Wikibooks:Requests for permissions/Artur Nowak

+Administrator
22:43, 12 November 2005 (UTC) Reason: I started a book about Reaktor, now (I'm glad about that) new people started to add content, but some just copy texts from Reaktor User Forum - this should not happen. I want to be able to delete these pages

Questions
 * You're contributing only to this book, you don't have any editions in Wikibooks namespace, you don't vote, we even don't know if you know current policies. You have just had 4-month break from Wikibooks - it's not ok for a sysop. Are you sure you need sysop rights? You can always insert delete if you want a page to be deleted. Apart from this, you don't need other user rights - as you are not willing to patrol recent changes. Am I right? --Derbeth talk 23:09, 12 November 2005 (UTC)


 * 1) No. For the reasons that derbeth described. you have, by my count, around 270 edits in the space of 1 year. Also, you seem to only contribute to a single book. Even though it is admirable that you would like to have more power to improve your book, it hardly seems reasonable to give sysop rights to every user with a pet project. This is not to say that edit counts or books influenced are the only metrics for determining sysop votes. However, you also arent very involved (at least not that i have seen) in policy discussions or votes, fighting vandalism, etc. If you do become more involved in the community, we will certainly have no problem voting to give you adminship. My advice is this: explore wikibooks, and see what all is here. Get involved in the policy discussions. See if you can add more to other books, on other bookshelves. If you prove that you understand and can execute policy throughout the entire site, you will have my vote. --Whiteknight T C E 03:15, 14 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment - Having a 4 month Wikibreak is just fine as a sysop. Do not let that be a reason to stop somebody from becomming an admin.  The willingness to expand beyond the single Wikibook, however, is a good reason to support becoming an admin.  The #1 reason I would see for becoming an admin that would be useful for a single project is to edit protected pages and to protect/unprotect those pages, presumably in concert with a larger group of users where you are taking on a leadership role and changing content on protected pages with community concensus of those working on that Wikibook.  In order for me to support this request for adminship, I need to see some more clear plan of what this user is going to try and accomplish with the additional options only available to an admin.  Marking pages with the    tag is sufficient for removing content.  You can even blank the page first except for this markup tag if you want to emphasis the point, and that is something an ordinary user can do without admin privileges.  There are now enough admins on Wikibooks to clean up the speedy delete category, although we could use some more help in general and I don't want to discourage anybody from trying to become an admin.  You also have to show some trustworthiness to prove that you won't vandalize other protected pages elsewhere on this project.  IMHO 270 edits is plenty sufficient to become an admin if the user is willing to take on the general responsibility associated with being an admin.  General project participation is beneficial to advocate becoming an admin, but it is not the sole criteria for acceptance.  --Rob Horning 17:50, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Votes


 * Oppose - Artur Nowak should read Deletion policy. This user has good intentions, and I might support adminship for this user in the future, but I think that this user should become more familiar with Wikibooks first. I hope that this user continues to improve Wikibooks by working at Reaktor or other books. --Kernigh 04:50, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Let us just finish this issue. --Derbeth talk 01:25, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose - I gave some reasons why this user might be permitted to become an admin, and that user has neglected to come up with a "mission statement" as to what they intend to use the admin authority to accomplish. In addition, the last edit was on November 12th, and doesn't appear to be active in the policy discussions, even partially with just voting and demonstrating knowledge of Wikibooks policy.  This is no prejudice against this user applying for adminship in the future, but at the moment I don't see him ready to take on the duties.  --Rob Horning 06:31, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Rejected in consensus. --Derbeth talk 22:55, 11 January 2006 (UTC)