Jump to content

Stewards/Elections 2025/Votes/Leaderboard

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Leaderboard

[edit]
ContentsYes • No • Neutral
  • Languages: see below
  • Personal info: (English)
    I'm Leaderboard, and I want to be a steward for 2025. My primary areas of interest would be
    • granting permissions on SRP and SRGP - I've been around as a participant on the latter for a while, and would like to grant them myself
    • using my technical skills to make things easier and better for other stewards and contributors, and more broadly being on the "backend" of the team including handling off-wiki requests:
      • I am the author of Global reminder bot, which runs on nearly 800 wikis and reminds users whose temporary rights are due to expire (especially useful on smaller wikis which tend to be the ones with few/no permanent administrators), supporting MVR in the process. As a steward, I'd like to help resolve issues such as Stewards'_noticeboard/Archives/2024-09#phab:T25310 (to the extent I'm allowed to), and perhaps improve related things such as AAR.
      • I'm also an abuse filter helper, which grants me the ability to view (private) filters on the Wikimedia network, and have assisted multiple wikis with their filters over the years.
      • As an admin+interfaceadmin on en.wikibooks, I've also helped implement many of the technical requests submitted by users, and have performed relatively advanced tasks such as importupload and history-merging.
      • I'm an admin on en.wikinews (and the Wikimania wiki) primarily for anti-vandalism and maintenance, and wrote/used scripts (with my adminbot) to help the project by replacing thousands of templates as they were changing licences (amongst others), and am in the process of writing another (which is expected to take a lot of time, however) for the Albanian Wikipedia (see my talk page).

    While I do expect to do other tasks such as locking/blocking global accounts (and have submitted many requests to SRG, though I'm by no means close to some of the other users there), unlike some of the other stewards (and candidates), I do not expect routine anti-vandalism to be my priority as a steward (though I do have the experience as an admin of five wikis, including en.wikibooks, MediaWiki and Meta-Wiki). I am not perfect, and have made mistakes over the years, but I like to think that I've improved and am receptive to feedback. This statement is not exhaustive in terms of what I've done, and feel free to ask any questions you have.

    I primarily speak English and Malayalam (though I don't tend to use that on Wikimedia as I've never formally learned the language), and can understand basic Hindi and Dutch.
  • Questions: See Stewards/Elections 2025/Questions#Leaderboard


If you have JavaScript enabled, you can easily vote with a Vote! button which will appear in the place of this notice. If you would prefer to add your vote manually, please add:
# {{Se-vote|2025|Your username|checked=|cb=}} <optional comments>. ~~~~
to the bottom of the appropriate Yes, No or Neutral section.

Yes

[edit]
  1. Sdrqaz (Eligible, checked by Stïnger)2025 •  I'm willing to give them a chance, based on what I've seen of them. I think that quite a lot of their work with Global reminder bot has been commendable and some of the backlash has been a bit overblown. From what I've seen, Leaderboard works in good faith and is willing to seek second opinions to see if they're wrong. If they continue with that approach as a steward, they should be fine. Sdrqaz (talk) 14:05, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Arcticocean (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  arcticocean ■ 14:11, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Minilammas (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  --Minilammas (talk) 14:12, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Skilsdhuo (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Skilsdhuo (talk) 14:12, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  4. SHB2000 (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  I understand if anyone doesn’t support this request due to the lack of GR or GS, but Leaderboard has some invaluable technical skills. They made it clear in their statement that routine anti-spam/vandalism is not the focus. shb (t • c) 14:12, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Stïnger (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Tech-skilled candidate that can be really useful for the team. --Stïnger （会話） 14:17, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Svartava (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Good luck! Svārtava (tɕ) 14:30, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  7. KonstantinaG07 (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  weak support, while I understand the concerns raised, I believe they have a different skillset than other candidates and already-standing stewards to offer, and that they'll be a net-positive on the team as long as they take it easy with areas they may not be as familiar (which stands for everyone) and are receptive to feedback. KonstantinaG07 (talk) 14:34, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  8. JrandWP (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Really technical, will contribute a lot for Steward community. JrandWP (talk) 15:00, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Iming (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Yours sincerely, Iming 彼女の愛は、甘くて痛い。 15:24, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Talimu0518 (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Talimu0518 (talk) 15:28, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Cooldudeseven7 (Eligible, checked by Stïnger)2025 •  Cooldudeseven7 (talk) 15:43, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Ternera (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  I appreciate Leaderboard's thought-out takes on different matters and believe they would be a net positive as a steward with their technical knowledge. Ternera (talk) 15:53, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Quebecguy (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  quebecguy ⚜️ (talk | contribs) 15:53, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Barkeep49 (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Barkeep49 (talk) 16:09, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Bencemac (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Bencemac (talk) 16:16, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Borhan (Eligible, checked by Stïnger)2025 •  Borhan (talk) 16:16, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Ferien (Eligible, checked by Aqurs1)2025 •  I've interacted with Leaderboard on a few occasions now and I actually quite like the way they approach problems. One of those interactions was about the global reminder bot being enabled on simplewiki that I declined (w:simple:Wikipedia talk:Bots#Leaderbot) and I wouldn't consider their attitude on that to be combative. Their technical knowledge would certainly be a benefit to the team.--Ferien (talk) 17:36, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  18. XXBlackburnXx (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  I’m willing to give them a shot. XXBlackburnXx (talk) 19:13, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  19. JJPMaster (Eligible, checked by Svartava)2025 •  I had to think about this one a little due to the SRB concerns, as well as this which made me concerned that you wouldn't strictly follow MVR, but my concerns were largely addressed by your answer to my question. Although the WMF researcher request was admittedly unusual, I don't view you as a hat collector, and you would be an excellent asset to the steward team, especially since I feel like we need more stewards focused on things other than SRG. JJPMaster (she/they) 19:25, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Argam Forbes (Eligible, checked by Svartava)2025 •  Argam Forbes (talk) 19:33, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Aopou (Eligible, checked by Svartava)2025 •  —Aopou {talk} 19:57, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Zafkiel GD (Eligible, checked by EPIC)2025 •  Zafkiel GD | Talk 20:02, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  23. FusionSub (Eligible, checked by Aqurs1)2025 •  -FusionSub (talk) 20:28, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  24. LR0725 (Eligible, checked by Svartava)2025 •  LR0725 ( Talk / Contribs ) 20:54, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Eihel (Eligible, checked by SHB2000)2025 •  All my confidence —Eihel (talk) 22:46, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Codename Noreste (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Codename Noreste (talk) 23:32, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Shizhao (Eligible, checked by Aqurs1)2025 •  Shizhao (talk) 02:47, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Hehua (Eligible, checked by Mtarch11)2025 •  Hehua (talk) 04:35, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  29. DreamRimmer (Eligible, checked by SHB2000)2025 •  – DreamRimmer (talk) 05:32, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Lookruk (Eligible, checked by 20041027 tatsu)2025 •  --Lookruk 💬 (Talk) 09:31, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No

[edit]
  2. Johannnes89 (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  The candidate undoubtedly has a lot of technical skills and knowledge which might make them a good candidate. However they seem to have a tendency to try and solve technical problems by requesting permissions for themselves. I don't want to hold past issues (requests from 2021 or older) against them, but looking at more recent ones, there is a RfLA in 2023 trying to set up a global filter for logging almost all edits [1], later requesting WMF researcher permissions to access OS deleted edits globally [2] and asking for global OS access for their bot in 2024 [3]. That's to soon for me to support. Johannnes89 (talk) 14:38, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Just want to acknowledge your concern there, and it's valid. Just one note: in the 2024 case the reason I decided to discuss with the stewards early-on was to prevent a repeat of what happened before that (in 2023), having learned from that experience. Leaderboard (talk) 14:55, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the reply! Perhaps a good opportunity to point out that I like your overall communication style whenever I notice your comments on SRGP or RfA, always trying to form a differentiated opinion. I see the difference between your requests in 2023 and 2024 and I also see your learnings with the GlobalReminderBot. If this trend continues, I would support a candidacy in the future. Johannnes89 (talk) 15:40, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Seewolf (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Harald Krichel (talk) 14:42, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  4. BZPN (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  for some personal reasons that we both know. A steward should demonstrate objectivity and a neutral approach. I have no major objections beyond those raised in this section and the neutral section. BZPN (talk) 14:52, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Krd (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Per Johannes89. Alone the story around Global reminder bot, with dozens of rights request even after denials, appears like a big WP:POINT issue to me. Pushing this or similar things with steward rights is not not the right thing. Sorry. Krd 16:20, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Out of the hundreds of wikis I've requested rights on, the number of wikis that refused the bot (which I am fine with) is in the single digits. I'd call that normal for a bot that runs globally, and to be clear I've never re-requested rights or run the bot on such a wiki (except one accidental run). Leaderboard (talk) 16:25, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Martin Urbanec (Eligible, checked by Svartava)2025 •  Per Johannnes89. I'm also concerned about the use of steward rights potentially for research purposes as well; the community objected against that at Steward_requests/Global_permissions/2023-03#WMF_Researcher_for_Leaderboard, and Leaderboard specifically mentioned running as a steward is an option. Martin Urbanec (talk) 20:03, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  7. MF-Warburg (Eligible, checked by Svartava)2025 •  This user has a tendency to invent or exaggerate problems in order to impose complicated "solutions" that inevitably lead to him urgently needing some right. To quote Xaosflux from here, these are usually things which should have "technical [fixes], or perhaps technical + a maintenance script run; certainly not a volunteer's bot to go around to hundreds of project suppressing things." I don't feel comfortable with the thought that this person will be a steward and potentially imposing these non-solutions even more. I have also not been impressed by the past discussions about these things: usually they should have requested more feedback from the community first, before coming up with a grand proposal to vote upon. They also seem to never accept that maybe some ideas are just bad and shouldn't be done. MF-W 20:04, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  8. DCB (Eligible, checked by Svartava)2025 •  DCB (talk) 20:08, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Giraffer (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Giraffer (talk) 21:57, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Multichill (Eligible, checked by SHB2000)2025 •  Multichill (talk) 22:04, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Takipoint123 (Eligible, checked by Mtarch11)2025 •  ko:특수:차이/38580144 It seems like this user does not have a good idea about processes in local wikis. In KoWiki, this user tried to get bot permissions, in which after no response they went straight to Meta despite there being local processes. I really thank the user for the courage to step up, but demonstrataby poor understanding on global and local processes does not make me have confidence for this user as a steward.--Takipoint123 (talk) 23:49, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Please see my response to EPIC below. There was no prior precedent on how such bot requests are to work (or I couldn't find one), and I just did what I thought was right at that time based on my prior reading and understanding of the process. Nowhere on kowiki did it say that I had to follow a certain process (as I highlighted to you over there), as some other wikis have done. Leaderboard (talk) 02:43, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Korean Wikipedia has a local bot policy, and REQUIRES you to request for bot privilege through request. Even if you were not sure what to do, before you requested at Steward Requests you could have at least checked if the bot requests page were active and how long bot requests usually take in KoWiki through the page history (it takes a while, and I know it can be frusturating. But local bureaucrats do frequently check the page). At the very least you could have went to ko:백:사랑방 to ask for help, and me or other people would have gladly commented (which I don't see in your contribs). This, along with mass requesting for a whole bunch of others despite several local bureaucrats of several wikis having objections don't give me the confidence to vote in favor. My main concern is that granting of bot privilege can be very dangerous, and is usually likened to administrative permissions: it is not a simple matter of "I didn't know, there was no precedent." The care I've seen put into projects is commendable, but I just don't think that you can exercise the due caution required in the capacity as a steward based on the requests I've seen. Takipoint123 (talk) 03:19, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for the feedback, but I'll continue to disagree with you here (and that's OK, it's not like we need to agree on everything). That being said, as I commented above, "several local bureaucrats of several wikis having objections " is not quite right, and the refusals I did get is normal for a globally-running bot when the percentage of such objections is in the single digits. Leaderboard (talk) 03:22, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Jet Pilot (Eligible, checked by EPIC)2025 •  Jet Pilot 00:59, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Aqurs1 (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  aqurs ❄️ 02:34, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  14. JustARandomEditor123 (Eligible, checked by SHB2000)2025 •  Due to concerns raised by Johannnes89 regarding problem solving issues. JustARandomEditor123 (talk) 07:12, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Justiyaya (Eligible, checked by SHB2000)2025 •  Justiyaya (talk) 07:44, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Minilammas (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Changed my mind after reading Takipoint's vote. --Minilammas (talk) 11:03, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

[edit]
  1. TenWhile6 (Eligible, checked by Stïnger)2025 •  --TenWhile6 14:00, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  2. EPIC (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  This one is hard for me to judge. Here we have a technically compentent candidate who has cross-wiki experience and is a sysop on two medium-large wikis as well as an AFH. They're engaged in several steward areas and have relevant experience. My interactions with them have also been positive, and I believe they could do well if elected. However, I've seen combative behavior from them which I dislike and could be a problem as a steward, and I do have some slight concerns about their understanding of steward policies (judging by for instance questions they have asked in past steward elections) and some previous failed permission requests. I've also seen several SRB requests from them where they have tried gaining approval for their bot (Global reminder bot) on wikis with local bureaucrats or local processes for bot approval, in many cases without having informed local bureaucrats or admins about their intention (and thus I've instead had to do it for them), but in most of these cases the locals have responded on a simple ping or email. This makes me have some concerns mainly for SRP and SRB that they will bypass local processes if they are elected as a steward, which could cause problems. With all of this combined I'm on the fence, but I'd like to thank Leaderboard for volunteering and wish them good luck. EPIC (talk) 14:10, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I want to comment on this. Before requesting rights for Leaderbot, I carefully reviewed past bot operators' requests on SRB, and checked on other forums as well. I was under the impression that it was appropriate to request rights after waiting a week or two, without necessarily having to ping further. You were the main steward granting the right, and I hence deferred to you on things such as contacting users whenever necessary as I thought stewards (and not the bot operators) were supposed to do this, and I was never told that I should be emailing bureaucrats (which I have no problems doing), just like how it's the global renamer that normally posts an usurp notification and not the user being renamed. I have since modified the procedure and try to ping active bureaucrats before going to SRB. Leaderboard (talk) 15:11, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  3. A09 (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  I can't decide whether to support or oppose here, as I agree with both SHB and EPIC here. This candidate has some invaluable technical skills however I'm going neutral due to some of his weird takes in the past. A09|(pogovor) 14:16, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Minorax (Eligible, checked by Stïnger)2025 •  Neutral for now, mainly per A09 --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 14:29, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Ajraddatz (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  I almost never vote neutral, but I think I'm landing here for now. Leaderboard, you do a large amount of good work, but every few months you request more permissions in somewhat strange ways. I appreciate the desire to help, but I think that demonstrates a bit of a lack of understanding of community norms - something very important that stewards have. Overall I think your experience would lend itself well to the role, however, so I won't oppose. – Ajraddatz (talk) 14:42, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  6. V0lkanic (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  A09 summarized it well. V0lkanic (talk) 15:14, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Wüstenspringmaus (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Wüstenspringmaus talk 15:50, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Well very well (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Well very well (talk) 16:41, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Alachuckthebuck (Eligible, checked by EPIC)2025 •  my concern is the same as Krd, but balanced out by A09 and Ajraddatz's points. All the best -- Chuck Talk 17:34, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Ankermast (Eligible, checked by EPIC)2025 •  --Ankermast (talk) 17:37, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Tvcccp (Eligible, checked by Svartava)2025 •  Tvcccp (talk) 19:33, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Queen of Hearts (Eligible, checked by Svartava)2025 •  per EPIC. Queen of Hearts (talk) 19:50, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  13. PoetVeches (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  PoetVeches (talk) 21:52, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Sink Cat (Eligible, checked by SHB2000)2025 •  — Your local Sink Cat (The Sink). 22:51, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Miniapolis (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Miniapolis 23:57, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Pólux (Eligible, checked by 20041027 tatsu)2025 •  per EPIC and A09 Pólux (talk) 02:03, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Cactusisme (Eligible, checked by Aqurs1)2025 •  per above Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 03:19, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Jan Myšák (Eligible, checked by 20041027 tatsu)2025 •  Jan Myšák (talk) 09:53, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stewards/Elections_2025/Votes/Leaderboard&oldid=28227954"