Wikisource:Administrators

Current administrators

Administrators are given access for one year per the Restricted access policy. Regular votes are held to confirm each user's status. Other languages indicate the areas in which the administrators might be able to converse with outside project members, or help provide public domain translations.

Username	Other languages	Confirmation	Other access
AdamBMorgan	German (basic), Polish (learning)	2011-12
Angr	German (fluent), French (intermediate)	2012-01
Billinghurst		2011-03	CheckUser
BirgitteSB	Spanish (intermediate)	2011-04	bureaucrat
Bookofjude		2011-12
Charles Matthews	French (intermediate), Russian (basic)	2011-09
Cirt	Spanish (basic)	2011-08
Cygnis insignis		2011-10
Dmitrismirnov	Russian	2011-11
Eliyak	Hebrew (intermediate)	2011-09
Geo Swan		2011-09
George Orwell III		2011-07
GrafZahl	German, French (basic), Latin (basic)	2011-05
Hesperian		2011-04
Inductiveload	French (basic), German (intermediate)	2011-05
Jack Merridew		2011-08
John Vandenberg		2011-01	CheckUser
Jeepday		2011-12
Jusjih	Mandarin, traditional and simplified Chinese, French (basic)	2011-01	WMF steward
Kathleen.wright5		2011-11
LarryGilbert	Esperanto (basic), Spanish (read-only)	2011-01
Mattwj2002		2011-09
Maximillion Pegasus		2011-07
Pathoschild	French	2011-06	WMF steward, CheckUser
Phe	French	2011-08
Prosfilaes	Esperanto (basic)	2011-09
Psychless		2011-11
ResidentScholar	French (intermediate)	2011-05
Sanbeg		2011-06	developer
Spangineer	Spanish (advanced)	2011-03
Tarmstro99		2011-02
ThomasV	French	2011-03	developer
Wild Wolf		2011-06
Xxagile	Spanish (basic)	2011-03
Yann	French, Hindi (intermediate)	2011-01
Zyephyrus	French, Latin, Ancient Greek	2012-01
Zhaladshar	German (basic), Latin (basic)	2011-01	bureaucrat

Confirmation discussions

Restricted access depends on the continued support of the community. This may be tested by a vote of confidence, in which a simple majority (50%+1) must support the user's continued access for it to be retained. (What access a discussion concerns should be explicitly noted in the discussion's introduction.) Any user may propose a vote of confidence, but at least three established users must support the need for one before it can be called. Such a proposal is made automatically one year after the last scheduled or called proposal (concerning all restricted access).

In the case of an unscheduled (called) proposal, the user may not use the restricted access for any non-trivial action at any time until the vote is closed. A bureaucrat will eventually archive the discussion and, if so decided, request removal of restricted access by a steward.
 —Restricted access policy

John Vandenberg

Administrator since 2 November 2007 and checkuser since 15 April 2008 (see previous discussions), currently active (contributions · logs · count · crossactivity). John Vandenberg will be reconfirmed automatically unless at least three established users oppose, which will trigger a vote of confidence with decision by simple majority.

• Support. -- George Orwell III (talk) 20:55, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
• Support. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:58, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
• Support as admin, oppose as checkuser. I'm feeling quite resentful of what I perceive to be John treating Wikisource as a rehabilitation centre for users who have made themselves unwelcome elsewhere. I don't have all the facts and I guess I never will, but it seems like every time we receive such a user, it is because John has invited them to try their luck over here, to use this project to prove to the other projects that they can be a useful and unproblematic contributor. Jack Merridew was a success on this account, but I also think the massive dramafest of the last few days should be marked down as an inevitable consequence of John's policy. I'd like to strike a blow against his ability to pursue this policy in future, and I think denying him checkuser would do that. At the very least, consider this a protest vote. Aside from this one issue, John still enjoys my respect and trust, so I continue to support him as administrator. Hesperian 00:41, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose all aspects - Though I still respect him and consider him as a friend as I always did, I do not think he made appropriate moves for this community. Consensus should be king, and that requires community discussion. Ottava Rima (talk) 01:21, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

  For reference, Ottava has filed a request for comment about this wiki's 'adminstration problems', which includes John Vandenberg. —Pathoschild 02:30:50, 03 January 2011 (UTC)

• Support I understand Hesperian concern and do feel that some users should be like-totally-banninated by slamming two hemispheres of plutonium together at the point where their head is (was;). Nothing to do with CU, however. fwiw, I'm trying to rehabilitate User:Gabi Hernandez, here; she's indef'd on en:wp; there's no maliciousness in her, just a bit of mildly disruptive behavior that need moving away from. Sincerely, Jack Merridew 06:56, 3 January 2011 (UTC) <Gabi, you need to get cracking;>

• Question for John. After reading your comments on Meta, I wonder if it would be for the best if you voluntarily returned the Checkuser permissions and let someone with more time assist the Community with the task. As you know, in order to handle complex cases such as PL/Cato a checkuser needs to have adequate time to do follow up. Have you considered returning the Checkuser tool? Later if you have more time then the community can do a RFCU and reconfirm your permission. FloNight♥♥♥♥ 12:52, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

  Not answering John's question, it has me thinking though about a process to manage any extended leave of absence. Would whatever process that the stewards use for (extended) absence be something that could/should be considered for CU, as long as the minimum no. of CUs can be maintained? — billinghurst sDrewth 15:30, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

  The steward inactivity policy is at m:Stewards policy#Inactivity. —Pathoschild 16:50:23, 03 January 2011 (UTC)

  Also relevant to Billinghurst's comment is m:CheckUser_policy#Removal_of_access: it appears that current policy is that the CU flag is removed after one year of complete inactivity. —Spangineer (háblame) 17:38, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

• Support. Both as administrator and CU. --Zyephyrus (talk) 15:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
• Support. --Eliyak T·C 16:10, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
• Comment: I have not done my fair share of the CU work here, and have not been a very active member of this community for the last two years. In recognition of that, and the fact the next 12 months will likely be similar, and in recognition of the Hesperian's protest vote above (which I have quibbles with, but accept the thrust of it), I'm requesting that my checkuser status be removed, with resumption only possible via a community election. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 22:33, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Jusjih

Administrator since 18 September 2005 (see previous discussions), currently active (contributions · logs · count · crossactivity). Jusjih will be reconfirmed automatically unless at least three established users oppose, which will trigger a vote of confidence with decision by simple majority.

• Support. -- George Orwell III (talk) 20:55, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
• Support. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:58, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
• Support Hesperian 00:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
• Support. --Eliyak T·C 01:17, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
• Support. --Zyephyrus (talk) 15:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

LarryGilbert

Administrator since 05 January 2010 (see previous discussions), currently active (contributions · logs · count · crossactivity). LarryGilbert will be reconfirmed automatically unless at least three established users oppose, which will trigger a vote of confidence with decision by simple majority.

• Support. -- George Orwell III (talk) 20:56, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
• Support. Though it would be nice to see a little more of him. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:58, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
• Support Hesperian 00:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
• Support. --Zyephyrus (talk) 15:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Yann

Administrator since 15 September 2005 (see previous discussions), currently active (contributions · logs · count · crossactivity). Yann will be reconfirmed automatically unless at least three established users oppose, which will trigger a vote of confidence with decision by simple majority.

• Support. -- George Orwell III (talk) 20:56, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
• Support. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:58, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
• Support Hesperian 00:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
• Support. --Eliyak T·C 01:17, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
• Support, obviously. Sincerely, Jack Merridew 06:56, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
• Support. --Zyephyrus (talk) 15:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Zhaladshar

Administrator since 30 April 2005 and bureaucrat since 12 September 2006 (see previous discussions), currently active (contributions · logs · count · crossactivity). Zhaladshar will be reconfirmed automatically unless at least three established users oppose, which will trigger a vote of confidence with decision by simple majority.

• Support. -- George Orwell III (talk) 20:56, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
• Support. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:58, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
• Support. Our two crats are doing a great job. Hesperian 00:43, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
• Support. --Eliyak T·C 01:17, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
• Support, obviously. Sincerely, Jack Merridew 06:56, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
• Support. --Zyephyrus (talk) 15:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Nominations for adminship

Older nominations are archived.