Wikibooks:Requests for permissions/Herbythyme

+Administrator

Herby hasn't been here all that long, but he's made a lot of contribs in many projects. He's also an RC patroller and has caught vandalism time and time again, so I think the block tool would be useful for him (as well as the delete tool for pagemove vandalism). He's also in Britain, and thus can help provide some "timezone coverage", since there's often a gap in administrator presence during the hours he's most active. --SB_Johnny | ^talk 15:38, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I really have given this considerable thought but in the end I find myself feeling like Panic and if I wouldn't vote for me why should anyone else so, with thanks and respect to my nominator, I will decline this for now. However while I hold the "talking stick" I would like to air a point. Wikibooks is a small but very pleasant Wiki and it needs to give some thought on how housekeeping may be maintained at a good level with scarce admin resources. Yesterday I came across a page that was solid spam, I blanked it and marked it for deletion. Now an admin with more than enough has had to review it and delete it - frankly I think that is daft under the circumstances. I would ask that a discussion on this continue elsewhere and I hope it does. With thanks for your time --Herby ^{talk thyme} 17:48, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose - To soon. --Panic 17:05, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
  • You want to wait until this user accepts or declines his nomination? --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 17:24, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Well lets say I oppose the nomination then. The ground for my vote will not change.--Panic 17:46, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose - Much, much too soon. This user has been here for less than two weeks. I find only a couple months of activity to be disturbing. I don't think anyone can grasp everything here at the project in that time no matter how much activity they have. Great job helping out, but I think some more trust needs to be established. I also don't think voting needs to wait for the nomination to be accepted. -withinfocus 22:13, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

+Administrator

OK enough, not solely based on today's vandal, but that is the straw etc - fairly reluctant self nom, not completely or it wouldn't be here. Why have my views changed - I'm getting irritated by having to ask others to finish off things that I could and would do myself. I've been involved with the majority of Vandalism in progress notifications since I've been here. I reckon I probably place around half the tags on new pages and would like to think I deal with half the vandalism. I take an interest in VfDs. So these would be the main areas I would use the tools if I had them. I would be rather prejudiced against vandals. The downside - I would have to be very sure what I was doing as someone else would not be taking responsibility for my suggestions.

I'd like to think I had contributed in some way to moving Wikibooks forward. It's too early - yes it is. However in my time here I've nudged somewhere over 3000 edits (all of which AFAIK have the edit summary completed) across most areas of Wikibooks. I guess a number of the current Admins, while longer serving, became admins with lower edit counts.

If I had the tools I guarantee I would request their withdrawal if I ceased to use them for a period of three months. I like this place and the people - over to you. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 09:04, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

Votes

• Support Herby is one of the most active vandal-fighters recently and I think giving him sysop rights would be profitable for the whole Wikibooks. --Derbeth ^talk 10:42, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Fully support -- as before :) --SB_Johnny | ^talk 10:50, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
• Not so sure As I am often opposed to self nominations. Mirtone @ 12:08, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

He was nominated before (by me), but declined. --SB_Johnny | ^talk 12:40, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Support I'm voting in favour as Herby is very active and also when he needs someone blocking or something sorting there's often no admin around to do the necessary work. Are ordinary users allowed to vote in these votes? Xania 12:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Of course! --SB_Johnny | ^talk 12:40, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

• Support There's nothing new that I can think of to say thats not already been said. --darklama 15:41, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
• Support I was about to nominate you actually. (then saw the archives) --Dragontamer 18:10, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
• Support - Decent amount of time here. -withinfocus 19:03, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
• Support. One thing that I typically say to all new sysop hopefulls is a warning against burning yourself out. What we need around here is genuine help, not a flash in the pan. I'm certainly not accusing you of any such thing, but you are very active, you have put up a large number of edits in a short time, and sometimes I worry that people who are so driven will get bored with performing the same repetitive tasks on our humble little wiki. We certainly dont have the hustle and bustle of WP (for better or for worse), and some people have commented that wikibooks becomes boring, or even accuse our project of being "stagnant". Also, I want to caution the rest of the wikibooks admins not to become too reliant on Herby, and we shouldn't neglect RC patrolling or vandal fighting just because "Herby has it taken care of". You certainly are a valuable resource to us, but it's all too easy to take you for granted. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 22:28, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

• Worth an answer I guess. Driven - we all are to a degree and no I won't keep up this rate - I hope. However the vandal bit I can almost do with my eyes closed tho admin tools will make it easier.

Would I go back to Wp - no, it really doesn't have the appeal that this Wiki has, I'll keep an eye on my watchlist there and I have accounts on a number of other wikis, however if I find I'm not around I will request revocation of rights very quickly

WB is certainly not boring, is it stagnant - well I have known fresher water but life is boring without challenges. There are some great editors on WB - the real question is why they are not here voting. I appreciate the support of you guys but is this real democracy? So my aim (other than to look under the carpet where the dirt has been swept) is to see if we can get some interest in the project as a whole rather than just individual books. I have some ideas, I will work on them and bring them to you. I will change things if I can. I will help where I can.

Yes you do take me for granted - so one of you (or more) close off the gaming VfDs. I know little about the subject (and probably the policies too) so I will not close them (& will not close them in the future either probably). Now you know that if I do think you are taking me for granted I will speak my mind (and about anything else too - but you knew that <g>).

So - if any of you want to change your minds it really will not worry me. Otherwise lets get on with improving Wikibooks for all. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 10:07, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

• Support --Swift 19:23, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Done. This user is now a sysop. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 02:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• Belated upport Better late than never I guess. I want to go on record saying that I support and trust this user to use the tools appropriately. --xixtas 04:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

+CheckUser

Please note Checkuser rights on this wiki are really sought for vandal fighting. It enables vandal fighter to see where a user logs in from (their IP address) and look at other edit activity/user creation activity from that IP. Due to the rules on the vote there must be 25 users in favour of these rights being granted so every votes really does count.

This addition to admin rights would enable me to take a more proactive approach to vandalism and my only interest in these rights is to help this fight. While I do not have the length of experience that some admins do much of it has been spent vandal fighting in order to help preserve the integrity of Wikibooks. I am an active admin who will block vandals without hesitation however all my actions are in the public view and I will respond with thought to anyone who wishes to question any action of mine. A minor issue is that I operate in a different timezone to others and this might help speed up vandal fighting if there were a spread of admins with these rights. As with my Admin nom I will request the removal of this tools should I be inactive for a period of three months as an admin. I request a checkuser check to be performed on my account as I feel it is important for someone seeking trust to be seen as being above board themselves. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 13:15, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

• Confirmation of checkuser status
  • Clean. --Derbeth ^talk 14:29, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

• Discussion
  • Comment. I do think it's a good idea to have more checkusers, especially since User:Derbeth and I haven't been nearly as active recently as we were when we were nominated for the permissions. As i've said before and I'll say again, I am generally against giving our active contributors more work to do around the project (I would much rather people were contributing!). However, the checkuser rights don't necessarily increase the workload, and it would actually reduce your need to constantly ask for checkuser checks on WB:VIP or our user talk pages. I'm going to vote for you, and I sincerely hope that other people do the same. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 13:57, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

• Votes

Support: I vote for Herby for his stance on enforcing policies. No mercy for spammer. Aburizal 13:18, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Support. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 13:57, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Support Herby gives me so many requests I cannot often handle. As a very active vandal fighter he should get these rights. --Derbeth ^talk 14:29, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Support: Good faith wikibookian, energetic vandal and spam fighter. --SB_Johnny | ^talk 10:48, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Support Every "me too" counts in this case. --xixtas 12:51, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Support: Hard-working wikibookian, we need more like this one and with powers necessary for fighting vandals. Webaware 13:25, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Support: Important tools which would allow Herby to better fight vandalism. Xania 14:24, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Support: $Herby=Wikibookian_{good}$ Jim Thomas 18:39, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Support -withinfocus 22:48, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Support --Az1568 04:33, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Support: Betsy 18:20, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Support: Pathfinders 18:45, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Support: I've seen Herby do some excellent work here, and have no doubt it will continue after he gets checkuser rights. Mattb112885 02:32, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Support -- Herby is definitely a trusted user here on Wikibooks, and I don't think checkuser rights are nearly as big of a deal as certain members of the WMF board of trustees make them out to be. Definitely add my vote of support, and I think we need more with checkuser rights as well. --Rob Horning 17:36, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Support Tommciver 09:04, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Object While I think Herby is a good guy and a good vandal fighter and the community could benifit from him having these tools, I'm concerned with him sometimes being quick to block and potential incress in users who may be prematurely blocked if allowed to checkuser. I believe Herby still needs to learn to be more cautious and refrain from blocking when hestitent rather then block now and ask questions later. --darklama 15:15, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

comment -- Actually, part of the advantage of checkuser is it allows us to see if an IP that a vandal has used is also being used by a good-faith contributor. To put it another way: when used correctly, it protects users from unintentional blocks by increasing our accuracy. --SB_Johnny | ^talk 15:19, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Support -- I had some of the same concerns as Darklama. But SB_Johnny brings up a good point that I can't really argue against. --Dragontamer 22:06, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Support --Panic 17:16, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Support -- While I've not had a huge amount of contact with Herby, what I've seen of him has been good. Chazz 08:40, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Support --Remi0o 08:42, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Support --AdRiley 09:32, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Support -- KristianMolhave 15:25, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Support strongly; friendly and helpful. Regards, Celestianpower 20:51, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Support -- Through his discussions with users and assumption of good faith Herby has displayed qualities deserving of such a right. --Herraotic 21:50, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Support: --I have watched some of the work he has done with pages I was working on. I appreciate his desire to protect what I view as a very good endeavor. Rodney 17:34, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Support. Ditto to Dragontamer since Darklama hasn't objected to Johnny's comment. --Swift 06:03, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

By my count, User:Herbythyme has received the necessary 25 votes to become a checkuser. I believe (and I may be wrong in this count) is that in a checkuser vote only 25 support votes are needed, and oppose votes are ignored. I may be wrong in this, in which case we may need to obtain additional votes, or participate in some additional level of discussion to account for the single vote cast in opposition above. I have made the request at meta that a steward come to look at this vote, and grants the permissions as requested pending the review. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 00:44, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

My sincere thanks to all who voted. I appear to have been granted Checkuser rights --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:37, 5 January 2007 (UTC)