth, sv, en-4 Badseed, el, en-3, it-1 Bapti, fr, en-3, de-2 Barcex, es, en-2, fr-1 Bastique, en, fr-3, es-2, la-2, ga-1 Bdk, de, en-2 Bencmq, zh, en-3 (steward) Beria, pt, en-2, es-2 Bidgee, en Billinghurst, en Blacklake, ru, en-2 Blurpeace, en, es-1 Butko, ru, uk-2, en-1 Cambalachero, es, en-3 Captain-tucker, en Cbrown1023, en Cecil, de, en-3, fr-2, es-1, fi-1 (bureaucrat) Chatama, ja, en-1 Chris 73, de, en-3, ja-1 ChrisiPK, de, en-3, fr-1 ChristianBier, de, en-3 Ciell, nl, en-2, de-1 Cirt, en, es-2 Common Good, en CommonsDelinkerHelper (bot) Cookie, es, en-2 Courcelles, en, es-2, fr-2 Coyau, fr, en-1 DaB., de, en-1 Dantadd, it, pt, en-3, es-3, fr-3, gl-3, ca-2, ro-1, el-1 Darwinius, pt, en-3, es-2, fr-2, gl-2, ca-1, it-1, oc-1 Davepape, en David Levy, en Dcoetzee, en, fr-2, et-1, af-0 Denniss, de, en-2, fr-1 Dereckson, fr, en-3, de-1, nl-1 DieBuche, de, en-4, la-3, it-1 D-Kuru, de, en-2, it-1 Dodo, es, en-2 Dschwen, de, en-3, fr-1 Ecemaml, es, en-3 Edgar181, en, de-1, fr-1, es-1 Effeietsanders, nl, en-3, de-1, fr-1, la-1 Ejdzej, pl, en-2 Elcobbola en, de Elya, de, en-3, uk-2, ru-1 EPO, da, en-3, de-1 Esby, fr, en-3, de-1 EugeneZelenko, ru, be, en-2, bg-1, pl-1 (bureaucrat) EVula, en Ezarate, es-3, en-1 Fanghong, zh, en-2, fr-1 Fastily, en, fr-2, zh-2 Flominator, de, als, en-3 Foroa, vls, nl, en-3, fr-2 FunkMonk, da, en-4, no-3, fo-2, sv-2, de-1, es-1 Geagea, he, ka-3, en-3, ru-1 Geni, en George Chernilevsky, ru, uk-3, de-2, en-2, bg-1, la-1, be-1, fr-1 GeorgHH, de, en-1 Gestumblindi, als, de, en-3 Gmaxwell, en Gnangarra, en Golbez, en, ja-2 Greudin, fr, en-2, de-1 grin, hu, en-3, de-1 Gruznov, ru, en-1, fr-1 Guandalug, de, en-3 guillom, fr, en-3, de-1 Harej, en, fr-3 Herbythyme, en, fr-2, es-1, it-1 (checkuser) Herr Kriss, pl, en-2 Hesperian, en High Contrast, de, en-3, fr-1 Howcheng, en, ja-2 H-stt, de, en-4, fr-1 Ilmari Karonen, fi, en-3, sv-2, de-1, fr-1 Infrogmation, en, es-1 JDavid, pl, en-2, de-1 J Milburn, en Jafeluv, fi, en-4, fr-3, de-2, ru-2, sv-2 (steward) Jameslwoodward, en, fr-1 (checkuser) Jarekt, pl, en Jastrow, fr, en-3, de-1, it-1 Jcornelius, de, lt-2, la-2, en-2, pt-2, fr-1 Jdforrester, en Jean-Frédéric, fr, en-4, es-1 JeremyA, en JGHowes, en, fr-2, de-1 Jmabel, en, es-3, ro-2, de-1, ca-1, it-1, pt-1, fr-1 Joergens.mi, de, en-3 John Vandenberg, en Juliancolton, en (bureaucrat) Julo, pl, en-2, de-1, ru-1 Jusjih, zh, en-3, fr-1 (bureaucrat, steward) Kaldari, en Kallerna, fi, en-3, sv-2, de-1 Kameraad Pjotr, nl, en-3, de-2, fr-2, la-2, grc-2 Kanonkas, no, en-4, nn-3, da-2, sv-2, de-1 (bureaucrat) Killiondude, en, es-3, ru-1 Kjetil r, no, en-3, eo-2, de-1 Klemen Kocjancic, sl, en-3, de-2, hr-1, bs-1 Krinkle, nl, en-3, de-2 KTo288, en, zh-4 Kved, es, en-3 Kwj2772, ko, en-2 Kyro, fr, de-3, en-2 Leafnode, pl, en-3, ja-2, de-1 Leit, de, en-3, fr-1 LERK, ja, en-2, ko-2, ko-han-3, de-1, es-1, fr-1 Lestath, pl, en-2, la-1 Leyo, gsw, de, en-3, fr-3, es-1, la-1 Logan, en, es-3 Lokal Profil, sv, en-4, pt-2, fr-1 LtPowers, en, es-1 Ludmiła Pilecka, pl, en-2, ru-1 Ludo29, fr, en-2 Lukasz Lukomski, pl, en-4, es-2 Lupo, de, en-3, fr-2, es-1, it-1 Luxo, gsw, de-4, en-1, fr-1 Lymantria, nl, de-2, en-2, fy-2, fr-1, zea-1 Magister Mathematicae, es, en-4, pt-1 (checkuser, steward) Magnus Manske, de, en-2 Maire, pl, en-4, de-2, fr-2, es-1, ru-1 MarcoAurelio, es, en-3, fr-2 (steward) Marcus Cyron, de, en-1 Mardetanha fa, az, en-3, tr-2, ar-1 (checkuser, steward) Martin H., de, en-2 (checkuser) Masur, pl, en-3, de-1 Matanya, en, he (steward) Matt314, de, en-3, fr-2, es-1, zh-1 Mattbuck, en, fr-1, la-1 Maxim, ru, en-3, fr-2 Mbdortmund, de, en-2, fr-2, la-1 MBisanz, en Mentifisto, en (steward) MGA73, da, en-3, de-2, sv-1, no-1 Micheletb, fr, en-3, it-1, es-1 Micki, sr, bs-4, hr-3, en-2 Mitchazenia, en, es-2 Miya, ja, en-2 Mmxx, fa, en-3 Morgankevinj, en, es-1, la-1 Mormegil, cs, en-2, de-1 Morning Sunshine, vi, en-2 MPF, en, da-2, de-1, fr-1 Multichill, nl, en-3, de-1, fr-1 Mys 721tx, zh, en-3 Myself488, de, en-3, la-2 Nagy, de, en-3, fr-2, es-1, sv-1 Neozoon, de, en-4, nl-4, fr-2 NEUROtiker de en-3, fr-1 Nilfanion, en, fr-1 notafish, fr, en-4, de-3, es-2, it-2 NuclearWarfare en, es-2 O, zh, en-4, zh-wuu-2, zh-hu-3, yue-1 fr-1 odder, pl, en-2, de-2 Okki, fr, en-2 Otourly, fr, en-2, it-1 PeterSymonds, en, de-1 (steward) Pharos, en, fr-1 PierreSelim, fr, en-3, es-1 Pitke, fi, en-4, sv-2 Platonides, es, en-2, fr-1 Podzemnik, cs, en-2 Polarlys, de, en-2, fr-1, no-1 Powerek38, pl, en-4, fr-2, es-1, de-1 Pruneau, fr, en-4, de-1 Putnik, ru, en-2 ~Pyb, fr, en-2 Pymouss, fr, en-3, de-2, it-2, he-1 Ragesoss, en, de-1, fr-1 Ra'ike, de, en-2 Rama, fr, en-3, de-2, la-2, es-1, it-1, ja-1 (oversighter) Rastrojo, es, en-3, fr-2, eo-1 Raul654, en, es-1 Raymond, de, en-3, nl-1 (oversighter) Rd232, en, de, es-2, fr-1 Rehman, en, si-1 Reinhard Kraasch, de, en-3 Rillke, de, en-2, fr-1 Rimshot, de, en-4, fr-2, it-1 Rocket000, en, es-1 Romaine, nl, en-3, de-2, af-1, fr-1 Rosenzweig, de, en-3, fr-1, la-1 Royalbroil, en, es-1 Rubin16, ru, tt, en-3 Rüdiger Wölk, de, en-2 Russavia, en, ru-3 (bureaucrat) Saibo, de, en-3, la-1 Sanbec, es, en-1, fr-1 Sandstein, als, de, en-4, fr-3, it-1 SatuSuro, en, id-1 Sfu, pl, en-2 ShakataGaNai, en Shizhao, zh, en-1, ru-1 (steward) Siebrand, nl, en-3, fr-1, de-1 Skeezix1000, en, fr-2 Slomox, de, en-2 Spangineer, en, es-3 Spiritia, bg, en-3, ru-2, mk-2, de-1 Stan Shebs, en, de-1 Steven Walling, en Stifle, en, ga, fr-2, de-1 str4nd, fi, en-2, sv-2 Szczepan1990, pl, en-2 Tabercil, en Tarawneh, en, ar, de-1 TheDJ, nl, en-3, de-1, fr-1 The Evil IP address, de, en-3, fr-2 Thuresson, sv, en-3, no-2 Tiptoety, en (checkuser, oversighter) Tom, en, es-1 Trijnstel, nl, en-4, de-1, fr-1 (steward) Trixt, it, en-2, fr-1 tsca, pl, en, da Túrelio, de, en-3, es-1 VIGNERON, fr, de-2, en-2, zh-1 Waldir, pt, en-3 Wikitanvir, bn, en-3, as-2, bpy-1 (steward) WJBscribe, en, fr-3, de-1 Wknight94, en Wsiegmund, en, fr-1, es-1 Wutsje, fy, nl, en-3, de-2, fr-1 Wuzur, de, en-3 wvk, de, en-4, fa-3, fr-2 Yann, fr, en-3, hi-2, gu-1 Yuval Y, he, en-3 Zirland, cs, pl-3, en-3, sk-2, eo-2 Zolo, fr, en-4, de-2, zh-2 ZooFari, en, es-3 Zscout370, en, be-1, es-1, ja-1, ru-1 Zyephyrus, fr, en-3, la-3, el-2 Zzyzx11, en, es-1, fr-1 Raindrift, Temporary adminship: "As a developer, needs to run tests, delete files, etc." No exact expiry date. KrinkleBot, Bot account; temporary adminship for testing, see also Commons:Bots/Requests/KrinkleBot (2). The system currently recognizes 263 administrators. If that is not the last number in the list above, there is an error in the list.

Technical

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

• delete and undelete images and other uploaded files, and to view and restore deleted versions
• delete and undelete pages, and to view and restore deleted revisions
• protect and unprotect pages, and to edit admin-protected pages
• block and unblock users, individual IP addresses and IP address ranges
• edit the MediaWiki namespace
• rename files

These are collectively known as the admin tools.

Community role

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

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

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

How do I become an administrator?

First, consider whether becoming an administrator is the best way for you to contribute to the project. Experience shows that outstanding contributors of content often reduce their contributions because of the maintenance overhead after they become admins, and this is what we want least. So please contribute your best skills and understand that there are many ways of getting community credit besides being an admin. Admin status on Commons is not an honour for outstanding content contributors, but just provides an additional set of tools for people who show that they want to clean up.

Consider whether you actually need the admin tools for the work you would like to do. The community does not hand out the tools to those who do not need or who are not likely to make use of them. So, if you need the tools only for a limited period, or in order to clean up your own contributions, please simply ask an existing admin to help you out.

Admins are expected to remain reasonably active here, and if after appointment you cease to use the tools for an extended period you will automatically lose them under our de-admin policy. You should expect as an admin to make yourself available on Commons to a reasonable extent (a userpage that asks people to leave messages for you on some other project is not considered acceptable practice for an admin).

More information about the administrators' community roles can be found at Commons:Guide to adminship.

We do not have any hard and fast rules setting out the minimum period you should have been active on Commons in order to apply for adminship, nor any minimum number of edits. However, the requirement that you be an experienced and trusted member of the Commons community typically means that prior to applying you should have had sufficient breadth and depth of experience here to be able to demonstrate that. If you are an admin or an experienced user on another project, by all means mention that, but bear in mind that off-Commons experience is on its own not normally enough.

Although not mandatory, it is often a good idea to talk to existing admins to get feedback about your experience and approach. You may be able to get another admin to nominate you, although self-nominations are also allowed.

When you request adminship, the community will consider your ability to fill the admin role. Individual Commons contributors may have varying expectations of candidates, and you may wish to review some archived applications to get a sense of what people are looking for. As a practical matter, users often want to see a reasonable level of involvement in admin-type activities such as deletion requests, accurately tagging images as copyright violations, new user patrolling, and so on. Users often want to be satisfied that you are an integral member of the Commons community and will look at the way you interact with others, on user talk pages and elsewhere.

The public discussion and vote

Adminship nominations remain open for at least seven days, for votes and comments, unless withdrawn early as unsuccessful. The period starts when you posted your nomination (if a self-nom) or when you posted your acceptance (if somebody else nominated you). At the end of that period the nomination will be closed by a bureaucrat who will either grant or decline promotion. The nomination may be left open for more than seven days, or a longer period specified, should a bureaucrat consider that desirable.

As a guideline, promotion normally requires at least 75% in favour, with a minimum of 8 support votes. Votes from unregistered users are not numerically counted, although such users may still offer their opinions on the candidate. However, the closing bureaucrat has discretion in judging community consensus, and the decision will not necessarily be based on the raw numbers. Among other things, the closing bureaucrat may take into account the strength of any arguments presented and the experience and knowledge of the commenting users. For example, the comments and votes of users who have zero or few contributions on Commons may at the bureaucrat's discretion be discounted.

If the nomination is successful, the closing bureaucrat will grant the applicant admin rights.

The request for adminship

When you are ready, make sure you have a userpage, enable email in your preferences, then apply, or ask your nominator to apply, back on the main Commons:Administrators page.

Suggestions for administrators

Please read Commons:Guide to adminship.

Removal of administrator rights

Under the de-admin policy, administrator rights may be revoked due to inactivity or misuse of sysop tools.

How do I become an administrator?

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

• After clicking on the appropriate button and creating the subpage, copy the link to the subpage, e.g. "Commons:Administrators/Requests/Username", edit Commons:Administrators/Requests and paste it in at the top of the section, then put it in double curly brackets (e.g. {{Commons:Administrators/Requests/Username}} ) to transclude it.

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

Use the box below, replacing Username with your username:

Voting

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

Promotion normally requires at least 75% in favour, with a minimum of 8 support votes. Votes from unregistered users are not counted. However, the closing bureaucrat has discretion in judging community consensus, and the decision will not necessarily be based on the raw numbers.

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

Requests for adminship

Watch

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

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

Moondyne

Vote

Moondyne (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · SULinfo)

Scheduled to end: 02:57, 17 February 2012(2012-02-17) (UTC)

I've been a Commons contributor since 2005 and have made 63000 global edits since 2003. Interestingly my second edit here was creating {{PD-Australia}} which is basically unchanged since then. I'm an admin in good standing at w: which is where I do most of my work. I'm also fairly active at English Wikisource. I've read and understand Commons policies and guidlelines. I don't claim to be a full bottle on all copyright and licensing issues but do know enough to get by and when to ask for help.

Several people suggested running for adminship here previously but I declined as I couldn't see a great need. However a few instances have cropped up recently where I've needed to review some deleted revisions, or do speedy deletions of my own work where I've uploaded incorrectly. If appointed, I'll try to pitch in at Commons:Deletion requests#Open requests and Category:Duplicate where I see frequent backlogs, as well as categorisation tasks. I've done a lot of work in the past with w:WP:TOCOMMONS where Commons adminship would have helped. I think I'd be a net gain to the project if I had the sysop tools.

Thankyou for your consideration. Moondyne (talk) 02:57, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

PS. I forgot to add that I do have an alternate account User:MoondyneAWB which I don't use much. Moondyne (talk) 04:12, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Votes

•  Oppose This is an experienced wikipedian, with 63,001 global edits, of which 2046 are on Commons. He is also an admin at en.wp. However, he has made only 40 edits in Commons namespace and there are not many activities in DRs as well as in image tagging while he said he need the tools for closing them--Morning Sunshine (talk) 05:45, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Oppose "...a few instances have cropped up recently where I've needed to review some deleted revisions, or do speedy deletions of my own work where I've uploaded incorrectly." - the first is a good reason, the second abysmal. We don't give out admin tools as a substitute for being more careful. An editor of Moondyne's experience should know just how bad that second reason sounds, so the fact that he/she wrote it suggests they've not really thought this RFA through. I'll keep an open mind, but I'll need some convincing that the editor really needs and understands the tools. I'll also make a point I made recently at COM:VPR in a discussion about new usergroups: what we really need is not admins hastily closing DRs with little or no reasoning "to get through the backlog", we need users (who need not be admins) to summarise complex discussions and reach well-argued conclusions. If the user does that, and the conclusion is "delete" and they don't have access to the delete button, they can ask an admin. The hard work is not in pressing the button! I say this because there are indications that Moondyne might be in a good position to do these sorts of non-admin closures. And if he/she did that successfully for a while, then a future RFA request would look very different. Rd232 (talk) 12:26, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Oppose Basically per Rd232 - particularly the first couple of sentences. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:44, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Moondyne is already very experienced on Commons and Wikisource, and has prior experience with sysop tools. I am confident that Moondyne will use the tools on Commons often enough, and wisely. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 13:35, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Oppose Using Admin tools in any way on your own work is a serious violation of policy. (Full disclosure -- I've done it once when I removed my own ill-advised comment from a discussion and then was properly chastised by one of our colleagues). To suggest that is a good reason for an RfA is out of bounds. Also, as Morning Sunshine says, 40 edits in the namespace tells us little about his knowledge of the issues here.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:16, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support - need more admins like this (deleting one's own work which has errors is not nearly as big of a travesty as not understanding copyright). Magog the Ogre (talk) 07:50, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Comments

• Question Whilst commenting in Commonspace isn't the be all and end all of whether an editor is granted admin rights, can you please give us some specific examples in file space where the admin rights would have streamlined the workload of the community at large? russavia (talk) 11:10, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Do you mean examples pertaining to my own past contributions? Moondyne (talk) 14:06, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

I mean others contributions with which there were problems, which if you had admin tools you could have handled on the spot. russavia (talk) 14:12, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

• Comment at the risk of digging a deeper hole for myself, I re-read COM:D and all I can see is "If you are absolutely certain that the deletion of a page or file falls in the speedy deletion criteria such as an upload error of yours, ... the file is a candidate for speedy deletion." [my emphasis]. If I gave the impression of needing to go off on a deletion spree I apologise. The comment wasn't intended to imply that using the tools for fixing my own stuffups was likely or imminent, although I confess it was worded poorly. I was trying to say I that I would assist with simple, non-controversial housekeeping, which is surely one role of an admin. In fact, reviewing my past contributions I cant even find an example that would warrant making the statement I did. I can't explain that. My bad. Moondyne (talk) 14:59, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Although I agree that the cite is not completely clear, I am fairly certain that it means to say that if you make an upload error, you may add {{speedy}} to the file so that an Admin (not yourself) may delete it. I'll give you a {{neutral}} on this issue, but there is still the matter of limited experience in the namespace where Admins spend almost all of their time.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:47, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Tagging is certainly best practice if there is any element of judgement or doubt involved, but for totally clearcut cases, it's OK to do it yourself. I say this based on the fact that on en.wp I've tried in the past to make a rule to require tagging except in certain clearcut cases; but even that wasn't accepted ("too bureaucratic", AFAIR). I think (given that policy doesn't clearly say otherwise) a similar logic would apply here, only more so because there are fewer really active admins. Commons somehow doesn't have an equivalent of en:WP:INVOLVED; in general, it seems to trust admins' judgement more. Rd232 (talk) 16:33, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

"...but for totally clearcut cases, it's OK to do it yourself." Thankyou, that is what I thought. Moondyne (talk) 03:45, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

•  Comment If you want to turn this current RFA around, you should do more to explain your understanding of copyright/licensing issues (examples beyond PD-Australia template), and also your approach to closing debates (eg do you close AFDs on en.wp?). cheers, Rd232 (talk) 12:18, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

I briefly described what I know and how I might use the tools in the nomination above. I've only ever closed a handful of non-controversial AFDs at w: and to be honest, don't see myself doing any more over here. As stated, I think I would be a net gain to COMMONS with the tools but I wouldn't want anyone to have expectations of high-level involvement or a great deal beyond what I have in the past. You wont see me at the administrator's noticeboard unless I'm asking for advice. If this doesn't pass I wont lose any sleep and I will happily continue on as I have. I don't want to sound disrespectful but I have no intention of doing what you ask. Moondyne (talk) 13:50, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

ANGELUS

Vote

ANGELUS (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · SULinfo)

Scheduled to end: 14:43, 16 February 2012(2012-02-16) (UTC)

I'm trusted and experienced user, I’m already a rollbacker, a patroller and a file mover here, on Commons. I'm also a file mover and a rollbacker on the English Wikipedia. Futhermore I’m autopatrolled on the Italian Wikipedia. I registered my account on the Wikimedia projects in December 2010, and I made more than 15,700 global edits. I am a very active user on Commons, most of my contributions are related to updating categories, moving/uploading images, categorisation, deletion requests and vadal fighting. My RFA is mainly because I'd like to make myself even more useful, and I’d like to assist in general maintenance. For exemple I would like to use the admin rights to delete obvious copyviols directly, instead of just tagging them and to do maintenance speedies (e.g. accidental creation or useless redirs for file moves shortly after upload/transfer to Commons), just helping to reduce the backlogs a bit. Thanks a lot and best regards. Angelus^(talk) 14:43, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Votes

• Angelus is one of the most gentle and collaborative users I ever met in wiki. A talented graphics artist, it is always available for supporting any kind of project. Deeply involved in the wiki movement, he's currently a member of the Local Team of Naples' Candidature to Wikimania 2013. Owed to his involvement, attitude and sensibility, I would not imagine anybody more fit for this role.--Ferdinando Scala (talk) 17:10, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support - Why not? --Katarighe (Talk) 22:19, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Good user, very experienced--Baku (talk) 23:33, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Reliable. Always present and quick to offer his contribution. Perfect as an administrator --o'Sistemone^{tell me} 23:41, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Contributions look OK, could use the tools. Ajraddatz (talk) 00:39, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Oppose I don't feel that understanding of copyright by the user is enough to be an admin. I am talking about this discussion -- the candidate thinks that the work is in PD, if it was created _for_ the US government, it's a serious misunderstanding of the basics. --Trycatch (talk) 04:06, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
  •  Comment This file was kept two times, by two different admins... --79.22.83.179 04:11, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
    • It doesn't matter how many times the file was (wrongly) kept. It doesn't make statements like "If a work is created for a public body and is distributed with the aim of being in the public domain, it is entirely in the public domain!" more true. Trycatch (talk) 09:14, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Good user, always present. --Etienne (Li) (talk) 08:30, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Contributions look ok --Il conte (talk) 12:03, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Good user, he has always been available to help novice users --Gelmo94 (talk) 14:29, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Always polite and helpful to the Graphic lab, experienced in graphics works, will be useful for the entire project. --Nicola Romani (talk) 14:52, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Oppose The statement Trycatch mentioned was just this January and couldn't be more wrong. We don't need admins who will wing it or squint hard to come to a conclusion when they could read the rules of check the laws. Hekerui (talk) 19:45, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I have already answered below and I also said that since I wrote that sentence I realized that I had misinterpreted the situation. Now I understand perfectly and I also agree that there was valid reasons for the deletion request. --Angelus^(talk) 19:58, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
    • I want admins who are deliberate regarding to and interested in copyright and the attitude in the linked recent discussion didn't reflect those qualities and it gives me pause that they were so recent. However, I stroke out a sentence of mine that sounded unnecessarily harsh, and I'm sorry if it did. Hekerui (talk) 21:15, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Oppose - insufficient understanding of copyright. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 22:22, 10 February 2012 (UTC) Additional reasons for concern: File:Colosseum.svg. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 19:23, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Oppose Copyfraud is a severe problem on Commons. I don't want users who commit copyfraud to become to get the tools. --Leyo 23:18, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Oppose - Angelus does not see the problem with taking another user's work and claiming it as his own when all that he did is a crop (a change which is too slavish to warrant copyright protection anyway). Even though the original source was listed as public domain, our policy dicatates that derivative works should be properly sourced (this is a good policy). I'm not impressed with the fact that Angelus doesn't see the problem with this: while he changed the description, he doesn't seem to understand why people are creating a big fuss. But in order for Commons to provide the most free content, we absolutely must keep sourcing proper. I'm also not impressed with the answer he gave below to my "speedy" question, which isn't specific enough for me - but I do not see the need to pursue that further because I'm opposing anyway based on copyright grounds. Magog the Ogre (talk) 07:43, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Comments

•  Question - Are you proficient in any other languages asides from English and Italian? -- Cirt (talk) 16:22, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I am: It-N / en-3 / es-2 / fr-1. Greetings. ;-) Angelus^(talk) 16:48, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
    • In that case, please add a babel box to your user page. Thanks! Trijnstel (talk) 20:06, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
      • Ok. I inserted the language categories. :-) Greetings. Angelus^(talk) 21:12, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
        • Thank you! -- Cirt (talk) 02:29, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
          • You're wellcome! Angelus^(talk) 03:13, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Question - at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Donald Duck - The Spirit of '43 (cropped version).jpg, you !voted speedy keep. Does this mean you believe the discussion should have been closed immediately? Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:57, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
• Please tick Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. --Leyo 08:34, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
  •  Done ;-) Angelus^(talk) 15:09, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

While the DR cited by Trycatch has many issues, I am very troubled by this comment by Angelus in it last month:

"If a work is created for a public body and is distributed with the aim of being in the public domain, it is entirely in the public domain!" (emphasis in the original)

This is simply not true. There are many examples of non-PD works created for the United States government by people who are not government employees. This includes portraits of many of the presidents, and even the Sacagawea dollar. It is even less true (if that is possible) in other countries where even works by government employees are not PD. The fact that the image was kept three times has no bearing on Angelus's comment -- it was kept for unrelated reasons.

Getting this issue right is essential for an Admin -- it frequently arises in the case of images made by National Laboratories, in images of monuments commissioned by the government, and in formal portraits of Federal government officials.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:41, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

@Trycatch, Magog the Ogre & Jameslwoodward - Reading well all the discussion that followed the deletion request, I realized my mistake. Before I had not fully understood the license difference between "for the US government" and "by the US government". But now it is very clear. I don't claim to be perfect and I know that there is always something to learn and I can say with certainty that I realized I was wrong to interpret at the beginning. In recent days I have not written anything in the deletion request discussion, because I wanted to analyze better the reasons exposed for the deletion. Now I understand perfectly and I also agree that there are valid reasons. Angelus^(talk) 15:05, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Good answer. I asked the question not to test your knowledge, but to test your ability to admit a mistake -- something we all make from time to time. An Admin must be willing to say, "Oops, sorry, I goofed" when it is appropriate -- hopefully not often.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:39, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Has someone found out where all the redlinkvoter come from? -- RE rillke questions? 16:40, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

•  Question - Why do you claim File:Tigranes II the Great.png as own work? /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:44, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Sorry, I've fixed it. Greetings. Angelus^(talk) 22:01, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
    • Do you consider yourself to be the author? Do you think your crop entitled you to state "I, the copyright holder of this work, ... CC-BY, attribution to me"? /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 22:12, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
      • The derivative work is made by me. What's wrong? Could you explain better? Angelus^(talk) 22:18, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
        • I agree. The source is a public domain work so one can call oneself the copyright holder of a derivative work of the original without legal problem. It may not be artful to use the "I, the copyright holder" line but the original work is PD through and through, so attribution and other conditions aren't issues. Hekerui (talk) 22:26, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
          • Angelus has never seen the coin (or the plaque, or whatever it is). He just made a crop of an image uploaded by someone else. The claim that users would need to attribute a cropper is nonsense. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 22:31, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
        • I've attributed to me the work made for cropping a public domain image! Angelus^(talk) 22:41, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
      • Anyway I corrected... --Angelus^(talk) 23:29, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
• My question had less to do with the content of the discussion, then your statement for speedy keep. I repeat the question: do you think the discussion should have been closed immediately? If not, what did you mean by speedy? Do you understand why it's a problem to say that a discussion should have speedy closure in all but the most extreme examples? Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:03, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I asked for a quick closure of the debate, because I was wrong to interpret the license. I should not had to write "speedy". Angelus^(talk) 23:11, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
    • When should a discussion be speedy closed? When would you, as administrator, make use of speedy closes? Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:15, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
  • When the request is clearly and objectively wrong, or the result of a vandalism. Angelus^(talk) 05:21, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
• I am just curious: Are the instructions how to add new requests not clear/visible enough? ;-) --Saibo (Δ) 02:42, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I simply wrong to paste the request. Then I corrected immediately. ;-) Angelus^(talk) 04:52, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
    • Hmm, that I saw, but I do not mean this - I mean the missing summary line. :-) --Saibo (Δ) 18:21, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
      • Ok, sorry. Angelus^(talk) 19:35, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Requests for bureaucratship

Watch

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

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

Requests for CheckUser

Watch

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

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

Requests for Oversight rights

Watch

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

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

Archives

You can find requests for adminship archives at Commons:Administrators/Archive.

See also

• Commons:User access levels