Wikinews

Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Administrator/Diego Grez 2

< Wikinews:Requests for permissions | Administrator
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.

Diego Grez (talk · contribs)

edit

Hello. This is my second time on this side of the wiki, and I would like to throw myself to the lions --AlexandrDmitri because:

  1. I feel capable to handle blocks on vandals after some time.
  2. Delete spam (common thing on Wikinews).

And the most important reason, I'm running a customized version of a bot, named Pitsilemu (maybe you all know but it is extremely derivative from another bot). The main reason I need adminship, will benefit others as well. The bot handles blocks and deletions, in admin mode. I would set permissions to trusted users to delete pages by themselves. The bot is currently running on #pitsilemu@irc.freenode.net and you can test deletions on flaggedrevs_labswikimediawiki. I feel I have had enough time here and have written many articles too. I have done a good job with reviews too. In addition that I keep patrolling the recent changes on IRC (irc://irc.wikimedia.org/#en.wikinews, for instance). Thanks in advance. --Diego Grez return fire 22:44, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

edit
IRC logging is forbidden. =P --Thunderhead (t - e - c) 01:11, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
* Topic for #pitsilemu is: This is the channel of the greatest bot of Freenode... Pitsilemu! | SourceForge project: http://bit .ly/bZ6t30 | Homepage: http://pitsilemu.sourceforge.net | Public logging allowed | Check out #wikinews too. --Diego Grez return fire 01:14, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
People that gets in my channel should read the topic ;) --Diego Grez return fire 01:15, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, per suggestions by people that I really trust, I've decided to not run the bot, anyway :) --Diego Grez return fire 22:41, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

edit
  • Neutral I only got back to Wikinews from a break less than 24 hours ago and you've only been truly active since the 4th March. It's a neutral from me but keep up the good work! --James Pain (talk) 23:23, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose for now. I much appreciate the work you've been doing here - it has helped the project immensely - but, to be honest, I don't feel I can have sufficient trust in your overall judgment or knowledge of what to do in certain situations. For instance: retiring and unretiring in the period of half an hour is a bit disconcerting (even if it was made on a sudden impulse of anger), and not the sort of thing I'd like to see in an admin. Also, publishing an article, then changing your mind ten minutes later to unpublish it is of some concern to me as well. One other note, having a bot handle deletions thru IRC isn't really a good idea (what's wrong with going on-wiki and doing the admin action yourself?), especially when it's not running on its own separate bot account. No hard feelings, and nothing personal, i'm just not totally comfortable with this at present. Tempodivalse [talk] 23:51, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OK. For sure that won't happen anymore ;) But OK again. It's your opinion, and I appreciate it. --Diego Grez return fire 23:55, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've changed this to "weak oppose" per Diego's use of rollback to undo non-vandalism edits, for instance: [1] [2]. TBH, I just don't think this user knows what the appropriate course of action is for certain situations. Tempodivalse [talk] 23:59, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It should be noted by the closer that I have a pre-existing friendship with Diego from WP and that I'm far from a veteran editor here, but I just wanted to get my 2 pence worth in. I think he can handle it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:27, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not under any circumstance. A) The bot should not be attached to your personal account. B) IRC != Wiki and as such bots on IRC should not be able to manipulate the wiki in such a way C) An IRC bot is wayyyyyyyy too easy to abuse/break D) You're not even writing the bot code, you're running vanilla what other people are writing. --ShakataGaNai ^_^ 22:36, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    OK, I'm not running the bot then. :) It was just a suggestion (for me being too lazy :P). --Diego Grez return fire 22:40, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    No comment on the RFA itself, but we run this bot on Simple English Wikipedia (a version of the bot, not Diego's bot). It works fine without problems. We allow it to be used as long as the admin in question takes full responsibility for actions taken by the bot. Griffinofwales (talk) 21:31, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose regrettably. This user is enthusiastic, and generally seems to want to work for the projects' good, but xe needs to take the spurs off and hide the cowboy boots. We've been through bot madness, and so on. We've had people in early teens take adminship, and do not too bad. Bed in with the project a good deal more before requesting this privilege, please. --Brian McNeil / talk 00:52, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Per Brian's comment, and the people that has voted, and by myself. I have been thinking about this, and yes, I have to stay a little longer to ask for this mad right. Thank you all and this will help me become a better editor. At its due time, I'll certainly get this, but I think, and I agree with the people above, that this is not the time. :) --Diego Grez return fire 00:56, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of the Admin's page or the talk page of the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Wikinews:Requests_for_permissions/Administrator/Diego_Grez_2&oldid=4582832"