Commons:Administrators/Requests/Yann (de-adminship)

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 Remove = 19;  Keep = 42;  Neutral = 4 - 31% Result: keep admin status. --Krd 15:47, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yann (de-adminship)

Vote

Yann (talk · contributions (views) · deleted user contributions · recent activity (talk · project · deletion requests) · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth)

Scheduled to end: 06:00, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Following a 48-hour consensus proposal requesting for discussion due to misconduct, this admin is under review for the community to decide whether or not they should continue serving Wikimedia Commons as an administrator. If you are !voting remove or keep, it is recommended you explain in detail why and include links as evidence for removal !votes. As established policy states (Commons:Administrators/De-adminship), if the majority is over 50%, this admin will be desysopped and will have to run another RfA with successful community consensus for restoration. Please be and remain civil throughout this discussion.

Votes

  •  Remove When blocking them, I described them misusing the toolset while in a dispute (performing involved actions) and removing statements (vandalism) when they claimed to “try to remove the insult (sic)” when in reality they reverted with the rollback tool their whole statement multiple times, when later I actually removed the insult they were referring to. While the majority viewed my decision as poor (my apologies for performing such), they did not disagree with me in regards to my reasons except for unclarity of the term, vandalism. Administrators are to be accountable when in regards to their actions, and imo they have failed to do so. Instead of acknowledging their misuse, they’d rather deserve an apology and for their “opponent” to be blocked. Unacceptable. This isn’t the first time they performed involved actions, as that is what got them desysopped at French Wikipedia by the Arbitration Committee. I will also refer to a previous discussion that took place last year in regards to them performing a range of questionable actions in which almost sparked a desysop discussion. When asked to clarify one of their actions, they insulted them by calling them a troll and told them to “[fuck] off”. When questioned about their actions, they are to be respectful, civilized and contain composure, bad conflict history with the user or not. With all of this being said, Yann, I advise you to take a break from Commons and attempt to reflect on yourself and your actions. While you’ve done good work all of these years, your behavior and how you’ve handled the toolset has been inappropriate lately, and I hope one day you will understand that. 1989 (talk) 06:00, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Remove As noted by 1989 above, Yann has subjected good faith users to out-of-process blocks, accused them of being trolls and/or vandals, and attempted to intimidate them into silence when they lodged legitimate complaints. This is completely unacceptable behavior for any user, let alone an administrator. As previously stated: complete removal of all sysop privileges followed by an indefinite ban from this project. We will all benefit from his absence. AshFriday (talk) 07:04, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Remove -- but only if Jcb's bit is removed too. --A.Savin 07:14, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep, while Yann is by no means a perfect admin and I've criticised them in the past, I can't say that any of their actions I've ever witnessed were deliberately taken in bad faith or that he's incompetent. In fact from what I can tell Yann is one of the best admins on Wikimedia Commons and him losing access to these tools would be a net negative for the project. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 07:16, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep I haven't been following the disputes but I agree with Donald Trung. Yann is by no means perfect and some of his responses show that he doesn't suffer fools gladly, I have found him to a good admin overall and his removal would be a loss to Commons. However the lack of civility needs to be addressed Gbawden (talk) 07:26, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Obviously Keep - I do agree with Donald Trung and Gbawden. To me, Yann is the most proficient admin of the Commons, and their long time services for the project is unforgettably excellence. IMO, The project indeed need such admin(s). It will be quite beneficial. There might be concerns, but removing sysop a bit is definitely not a good choice. Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 07:52, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Remove Intimidation, threat and falsehood of any kind is injurious to our project and contributors. This is the treatment I have received from this admin in the past few years. In March, this year Yann filled a COM:UDR for images nominated for deletion by another user. In that UDR statement, Yann falsely attributed the nomination to me. I immediately pointed out to Yann that the nomination was not by me and requested that this false claim be retracted. Ankry in fact pinged the actual nominator of those images for deletion. Rather than Yann at least retracting this falsehood, they responded with a block threat. They never correct this falsehood. As someone who has contributed immensely to promoting this project and other Wikimedia projects offline in my country, I do not think I deserve this sort of treatment from any user talk less of an admin. I no longer trust this user to hold the admin toolset. This project will be ruined in no time if we continue to keep this sort of user as administrator on this project. Enough is enough. O to ge!!! T CellsTalk 07:55, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "This project will be ruined in no time" is complete bullshit seeing my work on Commons on the last 15 years. I am ready to address the issue if presented in a good faith manner, which is not the case here. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:21, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yann I am not the one you should convince with your "work on Commons on the last 15 years" but the community who is currently evaluating your status and competency as an administrator. I don't care about it and I am struggling to understand why you thought it was plausible to point this out to me. You wrote I am ready to address the issue if presented in a good faith manner, which is not the case here. How else do you want it presented to you? You made a false claim against me and this was pointed out to you by me and at least one administrator yet you didn't correct or retract your statement. Rather, you responded with a bizarre block threat and intimidation with no attempt to retract the false claim or an apology. You are an extremely abusive, rude and arrogant administrator. Whether this request failed or not, you definitely has lost my trust and that of many other users who believed you are unsuitable as an administrator and therefore supported that your sysop bit be removed. If this request eventually fails, you are going to work hard to earn back our trust and until then, I'd have zero respect for you on this project. All the best. T CellsTalk 14:52, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Remove I second the "Intimidation, threat and falsehood" accusation by T Cells from my own experience. And agree with 1989 about recent misuse of tools. I think Yann is often a good admin but does seem to run into problems when angered. My own experience of this is when Yann uploaded a green-tinted version of a famous sepia (brown) photograph and I took it to DR (see below for details). We don't need admins who bully and intimidate and make personal attacks when angry, or admins who get this kind of angry if one of their uploads is taken to DR.
Wrt recent events, both Jcb and Yann have different views on deletion process and decisions but are no longer communicating respectfully or seeking consensus. Instead they just fight, call names, and take each other to AN/U. My feeling is that both could be admins again but really need some timeout, and to reflect on how they should behave as an admin. They need to learn to work together with other admins, to seek consensus rather than conflict, and to respect the community. -- Colin (talk) 09:02, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Remove I cannot recall interacting with Yann in any significant way prior to my noticing of this discussion, and thus reviewing this with a neutral view, the evidence shows significant problems with regard to conduct unbecoming of an administrator. Someone who has so many situations in which they used admin tools for the benefit of their opinion should not be an administrator on any project. I’m disheartened to support the removal of an administrator, as we do need as much help as we can get, however the incidents explained in above votes and relevant other pages leave me no choice. Best regards, Vermont (talk) 10:30, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Remove Yann is the singular worst admin on the Commons and routinely demonstrates ignorance of and disregard for policy. Readily available/recent examples:
    • Wheel-warring: File:Chile mine oct13 2010 dg.jpg was deleted by Túrelio as a copyvio. Its undeletion was requested and closed as not done by Ankry. Yann then unilaterally restored it with the rational "2010102910006171" (an issue in its own right, as that ticket is not valid for licensing, which any admin/OTRS member would be expected to know). I redeleted it as per the UDR, Yann restored it, and Túrelio ultimately redeleted it. Indeed, as also with the Jcb kerfuffle and references above, Yann does not appropriately respect his colleagues or due process and acts abusively.
    • AGF: This utter piffle, when Alexis Jazz was readily able to discern the selection pattern (albeit not the meaning of random, #4). (Good faith concerns are not infrequently labeled "vandalism," a behaviour spanning years.)
    • Blocking CentralTime301 on terrible evidence.
    • Yann also routinely demonstrates profound ignorance of copyright and an unwillness or inability to consider appropriate information contrary to his gut feeling. Ironically, it was years of astonishingly bad closures by Jcb and Yann that prompted me to write the models and stuffed toys essays. Эlcobbola talk 11:59, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  remove This was trickier for me than Jcb's de-RfA, but I do think, ultimately, it would be best for the project if Yann spent some time away from being an administrator here. Nick (talk) 13:27, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Remove After what happened, it will be better for them to take a break to clear their thoughts instead of pointing fingers at &/or insulting each other. Admins are supposedly a role model for fellow editors, they need not be perfect but they should at least be civil. 大诺史 (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 13:41, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral --VKras (talk) 15:11, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral Cuatro Remos (nütramyen) 15:16, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep This is ridiculous. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:11, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep i trust him. --Steinsplitter (talk) 16:13, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Strong keep You're de-sysoping UID 0?! --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 16:18, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak  Remove Removing someone's insult is hardly "tool abuse" and it's utterly absurd to claim that. I'm tempted to vote keep on that basis alone. However, I'm unimpressed by the other things I've read here so far, but willing to reconsider. Gamaliel (talk) 16:25, 19 September 2019 (UTC) Troubled by the conflict with T Cells and their response. Gamaliel (talk) 18:37, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Remove Edit-warring and inappropriate use of rollback at Commons:Undeletion requests, [1][2][3]. He also edit-warred to repost a sarcastic comment on my talk page repeatedly, despite knowing that I found it offensive.[4][5] He then posted another clearly sarcastic comment asking me to remain civil,[6] when it was his harassment of me that was uncivil (see Commons:Harassment#User space harassment). He expects extremely high standards from others while not meeting them himself, such as (1) complaining about use of the term "pissing about" while being happy to accuse others of "bullshit" or (2) accusing others of harassment while being happy to harass me on my talk page. DrKay (talk) 16:48, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep All these users, who brought their virtual bruises here, didn’t explain how this mutual desysop can heal toxic relationships between two very active admins, and who’s gonna manage all the stuff they do here. Sealle (talk) 17:02, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep perhaps I'm a bit naive and gullible but I believe that the raised concerns can be resolved through dialogue. Some of the concerns are serious but de-admin isn't the preferred solution. (In my opinion). Natuur12 (talk) 17:13, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep I see (and have seen) more than a few mistakes, but I have not seen enough to convince me that Yann is anything but a net positive as an admin. It's particularly hard to justify removal when put up against the other de-adminship discussion, in which there is far more evidence presented of a long-term problem (including 3 [!] other de-adminship discussions). I still haven't made up my mind regarding Jcb, but I don't think a sufficient case has been made about Yann.
One thing I will say: some of the issues raised above seem like they could've been resolved so easily with a quick fix/redaction/apology. Nobody expects admins to be perfect, but addressing and acknowledging a mistake goes a long way. I look at the interaction that T Cells linked to above, where the DR nominator forgot to sign, so you thought T Cells was the nominator. After he clarified that he was not, a quick redaction and "sorry, the nominator forgot to sign so I thought it was you" seems like it would've resolved it immediately. Perhaps there's more to that story, but that sort of simple mistake left unacknowledged can compound over time. FWIW. — Rhododendrites talk |  18:48, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Rhododendrites. It is somewhat difficult for me to believe it was a mistake, as mistakes are generally expected to be corrected if pointed out especially by more than one person. It was a deliberate attempt to damage my reputation on this project. If it was a mistake, why didn't Yann correct their statement? Till this moment, they neither retract it nor apologize for the reputational damage. Yann continuous show of power without empathy is concerning and disturbing. They should be striped of their admin privilege. T CellsTalk 20:32, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep I am with Natuur12 that de-adminship is not the preferred solution. Personally, I feel that any situation is made better by discussion between the affected parties without necessarily documenting every word back to the beginning of time. People change. Internet behavior changes - what is acceptable to one group may or may not be to another group (speaking in general all over the internet for the last 20 years). Specifically, Yann is an able and experienced administrator and I have seen little to nothing convince me that his actions are not done in essential Good Faith and his best abilities to enrich the project. Every few years, a big storm brews up. Words are tossed. Feelings are hurt. Sometimes we lose administrators. It is always sad, and I don't think it's necessary this time. There are aspects of how this situation got here that seem like pack hunting behavior - that is sad. We are all volunteers on the same project, folks. Let's pull together and work through issues. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:06, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep For his contributions in the project seen from a long-time perspective Poco2 19:08, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep as per Natuur12. MZaplotnik(talk) 19:43, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Remove He has no respect for those, who create the content for this project. --Stepro (talk) 20:01, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  remove per Stepro and others --DCB (talk) 20:02, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Remove - I think, it would be a good idea for both, for Commons and Yann, for one or two years not to be bound on each other in this way. It feels like Yann is so much and so deep into Commons, that he lost a bit the ground. I relly belive, he's already wanting the best, but has become a bit operating blind. Mostly it's excusable and fixable, but when people feel not respected, peole that working hard here and try to do their best, then the road to hell is paved with good intentions. I would not see it as de-adminship, I would see it as a break to become a bit more grounded again. Then Yann could be again a good Commons adminstrator. When people become very depply involved in a project, it's sometimes o good idea, to let them be a pedestrian for some time again, at least to see again, how the other perspective look like. This grounded. -- Marcus Cyron (talk) 21:45, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep per Donald Trung, Gbawden and Steinsplitter. Strakhov (talk) 22:14, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  remove. I'd rather not sound this whiny, but in reality much of the reason that I have chosen to prioritize other things in my life rather than Commons was due to Yann, with no discussion, reversing admin decisions I had put time and thought into and utterly failing to acknowledge that this might be a problem, and failing to engage in any kind of meaningful discussion afterwards (see addendum below). No other admin has treated my contributions with as much contempt, and if it drove me largely away, I'm sure it has driven others away too. Yann has always had a kind of impunity due to being User 0, but I very much doubt it has been worth the cost. Storkk (talk) 23:02, 19 September 2019 (UTC) An illustrative link: rules and norms just don't apply to Yann... I think this is wheel warring (regardless of whether the restoration was ultimately correct, which it probably was.) Storkk (talk) 23:15, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Struck out a sentence above - it's too late in the evening to go searching through logs and edit histories, and my memory may be faulty on this. The struck sentence should instead read: "treating the contributions of those less experienced than himself (i.e. everybody) with contempt." Storkk (talk) 23:28, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Remove regretfully. Yann does excellent work on Commons both as an editor and administrator; he's got a critical eye and he's 100% correct about any nonsense he calls out. However, that does not excuse incivility and hostility towards others. While I do understand he was being baited by Jcb, administrators are expected to be model members of the community, and collegial conduct is especially important in contentious situations. Regardless of whether this passes or fails, I hope Yann decides to take time to reflect on recent events and how they will improve their conduct for the future. -FASTILY 23:22, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep Yann has always helped for the betterment of the project. In this time when the project is in need of active admins I don't think his deadminship will be a solution. He has helped me alot and I trust him. Thank you. --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 01:08, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Remove unfortunately, while he has done good work in the past he seems to think that he is above the rest of the community, and is not accountable to them. --Rschen7754 02:35, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep They deeply care about the project. It is not easy to review 115 instances of poorly-deleted (and unfortunately poorly-reviewed) files and restore the good ones: Commons:Undeletion_requests/Archive/2019-07#Jcb's_deletion_between_20:16_and_20:18,_4_January_2019_(115_files). They have integrity which is more valuable than carefulness and precision. 4nn1l2 (talk) 03:57, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep My interactions with Yann have always went well. I believe that he is a great contributor for Commons, but I am not saying that he does not have his faults. Sure his feud with Jcb is problematic, but I will still vote keep if he ends this feud with Jcb. --Boothsift 05:03, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep. I have seen much and good contribution from YANN in the past years. I don't think that mutual de-sysop is a solution. -- Geagea (talk) 05:23, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep Never had any problems with Yann. The Banner (talk) 07:40, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Remove. Civility problems. Yann speaks with other users in such a way, which is not acceptable for an administrator. Colin found a lot of examples in comments section. Taivo (talk) 09:14, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep I deliberated long about this, especially since I have not been very active in the last year. Yann always left the impression of a good, dedicated admin to me, although sometimes a bit abrasive. But some of the examples of other users in this discussion made me a bit wary. But in the end I will go with my own impression. I hope that if Yann keeps his adminship, he will take this discussion as a "warning shot", though and will take the misgivings to heart. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 09:30, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral, This is not gonna end well... CptViraj (📧) 09:47, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep Freedom for Yann to decide whether or not to continue to handle these administrative responsibilities -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:01, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep I see no abuse of admin tools by Yann. Ankry (talk) 11:13, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Remove per many above, including 1989, Fastily, Storkk, and Colin.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:35, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep as per Donald Trung, Steinsplitter, Natuur12, Rhododendrites, Ellin Beltz, Tiven2240, Boothsift and Sebari - Yann's misuse of rollback is concerning but to my knowledge they've never actually misused their admin tools, I will just add Yann is a great admin and I fully support them keeping their tools. –Davey2010Talk 19:03, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep Reading that discussion it looks like Yann did right thing restoring those files but yet they received that personal attack which is what fueled this fire. IMO a good discussion is the best way to settle this. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 04:35, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep per Gbawden and Ellin Beltz. Some of the concerns mentioned are serious, and they need to be addressed. However, I trust Yann's expertise and believe that he has a heart for the project. I hope that these issues can be resolved. Jianhui67 T★C 04:57, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep good admin - in my experience, always tries to understand and help good-faith (not native en-speakers) contributors who do not master all the complicated tools and templates --Hsarrazin (talk) 08:03, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep per Sebari and Rhododendrites. De728631 (talk) 11:51, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep per Jianhui67. --Biplab Anand (Talk) 12:32, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep per Donald Trung, Gbawden and Steinsplitter. Good admin. EPIC (talk) 13:43, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep, good admin, no need to remove. --痛心疾首 (talk) 14:09, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep issue not sufficient for removal imo. Yann could perhaps take issues more slowly and carefully though.--Roy17 (talk) 23:34, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep Two hard working admins, one doesn't like the other much. Where did that happen before? Everywhere. This is not Tinder, nor is it an 'everything is pink and rosy' website. You've got to crack a few eggs to make an omelette, shit happens, etc pp. If Yann and JCB don't love each other, get over it. That's not a community problem. So, if they hit each other, we provide a bandaid and delete the blood from the harddrive. And yes, Yann and JCB can be difficult, sometimes they lose their cool, sometimes one may want to throw a big book at them, and sometimes they make a mistake. Big fucking deal. There are other users here who are still around, despite being Class A jackasses. There's nothing here but hate and jealousy. If I had fired everyone I didn't like, I would have been pretty alone in the office. Speedy close this shit. P.S.: pardon my french. (c&p to same BS on JCB deadmin req.) --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 03:03, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep I was neutral about this before, but I no longer mind Yann remaining as admin. This user has never been rude to me. Nicer attitude than Jcb IMO. If Yann still will have administrator rights and Jcb is acting wrong, Yann can block Jcb. Yann is alright to me. --VKras (talk) 11:35, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep This is some nonsense. I don't get how a conflict between two users, who happen to be admins, led to two de-adminship requests. Commons needs admins and these two do a lot of work. --jdx Re: 13:08, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep --Zyephyrus (talk) 18:15, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep I trust Yann as an admin. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 20:39, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep. I trust Yann and respect his work. I don't see de-adminship solving anything here.--BRP ever 11:07, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep Despite Jcb, I had positive interaction with Yann, and he also restored properly some files mistakenly deleted by some other (bad) administrators. So definitely he is one to trust, and a very precious admin of Commons. --Sailko (talk) 19:01, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep--UltimoGrimm (talk) 16:55, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep C'est un contributeur que je ne connais pas vraiment pourtant il est francophone. Mais je n'ai pas cette mentalité discutable (qu'ont beaucoup trop de Wikimédiens) qui consiste à retenir de son travail ce qui serait le 1 % négatif et lui faire perdre ses outils d'administrateur alors qu'il effectue un boulot qui casserait les pieds à beaucoup de monde. Un autre trait Wikimédien est de croire que les erreurs ne viennent toujours que d'une seule et unique personne, ce qui est faux. Jérémy-Günther-Heinz Jähnick (talk) 17:22, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep; as we shouldn't „throw out the child with the bath water“, as the saying goes, und deprive ourselves deliberately of two of our most active admins. But, the situation, leading to these de-adminship requests, especially the quarrels between Yann and Jcb, must not go on. (I know from own experience that having to deal over the years again and again with the same ignorance, carelessness and even lies wrt copyright/authorship, can be exhausting and possibly even make you bitter and diminish the AGF attitude towards other users, especially new ones, we should have.)
    IMO, both Yann and Jcb need to do some sincere and profound introspection or self-reflection about their own activity on Commons, the areas/activities they still enjoy and those perceived merely as burden, the attitude towards other users, including those considered as difficult, and then draw a personal conclusion where to engage (and where eventually not) in the future. As this requires to gain distance from Commons, I recommend them to take a break for at least 4-8 weeks (either voluntary or per a temporary „suspension“ w/o need for a new rfa). --Túrelio (talk) 19:20, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral The voting period is over, but for the record: I would have voted "keep" if Yann had apologized for his error to T Cells. It's still unclear why he didn't. I hope he will provide a satisfactory response to that, because no matter if you are friends or not, if you wrong someone you should set that straight. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 08:34, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • In the light of this request existing, Yann is there anything about your past pattern of actions and behaviour on this project that you would commit to changing? Thanks --Fæ (talk) 08:44, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • An example of bad behaviour when angry. Yann uploaded a green-tinted version of a famous old sepia photo of Ellen Terry and nominated it for FPC. The photo is brown, yet Yann insisted repeatedly it had a "pink stain" and that his green-tinted version was "desaturated". A green version of a famous sepia photo has no educational value so I sent it to DR. The deletion failed because the photo was in-use on Wikipedia -- Yann had put it there. Yann's response to the DR was hostile and intimidating and I was threatened on my talk page several times to stop (here, here, here, here, here) and then taken to AN/U. Yann's approach at AN/U was to make a series of personal attacks on my character. Bizarrely an edited version of my block log was brought up repeatedly even though on multiple occasions it was Yann who unblocked me for a "bad block" and once Jcb unblocked me "per Yann". Remember this is all just about a DR of a file, which is simply a request for the community to review. Examples of abuse I got:
"Nonsense! Colin, I advise you to stay away, and stop insults to me", "Are you trying to suppress evidence?", "you are distorting things to make your opinion looking right", "Do not try to teach anything when YOU made me angry. I don't have to prove anything to you, you are not my boss", "Could someone please close this nonsense by Colin", "you really need to stop all this nonsense, or it will finish very badly", "having written pure nonsense", "if you really want this "bad dream" to go away, please withdraw this deletion request", "I request a block for insult and harassment"
The AN/U was closed: "Discussion was opened as a way of intimidation (trying to force a user to revoke a DR) rather than to bring up a real user problem". In the end, Yann renamed his file to no longer wrongly claim it was a Getty/GoogleArtProject original, but rather a "desaturated" version, and then he overwrote it with a new version, without the green tint, merely black-and-white. So, the green-tinted photo got "deleted" after all and even French Wikipedia removed it. I think we will all find some similarity in the language used by Yann against me that he also used against Jcb when angry with him. If Yann wants to respond to my comments, I remind him this page is about him, not me, and I'm not the one being held to the standards expected of admins. -- Colin (talk) 09:02, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Bold from you, Colin, to come here to give lessons about being civilized and respectful to other members of the community Poco2 19:09, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Poco_a_poco, could you please keep your comments here about Yann. I've given a detailed account of horrendously bad admin behaviour, and rather than refute or reject or disagree with any points, you have instead simply made a personal attack against me. The irony of making a clear personal attack while at the same time claiming to be concerned about civility, is here for all our amusement. You have rather shamed yourself with this comment. -- Colin (talk) 20:45, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Hedwig in Washington: It's true that people may disagree and people make mistakes. In Dutch we say waar gehakt wordt vallen spaanders. (where there's chopping, bits of wood will fly around) But I'm not voting remove (or refraining from voting keep) because either of these two made mistakes. It's Yann inability to say "sorry" to T Cells and Jcb's overall inability to say "sorry" that leads me to that. An admin who can't say sorry shouldn't be an admin. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 05:12, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Answer by Yann

Hi, I am not only the oldest active administrator, but also one of the oldest active user. I am always open and ready for discussions and suggestions, even on the most difficult and sensitive issues, when they are initiated in peaceful and good faith manners. I always answer very quickly to questions about my actions, specially when they involve admin rights. I have readily and quickly reverted some of my admin actions when presented with logical or sensible arguments. My deletions are seldom contested in undeletion requests. In 15 years of active work on Wikimedia Commons, I have been one the most active admin for quite of a number years in a row (I didn't check the actual statistics, but I am quite confident on this). Despite this, this is the first time my admin right is put into serious question. My position on copyright issues has evolved a bit, trying to be on part with the consensus. I have had the highest responsibilities in Wikimedia projects (steward, checkuser on Commons, admin on a dozen different projects, etc.). So in short, my actions speak on my behalf. I trust the community as a whole to take the right decisions. As I already said in several places, I am quite busy in real life now and for several weeks at least, so I am sorry if I don't answer rapidly to questions. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:58, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Yann: What do you have to say about the issue T Cells brought up? - Alexis Jazz ping plz 09:05, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Please see my answer above. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:22, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Yann: I am disappoint. You could have refuted T Cells' overreaction while apologizing. Be the bigger man. This is an extremely bad time to use the word "bullshit" again, and it just might cost you your bit. If you had shown some reasonable response and understanding of what went wrong, I would have voted keep. But now, I can't really do that in good conscience. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 10:29, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The effect is showing already. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 17:13, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yann, if there's more to the story, it would help to provide that context. Otherwise this just looks like you made a mistake (saying "This was part of abusive deletion requests by T Cells" when the deletion request was actually by Incnis Mrsi). This seems like a very easy matter to fix, and it's confusing why you aren't. If there is something we are not seeing, a link would help. — Rhododendrites talk |  19:36, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Quote: I always answer very quickly to questions about my actions, specially when they involve admin rights.
@Yann: One of your "answers" involved calling me a vandal and implying that you'd block me after I questioned one of your actions. Please explain this personal attack; I for one would be very interested in reading your response. AshFriday (talk) 04:24, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Mediation

Racconish proposed to act a mediator between Jcb and me.

Contrary to what Jcb want us to believe, I have nothing personal against him (except possibly when he insults me as he recently did), but I consider that he is no longer able to assume the responsibilities of admin. The problems with Jcb do not date from yesterday, but from the time when he obtained these rights. Until recently, I thought he would be able to change with the help of the community. I was a supporter of Jcb several years ago because I thought that the problems were minor and temporary. Unfortunately the problems have gotten worse. It is clear today that he has neither the intention nor the ability to change.

Basically, at least 90% of files deleted by mistake are by Jcb. It is a major deficiency of Commons, and Jcb is 90% of the problem. In addition, it does not follow standard procedures (warn the user, respect the consensus, give a valid reason, etc.). The community must therefore take responsibility for Jcb's failures. So I declined Racconish's offer, as I don't think a mediation between Jcb and me is needed. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:45, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

False claim by Yann

Yann has been asked numerous time to either clarify or retract his false claim against me here. At least one user changed their "weak removed" to "remove" as a result of this. In my oppose comment citing Yann's false claim, he responded and described by comment has "bullshit". At least one user requested that Yann should remove the " bullshit" from their vocabulary. The user wrote in their edit summary: One level down. They should remove the word "bullshit" Yann has not remove this word till now. Also, he neither retract their false claim, apologize nor explain why he made that false calim against me. This request as been made by numerous people on this thread which Yann has ignored. Lieing or making false claim against our users is not only damaging to them, but also damaging to this project. This is a classical example of a behavior that drives away potential contributors especially people who are new to our community. I could live with this as a long term contributor but I do honestly feel that a behavior like this should not be tolerated from any user (talk less of an administrator). That Yann failed to understand the problem is worrisome and speaks volume of the judgemmet of this administrator and further confirm others concerns about this admin lack of respect for anyone including fellow admins. I trust our Bureacrat and I believe they won't be silent about this concerns as it appears that Yann already have confidence that he would retain his tool considering that many users has voted in support of him keeping the tool. As such they felt it's a good strategy to not respond to query about the false claim, apologize or retract it. If this request is going to be closed, at least this issue of false claim against another user should be addressed. It does appears that Colin has a similar experience with Yann. I am bringing this here for the community to address. Thank you. T CellsTalk 07:04, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators/Requests/Yann_(de-adminship)&oldid=368271835"