Wikibooks:Requests for permissions/PokestarFan

+Reviewer
Having "Reviewer" would make fighting multiple accounts of vandalism on a page much easier. Also, it is just something that would make my life (and admin's lives) easier. 17:04, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Looking at your Special:Contributions, I suspect you'll be auto-promoted in a few days. My best guess is, the criterion the software is waiting on is 8 edits spaced 2 or more days apart.  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 18:27, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
 * How do I do that without waiting 24 days? Then I cannot fight vandals.

19:31, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
 * My impression was that today probably marked edit number 7 of 8. So, if I'm reckoning it rightly, if you keep editing you should meet the 8-edit requirement in two or three days from now.  (Alas, the software doesn't provide a way to simply ask it which criteria a given user doesn't satisfy; so it's possible I've misjudged and there's some other reason; but that's my guess.)  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 19:44, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

+Administrator
I want to help a lot on Wikibooks. I fight a lot of vandalism, I review pages, and I (sometimes) help move book categories. I would like to be able to enhance my ability of doing such tasks with admin privileges. 03:12, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * 1)  Too soon: apparently your four months of activity doesn't reveal a good knowledge of our policies, and I have some reasons to question your reliability. On the one hand you are very active and friendly, on the second hand a part of your account contributions comes from the bot AWB, apparently in automatic mode judging by the two errors I had cancelled this week: [//en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=AWK&diff=prev&oldid=3249828 -] and [//en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=A_Quick_Introduction_to_Unix&diff=prev&oldid=3248591 w:], several hours after. And it could have been worse in the protected templates or the MediaWiki namespace. And this was in spite of my request to use your bot account for these actions: in addition to the attention it requires and the watchlist pollution, the fact to use a non-approved automatic bot is punishable on the most part of the wikis I know.  JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 08:04, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * 2)  Pretty similar to the above:  I figure you're enthusiastic, I'm glad you're on the project, and you're not yet ready for admin.  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 19:25, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * 3) oppose per above. --Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 21:57, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

+Uploader
I cannot upload to Commons (blocked) and want to upload media. 01:14, 11 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Why are you blocked on Commons? (Seems pertinent here under the circumstances.)  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 01:18, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
 * (Copied from the block log)Treating Commons as a playground. User is incompetent. Not on enwikibooks. I tried asking for an unblock, that went bad. 01:24, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Since it's come up, I feel I should ask a bit further, so not to leave this on an ambiguous note. (Sorry if my questions become a bit awkward; I'm seeking clarity of understanding, not meaning to give you a hard time.  You seem to me to be trying quite sincerely on Wikibooks, misjudging some things here and there but, in the large, learning over time.)  What does "treating Commons as a playground" mean, in this case?  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 01:42, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I do not even know. Very vague. 01:46, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I think we &mdash; and you &mdash; need to tread carefully, here. Your Commons talk page mentions the possibility of a global ban against you, which would also prevent you from editing Wikibooks; and in fact such an action has been formally proposed (whether the formal proposal follows correct procedure for such things, I do not know).  So when you say you don't know what that was about, I've looked some more.  Here is what I see there, fwiw:
 * The block was in March.
 * You requested unblock in April, which was turned down on grounds that (1) you'd been getting in trouble on various wikis for years so more than the words of a promise would be needed for credibility, and (2) your stated reason appeared to be stuff on Wikibooks that violated Wikibooks policy (which, as I recall, was the eventual consensus of the RFD discussion for that book, too). The declining admin on that request also noted an example of using a project as a playground: "seem[ing] largely interested in playing with signatures and user space decoration/formatting".
 * You requested unblock again in June, with a reason related to Wikidata spam. That time, in turning down the request, the admin said that (1) a Commons block wouldn't matter to removing Wikidata spam; (2) in order to be unblocked you would have to show that you understood why you had been blocked in the first place, and show a "genuine commitment" to not doing that anymore; and (3) if you kept requesting unblock without satisfying those requirements, you would lose your user talk privs.
 * You requested unblock again at the end of July. The admin noted that on the same day you made the request, you were blocked on Wikidata for the same thing you'd been blocked for on Commons.  The request was judged not credible, and therefore, as described in the June decision, your talk privs were revoked.
 * A strange epilog to these events is that, five days after talk privs were revoked, an IP pinged that admin on your user talk page to point out that they had started a global ban proposal against you (I'll remark on that further down).
 * Here are some observations about this situation, that I feel you should consider carefully.
 * You say here, if I'm understanding you rightly, that you do not understand the reason for the block in the first place; yet you promised not to do it again. I don't see how you could have confidence in your ability to keep that promise, if you didn't understand what you were promising not to do.  If you didn't understand why the block was applied in the first place, you should not have promised not to do it again.  Perhaps you could have politely and deferentially asked for help in understanding what the problem was.  If you didn't know how to ask, or thought the question would be resented, the best thing to do would be leave it alone for the moment, until such time as you might come up with a plan that seemed more workable.
 * You were told not to reapply for unblocking without a credible effort to do certain things, and you reapplied really without, so it appears, trying to do those things. If you weren't sure how to do those things, you should not have reapplied yet.
 * The second thing in the original reason for blocking, harshly worded, was "incompetence". That's a pretty nasty word choice, but it does seem that you repeatedly failed to understand things that you were told, and either didn't realize that you didn't understand, or possibly tried to bluff your way through without understanding.
 * I would like to understand more specifically just what you would like to do with upload privs here on Wikibooks, noting that it seems your request for Commons unblock in April was to upload stuff for a wikibook that, I recall, no longer exists. If you would be likely to get yourself in trouble using local upload privs, then the best thing we could do for you right now would be to decline your request for the privs. I've examined the global ban proposal, and it seems quite strange to me.  It appears to be undertaken entirely by anonymous IPs, with so far no registered users participating (except for one edit by a registered user who removed a bunch of unexplained names of registered users).  I have no experience with such proceedings myself, but this really does seem odd; I'm keeping an eye on it now, and am considering whether to inquire of someone more experienced about the seeming oddity of it.  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 03:55, 11 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Seems like these IPs have been monitoring my actions. But ips cannot make an entire rfc. You need user input. 04:11, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I see the irregularity of it has attracted admin attention there. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 08:39, 11 August 2017 (UTC)


 * he was banned on Simple English wiki for using bots. Check his talk page archive. An Admin banned him from "welcoming users". also, look at his userpage on enwiki. Sockpuppetry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.172.143.180 (discuss • contribs) 12:34, 14 August 2017
 * I wasn't aware that he used bots on simple... He was blocked for violating topic bans. --George (Talk &middot; Contribs &middot; CentralAuth &middot; Log) 12:38, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
 * , you might want to look at d:Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/PokestarFanBot 5 and the first 4. Also, a thread on his talk page (from 2 weeks ago titled "stop your quickstatement runs") shows that an admin wrote an edit filter just to stop him from using automated tools (prevent him from making ridiculous amounts of edits at one time). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.172.143.180 (discuss • contribs) 12:46, 14 August 2017
 * I am aware of their questionable use of semi-automated tools on Wikidata, and his subsequent indefinite block following extensive community discussion. However, you were saying that they misused bots on simplewiki, and were blocked for that reason, that just isn't true. --George (Talk &middot; Contribs &middot; CentralAuth &middot; Log) 13:19, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
 * There is, of course, a strong tradition of not holding a user's troubles on one project against them on another project; PokestarFan isn't on trial here. The Commons block did seem to me relevant for this request since that project is specifically concerned with the sort of things this request bears on, and that block evidently led to this request.  Imho we now have more than enough context.  I've observed that the global-ban proposal promulgated against PokestarFan by two IPs (including the above) feels more like trolling than a serious proposal; let us please not get off-topic here.  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 19:32, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


 * It seems PokestarFan has a tendency to get in trouble by acting too quickly, without fully thinking things through. Enthusiasm is a double-edged sword.  My inclination atm &mdash; but I'm not fully settled in my mind, yet &mdash; is that we should decline the request at this time, letting PokestarFan demonstrate improving control of such impulses regarding, for example, bot use.  However,  I would still like to hear your account of what, specifically, you would use the uploader priv for.  (I asked earlier but somehow it got lost in the clutter.)  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 19:32, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I was going to update PDF versions of books. 19:38, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Meanwhile if you write a book I could upload it for you on Commons. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 23:32, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Today your bot has used your user account again with several mistakes. For example you've broken two functional redirections [//en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=A-level_Computing/AQA/Problem_Solving,_Programming,_Operating_Systems,_Databases_and_Networking/Programming_Concepts/Queues&diff=prev&oldid=3279460 here] and [//en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=Programming%3AMySQL&type=revision&diff=3279466&oldid=3278554 here] by asking the administrators to speedy delete more than 800 pages, without any [//en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=Physics_with_Calculus/Introduction/Textbook&diff=3279474&oldid=3263288 linked page consideration], and you've [//en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JackBot&diff=3278551&oldid=3278550 trigged my bot stop again]. So I don't want to imagine what it could do with the uploader right, especially when your only justification is the impossibility to upload on Commons (but upload what?). JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 10:40, 20 August 2017 (UTC)