Commons:Administrators/Requests/Melos 2
- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not succeed.
- Support = 24; Oppose = 10; Neutral = 1 - 71%
- Closed by non-bureaucrat Huib talk 11:46, 27 November 2009 (UTC) per user request [1].[reply]
Melos
Very trusted user, here as well as on it.wiki, where is a valid Check User. He has a "temporary flag" because he conducted an important work about italian CoA (you can see also last request for adminship); now this work is successfully done, but I request for him a stable flag, because he can surely be a very good referring point here and a valid, neutral and experienced admin. --Roberto Segnali all'Indiano 19:06, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I accept, thank you --melos (talk) 19:39, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Links for candidate: Melos (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth)
Votes
Support
- Support --Roberto Segnali all'Indiano 19:44, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- WTF? I forgot that he was a temp admin. Support without a doubt, I know Melos now for a year, maybe a little bit more and he is always nice and willing to help. There is nothing where I could think of that could make me oppose on this request, this kind of people do we need much more on Commons. Huib talk 19:49, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support--Henrykus (talk) 19:54, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support--Marco 27 (msg) on it.wiki: user page — talk page 19:57, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support --gian_d (talk) 20:03, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support -- Marco Bernardini (talk) 20:21, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support --Vituzzu (talk) 21:34, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- No reason to believe they're not trustworthy. Support –Juliancolton | Talk 22:06, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support -- Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 22:06, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support --Wim β 23:10, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
- Support I trust him. --Jaqen (talk) 23:43, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support --Tia solzago (talk) 11:29, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support --Skyluke ★ | @it.wk 11:34, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support No doubt --Fabexplosive (talk) 12:25, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Highly trusted. PeterSymonds (talk) 16:40, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support reliable. --Superchilum(talk to me!) 18:17, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support he is confident with both the technical matters and the copyright law. He's reliable and trust-worthy. --Austroungarika write here! 19:17, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support very good cu and admin at it.wiki --FiloSottile (talk) 23:57, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support per Melos's answer, and strong trust from the community that knows him best. Durova (talk) 01:57, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support His skills make him an excellent candidate. --Vipera (talk) 08:24, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support —Dferg (disputatio) 14:17, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support I'm sure as in it.wiki he can be a good sysop also in commons --Ignlig (talk) 22:13, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, Nixón〃 03:41, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support: sysop@it.wiki, checkUser@it.wiki, OTRS operator, greatly technically skilled and far good knowledge of copyright matters. Good news for Commons if flagged. If won't, he'll continue with his crucial help on other projects. --Pap3rinik (talk) 12:24, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
- Oppose Melos did 141 edit in almost 2 years [2] There is no confidence that user understand copyright laws in different countries, no participation in DRs, speedy deletion, and copyvio-cleanup or others community based activities. And there is almost zero history of communication with other users on Commons --Justass (talk) 20:11, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose I have to agree. It's not clear if this user knows the Commons policies, processes and conventions. Furthermore, I find it very questionable that the user misused his tools for stuff that wasn't supported by consensus. Honesty is important: If you say you only use it to restore those images but do other things as well, how can I trust you then? --The Evil IP address (talk) 21:17, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose Less than 150 edits since 30 January 2008 is not sufficient for an admin. --High Contrast (talk) 22:08, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose get more active, come back here. Multichill (talk) 22:13, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose - KTo288 (talk) 23:25, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose Nothing like active enough on Commons for me I'm afraid. --Herby talk thyme 08:29, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose. As others have said, not enough activity on Commons. It seems partly due to most of his deletion requests being made through IRC. Not a very good habit for a new administrator; most of wiki maintenance should happen on wiki. –Tryphon☂ 13:08, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose active on it.wp, but complete lack of activity on commons -- User:Docu at 06:12, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose Melos has very few edits. Commons and it-wiki has different rules so just because you are good on it-wiki does not mean you are good on Commons. Yes he is a member of the OTRS-team. But why does he has so few edits then? We do not need an admin that is not active. Let him do some more edits and I'm sure he will get enough support.
- I can se he got a lot of support from Itallian users in no time. That is good. But I would have prefered that it was only active users on Commons that voted. Melos might not have advertised for his Rfa but that does not change that votes from active users on Commons should count more than votes from users that wants to support a greate guy from it-wiki. --MGA73 (talk) 12:51, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose I trust him, but I think that is not enough active on commons to be an admin. Fale (talk) 16:04, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral
- Neutral --Leyo 08:45, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
- Comment He doesn't seem to be limiting the use of his temporary access (Commons:Administrators/Requests/Melos) to the tasks it was granted for. -- User:Docu at 19:15, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- That could be my fault, I asked Melos a few times if he could help out when there where requests on IRC and I didn't have a secure connection, Its my mistake that I forgot to check if he could use the buttons. But with his use of the tools he shows us that he know the policies because everything he did was according to our policy. Huib talk 19:52, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- He should know about this himself. -- User:Docu at 06:41, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- That could be my fault, I asked Melos a few times if he could help out when there where requests on IRC and I didn't have a secure connection, Its my mistake that I forgot to check if he could use the buttons. But with his use of the tools he shows us that he know the policies because everything he did was according to our policy. Huib talk 19:52, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Curious about the concerns articulated by Justass. Durova (talk) 20:30, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I'd like to ask Justass about the number of admin who knows italian copyright law, some month ago (if needed I'll take a link to the village pump's archives) I noticed that only a few number of sysop, almost nobody was able to deal with italian "decreto Urbani" (a really important matter for all photos taken into italian museums). --Vituzzu (talk) 21:37, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment And I'd just like to ask to all about the number of edit; do you really think that high number of edit means knowledge of policies, experiences about copyright, technical knowledges? And more, do you really think that experiences is only through number of edits made on Commons? I know here edicountitis reaches the top, so I see here admins having no full knowledges about copyright, I saw it many time. Moreover, Melos did a work that don't figure in any log here: searching thousand of deleted files, saving on his desktop and reuploading on it.wiki. The work is the same than restoring files here; the greatest part of the work was done here, and we should (we must?) consider all this deleted files viewed by him as edit done here. --Roberto Segnali all'Indiano 08:32, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Roberto, this is a difficult decision from the perspective of someone who doesn't already know him. Several Italian editors have a lot of trust and respect for this person. Probably that's well earned. Yet he's averaging about 6 edits a month to this site over two years. Definitely there's value in diversity and in having Italian administrators. If Melos had come and done a couple hundred edits over six weeks, and not run into any problems, then he would definitely have my support. Right now I don't know what to think. It would be really helpful if he came to this discussion himself and addressed the concerns. Durova (talk) 22:13, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I really believe in this RfA. I've accepted this because I can give a hand to the project. Until now I have always limited to report speedy deletion or other to different admin via IRC (Filnik and others can confirm) and this is the real reason why i have only 157 edits. I'm an admin on itwiki since 2008 and OTRS volunteer since the same year and for this reason I know the different copyright laws. --melos (talk) 23:42, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Fair enough. Durova (talk) 01:58, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I really believe in this RfA. I've accepted this because I can give a hand to the project. Until now I have always limited to report speedy deletion or other to different admin via IRC (Filnik and others can confirm) and this is the real reason why i have only 157 edits. I'm an admin on itwiki since 2008 and OTRS volunteer since the same year and for this reason I know the different copyright laws. --melos (talk) 23:42, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Roberto, this is a difficult decision from the perspective of someone who doesn't already know him. Several Italian editors have a lot of trust and respect for this person. Probably that's well earned. Yet he's averaging about 6 edits a month to this site over two years. Definitely there's value in diversity and in having Italian administrators. If Melos had come and done a couple hundred edits over six weeks, and not run into any problems, then he would definitely have my support. Right now I don't know what to think. It would be really helpful if he came to this discussion himself and addressed the concerns. Durova (talk) 22:13, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Question how would you intend to use the admin tools? -- User:Docu at 06:41, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I intend to use the admin tools especially for maintenace works. There are always files to review in the speedy deletion category, but, because I'm enough available via IRC, I receive also several request of speedy deletion, file renaming etc. Furthermore, italian copyright law is little different from other countries. Every day I revert several "nowcommons" that was uploaded on commons via file upload bot. These files need to be deleted here because they are not free. --melos (talk) 08:15, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Maybe this is an indicator that something at Italian Wikipedia could be done about it. After your comment, I checked your deleted edit count (3). It doesn't indicate that you did any tagging for deletion either. Frequently interesting opinion on copyright are provided by a user that doesn't even have a user page, so I don't see what prevented you from doing so before. I think you should attempt to gain more experience on commons before applying for adminship. -- User:Docu at 06:10, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- By your argument, since an edit on Commons has an impact on every wiki, a Commons edit must be seen as an edit at it.wiki. If so would you support a Rfa at it.wiki of a trusted and active Admin here but who has made only a minimal number of edits and has only a minimal interaction there? Actually I am less concerned with Melos's technical abilities so much as his soft skills, how good a diplomat is he? How will he react when a newbie in good faith uploads a copyvio, how would he mediate between two established users whose categorisation schemes clash. What happens when he's asked to delete an image that offends him personally but is within Common's scope. Sure edits are not an indicator of ability or personality but it is only from edits that we can gauge ability and character.KTo288 (talk) 08:48, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I intend to use the admin tools especially for maintenace works. There are always files to review in the speedy deletion category, but, because I'm enough available via IRC, I receive also several request of speedy deletion, file renaming etc. Furthermore, italian copyright law is little different from other countries. Every day I revert several "nowcommons" that was uploaded on commons via file upload bot. These files need to be deleted here because they are not free. --melos (talk) 08:15, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Melos toke here a temporary flag for doing a specific works; as written before, he asked continuously on IRC to delete files here. Concerning wikilove, I trust him because of his diplomatic skills on it.wiki, and I have no way to think that he will keep a different "diplomacy" here. --Roberto Segnali all'Indiano 10:53, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Question where was this advertised? I see a lot of support votes from users who rarely edit at Commons. How did they suddenly become aware of this request? Multichill (talk) 23:43, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- There was no advertising, and IMHO this is not anything to advertise about. First and foremost, there is no action which I am interested in taking in order to influence any opinions. Simply said, it wasn't a secret that there was this request, and I can imagine that some users just wanted to say something about me, knowing perhaps that I could be little known here as I am in it.wiki (despite the role, or perhaps due to it). This is also usual in that Project, where the candidate arrives at the RfA preferably with some supporting comments so to filter unlikely successful requests. But this is only how I can imagine it went. I am obviously very grateful towards those users, but I never - if this was your comment - asked for anything that could be, at any extent, related to this request. I merely exposed why I thought it could have been of some help if I was an admin, this is what you are evaluating; and I certainly thank you for your kind attention. --melos (talk) 11:29, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I am with Multichill here. The idea that a collection of people who don't use Commons much have suddenly discovered this RfA is obviously daft - it has happened before and will again. However Commons users will hopefully express their views on the candidates suitability or otherwise we will get another admin who the actual local community might not be fully happy with - again it has happened before. --Herby talk thyme 11:35, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Aw, come on, man. Melos is one of the best admin @ it.wiki, it's an OTRS member and DOES knows how to deal with copyright issues. Do you REALLY think he's not suitable for this task only because Italians are voting for him? If we're voting for him, it's because we know him and we TRUST him. I work with him in OTRS and I never saw, not just once, something to be wrong in his attitude. And, frankly, I don't like at all that my vote is to be considered "altered" or "traded", just because it occurs that me and Melos share the nationality and that I use Commons only for uploading pictures. -- Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 11:47, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm opposing because of the (in)activity here and would oppose anyone on the same basis. However the "advertising" issue puts me off too even if it isn't new. If someone is ok Commons folk will support them anyway. --Herby talk thyme 13:22, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The resolution of the problem with Italian COA, the reason for temp sysop flag of Melos, involved many user who worked simultaneously on itwiki and commons searching images liable to be delete, so it's normal that they know this RfA. Besides many user from other wikis follow commons "affaire" without editing so much, like me. --Skyluke ★ | @it.wk 11:54, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Aw, come on, man. Melos is one of the best admin @ it.wiki, it's an OTRS member and DOES knows how to deal with copyright issues. Do you REALLY think he's not suitable for this task only because Italians are voting for him? If we're voting for him, it's because we know him and we TRUST him. I work with him in OTRS and I never saw, not just once, something to be wrong in his attitude. And, frankly, I don't like at all that my vote is to be considered "altered" or "traded", just because it occurs that me and Melos share the nationality and that I use Commons only for uploading pictures. -- Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 11:47, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I am with Multichill here. The idea that a collection of people who don't use Commons much have suddenly discovered this RfA is obviously daft - it has happened before and will again. However Commons users will hopefully express their views on the candidates suitability or otherwise we will get another admin who the actual local community might not be fully happy with - again it has happened before. --Herby talk thyme 11:35, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- To answer my own question: This rfa was advertised at the internal it.wiki admin mailing list, so that explains the high number of itwp users suddenly popping up here. Closing bureacrat: Please take this into account. Multichill (talk) 12:39, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- To closing 'crat - per Multichill --Herby talk thyme 13:22, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- you seem very sure, Multichill. You don't even need to ask, you affirm something as it's the truth and tell the bureacrat to take your truth into account. Very nice. Unfortunately no emails were sent on the admin mailing list. Please don't be so offensive next time. --Superchilum(talk to me!) 13:51, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- There was no advertising, and IMHO this is not anything to advertise about. First and foremost, there is no action which I am interested in taking in order to influence any opinions. Simply said, it wasn't a secret that there was this request, and I can imagine that some users just wanted to say something about me, knowing perhaps that I could be little known here as I am in it.wiki (despite the role, or perhaps due to it). This is also usual in that Project, where the candidate arrives at the RfA preferably with some supporting comments so to filter unlikely successful requests. But this is only how I can imagine it went. I am obviously very grateful towards those users, but I never - if this was your comment - asked for anything that could be, at any extent, related to this request. I merely exposed why I thought it could have been of some help if I was an admin, this is what you are evaluating; and I certainly thank you for your kind attention. --melos (talk) 11:29, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Question Melos, are you on the internal it.wiki admin mailing list? Did you receive an email on that list mentioning this rfa? Did you send an email to that list mentioning this rfa? Multichill (talk) 12:44, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- @Multichill: compliments, your presuming of good faith is the best thing that I've never seen here on any wiki projects! This you want? Ok, I'm presuming for you the same, because you are presuming bad faith not only for Melos, but also for me, and for all 101 admins on it.wiki. This is a problematic skills, saying the false without having nothing in your hands. Good. --Roberto Segnali all'Indiano 13:35, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm in internal ML as every admin of itwiki. There's no spam there's no link, there is anything. I did't send any email --melos (talk) 13:52, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- @Roberto: Why do you think I'm not assuming good faith? It's not entirely clear what you're trying to say with your last sentence, could you please elaborate? I wondered why a lot of itwp users show up. A user (Fabexplosive) contacted me at irc and asks me why I voted against Melos (because I don't see enough activity). I asked him how he knows about this rfa as his last edit is ages ago. He tells me there was a mail about it mentioning this rfa. I asked him who send this email. He doesn't know because he doesn't have his email available. Melos wrote above that this rfa wasn't advertised, but Fabexplosive tells me this rfa was mentioned on the internal itwp admin list. So these questions are just to get things straight.
- @Melos, thank you for responding. Strange situation, Fabexplosive says he knows about this rfa because he read about it at the "internal it.wiki admin mailing list", but you, also on the same list, didn't receive anything about it. Multichill (talk) 14:00, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Quoting Superchilum. Because you are so sure of your truth, so sure that you are asking to 'crats to take into account this scenario. No mail was sent, I'm sure of this. So if you can't demonstrate what you are saying, please don't say it. --Roberto Segnali all'Indiano 14:06, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Sure of my truth? Haha, I see strange things happening and I want to have that cleared up. So you're saying Fabexplosive was lying when he told me this:
- Multichil - Where did you find it? You last 50 edits go back to 15 june 2007
- Fabexplosive - internal it.wiki admin mailing list :)
- That wouldn't be nice. Multichill (talk) 14:15, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Sure of my truth? Haha, I see strange things happening and I want to have that cleared up. So you're saying Fabexplosive was lying when he told me this:
- Quoting Superchilum. Because you are so sure of your truth, so sure that you are asking to 'crats to take into account this scenario. No mail was sent, I'm sure of this. So if you can't demonstrate what you are saying, please don't say it. --Roberto Segnali all'Indiano 14:06, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- On internal IRC chan someone notice this RfA and told me "in bocca al lupo" that means "good luck". Others peaple "Good luck for what??" and since this moment the notice go ahead... only this. I think there was a misunderstanding --melos (talk) 14:11, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- So why didn't you say this the first time when I asked? Multichill (talk) 14:18, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- On internal IRC chan someone notice this RfA and told me "in bocca al lupo" that means "good luck". Others peaple "Good luck for what??" and since this moment the notice go ahead... only this. I think there was a misunderstanding --melos (talk) 14:11, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Multichill, why didn't you say the first time that Fabexplosive told you that? You know that telling something like that needs a source, don't you? Didn't you think that people would have been offended by your lack of assumption of good faith? --Superchilum(talk to me!) 14:22, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Fix, IRC message not mailing list :( sry --Fabexplosive (talk) 14:24, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- @Multichill: thus what you are affirming is that you assumed there have been spamming of this RfA in an internal ML - and you stressed such fact in your post above - without having any real evidence of such fact but a simple answer to a question you made to a user? Well, if not bad faith I can easily call this unwariness and imprudence. If you affirm something you must be ready to show evidences. And, for sure, you cannot: there have been no e-mails related to this RfA on that ML nor anywhere else. I suggest you to be very carefull when doubting of other people's good faith and promptly being ready to excuse yourself when you are wrong, as you are in this case. Last post from Fabex makes it clear. Thank you --Pap3rinik (talk) 14:26, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- @Multichill: You asked me emails that is quite different from a "good luck" via IRC in a restricted and private chan. --melos (talk) 14:28, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is, indeed, something strange in all this investigation, with all the related and consequent excitement. On one side it is quite funny to see some of the supporters confused with spammers (their list would be a selected sort of collection of many of the best users and sysops we've ever had in it.wiki), and seeing them targeted all together in this... hunt for troublemakers, well... is something to be remembered for a long while :-) On the other side, this climax has nothing to do with Melos' reputation, which is very distant from this kind of suspects, and this actually can be everything but funny.
I won't vote: I'm not a regular so it wouldn't be appreciated, I'm not a sysop so I haven't received any secret spam, and (far beyond that) I'm still in the "no big deal" mood. In that state of mind, I'm only able to say that when editcountitis is not an issue, Melos is by far one of the best - let's say - twelve sysops I've ever seen since the beginning of the whole adventure, back in 2001. This just to be precise, so that a walker who happens to read this page doesn't mistake him for someone of different qualities and habits. And when editcountitis effectively is an issue, taken in its sysop variant, not less than one third of Commmons' perm admins did less than Melos in recent times, and Melos was only a temp admin.
So, don't flag him, if you are not comfortable with flagging him, but please keep the discussion at a respectful level. --g (talk) 15:59, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- A RfA must be a positive moment for the project. When there is only fighting X vs Y this became something deleterious. A good admin must looking only for positive moments and positive things. There is too noise around this RfA and for the previous reasons as a good admin (yes I'm an admin inside without any flag, without any tool) please end this RfA. No big deal, thanks for support, thanks only for
positiveconstructive critics. Sorry, for "positive" I meant "constructive" --Melos (talk) 11:34, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]