Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Tamzin/Bureaucrat chat: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
→Discussion: added comment |
|||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
*:Thanks for opening the crat chat, Maxim. Looking at it now... [[User:28bytes|28bytes]] ([[User talk:28bytes|talk]]) 03:07, 2 May 2022 (UTC) |
*:Thanks for opening the crat chat, Maxim. Looking at it now... [[User:28bytes|28bytes]] ([[User talk:28bytes|talk]]) 03:07, 2 May 2022 (UTC) |
||
*Preemptive apologies to Tamzin, since it is already quite late in the evening in the US, I won't be able to read through the RFA contents in its entirety until after work tomorrow. [[User:Useight|Useight]] ([[User talk:Useight|talk]]) 03:25, 2 May 2022 (UTC) |
*Preemptive apologies to Tamzin, since it is already quite late in the evening in the US, I won't be able to read through the RFA contents in its entirety until after work tomorrow. [[User:Useight|Useight]] ([[User talk:Useight|talk]]) 03:25, 2 May 2022 (UTC) |
||
* I read through the RFA enough to understand the situation. I do not believe there is a consensus. The considerable opposition is rooted in [[WP:NPOV]] and other foundational principles, and resonates with the consensus conclusions from the 2006 userbox wars. The change in voting patterns after [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Tamzin&diff=1085133697&oldid=1085133188 Hammersoft's oppose] is stark, and I cannot believe for a minute that this RFA would enjoy 75.3% support if the facts brought to light in Hammersoft's oppose had been available for consideration from the beginning of the RFA. The [[Wikipedia:Bureaucrats|bureaucrats]] are not bots; to proceed with promotion on the technical grounds that 75.3% is outside the range now considered discretionary would imply that we can be replaced with a very small shell script. I would like to thank {{u|Maxim}} for opening the chat and {{u|Useight}} for bringing it to my attention. '''[[User:UninvitedCompany|<span style="color:green">Uninvited</span>]][[User_talk:UninvitedCompany|Company]]''' 04:02, 2 May 2022 (UTC) |
|||
== Recusals == |
== Recusals == |
Revision as of 04:02, 2 May 2022
![]() | This page contains a bureaucrat discussion about the result of Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Tamzin and is only for comments by bureaucrats. All other editors are welcome to comment on the talk page. |
Discussion
- Initiating discussion; I am still assessing the RfA. For those who care about numbers: the strict math puts the RfA at 75.3%, which is within the discretionary range if rounding to the whole percentage point, and slightly outside if we round to the one-tenth. I feel a crat chat is worthwhile given not only the closeness but also the volume (>450 editors opined) and the acrimoniousness of the discussion. It is the kind of RfA that is better closed collectively than leaving one of us to do it alone. Maxim(talk) 02:37, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for opening the crat chat, Maxim. Looking at it now... 28bytes (talk) 03:07, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- Preemptive apologies to Tamzin, since it is already quite late in the evening in the US, I won't be able to read through the RFA contents in its entirety until after work tomorrow. Useight (talk) 03:25, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- I read through the RFA enough to understand the situation. I do not believe there is a consensus. The considerable opposition is rooted in WP:NPOV and other foundational principles, and resonates with the consensus conclusions from the 2006 userbox wars. The change in voting patterns after Hammersoft's oppose is stark, and I cannot believe for a minute that this RFA would enjoy 75.3% support if the facts brought to light in Hammersoft's oppose had been available for consideration from the beginning of the RFA. The bureaucrats are not bots; to proceed with promotion on the technical grounds that 75.3% is outside the range now considered discretionary would imply that we can be replaced with a very small shell script. I would like to thank Maxim for opening the chat and Useight for bringing it to my attention. UninvitedCompany 04:02, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Recusals
- Bowing out of this one, for the reasons I noted within Tamzin's candidacy itself and because I supported. Acalamari 03:20, 2 May 2022 (UTC)