Logo Voyage

Wikivoyage:User rights nominations Voyage Tips and guide

You can check the original Wikivoyage article Here

If you believe a Wikivoyager – including yourself – should have administrative status or any other higher user right, then add that person's username to the nominations section below.

If nominated for permanent administrator, the Wikivoyager should meet the guidelines for becoming an administrator. Generally speaking, they should:

  • Have been a contributor for at least a few months
  • Have an extensive knowledge of our policies
  • Have a history of article contribution, janitorial work, cleaning up articles, contributing to policy discussions, and combating vandalism/spam
  • Have a demonstrated ability to work with the community

Nominations must include a short statement outlining the nominee's eligibility in terms of these requirements.

When responding to a nomination, most people choose to express their opinion with a bolded word or phrase, most often Support or Not yet, followed by an explanation of the opinion. After 14 days, a bureaucrat will close the discussion and, if there is a consensus that the nominee would make a good administrator, grant the administrator flag using Special:UserRights.

Bureaucrats and interface admins should also be nominated here.

Users running for interface administrator must also confirm that they have 2FA enabled before they are promoted as per WMF policy. If this is not done, the request will be closed as unsuccessful.

Temporary permissions

Most requests on this page will go for 14 days and all will have a nomination period of 14 days, with the exception of temporary permissions, which may be granted no earlier than 7 days after the nomination was made if there are no outstanding questions or objections. An objection or question raised on the sixth day would automatically keep the nomination open (without temporary permission) for the full 14 days unless the matter was resolved before then. The nomination would always be open for 14 days so in some cases editors could comment after they have seen a couple of days of use of the temporary permission.

Nominations

[edit]

User:Wauteurz (extension of temporary Interface Adminship)

[edit]

Hello all. Half a year ago I expressed hope that Vector 2022 would be better fit for us by now. Judging by the update log of the skin, however, nothing significant has changed. I assume that Vector 2022 as it sits now is the long-term version we'll keep, but I do also still have a couple of changes to our Main Page templates in the pipeline that should make Wikivoyage's landing page's appearance to new and non-signed in readers more appealing (namely tweaking Mapbanner and the JCaroussel). Implementing those, assuming they get a solid consensus, would be helped by retaining this role. Currently, my Interface Admin role expires on June 10th, and I'd like to have that extended by another half year to ensure that nothing breaks, and to further improve Wikivoyage's appearance in the skin.

Please chime in with your opinion below. I'm of course available for questions if needed :)
― Wauteurz (talk) 14:23, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ikan Kekek: after a unanimous vote six months ago, Wauteurz was granted temporary Interface Adminship. No complaints were made about their use of these powers. Is there any need to waut 14 data on this, or can we make this an immediate renewal, which would ve cancelled if there were any objection, which there won't be? Ground Zero (talk) 19:00, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As their rights won't expire in these 14 days (actually 7, for temporary with no objections), there is no difference between waiting and renewing conditionally. If we are to revert the renewal in case of objections, there is no point in not waiting. On Swedish Wikipedia, most admin rights renewals (the term is one year only) end 30-0, 30-1 or so, but we feel it is important to keep this renewal procedure. Making exceptions may lead to not making an exception feeling as a statement – better keep to the rules with no drama. –LPfi (talk) 19:16, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No objection from me. I don't know if we have any rules about votes for extensions of permissions, but it seems like because we already agreed the user in question is trustworthy, it should be unnecessary to be as rigorous as when making the initial decision. I see LPfi's point, though. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:21, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed; though I think we can extend this such that it will be another 6 months from when Wauteurz's perms expire, not when this nomination closes. //shb (t | c | m) 23:41, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's logical. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:58, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See also

[edit]

Discover


Powered by GetYourGuide