Wikibooks:Requests for permissions/AdRiley

+Rollbacker and Patroller

  • ( let's comment rather than vote!). Perfect example of someone who really should have these rights. Been here a long time, dealt with plenty of the "grunt" work (particularly naming conventions etc), deals with vandalism. I trust this user & I'd be happy to grant these rights within 24 hours if no one else does or objects. ( is this the sort of process?!) --Herby talk thyme 09:38, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[]
    I've been waiting for AdRiley (and others) to request the permissions too. What's the deal here? Have they all fallen off the Earth? I'm going to nominate a few more of the ones we know in a minute. Let's at least get them to say they'll use the tools before giving them too.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 14:52, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[]
    Done - I misunderstood what was happening here. AdRiley requested the rights; I though Herby got tired of waiting (like me!) and did the nom. Well, this one's obvious, so I'm doing it now.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 15:04, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[]

+Administrator

The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Done - All supporting over one week. -withinfocus 23:34, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[]
I've removed redundant permissions because I'm neurotic :)  — Mike.lifeguard | talk 00:09, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[]

Following the implementation of the full book move tool [1]. I would like to request admin permissions in order to finish cleaning up the naming convention issues (something I have been working at for a while). I have been around here for a while now (I already have rollback and patroller permissions) and feel I have a good grasp of wikibook policies to not misuse these tools. --AdRiley (talk) 11:17, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[]

  • Support AdRiley has been an active patroller for quite a long time and does good work here. I fully support giving him the tools. --Jomegat (talk) 13:30, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[]
  • Support --Webaware talk 14:37, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[]
  • Support looking through the contributions you have made AdRiley i would concur with Jomegat Barry (talk) 14:47, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[]
  • Absolutely! I've suggested this at least once before, as have others, so it's great to finally see this name up on RFP. AdRiley has done tons of behind-the-scenes maintenance work, especially with naming, and has given excellent input on VFDs and other project spaces. Rollback and patroller have been well-used. He's shown the ability and need, and I certainly trust him with the extra buttons.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 18:31, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[]
  • Support Very active, always patrolling pages. Red4tribe (talk) 18:42, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[]
  • Comment I think your request suggests that Wikibooks shouldn't expect much from giving the tools to you in the long run due to your goal being narrow and short term; that you won't require use of the tools after your goal is complete. Is this true? Is this what the community can expect? If this is case, I don't think you really want the admin tools, which means you don't really need the tools either. Perhaps instead this feature should be made available to patrollers too. --darklama 12:52, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[]
    • Comment Sorry I did not mean to imply that I only wanted the tools for a short term project. I intend to be around here for a good while and make full use of the tools to better wikibooks. Granted my immediate goal is to sort out the naming convention issues (and has been for a good while), but once I have cleared those down I intend to move on to other maintenace projects. Requesting admin tools has been something I have been considering for a while. Twice I have witnessed live mass vandalism and been unable to do anything but revert until an admin has turned up. The extra page move abilities has just given me the push to finally nominate myself. Of course if the community (or indeed myself) feel I am not making use of the tools at any point I will be happy to turn them in. --AdRiley (talk) 13:22, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[]
  • Support and strongly. Someone who has contributed much to the project in a quiet & competent way. I'm delighted to see this & I definitely trust this user, thanks for helping --Herby talk thyme 10:46, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[]
  • Support - absolutely. --SB_Johnny | PA! 11:34, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[]
  • Support - Obviously a good wikibookian. He's helpful and active, and those are qualities that we always need in larger supply. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 14:30, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[]
  • Support, He's been a good cleanup man for quite some time, and will make good use of the tools I'm sure. Mattb112885 (talk to me) 15:31, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[]
  • Support --Panic (talk) 23:02, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[]
  • Support - When I first started using Wikibooks, I wondered why AdRiley was not an administrator. A dedicated user who knows his way around. Definitely support. Νεοπτόλεμος ( talk | email | contribs ) 01:45, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[]

-Administrator

I am no longer anywhere as near as active here as I once was and a result no longer require these tools. If I have need of them again in the future then I will re-apply as necessary. --AdRiley (talk) 09:53, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[]

I would like to thank you for the work you've done here, and I look forward to your return. The sooner, the better! --Jomegat (talk) 14:53, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[]
I don't know whether it's ever happened here, but on lots of other wikis, when a sysop in good standing (as AdRiley certainly is) resigns or has their tools removed while on break, they can simply be given back upon request by a bureaucrat. Would the community feel comfortable with that, of shall we require an RFA (which, I think, would be sure to pass)? You can request removal of your own tools at m:SRP & the stewards will handle it. Thanks indeed for all your hard work & I hope you will return in time.  — Mike.lifeguard | talk 15:02, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[]
I've made the request for him at Meta.  — Mike.lifeguard | talk 20:58, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[]
I don't see why should the request be made different from the normal process. Making it public to the community will not harm anyone, and will reduce any type of errors by keeping it transparent. We should consider also that for security reasons removing or expediting the process could be dangerous, at least as dangerous as letting admins+ keep the flags in the first place. --Panic (talk) 21:55, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[]
We all have noticed your efforts from welcoming new users, fighting vandalism to the great work done fixing incorrectly named pages. Thanks for all the work and time you have given to the project. --Panic (talk) 21:55, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[]
Done, thanks for the work You did, best regards, --birdy (:> )=| 07:46, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[]
This article is issued from Wikibooks. The text is available under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 unless otherwise noted. Additional terms may apply for the media files.