Commons:Administrators/Requests/Didym

Support = 17; Oppose = 1; Neutral = 0 - 94% Result. Successful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:50, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bureaucrat note: The editor in question has changed their username from User:Aa1bb2cc3dd4ee5 to User:Didym towards the beginning of their RfA. russavia (talk) 21:39, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Aa1bb2cc3dd4ee5 now User:Didym

Vote

Aa1bb2cc3dd4ee5 (talk · contributions (views) · deleted user contributions · recent activity (talk · project · deletion requests) · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth)

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

Scheduled to end: 00:00, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Deutsch: Nach 1,5 Jahren regelmäßiger Aktivität und ca. 10 000 Bearbeitungen lokal (ausserdem ähnliche vielen Bearbeitungen auf dewiki), hauptsächlich in den Bereichen Dateiumbenennung, Dateikategorisierung und Transfer aus der deutschsprachigen Wikipedia möchte ich mich als Adminkandidat zur Wahl stellen. Die erweiterten Rechte würde ich vor allem zur Löschung von Duplikaten und Urheberrechtsverletzungen einsetzen, gelegentlich auch zur Abarbeitung von Löschanträgen, wobei ich mich vorerst auf offensichtliche Fälle beschränken würde.

English: After 1.5 years of activity (not counting the more or less inactive year before) with about 10 000 edits here on the Commons (additionally approximately the same on dewiki), mainly in the areas of renaming files, categorizing files and transferring files from dewiki, I want to stand by as a candidate for adminship. I would mainly use the expanded rights to delete duplicates and copyvios or to close obvious DRs.

Aa1bb2cc3dd4ee5 (talk) 00:00, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

~~{{oppose}} The user with this name should not be an administrator. Please rename first, then I would be willing to look at your contributions.--Ymblanter (talk) 02:34, 25 December 2012 (UTC)~~ Now Support, do not see any problems.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:32, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Tbh I agree with Ymblanter, but on the other hand you do a great job. A Weak support and the advice to rename your username if possible. Trijnstel_talk 13:10, 25 December 2012 (UTC)~~[reply]
- Since your account is renamed, I now changed my vote to a full support. Trijnstel_talk 23:33, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose An administrator should always be a example to everybody else, especially when it comes to fulfill our policies. Your username does not comply with them but that does not seem to bother to you. It is an aptitude issue and you are already failing here. Sorry. Poco a poco (talk) 13:31, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As 3 users consider my username unsuitable, I think it's a good idea to rename my account. I will do this the next days. (When I registered my account on dewiki, this name was not considered a problem, but I agree, it's not really suitable for an admin.) --Aa1bb2cc3dd4ee5 (talk) 13:45, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I checked your contributions and they look good. Still, as said, having to be others (or this process) that moves you to require a rename of your username, is a reason for me to oppose. As said I expect that an admin serves to the community as a guide to others. And finally, due to the fact that my vote seems to be nothing or little worth, it shouldn't be a problem to keep it, wich also forces me not to participate in any other RfAs in the future. I will focus on non-crucial stuff, as I usually do. BTW, it would be good if you add a link to your archived threads on your user talk page, unexperienced users will not find them. Poco a poco (talk) 20:52, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you sincerely believe that your !vote is of little significance, then I suggest you strike it. The user has already promised to submit a rename request following the conclusion of this RfA, so your concerns have already been addressed. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:56, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Your doing hard work so far, but a rename is required to recognize you. I'm gladly to be happy to review your contributions after you have finished your rename. --cyrfaw (talk) 14:00, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support You're doing a great job, and your username is pretty easy to remember; I would prefer you stay with the username you have, it's kind of a trademark of yours. odder (talk) 18:13, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Have looked over the contributions and I don't see anything problematic from what I could see. russavia (talk) 21:35, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Trustworthy and experienced candidate. We could definitely use some help dealing with the large backlog of duplicates. INeverCry 21:42, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Why not? -FASTILY ^(TALK) 03:13, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sreejith K (talk) 14:47, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wagino 20100516 (talk) 19:42, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support, do not see any problems. --Cekli829 10:46, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Steinsplitter (talk) 12:38, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rzuwig^► 17:21, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support NNW (talk) 14:25, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Seems to be a trustworthy editor, although I would strongly advise you to rename your user name in accordance with Commons's username policy. TBr and ley 04:03, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Morning ☼ (talk) 16:08, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:40, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Udufruduhu (talk) 16:39, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Comment Ymblanter, please be advised that as a bureaucrat, if the RfA was dependant on the numbers, although I regard RfA's as being based on consensus, I would place little to no weight on the above oppose because it is not based on the editors contributions, etc. So please consider this. russavia (talk) 10:28, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is fine, but I can not support a user with a name which can not be pronounced (consequently memorized etc). I was yesterday blocked - by whom? Eh?--Ymblanter (talk) 10:48, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Moot point, I suppose, but you would really have trouble remembering a user with an abc/123 naming sequence? It's actually easier to remember than most usernames around here (and is probably on a "don't use this as your password" list somewhere). – Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 22:45, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This situation is covered by Commons:Username policy, which specifically mentions the problem of confusing usernames. This is a proposed policy, so it is still a matter of reaching a consensus by discussion and common sense to resolve a subjective issue. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 12:09, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If the success of this RfA depends on my username, it's no big problem to rename my account. But I think my username should also be no problem. --Aa1bb2cc3dd4ee5 (talk) 12:17, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So far I am the only one who voted and, yes, for me this is an issue.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:18, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I should note though that I have no problem when an ordinary user has this name, but I think for an administrator it is not acceptable. Same way as sometimes users require RFA candidates to create a user page, to opt-in to a monthly user counter, or to amend a signature.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:18, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Info I requested to rename my account. So the username should be no problem now. --Aa1bb2cc3dd4ee5 (talk) 17:16, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Renamed completed russavia (talk) 19:50, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Now that your username has been changed, please create a SUL account--Morning ☼ (talk) 14:53, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I will do this when the rename is completed on all projects. --Didym (talk) 23:53, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done --Didym (talk) 21:24, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]