Jump to content

Stewards/Elections 2021/Votes/Operator873

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Warning

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

Operator873

[edit]
ContentsYes • No • Neutral
  • Languages: en, es-3, it-2, pt-1
  • Personal info: (English)
    Greetings and thank you for participating here. I'm Operator873. I created my acount in 2008, but was only an avid reader for many years. In 2017, I became active on the English Wikipedia. I worked mostly anti-vandalism in the beginning, but then became involved with OTRS (which I am no longer active) and ACC (with which I still serve). In June of 2018, I became active on the Simple English Wikipedia and grew to enjoy being active in global efforts. I consider the Simple English Wikipedia my home wiki. In November 2018, I stood for consideration as a sysop on the Simple English Wikipedia and was successful. In early 2020, I became a CheckUser with unanimous support.

    Globally, I work to detect and remove spam as well as the associated spambots. I am currently a Global sysop and use that tool kit in this effort. I very much enjoy working with the smaller communities and admire the dedication of those Wikipedians. I am very active on IRC. I develop Bot873 (known as GlobalSysBot on IRC) to assist the Global sysops. I use SWViewer as well as the CVN network to assist in monitoring the smaller communities. As a Steward, I would continue and expand my effort against spam, doing LWCU work, combat LTA activities (locks and gblocks), and serve the global community's requests. Like many other Stewards, I would make myself immediately available for assistance via IRC as needed.

    Thank you kindly for your consideration! Operator873talkconnect 22:05, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Questions: See Stewards/Elections 2021/Questions#Operator873


Yes

[edit]
  1. Rschen7754 (Eligible, checked by -revi)2021 •  Good CU and GS experience and while newer to the global scene I think they will be a net positive. Rschen7754 14:02, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Yining Chen (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  --Yining Chen (Talk) 14:02, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Jianhui67 (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  Jianhui67 talk★contribs 14:04, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Tks4Fish (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Great CU, with a good GS experience. Very kind and always available. Good developer, having developed really helpful tools to the steward/CU workflow, like some of the ones embedded on his bots, and some scripts that he wrote for me which were a huge help. Will definitely be a great addition to the team. —Thanks for the fish! talk•contribs 14:34, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  5. AGK (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  AGK ■ 14:36, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Martin Urbanec (Eligible, checked by Blablubbs)2021 •  Global sysop already, will be helpful as a steward. Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:44, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Ajraddatz (Eligible, checked by Praxidicae)2021 •  CU and GS experience, looks like a competent user. If the incivility concerns in the oppose section are true, I recommend you take a step back in those situations and evaluate your actions and responses. – Ajraddatz (talk) 14:58, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Sotiale (Eligible, checked by -revi)2021 •  Sotiale (talk) 15:35, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  9. ImprovedWikiImprovment (Eligible, checked by Praxidicae)2021 •  I have thought on this carefully, and I can only conclude that Operator873 has the knowledge, expertise, and experience to act very well as a Steward. I have seen the logs referred to in the "no" section, and I am not convinced they constitute incivility. On simplewiki, he is perhaps the most active at RFCU and always responds very quickly to requests. He has a high degree of technical knowledge in the area and will be able to transfer this to the steward role. I'll also add that the Simple English Wikipedia is just as valid as any other, and it certainly takes as much dedication as anywhere else to be trusted as a sysop and CU (though perhaps not enwiki; that is an outlier). --IWI (talk) 15:46, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Barkeep49 (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Very thoughtful leader. While I understand the concerns about Simple Wiki being Operator's homewiki, there is enough of a trackrecord in other spaces to show that they will handle the responsibility of being a steward well. Barkeep49 (talk) 16:02, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Trijnstel (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Could be very valuable to the current stewards team. Trijnsteltalk 16:04, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  12. CptViraj (Eligible, checked by Blablubbs)2021 •  CptViraj (talk) 16:08, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Vermont (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Having worked with Operator873 as a CU and admin on the Simple English Wikipedia, and as a GS, I believe strongly that they would be a great steward. Relevant experience, demonstrated competency, and though Operator does not have very many edits xwiki there are considerable log actions through their GS work. Vermont (talk) 16:18, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  14. DannyS712 (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Xwiki activity, can be trusted with the tools, would be a positive addition. LGTM DannyS712 (talk) 16:31, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Miraclepine (Eligible, checked by Praxidicae)2021 •  This took a while, but I think there aren't much concerns here. ミラP@Miraclepine 16:34, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  16. MrJaroslavik (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Why he got GS without x-wiki activity then? :) MrJaroslavik (talk) 16:39, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  17. GeneralNotability (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  In my experience, Operator has been trustworthy and competent on multiple projects. To me, being active on both enwiki and simple is indeed "cross-wikiness," though I understand why some of the no !voters below feel otherwise. I believe Operator can be trusted with the steward role and would make good use of it. GeneralNotability (talk) 16:40, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Stryn (Eligible, checked by Praxidicae)2021 •  Stryn (talk) 16:41, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  19. SQL (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  SQLQuery me! 16:43, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Érico (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Érico (talk) 16:45, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Kizule (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Kizule (talk) 16:52, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Uncitoyen (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  He used the GS rights as much as possible. The number of wikis for global contributions may be small, but have admin operations on dozens of maybe more than a hundred wiki. see He helped with global sysop requests. Sometimes he made requests for global locks and blocks. Most of his answers also show that he understands steward rights. Therefore I think he can help for stewardship. --Uncitoyentalk 17:01, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Aranya (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Aranya (talk) 17:01, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Pppery (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  * Pppery * it has begun 17:05, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Camouflaged Mirage (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 18:26, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  26. L235 (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  KevinL (aka L235 · t) 18:27, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Mz7 (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Net positive. Mz7 (talk) 18:41, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  28. BrunoBoehmler (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  BrunoBoehmler (talk) 18:51, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Natuur12 (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Some doubts but I'm gonna trust Vermont's testimonial. Natuur12 (talk) 19:30, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Perryprog (Eligible, checked by -revi)2021 •  Vermont and Tks4Fish put it quite well in my opinion. Perryprog (talk) 19:34, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Legoktm (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Legoktm (talk) 21:47, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  32. ElHef (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Per IWI, particularly regarding the validity of contributions to simplewiki. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 22:40, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  33. David Wadie Fisher-Freberg (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  dwf² ✉ 01:52, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  34. JavaHurricane (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Work as GS offsets the concerns about lack of xwiki contribs. Sometimes you can't really gauge crosswiki work using the edit matrix. No concerns for me. JavaHurricane 02:11, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Darkfrog24 (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  My biggest concern for all candidates is "If given power, will this person abuse it, even if they don't think that's what they're doing?" Op's answer to the questions indicates that they know the power being given has limits. That's a good sign. Darkfrog24 (talk) 03:47, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  36. 痛心疾首 (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  With CheckUser experience, this user can help. 痛心疾首 (talk) 03:59, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Elliot321 (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  While they do have somewhat limited cross-wiki experience, I personally don't see that as much of a problem as others. Elliot321 (talk) 04:20, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Krinkle (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Krinkle (talk) 05:35, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  39. 游魂 (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Welcome more chekusers. Yo Yan 06:07, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  40. AfroThundr3007730 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  — AfroThundr (u · t · c) 07:24, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Novak Watchmen (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Novak Watchmen (talk) 07:30, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Nurtenge (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Nurtenge (talk) 07:45, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Mirinano (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  mirinano (talk) 08:02, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Cyfraw (Eligible, checked by Majavah)2021 •  cyrfaw (talk) 08:35, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Meiræ (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  per Ajraddatz. Meiræ 08:36, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Ejs-80 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  –Ejs-80 11:30, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Wagino 20100516 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Wagino 20100516 (talk) 12:23, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Aca (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  Aca (talk) 13:40, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Joseywales1961 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Joseywales1961 (talk) 13:48, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Lemure Saltante (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Lemure Saltante (talk) 14:27, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Michel Bakni (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Michel Bakni (talk) 17:13, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  52. باسم (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  باسم (talk) 17:28, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Hasley (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Sgd. —Hasley 17:53, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  54. Imetsia (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Imetsia (talk) 18:24, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  55. 1ForTheMoney (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  1ForTheMoney (talk) 18:45, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  56. Waggie (Eligible, checked by ImprovedWikiImprovment)2021 •  This one is quite difficult for me. I've worked with Operator873 and I believe that Operator873 can manage the tools quite competently, and has the temperament required. However, while I am voting yes, but I think Tony raises some extremely valid points and would suggest that Operator873 consider this very seriously. Waggie (talk) 20:22, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  57. Patrik L. (Eligible, checked by ImprovedWikiImprovment)2021 •  Patrik L. (talk) 22:39, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  58. Dostojewskij (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Dostojewskij (talk) 23:44, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  59. Wiwik P (Eligible, checked by Saroj Uprety)2021 •  Wiwik P (talk) 01:51, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  60. Geonuch (Eligible, checked by Saroj Uprety)2021 •  Geonuch (talk) 01:56, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  61. Fastily (Eligible, checked by Saroj Uprety)2021 •  FASTILY 02:06, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  62. Blue Sonic (Eligible, checked by Saroj Uprety)2021 •  Blue Sonic (talk) 02:20, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  63. Esteban16 (Eligible, checked by Saroj Uprety)2021 •  Esteban16 (talk) 02:39, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  64. Maynich (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Maynich (talk) 05:17, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  65. MJL (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Operator has worked to make Wikimedia a more civil place. I certainly have not always agreed with them, but I know their heart is in what they do. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 05:59, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  66. Mirer (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Mirer (talk) 06:03, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  67. Kocgs (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Kocgs (talk) 08:25, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  68. MarioJump83 (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  MarioJump83! 09:00, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  69. Gripweed (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Gripweed (talk) 10:44, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  70. John M Wolfson (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  John M Wolfson (talk) 17:48, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  71. NANöR (Eligible, checked by ImprovedWikiImprovment)2021 •  NANöR (talk) 20:08, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  72. Packa (Eligible, checked by ImprovedWikiImprovment)2021 •  Packa (talk) 21:04, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  73. Globalphilosophy (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  --Globalphilosophy (-̮̮̃•̃) (ღTalk ♥) 21:55, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
       Tfeliz (Not eligible, checked by Uncitoyen) •  Tfeliz (Talk) 00:25, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  74. Jusjih (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Jusjih (talk) 23:40, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  75. Impartial just (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  ℑ𝔪𝔭𝔞𝔯𝔱𝔦𝔞𝔩 𝔧𝔲𝔰𝔱🎙️ 01:41, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  76. جار الله (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  جار الله (talk) 02:22, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  77. Streetdeck (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  Trusted. Good luck. --Wright Streetdeck 03:40, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  78. Roller26 (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  Roller26 (talk) 06:11, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  79. Stigfinnare (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Stigfinnare (talk) 09:43, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  80. Dylsss (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  Dylsss (talk) 09:52, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  81. Whiteguru (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Looks like they will put in significant contributions. Whiteguru (talk) 10:15, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  82. Ammarpad (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  – Ammarpad (talk) 11:02, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  83. Veracious (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Veracious (talk) 14:06, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  84. Hiàn (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 •  Operator873 has my full trust. He's done good work over the years and I truly believe that he's more than qualified and capable to serve as a steward. Hiàn (talk) 20:34, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  85. Klaas van Buiten (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •   Klaas `Z4␟` V:  21:14, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  86. Iluvatar (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Iluvatar (talk) 23:45, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  87. Ahmetlii (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Ahmetlii (talk) 16:00, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  88. Giraffer (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Giraffer (talk) 16:18, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  89. ArdiPras95 (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  ArdiPras95 (talk) 22:00, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  90. KPX8 (Eligible, checked by ImprovedWikiImprovment)2021 •  KPX8 (talk) 23:53, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  91. Alexdoherty4 (Eligible, checked by 94rain)2021 •  Alexdoherty4 (talk) 03:14, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  92. Sun8908 (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  Sun8908 (talk) 11:14, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  93. Ahmad.aea.99 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Ahmad.aea.99 (talk) 14:39, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  94. 20041027 tatsu (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  20041027 tatsu (talk) 15:27, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  95. Juan90264 (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  Juan90264 (talk) 17:29, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  96. علاء (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  --Alaa :)..! 17:44, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  97. Filipović Zoran (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Filipović Zoran (talk) 20:08, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  98. Nehaoua (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  Nehaoua (talk) 22:48, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  99. Pharaoh of the Wizards (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 22:53, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  100. Ponor (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Ponor (talk) 08:22, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  101. .snoopy. (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  .snoopy. ✉ 13:27, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  102. Csisc (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 •  Csisc (talk) 17:41, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  103. Bff (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Bff (talk) 19:13, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  104. Mykola7 (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Mykola7 (talk) 21:43, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  105. Superpes15 (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  Superpes15 (talk) 01:54, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  106. Ddxfx (Eligible, checked by -akko)2021 •  — Ddxfx 10:45, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  107. Wim b (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Wim b 14:15, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  108. Mark7747 (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 •  Mark7747 (talk) 15:11, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  109. Maestro Ivanković (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Maestro Ivanković 17:42, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  110. Cybularny (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  ~Cybularny Speak? 20:14, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  111. Elizium23 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Elizium23 (talk) 01:16, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  112. Infinite0694 (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  Infinite0694 (Talk) 02:52, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  113. Soundwaweserb (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Soundwaweserb (talk) 13:33, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  114. Юрко Градовський (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Юрко Градовський (talk) 13:33, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  115. Bencemac (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Bencemac (talk) 14:36, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  116. Jmbranum (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Jmbranum (talk) 18:39, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  117. Zabia (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Zabia (talk) 09:04, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  118. MZaplotnik (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  MZaplotnik(talk) 15:56, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  119. فيصل (Eligible, checked by Saroj Uprety)2021 •  Faisal talk 05:28, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  120. Saroj Uprety (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  Saroj Uprety (talk) 06:14, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  121. Tupungato (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Tupungato (talk) 09:58, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  122. Geraki (Eligible, checked by Hasley)2021 •  Geraki TL 19:36, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  123. Raimundo Pastor (Eligible, checked by Hasley)2021 •  Raimundo Pastor (talk) 20:27, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  124. Dreamy Jazz (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  Dreamy Jazz talk to me | enwiki 22:49, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  125. Shizhao (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  Shizhao (talk) 01:50, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  126. Labdajiwa (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  Labdajiwa (talk) 03:10, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  127. LuK3 (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  -- LuK3 (Talk) 22:46, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  128. AVSmalnad77 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  --AVSmalnad77 talk 07:47, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  129. Tulsi Bhagat (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  I believe in him. — Tulsi Bhagat [ contribs | talk ] 10:30, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  130. Tolly4bolly (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  T4B (talk) 11:51, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  131. Saramag (Eligible, checked by Hasley)2021 •  --Saramag (talk) 13:25, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  132. Wil540 art (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  🍀 Wil540 art (talk) 01:14, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  133. Nioger (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Nioger (talk) 06:12, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  134. DutchDevil (Eligible, checked by Xaosflux)2021 •  DutchDevil (talk) 11:22, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  135. Jules* (Eligible, checked by Saroj Uprety)2021 •  — Jules Talk 11:24, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  136. Rzuwig (Eligible, checked by Hasley)2021 •  Rzuwig► 11:38, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  137. Roland Kutzki (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 • --Roland Kutzki (talk) 15:03, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  138. Darkhan (Eligible, checked by Nieuwsgierige Gebruiker)2021 •  Darkhan 17:38, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  139. *Youngjin (Eligible, checked by Saroj Uprety)2021 •  *Youngjin (talk) 04:21, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  140. Octahedron80 (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Octahedron80 (talk) 09:07, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  141. Jack Frost (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Jack Frost (talk) 14:44, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  142. P,TO 19104 (Eligible, checked by Praxidicae)2021 •  P,TO 19104 (talk) 17:21, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  143. Duży Bartek (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Duży Bartek (talk) 17:23, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  144. J ansari (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  -J. Ansari Talk 18:08, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  145. NK1406 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  NK1406 (talk) 04:05, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  146. Suvray (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Suvray (talk) 09:36, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  147. Superyetkin (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Operator873's interest in helping smaller wikis find their way is encouraging and would definitely enhance the WMF movement. --Superyetkin (talk) 13:01, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  148. JLavigne508 (Eligible, checked by Nieuwsgierige Gebruiker)2021 •  <His considerable amount of time spent serving in those projects overcomes a bit less time in cross wiki experience in my opinion>. JLavigne508 (talk) 13:57, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  149. Seewolf (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  Harald Krichel (talk) 15:57, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  150. Davey2010 (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Have here and there edited at Simple and have always found Operator to be helpful as well as knowledge throughout, He's a fantastic Admin and without a doubt would make a fantastic Steward. –Davey2010Talk 17:46, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  151. User3749 (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 •  User3749 (talk) 08:53, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  152. Atcovi (Eligible, checked by ImprovedWikiImprovment)2021 •  somewhat new but has been quite helpful and I've seen nothing but good work (it may just be me returning to Wikimedia recently though) —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 14:32, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  153. Coffins (Eligible, checked by Superpes15)2021 •  Coffins (talk) 21:37, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  154. WikiAviator (Eligible, checked by Superpes15)2021 •  WikiAviator (talk) 02:23, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  155. Jasper Deng (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  Jasper Deng (talk) 06:55, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
       VKG1985 (Not eligible, checked by ZabeMath) •  VKG1985 (talk) 12:26, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  156. Serial Number 54129 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Per --Uncitoyen, on y va! ——SerialNumber54129 17:12, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  157. Mrschimpf (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Mrschimpf (talk) 04:43, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  158. Bradv (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  – bradv🍁 20:07, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  159. Robert McClenon (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Robert McClenon (talk) 05:23, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  160. ZI Jony (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 06:50, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  161. Ahmad252 (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Ahmadtalk 14:17, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  162. Masti (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  masti <talk> 18:45, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
       Juniorlol05 (Not eligible, checked by ZabeMath) •  Juniorlol05 (talk) 21:39, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  163. Charitwo (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Very helpful and trusted candidate. And respect from a fellow Veteran. Charitwo (talk) 22:47, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  164. Nadzik (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 •  Nadzik (talk) 08:00, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  165. Base (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Base (talk) 12:11, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  166. RadiX (Eligible, checked by Superpes15)2021 •  RadiX∞ 12:30, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No

[edit]
  1. Naleksuh (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  History of off-wiki "selective incivility", assuming bad faith, and casting aspersions against other editors. As explained by English Wikipedia, An editor must not accuse another of misbehavior without evidence, especially when the accusations are repeated or severe. If accusations must be made, they should be raised, with evidence, on the user-talk page of the editor they concern or in the appropriate forums. Operator873 thinks it is acceptable to accuse established editors of "abuse and harassment" and not provide any evidence/diffs for it, even when asked by uninvolved editors to multiple times. Before I am accused of casting aspersions myself, I will note that I am unfortunately not able to link/post/publish anything that is off-wiki. However I have submitted a large amount of evidence to ElectCom who can confirm my statements as well as testimonials from uninvolved (and involved (as targets)) evidence. Naleksuh (talk) 14:00, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    ElerctCom member comment: The ElectCom asked Operator873 to consent with publishing off-wiki logs on-wiki, and he consented. Naleksuh is allowed to post the conversation, if they want so. Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:44, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for linking and quoting casting asperations as it seems that is what you are doing here. Especially this part: If accusations must be made, they should be raised, with evidence, on the user-talk page of the editor they concern or in the appropriate forums. I will begin my response with the assertion that this is not the appropriate forum and I've never received any talk page message on the matter from you. I've never been asked for evidence from any other editors so that statement is an outright lie. Since I've consented to you releasing any logs you may have which demonstrate and support your accusation, I look forward to seeing exactly what you are referring to. However, I can venture a guess that you are referring to my issuing you a (1) warning about your IRC behavior towards SEWP sysops. Specifically, the pattern of hounding and harassing sysops on and off wiki. This behavior, among others, resulted in you being community banned before. You've also a documented history of incivility towards other editors. As any SEWP CU or Ombuds person may verify, I have not used the CheckUser extension to connect your previous accounts and this is purely based off your behavior. Per CLEANSTART, since you've been connected to those previous accounts, you are responsible for the conduct of those accounts. I also find that you have a significant overlap where you used Krett12 and Computer Fizz at the same time, even interacting with yourself on occasion. This invalidates the CLEANSTART and leaves you subject to enforcement of abusing multiple accounts by evading scrutiny. To continue the pattern, Naleksuh became active before Computer Fizz was abandoned after being connected to Krett12 in your failed RfA. My warning to you to discontinue your pattern of abuse on IRC is not harassment and was, in fact, my effort to assume good faith and hope you would correct your behavior on your 3rd account. It is quite apparent you do not intend to do so. Since I've provided diffs to support my statements and have consented (per Martin Urbanec) to you providing logs, I look forward to you providing evidence of your accusations or withdraw it and acknowledge you were casting asperations. Operator873talkconnect 15:58, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    ElectCom member comment #2: Extended discussion around this topic has been moved to Talk:Stewards/Elections 2021/Votes/Operator873#Discussion for Naleksuh's vote. — regards, Revi 16:53, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Herbythyme (Eligible, checked by Praxidicae)2021 •  Inadequate cross wiki experience Herby talk thyme 14:04, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3. MF-Warburg (Eligible, checked by -revi)2021 •  Activity seems limited to enwiki and simplewiki, no real cross-wikiness. MF-W 14:05, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Xaosflux (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  Low x-wiki experience, despite becoming a global sysop last year. — xaosflux Talk 14:47, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  5. TonyBallioni (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Really struggled on this one, but this is where I land. Not having sysop access on a content project where there is a native language population is a deal breaker for me. I’ve consistently argued that global work works best when we take users who are trusted by their native language group and enhance their access. This allows them to assist people on other content wikis to do the work we’re here for: sharing free knowledge with the public. Simple wiki, unfortunately, is not a project that breeds that experience since it doesn’t have a native group. CU access there also isn’t the same as understanding when using it could be controversial on projects with larger populations, especially when you don’t speak their language. Sorry, but I can’t get behind this right now. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:23, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  6. WikiBayer (Eligible, checked by -revi)2021 •  Please make more crosswiki work 𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 15:25, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Minorax (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  concerns about x-wiki experience. Minorax (talk) 15:31, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  8. KPFC (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  Low crosswiki activity. KPFC 💬 18:11, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  9. ToBeFree (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  ToBeFree (talk) 22:10, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Lt2818 (Eligible, checked by Majavah)2021 •  Lt2818 (talk) 08:42, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  11. OhKayeSierra (Eligible, checked by ImprovedWikiImprovment)2021 •  Not enough crosswiki experience OhKayeSierra (talk) 19:46, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  12. SK2242 (Eligible, checked by Martin Urbanec)2021 •  per all above. SK2242 (talk) 18:10, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  13. PoetVeches (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  PoetVeches (talk) 13:40, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  14. SPQRobin (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  SPQRobin (talk) 12:57, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Zezen (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Naleksuh's detailed analysis is pretty damning. Zezen (talk) 21:44, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  16. CanadianToast (Eligible, checked by Miraclepine)2021 •  CanadianToast (talk) 21:58, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Taivo (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Your crosswiki activity is low. If we take the projects written in other languages than English, then you have made 18 edits in Croatian, 14 in Hindi and 11 in Esperanto Wiktionary, rest projects have less than 10 edits. Your contributions in Commons (50 edits) consist mostly of uploading personal files, some other uploads have no source. This is not what I expect from steward. Taivo (talk) 17:41, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Jo-Jo Eumerus (Eligible, checked by Hasley)2021 •  Mainly per lack of crosswiki work Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:31, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Bestoernesto (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Ciao • Bestoernesto • ✉ 03:39, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Ameisenigel (Eligible, checked by Nieuwsgierige Gebruiker)2021 •  Ameisenigel (talk) 09:49, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Johannnes89 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Johannnes89 (talk) 01:24, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  22. OlEnglish (Eligible, checked by Fitindia)2021 •  OlEnglish (Talk) 13:09, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Beyond My Ken (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:12, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

[edit]
  2. Miniapolis (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Miniapolis 16:22, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Firestar464 (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Firestar464 (talk) 11:25, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  4. NickK (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Rather relevant experience, but I share TonyBallioni's concern — NickK (talk) 12:58, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Daniuu (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Per NickK Daniuu (talk) 17:00, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Florian COLLIN (Eligible, checked by Jianhui67)2021 •  Florian COLLIN (talk) 22:55, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Kudpung (Eligible, checked by Perryprog)2021 •  Kudpung (talk) 13:03, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Dreamy Jazz (Eligible, checked by Tks4Fish)2021 •  Dreamy Jazz talk to me | enwiki 13:46, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Cbyd (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Cbyd (talk) 10:02, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
       Toad62 (Not eligible, checked by Uncitoyen) •  Toad62 (talk) 16:37, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Centaur271188 (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Centaur271188 (talk) 17:37, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Cairo2k18 (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Cairo2k18 • (talk) • (contribs) 06:24, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Gobonobo (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  gobonobo + c 07:58, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Gampe (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Gampe (talk) 10:42, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Teles (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  Não consegui chegar a uma decisão. Vejo que as flags que possui têm ligação com as atividades de steward, mas vejo pouca atividade cross-wiki, pouca atividade no Meta e até mesmo um número baixo de edições nos projetos onde é mais ativo. —Teles «Talk ˱C L @ S˲» 14:58, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  14. SMcCandlish (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  Low cross-wiki activity, though not none. Seems trustworthy and qualified otherwise, but overall/broad involvement in WMF as a meta-project is important to this role.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ<  20:30, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Mercy (Eligible, checked by ZabeMath)2021 •  Mercy (talk) 11:39, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  16. DARIO SEVERI (Eligible, checked by CptViraj)2021 •  --DARIO SEVERI (talk) 03:45, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Dash77 (Eligible, checked by Superpes15)2021 •  Dash77 (talk) 01:53, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Robert Važan (Eligible, checked by Uncitoyen)2021 •  — Robert Važan (talk) 05:52, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stewards/Elections_2021/Votes/Operator873&oldid=26574820"