|This page in a nutshell: Administrator review is an informal voluntary process where admins may invite community input regarding their administrative activities.|
|Request an administrator review|
|Instructions on creating an administrator review page:
Replace USERNAME with your username.
(Add a space followed by the number of the review if previous exist)
Open review requests
Scheduled to end 11:06, 6 May 2016 (UTC) or earlier.
I am running in this year's Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election, and I feel that my conduct as an administrator (which I have been for the last six years), but more importantly as an editor and as a Wikimedian, merits review by the wider Wikimedia community. I personally feel that the administrator review process will help bring more accountability to the election, ensuring that the Wikimedia community elects someone to the Board of Trustees who they know can stand the scrutiny of the microscope, and I welcome any and all feedback that would be offered to me by the community. --Sky Harbor (talk) 11:06, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
- Sky Harbor Sorry to see that your candidacy did not result in a placement on the Board of Trustees. According to your edit analysis, you have a fairly light presence on the English Wikipedia with very few edits outside of the article space. In terms of administrative actions, only about a dozen or so deletions per year, mostly inside your own user space or technical deletions to make way for a new page. In reviewing your block/unblock log, there are only two entries. A single block of an IP in 2012, and then an unlock of an editor in March 2015. The unblock request appeared both sincere and met all the criteria recommended for an unblock request. You checked with the blocking administrator and there was a consensus for an unblock. I would have made the same decision. I see recently you created a number of accounts for a Wikipedia Education Program seminar. Other than that, not seeing any actions in terms of page protections, user rights, revdel, and so forth. Overall I would say that your administrative actions have been few and far between in relation to the time you've spent on Wikipedia, but I see no signs of anything that would be a cause for concern. All the best, Mkdwtalk 21:14, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Scheduled to end 23:25, 3 October 2016 (UTC) or earlier.
It's been six months (and change) since my RFA and I've done well over 400 admin actions (not counting unlogged ones like declining reports, etc., which would probably push the total above 500 or even 600). I know that's not very many, but content writing is a lot more enjoyable. I haven't seen any angry complaints on my talk page about my admin work, so I'm assuming I haven't pissed to many people off, but I'm submitting this review just to be safe. Tell me what you think... --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 23:25, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
- "I haven't seen any angry complaints on my talk page about my admin work", well, one reason for that is because you do far more content creation than admin work. Not a bad thing though. sst✈discuss 09:21, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
- Invariably it's the admins who are least in need of an admin review that request it, and the ones most in need of it who don't. This one is another case in point. That aside, A+. LavaBaron (talk) 18:30, 13 February 2016 (UTC)