Wikipedia:Administrators/Archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Archived requests

Administrator / Bureaucrat / Checkuser / Oversighter
Rollbacker
Patroller
Importer

Successful

User Date Tally Comment
Cprompt 10 January 2004 N/A successful adminship
SimonMayer and Mero 19 March 2004 N/A successful adminship
Tango 16 April 2004 3/0 successful adminship
Netoholic 9 October 2004 N/A successful adminship
Netoholic 22 July 2005 4/0 successful bureaucratship
Ricky81682 22 July 2005 5/0 successful adminship
aflm 7 January 2006 2/0 successful adminship
Blockinblox 8 February 2006 4/0 successful adminship
Freshstart 13 March 2006 5/1 successful adminship
Archer7 14 March 2006 7/0 successful adminship
Eptalon 16 November 2006 12/0 successful adminship
Billz 29 August 2006 11/2 successful adminship
Tangotango 8 October 2006 13/0 successful adminship
Tdxiang 31 October 2006 14/2 successful adminship
Archer7 12 November 2006 12/0 successful bureaucratship
Blockinblox 12 November 2006 13/0 successful bureaucratship
PullToOpen 13 November 2006 11/0 successful adminship
TBC 23 November 2006 11/0 successful adminship
PullToOpen 25 November 2006 11/0 successful adminship

Not promoted

User Date Tally Comment
Darrien 8 May 2004 N/A Not promoted
Sverdrup 16 June 2004 0/2 Not promoted
Turcottem 11 March 2005 1/2 Not promoted
Marknew 9 April 2005 0/2 Not promoted
Postdlf 2 May 2005 N/A Not promoted
Ricky81682 14 May 2005 N/A Not promoted
Thorpe 13 June 2005 N/A Not promoted
Phroziac 12 August 2005 1/3 Not promoted
NickGorton 13 August 2005 1/3 Not promoted
Lucky 6.9 11 September 2005 N/A Not promoted
Y0u 11 October 2005 1/1 Not promoted
LBMixPro 3 December 2005 0/1 Not promoted
Hailey C. Shannon 14 December 2005 1/0 Not promoted
Aranda56 24 December 2005 0/2 Not promoted
Kbrooks 5 February 2006 0/2 Not promoted
Eptalon 14 March 2006 0/2 Not promoted
Keitei 4 April 2006 0/4 Not promoted
Deon555 27 May 2006 0/5 Not promoted
Sarahgal 28 May 2006 1/2 Not promoted
Freshstart (bureaucratship) 29 May 2006 0/2 Withdrawn
Archer7 (bureaucratship) 29 May 2006 1/2 Withdrawn
Psy guy 28 June 2006 4/2 Not promoted
Ionius Mundus 24 August 2006 4/4 Not promoted
ForestH2 20 September 2006 6/3 Closed due to sockpuppetry
Vector (bureaucratship) 12 November 2006 1/3 Withdrawn
Netoholic (bureaucratchip & adminship) 12 November 2006 1/8 Crat Rights & 4/5 Admin Rights Did not regain rights
Sir James Paul 5 December 2006 0/5 Not promoted
Sir James Paul 6 December 2006 0/2 Not promoted
J Di 6 December 2006 2/11 Not promoted

Inactivity

Cprompt, Menchi, Mero, Optim, Tango

Several adminstrator accounts have been inactive for a very long time. These pose a danger to the wiki because someone may try to guess their password. It can also be confusing for people when they want to seek help from an administrator for more immediate help. I (or any future bureaucrat) will likely have no problem re-instating sysop access if they return and ask. Here is a list I propose for removal.

Please leave your comments below. -- Netoholic @ 18:33, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

  • We should block them. They can unblock themselves. Otherwise, if the consequences are dire, desysopping is necessary. Email them first, if possible.-- Tdxiang @ 10:46, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • No, blocking them really wouldn't accomplish much because in the event their pw was compromised, the hacker would have the exact same ability to unblock himself. However, I feel the danger posed by this eventuality is infinitessimally small; and as I have pointed out, if someone was going to play 'guess the password' they might go for the bur., active or no. Since all passwords are unique and have billions and billions of alphanumeric permutations, it is too improbable to bother defending against IMO. Blockinblox 13:04, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • I agree with the conception of sysophood as kept on meta.wiki... Sysop-hood is not a lifetime status. Get it if you need it. Keep it if people trust you. Quit it if you do not need it. Lose it if people feel they cannot trust you. Should these people return back to simple.wiki, they can easily re-apply and get admin status back. It is sort of confusing and sometimes can be misleading saying "there are nn administrators", while more than a half can not be seen... I propose that they are de-sysoped, if there is a consensus, but I absolutely do not see any reason for blocking their account. --M7 20:42, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Isn't de-sysopping a little mean without letting them know? Besides, may they are on a very long wiki-break or something. My decision is to just leave them alone. --§ Alastor Moody (T + C) 03:09, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
    • What we are concerned about is that hackers might abuse these powers, creating problems for us.-- Tdxiang @ 03:11, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry I've been inactive for years, I might come back, but no promises. I am active on en and my email address is up-to-date, so if there are any problems requiring prompt admin action (I came here because I saw such a request on meta), feel free to email me or contact me on my en user page and I'd be happy to help out. I'll put a note to that effect next to my name in the list of inactive admins above. If you want to de-sysop me, I won't object, but I don't think you need to. --Tango 13:32, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

  • I think maybe we should remove User:Tango out of the de-sysop list since he apologizied and provided a way to contact him so no worries. --§ Alastor Moody (T + C) 01:44, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't come here too often simply because I'm busy. I guess you could de-sysop me if you think it's necessary. My email address still works, so I can still help out here in other ways. --Mero 10:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

  • I think there is not much harm that can be done by these inactive people keeping their admin status; provided they have chosen a decent (hard to guess) password for their account. On the other hand, seeing that they are mostly inactive, I think it would make sense to "demote" them to regular users. When they come back, and start editing again, their admin privs can be restored. --- Eptalon 11:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
  • I don't think there's much harm on the Simple English Wikipedia, which has few edits and only a very small number of administrators. The effect would be larger on the English Wikipedia, where there are thousands of edits a day and over a thousand admins - a single compromised admin account could wreck a lot of annoying damage without anybody noticing. Here, we tend to know what happens if we check New changes. In short, I don't think five inactive admin accounts are worth worrying about. - Tangotango (talk) 14:45, 5 November 2006 (UTC)