Commons:Administrators/Requests/Zyephyrus

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 Support = 17;  Oppose = 12;  Neutral = 5 – 59%. Result: Unsuccessful. odder (talk) 12:51, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Zyephyrus

Vote

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

Scheduled to end: 12:21, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • en -- Hi beloved Commonists. If you give me administrator's tools again, these tools that I have lost because not enough vandalisms and mistakes occurred in the djvu files to permit me to delete 5 of them these last six months (but there were few mistakes and few vandalisms because I did have the tools to check and I did check them and vandals knew that...), if you give these tools to me again, I will be able to go on. I'm a sysop and a bureaucrat on French and mutilingual wikisource, a sysop on English wikisource, a contributor in several other wikisources and wikipedias (125,000 contribs if I add them all); I have worked particularly on books and libraries, and can be useful there. Thanks whatever you decide.
  • fr -- Bonjour, bien chers Commonistes. Si vous voulez me redonner les outils que je n'ai plus, parce que des vandalismes et des erreurs, il y en a eu moins de 5 sur ces six derniers mois (tout s'est bien passé, ce qui est justement dû à la disponibilité de ces outils et non à leur non-utilisation...), si vous me redonnez ces outils, cela devrait permettre de continuer de la même façon, car on a pu constater sur les wikis dont je m'occupe que je peux, si besoin, m'en servir : admin et bureaucrate sur la wikisource francophone et la wikisource internationale, admin sur la wikisource anglophone, je totalise plus de 125 000 contributions en incluant les autres wikisources et les wikipédias où j'ai participé (livres, collaboration avec les librairies et les autres publications numériques.) Merci de votre bienveillance et de votre aide. --Zyephyrus (talk) 21:01, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

I do have to ask too, just what is the fascination with activity and inactivity, edit count and big fancy numbers - if someone comes here in good faith offering to help, when it's quite clear they have the skill and knowledge needed to help without a particularly high risk of incidents, and in this case, previously had the support of this very community, we should not be rejecting them with absurd and insulting "come back in a couple of months. Big chance I will support you" or "Only about 2100 contributions on Commons". The bureaucracy and pointlessness of such comments is unfathomable - just support them now and save the trouble of another RfA in 2 months time. And as for "we have the inactivity policy for a reason" nobody has yet been able to explain what that reason actually is. It's clearly not to promote activity amongst administrators given we've lost 200+ to inactivity in the time since Commons was started. It's definitely not to prevent people who aren't all that up to date from returning and making a complete mess of things, since we let administrators who retire regain their permissions without any issue or incident at all, some almost four years later. The inactivity policy has become a mechanism to automatically throw away knowledge and experience built up over years of contributing to various projects - we've lost now some 200+ administrators to inactivity, that isn't good for the community. It's firmly my belief that not promoting Zyephyrus would be a mistake, just as losing each and every other administrator who became inactive was a mistake.
And Zyephyrus, in future, if you're not active, do remember to game the system, retire in advance and then roll up at COM:BN a month later to request your permissions back, that's very popular. Nick (talk) 16:44, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
To game the system? You are joking? --Steinsplitter (talk) 16:50, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly not. It's being done fairly regularly, we have around 10 admins at the moment who retired and then returned and are currently active, a further 10 who retired, returned and retired again, 7 who retired, returned and were stripped for inactivity, and around 10 depending on how you look at it, who resigned after the inactivity sweeps started. The policy and the way it's dealt with is a complete farce, sorry. Nick (talk) 16:59, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Taking a (short) break is imho okay, but Zyephyrus failed to made 5 log actions since the start of the last inactivity review... --Steinsplitter (talk) 17:03, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody has been able to explain why that's such a problem, let alone one serious enough to oppose his RfA over. We want to retain editors, we want to prevent burn out, but we punish editors working elsewhere or having a break (it's quite clear that Zyephyrus was working elsewhere within the WMF community during the last few months) by stripping them of powers we, the community need them to hold and then being pedantic as hell when they ask for them back. It's still not written down that you can retire and return, requesting your rights be restored at any point, despite me asking for almost three months for this to be added to both the inactivity policy and the inactivity notice sent to admins. Nick (talk) 17:12, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I understand, WMF wants to keep access to deleted material at the lowest possible level. Also, with every "elevated account" the risk that third parties get access such an account raises statistically. So, all in all, I think our de-sysop policy is okay; at de:, for example you have to be re-elected periodically or after getting some voices demanding that - showing that you still have the community's trust. Not too bad, if you ask me. It is always nice to get some feedback, isn't it? But I believe that the Commons-model is sufficient for Commons. Otherwise we would have a lot more paper work. If you want your rights back, why don't you simply start a RfA? Really, if you are active you just have to point to your former RfA, list that sheet and that's it. Not a lot of work, really. The issue here is that a) Zyephyrus was quite inactive while requesting the rights back and b) Zyephyrus notified their homewiki before making Commons users aware of the RfA. If you, on the other hand, want to change one of these rarely-touched policies, you may start a Village Pump discussion or list a watchlist message. Both of this will require a lot of interaction from your side to address concerns users will raise during the discussion. -- Rillke(q?) 21:22, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Rillke: which is something that Wikisource does on an annual basis for each administrator and which Zyephyrus has done repeatedly (s:en:Wikisource:Administrators/Archives/Zyephyrus) since 2008 at mulWS I didn't check.. Specifically Zyephyrus addresses in this RfA the Wikisource-focus component of his request, which the community seems to wish to ignore. There is complexity and timing issues required and having rights at both places.  — billinghurst sDrewth 08:26, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Agreed, and canvassed votes submitted before 23 February may not be given equal weight. If any of the early supports wish to renew their vote, it would help if they could justify their support with a rationale. --99of9 (talk) 01:53, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • fr -- Je pense que vous avez tout à fait raison, je suis loin de faire tout ce que font d'autres administrateurs et je ne pourrais d'ailleurs pas les égaler même si j'essayais. De leur côté ils ne pourraient pas non plus avoir lu tous les livres que j'ai lus  ; le problème me paraît être celui des outils : faut-il enlever ses outils à celui qui sait faire des chemises, en lui reprochant de ne pas savoir faire de chaussures ? Est-ce que cette formulation vous paraît convenir au problème ? (I will translate that very soon).. --Zyephyrus (talk) 12:00, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • en -- I do think you're right, I'm far from achieving as many actions as the ones achieved by other admins, nor could I even if trying; all of them couldn't have read all the books I have read either; the problem seems to me to be a problem of tools: are the tools to be retrieved to a maker of shirts because shoes are not made? Do you agree with such a formulation? --Zyephyrus (talk) 09:14, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am disappointed to see COMMONS only dimensional view of this request. No known issues with previous administration efforts, and only lost rights due to not meeting a designated quota (by one measly admin edit). This user supports Wikisource matters, and is disparaged as you (the voters) don't view this in the holistic sense of the needs of the sister wikis. We don't sit in isolation people!  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:37, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • As a point of interest. The 25th August was the date of the notice to admins, and they are given 6 months to make 5 admin actions. The person signed the sheet, so why were the rights requested to be removed on 14th February, when the nominee had 11 more days available to make the quota for admin actions?  — billinghurst sDrewth 15:11, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@INeverCry: Tu ne perçois pas pour l'instant à quoi sert le fait que j'aie les outils./For the time being you don't perceive the wikisorcerer usage of the tools.

Explications/Explanations



Le Lion dans sa tête avait une entreprise.
Il tint conseil de guerre, envoya ses Prévôts ;
      Fit avertir les animaux :
Tous furent du dessein ; chacun selon sa guise.
      L’Éléphant devait sur son dos
      Porter l’attirail nécessaire,
      Et combattre à son ordinaire :
      L’Ours s’apprêter pour les assauts :
Le Renard ménager de secrètes pratiques :
Et le Singe amuser l’ennemi par ses tours.
Renvoyez, dit quelqu’un, les Ânes qui sont lourds ;
Et les Lièvres sujets à des terreurs paniques.
Point du tout, dit le Roi, je les veux employer.
Notre troupe sans eux ne serait pas complète.
L’Âne effraiera les gens nous servant de trompette ;
Et le Lièvre pourra nous servir de courrier.


[Translation:


The lion had an enterprise in hand;
Held a war-council, sent his provost-marshal,
And gave the animals a call impartial—
Each, in his way, to serve his high command.
The elephant should carry on his back
The tools of war, the mighty public pack,
And fight in elephantine way and form;
The bear should hold himself prepared to storm;
The fox all secret stratagems should fix;
The monkey should amuse the foe by tricks.
'Dismiss,' said one, 'the blockhead asses,
And hares, too cowardly and fleet.'
'No,' said the king; 'I use all classes;
Without their aid my force were incomplete.
The ass shall be our trumpeter, to scare
Our enemy. And then the nimble hare
Our royal bulletins shall homeward bear.']


Source



Affichage d'octobre 2006, copié ici après un premier dépôt par une IP, et déjà beaucoup d'heures de travail.



Même texte en février 2010, le mode Page permettant la vérification sur le site-même, en face d'une source immédiatement accessible. Un clic sur le bouton « Texte modernisé » dans les options d'affichage peut si on le désire moderniser l'orthographe. (Voyez ici.) L'ajout en qualité correcte de l'illustration reste ici à faire.



[Translation: Compare this text on fr.wikisource from 2005 to 2014; now it is easy to check with an accessible scan. The illustration needs still some more work to be added.]





Outils/Tools


Construire Wikisource n'était pas mon but.

[To build Wikisource has not been my goal.]

Certes travailler avec ceux qui créaient, au fur et à mesure des nécessités qui se présentaient, les outils qui allaient servir à transmettre des textes non déformés, a été une expérience merveilleuse qui a représenté à elle seule pour moi la plus belle des récompenses ; mais cette récompense n'était pas mon but.

[To work with all these people who were building and are still building these fabulous tools to transmit exact texts, to work with these people has been a wonderful experience for me, and still is its own wonderful reward. But this reward was not my goal.]

Le but était de transmettre des textes non déformés.

[The goal was to transmit exact texts.]

Ceux qui croient que c'est facile et que cela se fait tout seul ne peuvent absolument pas juger de mon travail.

[People who think this to be easy can't have any idea of what my work consists of.]

Ceux qui y ont travaillé peuvent en juger beaucoup mieux.

[Those who did work on these tasks can understand more.]

Ceux qui ont travaillé avant que les outils de Wikisource soient construits ou pendant la période (qui dure encore aujourd'hui) où ces outils se construisent, peuvent en juger encore mieux.

[Those who worked on these tasks with tools not built yet, can understand still better.]

Les Wikisourciens et les Commonistes qui me soutiennent le font non par affection (j'espère qu'ils m'aiment bien mais cela n'a rien à voir), mais tout simplement parce qu'ils ont des raisons de penser que ces outils sont utiles à la transmission de textes fiables, que cette transmission est le but de notre travail, ce sur quoi la Wikimedia Foundation nous juge, ce sur quoi le public nous juge, ce sur quoi j'imagine que nos arrière petits enfants nous jugeront un jour, ce sur quoi, pour ce que j'en avais cru comprendre, Commons est supposée nous aider et nous soutenir de son mieux.

[Wikisorcerers and Commonists who support me do that not because they love me (I hope they do but it is not the reason) they support me for a simple reason, the usefulness of these tools to transmit exact texts. This is the goal of our work , this is what will be judged by the Wikimedia Foundation, by our readers, by our grand-grand-children, and we expect this to be Commons' goal too: we ought to be helped and supported on Commons too as best they can.]

C'est la raison pour laquelle je redemande les outils.

[This is why I request the tools to be restored.]

Les tâtonnements et les erreurs doivent pouvoir être effacés rapidement et corrigés rapidement par des wikisourciens expérimentés, et comme nous montons en puissance et que les textes se créent de plus en plus vite, grâce à un travail qui pour être spécialisé n'en est pas moins énorme, exiger des explications complexes à chaque demande d'outils n'est pas approprié.

[Mistakes must be deleted easily by experienced and trusted contributors; as we are growing faster and faster, the work to do is enormous, tools are needed, not only on Wikisource but on Commons too, without having to take time to explain complicated things to authorities who ought to take a lot of their own time if they wished to follow what Wikisorcerers do, authorities who cannot have that time. Sorry if this translation is far from perfect: it was a difficult one.]




Ce que j'ai fait cette semain/What I've done this week

Texte déposé par un contributeur anonyme en avril 2013

Recherche des sources qui vont permettre de mettre les œuvres d'Hippocrate sur Wikisource.

Cela a représenté plusieurs heures de mon travail, comparaison de l'état des scans, de l'existence ou non de sources textes, de l'intelligibilité de la traduction, tout cela demande à la fois une bonne culture concernant la série de livres dont on a choisi de s'occuper, (je ne saurais pas aussi bien choisir des livres dont s'occupent d'autres wikisourciens dont je souhaite qu'on ne les décourage pas non plus), une bonne culture wiki, un minimum de talents d'animateur, beaucoup d'autres savoir-faire lentement et péniblement acquis, bien que dans une ambiance merveilleuse, il faut être juste :) et il nous faut aussi la compréhension, l'aide et le soutien de Commons ; je voulais mettre en lumière que mon inactivité apparente n'est pas vraiment de l'inactivité, je ne sais si j'aurai réussi à le faire comprendre.

Yesterday I looked for and found the best sources and compared them. On en.wikisource, you can see here how much I have worked on English books: all the Ns indicate books I have created: of course I have created the corresponding files on Commons too. This is the reason why tools were given to me, and I've not been inactive. Is it unclear? 

--Zyephyrus (talk) 17:55, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



INeverCry, I've answered this question in the first sentence I've written on this page. --Zyephyrus (talk) 10:12, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Canvassing

Zyephyrus has asked people to vote diff. This is unacceptable behavior. --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:57, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As I see it, he publicized this application for adminship on the VP of the project that would be the main beneficiary of this election, ie. Wikisource. The translation of the message is "If you want to support my re-election as admin on Commons, you can do it there, in french or in english". I might be wrong, but it seems to me that other applicants have done the same kind of thing on mailing-list or on chapters'wiki, quite recently if I recall correctly. Pleclown (talk) 16:07, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Steinsplitter: Well, he was desysopped 11 days too early. That is not unacceptable! Yann (talk) 23:04, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Zyephyrus was informed on 25th August 2013 that they were in danger of losing their admin rights due to inactivity and had 6 months to make 5 admin actions, 6 months would take them to 25th February 2014 (i.e today). 180 days takes them to 21st February 2014. They were desysopped between 7 and 11 days too early according to the notice on their talk page. However, Steinsplitter and Odder inform me that the measurement was made over 173 days as the previous inactivity sweep was made late. It also appears that if the 180 days was extended back from the 13th February, Zyephyrus wouldn't have the required 5 admin actions (although as he isn't an admin, I can't use the tool to check). I know I'm not impartial but given Zyephyrus is here asking for their tools back, and given there's been some sort of error somewhere, the fairest thing to do is to restore his admin permissions. If he's not going to be active, he will be automatically stripped of them at the next couple of inactivity sweeps. Nick (talk) 00:12, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Je ne parle pas un mot d'anglais, mais je crois comprendre que ce qu'on reproche à Zyephyrus c'est d'avoir appelé à le soutenir dans cette re-candidature sur le scriptorium de wikisource. Comme wikisource à besoin de ses services, je considère que la communauté wikisource francophone doit en être avertie. Je ne comprends rien au règles de Commons, seulement si les gens investis sur des projets frères se trouvent sans droit ici, ça va être coton pour résoudre des problèmes liés à ceux-ci quand on n'est pas adepte du monolinguisme english qui règne ici. Si j'avais le droit de vote, j'aurais évidemment voté pour la reconduction des droits de Zyephyrus. Si vous voulez me répondre merci de le faire uniquement en français. Cordialement, --Le ciel est par dessus le toit (talk) 15:52, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[Translation: I don't speak English at all but understand this: Zyephyrus is reprehended because of their asking for support of a Commons application on Wikisources scriptorium: Wikisource is in need of Zyephyrus' serving, so I think the Wikisource community must be informed. I don't understand anything of Commons regulations, but if people who have given themselves to sister projects have no rights here, it will be "coton" (=very difficult) to solve problems specifically linked to their projects, if they are not followers of the English monolinguism that reigns here. If I had the right to vote, of course I'd have voted for Zyephyrus' rights renewed. If you wish to answer me please do it only in French. Regards.]
I hope this makes sense. Communes est pour les utilisateurs de tous les projets Wikimedia, de sorte que vous avez le droit de voter. Il peut porter un peu moins de poids, mais il sera pris en compte.Nick (talk) 18:24, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[Translation: Commons is for the users of all Wikimedia projects, so you are entitled to vote. Your vote may have less weight but it will be taken into account.]
Thank you Nick pour l'information, ton français est quand même très bon.--Le ciel est par dessus le toit (talk) 19:22, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators/Requests/Zyephyrus&oldid=117845648"