Jump to content

Stewards/Elections 2021/Votes/DannyS712

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Warning

The 2021 steward elections are finished. No further votes will be accepted.

DannyS712

[edit]
ContentsYes • No • Neutral
  • Languages: en, he-2, es-2, zh-2
  • Personal info: (English)
    Hi. I'm DannyS712. I spend a lot of my time dealing with spambots and LTAs, both as a global sysop and as a local sysop on a number of wikis. If you want to know which wikis I have advanced rights on, see my user page here on meta, or my global account info (Special:CentralAuth/DannyS712). Xtools says I have over 2400 edits to Steward requests/Global, where I frequently report accounts and IPs for stewards to lock/globally block.

    I know that stewards often have to deal with sensitive information; I have experience dealing with sensitive information as an OTRS agent, an Oversighter on Wikidata (though I've only been an OS there since December 2020), and as a member of the account creation team on enwiki.

    When I'm online, I can usually be reached on IRC, and #wikimedia-stewards is one of the channels I idle in. I have noticed times when there is an ongoing cross-wiki vandal and no stewards are available, and while this is perfectly understandable (stewards are volunteers) I think it would be beneficial to expand the steward ranks.

    I am a volunteer MediaWiki developer with +2 rights, and if I become a steward I can look for places where stewards' workflow can be improved either via user scripts or improvements to the relevant MediaWiki core/extension code.

    I'm happy to answer questions.
  • Questions: See Stewards/Elections 2021/Questions#DannyS712


Yes

[edit]
  2. Yining Chen (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  --Yining Chen (Talk) 14:02, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Leaderboard (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  A very capable user, and in particular they have demostrated very good technical skills which I think would help the community a lot (from their "uniqueness" answer), and I can attest to the anti-vandalism work they do at my homewikis. Also handled Revi's challenging question about CU very well, and I'm satisfied with his response to that question. Their answer to the "bizarre situations" problem was fine as well. My main concern is honestly activity, you seem to be doing a lot and I'm not sure how you're going to maintain it as a steward. Leaderboard (talk) 14:03, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  4. ImprovedWikiImprovment (Eligible, checked by Praxidicae)2021 •  --IWI (talk) 14:22, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Super Wang (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  From what Danny promised I can support them, everyone should learn to walk before they run; still I'd appreciate if Danny's learning won't take too long. Super Wang hates PC You hate, too? 14:39, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  6. LuchoCR (Eligible, checked by Praxidicae)2021 •  LuchoCR (talk) 15:02, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  7. WikiBayer (Eligible, checked by -revi)2021 •  𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 15:23, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  8. CptViraj (Eligible, checked by Blablubbs)2021 •  CptViraj (talk) 15:33, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  9. User456541 (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Global sysop and have major contributions to SRG –User456541 15:55, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Kizule (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  I think that Danny will be a good steward too. Kizule (talk) 16:42, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Pppery (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  * Pppery * it has begun 16:58, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Vit Koz (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Good luck Vit; talk 17:11, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Fitindia (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  - FitIndia Talk Admin on Commons 18:25, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Jayprakash12345 (Eligible, checked by -akko)2021 •  Jayprakash >>> Talk 02:34, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  15. LClightcat (Eligible, checked by -akko)2021 •  メッキの光の勇者-猫🇨🇳Drink tea in tea room🐱 03:06, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Darkfrog24 (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  I worked with Danny on the English Wikinews and Simple English Wikipedia, and he seems to have his head on straight. Darkfrog24 (talk) 03:45, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  17. 游魂 (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Yo Yan 06:01, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  18. AfroThundr3007730 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  — AfroThundr (u · t · c) 07:24, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Novak Watchmen (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Novak Watchmen (talk) 07:30, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Mtarch11 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Mtarch11 (talk) 08:05, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Meiræ (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Although I do share some concerns raised in the "No"/"Neutral" sections, I am still inclined to support this candidacy. Meiræ 08:18, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Lt2818 (Eligible, checked by Majavah)2021 •  Lt2818 (talk) 09:03, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Wagino 20100516 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Wagino 20100516 (talk) 12:19, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Hasley (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Sgd. —Hasley 17:52, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Imetsia (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Imetsia (talk) 18:17, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  26. M-Mustapha (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Em-mustapha User | talk 20:46, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Dostojewskij (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Dostojewskij (talk) 23:39, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Richardkiwi (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  Richardkiwi (talk) 00:40, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Wiwik P (Eligible, checked by Saroj Uprety)2021 •  Wiwik P (talk) 01:49, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Eric0892 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Eric0892 (talk) 05:20, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  31. MJL (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Yay DannyS712!!! –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 05:45, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Firestar464 (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Firestar464 (talk) 11:09, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Tgr (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Tgr (talk) 16:33, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  34. عبد المسيح (Eligible, checked by Martin Urbanec)2021 •  عبد المسيح (talk) 17:42, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  35. SK2242 (Eligible, checked by Martin Urbanec)2021 •  Capable. SK2242 (talk) 17:58, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Globalphilosophy (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  --Globalphilosophy (-̮̮̃•̃) (ღTalk ♥) 21:57, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Florian COLLIN (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Florian COLLIN (talk) 22:49, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Jusjih (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Jusjih (talk) 23:20, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Impartial just (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Hope you can help us (Chinese Wikisites). ℑ𝔪𝔭𝔞𝔯𝔱𝔦𝔞𝔩 𝔧𝔲𝔰𝔱🎙️ 01:33, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Sportzpikachu (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Sportzpikachu (talk) 08:55, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Mirinano (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  mirinano (talk) 11:02, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Veracious (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Veracious (talk) 14:02, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  43. 20041027 tatsu (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  20041027 tatsu (talk) 15:36, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Hiàn (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 •  Hiàn (talk) 20:27, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Klaas van Buiten (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •   Klaas `Z4␟` V:  21:08, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Coffeeandcrumbs (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 •  Coffeeandcrumbs (talk) 03:31, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  47. L293D (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  L293D (☎ • ✎) 13:10, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Tanbirzx (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Tanbirzx (talk) 15:29, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Ahmetlii (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Ahmetlii (talk) 15:52, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Chz (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 •  Chz (talk) 16:41, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Eatcha (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Eatcha (talk) 17:47, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  52. ArdiPras95 (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  ArdiPras95 (talk) 21:58, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  53. MusikAnimal (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  I agree DannyS712 has moved up the ladder almost uncomfortably fast compared to your average Wikimedian. I used to be concerned with how they would manage their ever growing list of responsibilities. But, as far as I can tell, with each new position of trust, the results were at least a net positive and more often outstanding. Somehow they still have enough energy to stay true to their commitments and produce quality work, be it in the form of counter-vandalism, technical contributions, or otherwise. Enough time has passed that I can say DannyS712 has earned my trust, and my fandom. I for one think they would be a highly productive steward, and judging by their requests for steward intervention that I've responded to, I believe they would know how to use the tools judiciously. — MusikAnimal talk 21:59, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  54. KPX8 (Eligible, checked by ImprovedWikiImprovment)2021 •  KPX8 (talk) 23:51, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  55. Alexdoherty4 (Eligible, checked by 94rain)2021 •  Alexdoherty4 (talk) 03:14, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  56. Nightfury (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Nightfury (talk) 12:18, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  57. Juan90264 (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  Juan90264 (talk) 17:32, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  58. Zezen (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Seems very competent and experienced, including hunting for ru casino spambots, plus his zh skills. Zezen (talk) 21:34, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  59. RandomCanadian (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  RandomCanadian (talk) 04:52, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  60. SD0001 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  per MusikAnimal above. Net positive. SD0001 (talk) 11:34, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  61. Csisc (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 •  Csisc (talk) 17:38, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  62. ProcrastinatingReader (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Per MusikAnimal. Adding: Imo the CheckUser situation has been drastically overblown. If folks have an axe to grind with the WMF, do it with the WMF. Most of that situation is on pure principle, I’m not sure there were really any pragmatic concerns, especially given log access, and if there were then people failed to make those clear. The question about RfA on enwiki was somewhat bait. The answer was unsatisfactory, sure, but I’m not sure how much better he could’ve answered the question. Don’t really see any competence issues, as far as it relates to the role of steward. I do agree with Tony’s point on the algorithmic approach to communication; I hope that improves, but even if not I guess it doesn’t really factor too much into locking spambots etc, and most regular steward tasks. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 20:14, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  63. Ckoerner (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Ckoerner (talk) 21:54, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  64. Mark7747 (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 •  Mark7747 (talk) 15:10, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  65. Bilorv (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  I see no indication that the candidate would be untrustworthy with the tools or use them in a net negative manner. — Bilorv (talk) 23:08, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  66. Юрко Градовський (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Юрко Градовський (talk) 13:31, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  67. Soundwaweserb (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Soundwaweserb (talk) 13:32, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  68. Julle (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Julle (talk) 20:04, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  69. Xbspiro (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  - from what I have seen on en.wn, he is capable and willing. (Leaving the project the way you did puzzles me though. Most submissions there don't make it, and you know it.) - Xbspiro (talk) 16:22, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  70. Raimundo Pastor (Eligible, checked by Hasley)2021 •  Raimundo Pastor (talk) 20:29, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  71. Shizhao (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  Shizhao (talk) 01:47, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  72. Jack Frost (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Per MusikAnimal and ProcrastinatingReader. Jack Frost (talk) 02:36, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  73. Levivich (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 •  I don't think homewiki adminship should be a prerequisite to cross-wiki advanced permissions (as long as there is other experience, which there is with Danny). There are lots of reasons why someone might not want to run for RFA or be an admin on enwiki; Danny avoiding getting into the reasons why not is an example of politeness that shouldn't be held against him. Similarly, getting CU on testwiki as part of WMF dev work doesn't strike me as any kind of problem. Danny has shown he can have advanced perms and not abuse them and that's what matters. He is competent to assist the many wikis we have that don't have a large admin corps if he has steward rights. Trust + competence meets my criteria. Levivich (talk) 08:20, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  74. Gereon K. (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 •  Gereon K. (talk) 23:10, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  75. Érico (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Moral support, but please 1) resign from some of your current rights (it's really too much and very difficult to believe that someone can be an effective steward in this scenario) and 2) run again in the future. Érico (talk) 00:56, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  76. Mahedi181 (Eligible, checked by Nieuwsgierige Gebruiker)2021 •  Mahedi Hasan (talk) 11:25, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  77. Rzuwig (Eligible, checked by Hasley)2021 •  Rzuwig► 11:34, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  78. Ed6767 (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 •  Ed6767 (talk) 15:41, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  79. Ssstela (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Ssstela (talk) 21:35, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  80. Asartea (Eligible, checked by Majavah)2021 •  Asartea Talk (Enwiki Talk (preferred)) 07:21, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  81. Taivo (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Excellent crosswiki activity, but bad answers to questions. You answered like a robot, not like a human. But then I started to think: why not to have one robot-steward? We have a lot of bots with admin rights, let's have now a bot steward as well. Taivo (talk) 08:21, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  82. J ansari (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  -J. Ansari Talk 18:08, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  83. Bestoernesto (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Ciao • Bestoernesto • ✉ 03:34, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  84. Clump (Eligible, checked by Nieuwsgierige Gebruiker)2021 •  Clump (talk) 13:10, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  85. JLavigne508 (Eligible, checked by Nieuwsgierige Gebruiker)2021 •  JLavigne508 (talk) 13:46, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  86. 94rain (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  94rain Talk 03:28, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  87. User3749 (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 •  User3749 (talk) 05:11, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  88. Ameisenigel (Eligible, checked by Nieuwsgierige Gebruiker)2021 •  Ameisenigel (talk) 09:46, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  89. Hardenacke (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 •  Hardenacke (talk) 14:32, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  90. Coffins (Eligible, checked by Superpes15)2021 •  Coffins (talk) 21:35, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  91. Dash77 (Eligible, checked by Superpes15)2021 •  Dash77 (talk) 01:47, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  92. WikiAviator (Eligible, checked by Superpes15)2021 •  WikiAviator (talk) 02:21, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  93. Tiven2240 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Tiven2240 (talk) 17:12, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  94. Adithyak1997 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Adithyak1997 (talk) 07:48, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  95. ידידיה צ' צבאן (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  ידידיה צ' צבאן (talk) 10:28, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  96. Robert McClenon (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Robert McClenon (talk) 05:20, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  97. Masti (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  masti <talk> 18:44, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  98. Charitwo (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  The CU situation is weird and awkward, but I don't think it's disqualifying. I do wonder why this wasn't on a non-production instance if it was for development purposes, but that's not my call. Overall, I see them as a great contributor in various aspects of the project and I have no doubt they would serve in the role well. Charitwo (talk) 22:13, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  99. Marshallsumter (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 •  --Marshallsumter (talk) 02:24, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  100. Suffusion of Yellow (Eligible, checked by Nieuwsgierige Gebruiker)2021 •  Basically per MusikAnimal; my first reaction here was "way too soon". But that's been my reaction to some of the other rights Danny has acquired over the years and I've always been proven very wrong. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 05:15, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  101. Nadzik (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 •  Nadzik (talk) 08:01, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  102. DavidDelaune (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 •  Global sysop and great script writer. DavidDelaune (talk) 09:48, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  103. Camouflaged Mirage (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Moved from neutral, mainly I still have concerns about the issues raised in my neutral !vote, just parking here for moral support. I hope DannyS712 will not feel too discouraged and continue to serve us well, you are much appreciated. Just take it slower and take in heart what the opposers gave, and work on these concerns. I guess after a while, you will be a much stronger candidate. Thank you for standing still. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 11:45, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  104. Base (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  I am not happy with the testwiki incident, but I do trust that Danny will make a good steward. Hopefully next time they will pass. Base (talk) 12:07, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No

[edit]
  1. Rschen7754 (Eligible, checked by -revi)2021 •  Stewards are supposed to insist that community consensus and global policy are to be followed by the WMF - not to take advantage when the WMF decides to go against the community, as seen at phab:T268090#6630726 when the candidate got CU rights on testwiki against the global CU policy. Sad to say, I do not think this incident reflects well on his ability to stand up to the WMF in situations like this. Rschen7754 14:00, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2. -revi (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  Fails my voting criteria 1, 4.2. Improper, unauthorized access to CheckUserLog data has not been sufficiently addressed. — regards, Revi 14:01, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3. TonyBallioni (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  I have serious concerns with his ability to interact with community members in a way that is human and not rigid and formulaic. His responses to the questions (particularly Nick’s and revi’s) dodged what they were actually asking and provided answers that amounted to little more than “I have answered your question and I am right.” That is not the correct temperament to be a steward. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:06, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Tks4Fish (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Per Rschen, -revi, Tony. He has problems dealing with people which is not fitting for a steward. His responses to the emergency actions and to the homewiki questions were awfully bad, and his reply to the CU granting on testwiki did not respond to the issues there presented. —Thanks for the fish! talk•contribs 14:08, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Herbythyme (Eligible, checked by Praxidicae)2021 •  Herby talk thyme 14:08, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  6. MF-Warburg (Eligible, checked by -revi)2021 •  Not convinced, seems like a hatcollector. The answers to the questions are often "disappointing and uninformative", as one questioner put it. Also the CheckUser incident gives me pause. MF-W 14:09, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Miraclepine (Eligible, checked by Praxidicae)2021 •  Per the CU log incident. ミラP@Miraclepine 14:22, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Martin Urbanec (Eligible, checked by Blablubbs)2021 •  Danny's answers to questions are unsatisfying to me. They seem to recite policies rather than show how the candidate feels about the topic. As Nick put it, his answer to the enwiki RfA question was "disappointing and uninformative". In addition to that, his answer to my emergency situations cases doesn't satisfy me. It doesn't unravel how the candidate understands emergencies at all. I'm also concerned by the candidate's fast promotion track. Most of the permissions the candidate now has were granted in 2020. I don't think that gives him required experience. Maybe next time, Danny. Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:24, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  8. AGK (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  AGK ■ 14:28, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Xaosflux (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  For stewards, I like to see a much longer tenure engaging with communities. — xaosflux Talk 14:36, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Praxidicae (Eligible, checked by Blablubbs)2021 •  Per many others, but particularly revi and Tony's points. Praxidicae (talk) 14:42, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Spicy (Eligible, checked by Praxidicae)2021 •  Concerned by answers to questions, particularly the one about emergency situations. Spicy (talk) 15:07, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Jianhui67 (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  While I believe he means well, I think this candidacy is premature. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 15:19, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Savh (Eligible, checked by Superpes15)2021 •  Valid concerns have been raised. Savhñ 15:22, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Natuur12 (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  The concern mentioned by Rschen7754 cannot be overlooked. Natuur12 (talk) 16:04, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Barkeep49 (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  I approached Danny in July 2020 suggesting a possible enwiki RfA in a year. They responded to me that they had thought about it but were reluctant at that time given their recent enwikquote adminship. Could this be true and also it's true that they hadn't given it "much thought" which they told Nick? Maybe but it's confusing at best. Given how many permissions they do have it would be very surprising to me if they hadn't given thought about RfA on one of their homewikis. Barkeep49 (talk) 16:18, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Barkeep49 I am confused by your opposition to DannyS712 as a Steward. Do you believe DannyS712 will not be a good Steward because DannyS712 chose not to apply for an Adminship at en-wiki? This is particularly confusing since others have rejeted DannyS712 as a hat-collector. How can he be a hat-collector if he turned down an an opportunity to be an admin at enwiki? Sincerely, Ottawahitech (talk) 00:01, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I had believed Danny would make a good enwiki admin which is why I talked to him. I believe his answers when asked about enwiki RfA by Nick were misleading. I do not want that from a Steward and so I am opposing. Barkeep49 (talk) 05:31, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  16. SQL (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  SQLQuery me! 16:44, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  17. MrJaroslavik (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Many, many, many hats... MrJaroslavik (talk) 16:47, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Mz7 (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Mz7 (talk) 18:28, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  19. BrunoBoehmler (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  BrunoBoehmler (talk) 18:39, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Count Count (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Count Count (talk) 21:36, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  21. ToBeFree (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  ToBeFree (talk) 22:02, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  22. David Wadie Fisher-Freberg (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  dwf² ✉ 01:50, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  23. JavaHurricane (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Serious concerns raised by others. Perhaps one or two more years' experience as GS and after a successful RfA at enwiki? I'll be more confident then. JavaHurricane 02:16, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Ddxfx (Eligible, checked by -akko)2021 •  — Ddxfx 02:32, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  25. -akko (Eligible, checked by Praxidicae)2021 •  (｀・ω・´) (talk) 03:28, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  26. 痛心疾首 (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Per Rschen7754. Stewards should serve the community, and should not help WMF against the community. 痛心疾首 (talk) 04:02, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Elliot321 (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  I have nothing in problem with this candidate in general, but their answer to not running for RfA on enwiki was deeply unsatisfying to me. If they ran there, and were given the mop, I'd be likely to support them here, but their reasoning for not doing so was unconvincing. Elliot321 (talk) 04:06, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Horst Emscher (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  for me its seemingly overacting Horst Emscher (talk) 07:09, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Nurtenge (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Nurtenge (talk) 07:41, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Cyfraw (Eligible, checked by Majavah)2021 •  cyrfaw (talk) 08:34, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Johannnes89 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Johannnes89 (talk) 14:25, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  32. 1ForTheMoney (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  I am also concerned by the issue raised by Rschen7754. 1ForTheMoney (talk) 18:35, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Nguyentrongphu (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  We need to be united against WMF's dictatorship. Per Rschen7754. Nguyentrongphu (talk) 19:31, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  34. OhKayeSierra (Eligible, checked by ImprovedWikiImprovment)2021 •  OhKayeSierra (talk) 19:43, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Waggie (Eligible, checked by ImprovedWikiImprovment)2021 •  revi, Tony, and Xaosflux have summarized my concerns precisely. I think it's too soon. I think Danny should consider the concerns about their responses and also consider establishing more tenure in their current endeavors. Having worked with Danny to assist users on IRC, I think they're competent and a good person, I just don't think it's time yet. Waggie (talk) 20:13, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Atcovi (Eligible, checked by ImprovedWikiImprovment)2021 •  Danny's a good person but I'm not a big fan of the amount of hats he has. The WMF checkuser incident isn't a pleasure to see and the robotic answers to the questions posed against him do not give me confidence in his ability. —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 20:32, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Patrik L. (Eligible, checked by ImprovedWikiImprovment)2021 •  Patrik L. (talk) 22:24, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Janbery (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  janbery (talk) 22:33, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Fastily (Eligible, checked by Saroj Uprety)2021 •  premature imo, but would support a future run FASTILY 01:59, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Enjoyer of World (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Enjoyer of World (talk) 05:35, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Maynich (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Maynich (talk) 05:37, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  42. O.Koslowski (Eligible, checked by WhitePhosphorus)2021 •  O.Koslowski (talk) 10:22, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Gripweed (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Gripweed (talk) 10:42, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  44. NickK (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Mainly per Rschen7754 — NickK (talk) 12:47, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  45. John M Wolfson (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Per all. John M Wolfson (talk) 17:36, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Jan Myšák (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Already a lot of responsibility gained by one user within a single year Jan Myšák (talk) 18:55, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Robins7 (Eligible, checked by ImprovedWikiImprovment)2021 •  Robins7 (talk) 21:01, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Jasper Deng (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  Regretfully, I have to land here, mostly due to the situation with CheckUser. At minimum, CheckUser privileges for development purposes should be only provided to WMF staff accounts, not personal or community accounts. Their answers are less satisfying than I expected. I'm willing to consider supporting next year. Jasper Deng (talk) 03:50, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Sun8908 (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  Sun8908 (talk) 09:46, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Whiteguru (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Appears to be too busy with other tasks and duties. Whiteguru (talk) 10:02, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Kudpung (Eligible, checked by Perryprog)2021 •  Kudpung (talk) 12:55, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Perryprog (Eligible, checked by -revi)2021 •  Revi and Tony put it quite well; while I believe they have the skills to be a Steward, I worry that the rest of what's required for Stewardship is lacking. Perryprog (talk) 13:35, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Wim b (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Wim b 09:49, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  54. SPQRobin (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  SPQRobin (talk) 12:56, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  55. CanadianToast (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  CanadianToast (talk) 21:56, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  56. Gobonobo (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  gobonobo + c 08:02, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  57. JJMC89 (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 •  — JJMC89 (T·C) 07:22, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  58. Hadrianus (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Hadrianus (talk) 14:22, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  59. Jmbranum (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Jmbranum (talk) 18:30, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  60. MZaplotnik (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  MZaplotnik(talk) 15:54, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  61. CaptainEek (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  Ughh I hate that I'm here, but the CU log incident is a serious issue in my eyes. Additionally, while Danny may have sysop in several places, they don't on enWP. Why have they never run? Why go for steward if you aren't even an admin on your home project? Danny's answer to this question is not reassuring, and it exemplifies what Tony points out: Danny is robotic, which is not an excellent quality for a steward. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 23:52, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  62. SMcCandlish (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Same concerns as Rschen7754 and TonyBallioni.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ<  20:21, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  63. Octahedron80 (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Octahedron80 (talk) 09:05, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  64. Mercy (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Mercy (talk) 11:36, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  65. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:00, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  66. NK1406 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  After reading through the questions and answers, I find myself inclined to stay on the safer side and vote no. NK1406 (talk) 01:22, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  67. Davey2010 (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  per Revi, Tony and Capt Eek - Really hate to plonk myself here however the CU issue is too much of a big deal to ignore and I'm not entirely happy with the answers provided to it either. Genuinely disappointed to plonk myself here. –Davey2010Talk 17:21, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi @Davey2010: I just want to tell you that there are many participants in these elections who have no idea who Revi, Tony and Capt Eek are. I have become familiar only with the first one on your list of three, who happens to be a Steward running for re-confirmation, but I have no idea who Tony and Capt Eek are, nor can I find their comments on which you base your vote in the list above. Could you please clarify what the "CU issue" is? Thanks i advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 17:36, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi Ottawahitech, There is only one Tony here and only one Capt Eek here - Please use CTRL+F to find said people. CU = CheckUser. CU issue = Revi's question at Stewards/Elections_2021/Questions#DannyS712. Cheers, –Davey2010Talk 17:42, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the speedy response @Davey I'll check the link you shared, but please don't assume that I have a "CTRL+F" on my keyboard. Thanks again. Ottawahitech (talk) 17:51, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Ottawahitech, you have an F on your keyboard at the very least, and there's very likely a control key somewhere. Regardless, as you've noticed it's unlikely that users will link every person, program, entity, organization, page, etc. that they refer to. It is not helpful for you to ask these users for direct links and explanations every time you see something you are not familiar with, especially when it is very often easy to find answers yourself (here, simply by scrolling up). Regards, Vermont (talk) 18:25, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  68. Amorymeltzer (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Generally per above — the CU thing was, at best, weird and uncomfortable, and I do have concerns about too much on a plate/burn out, etc. Not generally concerned about enWiki sysopship, which I think Danny has show judgment in not going for. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 19:34, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  69. Guerillero (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 •  Per the CU weirdness Guerillero Parlez Moi 04:01, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  70. Serial Number 54129 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Il voit la cerise , per The Balioni & revi.. ——SerialNumber54129 17:00, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  71. Beyond My Ken (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:09, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  72. Bradv (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  Sorry, Danny, but you're stretched too thin as it is. Don't try to do everything at once – you won't do any of them well, and then you'll burn out. – bradv🍁 20:04, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  73. Nick (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  It is impossible to escape the impression that Danny is trying to acquire the maximum amount of permissions with the minimum of scrutiny. The CU incident is what comes from that lack of scrutiny, a couple of years from now, but, all being well, the CU stuff won't be a deal breaker. A year or two of continued (and perhaps, greater) scrutiny, and perhaps as importantly, ongoing editing at a sensible rate (you're not Superman, don't try to be) will put them in a good place to support. Nick (talk) 21:16, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  74. ZI Jony (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 06:43, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  75. عماد الدين المقدسي (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  all the above reasons are enough to vote with no. PhD_IMAD (talk) 11:04, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

[edit]
  2. Minorax (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Minorax (talk) 15:33, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Miniapolis (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Miniapolis 16:18, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  4. 1989 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Take this as a moral support. Despite the opposition, there's no denial you are a hardworker and dedicated to it. Take the opposition to heart, improve yourself, keep up the good work and one day, you will become a Steward. 1989 (talk) 17:39, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Camouflaged Mirage (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Very hard decision on this one, Danny is a very hardworking candidate who despite having flags in many wikis, still manages to be relatively active in all. He isn't a hat collector. The enwp RFA issue / CU issues isn't what that makes me hesitant in supporting, it's the emergency situations question. Thanks so much for volunteering. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 18:15, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Legoktm (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  I've had the pleasure of working with Danny a lot on MediaWiki stuff lately. He works hard and most importantly learns and is never afraid to ask questions. However, I'm very worried that he's going to burnout with all of the responsibilities he's taking on and I really don't want to see that happen. Legoktm (talk) 21:44, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  6. ElHef (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  What 1989 said. I have no doubt that once you put this hat on you'll wear it well, as you have many others. Keep up the excellent work and one day I will be in the Yes column for you. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 22:25, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  7. DrTrumpet (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  I think you are busy enough DrTrumpet (talk) 23:21, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Rachmat04 (Eligible, checked by -akko)2021 •  ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 03:04, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Mahir256 (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  per Legoktm. Mahir256 (talk) 04:33, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  10. WhitePhosphorus (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Danny is unanimously capable and diligent in technical stuff, though the community may expect more for a steward - just as what 1989 said, keep it up and you'll be there. WhitePhosphorus (talk) 05:27, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Uncitoyen (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  Danny is an active user. However, the negative opinions give a chance me think a little bit. The length discussions and few responses had a little negative impact on me. Other hand, Danny is successful in most of his roles for now and helpful, and I hope Danny will do better on steward nominations in the future. --Uncitoyentalk 08:39, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Joseywales1961 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Joseywales1961 (talk) 13:44, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Geonuch (Eligible, checked by Saroj Uprety)2021 •  Geonuch (talk) 01:54, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Blue Sonic (Eligible, checked by Saroj Uprety)2021 •  Blue Sonic (talk) 02:18, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  15. IN (Eligible, checked by Saroj Uprety)2021 •  Pls help to translate to english, thx. 尽管这位用户是这次监管员选举中唯一一个会中文的用户，但是当我看了一下下面的投票，发现反对的人比支持的人还多，所以我投下了中立票。 IN (talk) 02:23, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Translation: This user is the only SE candidate who knows Chinese. However, after looking at the votes below briefly, I realised that there are more oppose votes than support votes. Hence, I voted neutral. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 05:37, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Mirer (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  When I read you name, I thought this would be an easy yes. But to be honest, the answers to the questions left me confused. Mirer (talk) 05:51, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  17. MarioJump83 (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Danny is capable enough for being a steward, however there is a lot of questions. I'm going to be neutral. MarioJump83! 08:55, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Daniuu (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Daniuu (talk) 17:09, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Dylsss (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  Dylsss (talk) 22:03, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Jni (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Has required competence, but opponents have valid points also. jni (talk) 08:04, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  21. PoetVeches (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  PoetVeches (talk) 13:38, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  22. YFdyh000 (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 •  I am happy to see the existence of a steward who understands Chinese, but as mentioned and worried in the comments above, I don't know what improvement he will bring if be elected. I am also worried that he will not have enough time to deal with many things. In addition, I have not read all the questions and comments due to language barriers, it seems that his answers and some actions are not very satisfactory. YFdyh000 (talk) 19:15, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Cbyd (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Cbyd (talk) 09:59, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
       Toad62 (Not eligible, checked by Uncitoyen) •  Toad62 (talk) 16:40, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Centaur271188 (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Centaur271188 (talk) 17:46, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Ahmad.aea.99 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Ahmad.aea.99 (talk) 14:31, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  26. علاء (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  I admire DannyS712 activity, and he has a good experience, but I think he needs more time to interact with the communities --Alaa :)..! 17:43, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Cairo2k18 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Cairo2k18 • (talk) • (contribs) 06:19, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Mykola7 (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Mykola7 (talk) 21:01, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Draceane (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  per 1989 — Draceane talkcontrib. 11:15, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Cybularny (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  ~Cybularny Speak? 20:09, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  31. P,TO 19104 (Eligible, checked by Praxidicae)2021 •  P,TO 19104 (talk) 14:27, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  32. AVSmalnad77 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Undoubtedly a hard worker with a strong cross wiki activity record. But I think he needs to wait for more time to become a Steward. AVSmalnad77 talk 06:54, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Zabia (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Zabia (talk) 09:08, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Gampe (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Gampe (talk) 10:40, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Saroj Uprety (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  Saroj Uprety (talk) 05:57, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Teles (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Tem muito a contribuir com sua presença e proatividade e um forte conhecimento na área técnica, mas gostaria de ver algo mais. As respostas a algumas perguntas pareceram evasivas demais. —Teles «Talk ˱C L @ S˲» 14:37, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Geraki (Eligible, checked by Hasley)2021 •  Geraki TL 19:37, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  38. DePlusJean (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Like many people here, I have a sincere respect for DannyS712's contributions (Wikiscan and Xtools) but I have doubts about the relationship with the community DePlusJean (talk) 12:05, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Miraclepine (Eligible, checked by Praxidicae)2021 •  Switching to neutral per the observations by the yes camp. Sure this user has the experience and admin rights on seven wikis (albeit got them a little faster than usual) and is IMHO sufficiently competent. That said, I share the no camp's skepticism about trusting the steward tools to someone whose answers to a question about WMF power over community power are concerning, so I can't say yes. (Though, this is without prejudice to a yes in 2022.) ミラP@Miraclepine 00:23, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Jules* (Eligible, checked by Saroj Uprety)2021 •  User doing a lot for the community, but I share some concerns expressed in the "No" §. — Jules Talk 10:40, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Darkhan (Eligible, checked by Nieuwsgierige Gebruiker)2021 •  Darkhan 17:36, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  42. OlEnglish (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 •  OlEnglish (Talk) 13:03, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Mrschimpf (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Mrschimpf (talk) 04:40, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Robert Važan (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  — Robert Važan (talk) 05:50, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Stryn (Eligible, checked by Praxidicae)2021 •  I think he would be a competent steward, but there are some concerns raised so I can't unfortunately support this year. Stryn (talk) 07:54, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stewards/Elections_2021/Votes/DannyS712&oldid=23407704"