Inkipedia:Requests for Rights/Archives/Exaskliri (4)

I want to be re-promoted to admin. I got promoted to admin before, but relinquished it due to inactivity. Slate asked me to post a RfR for "paper trail purposes." — Exaskliri _(they/them) (talk | contribs) 03:49, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Support

1. Easy support! :] FancyRat 05:30, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
2. Absolutely! Always need editors, especially detail oriented ones! WaferCaken (talk) 07:13, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
3. support has talent and was previously an administrator! Florescent/Lorie 07:17, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
4. Why not? Olivia (talk) 07:30, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
5. A former admin. Exa has made many great contributions, and I recall that they always paid excellent attention to detail. I pretty much disagree with the oppose votes; I believe there is no need for someone who has already attained admin rights in the past to prove themselves *again* by making a high quantity of great edits *again*, as they have already done so in the past, and I believe there is nothing wrong with taking a break in the form of a voluntary demotion. Heddy (talk) 18:09, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
6. P.J. GT(talk) 18:42, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1. I'm afraid your previous instance of relinquishing admin rights seemingly due to becoming too busy for the wiki doesn't paint a great picture. Staff is free to take breaks from the wiki for as long as they need them; the choice to remove your own rights rather than announce you'll be taking a break is... odd. There's nothing wrong with needing breaks for any reason at all, but adding or removing staff position titles on a whim makes it seem like it's not being taken seriously. The edits you've been making lately do not seem like they'd be improved by access to higher rights. Furthermore, the attitudes towards editing you've displayed lately in public discussion are not "admin quality" so to speak. Yoshifan52 (talk) 02:55, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
2. I'm with Y52 on this one. I've had some concerns with some of the behaviors and editing patterns upon return, particularly with the lack of consultation/consensus for widescale changes such as the "deprecated template"; similar can be said for the tone, methods, and misplaced urgency in getting help with lua module creation. Y52 brings up my other point in a bit of a different way—What says you may not leave shortly after a re-promotion? How can I be certain of that? If you stick around longer to show a determined interest in the platforn again, I'd be much more willing to support a vote. — Trig - 03:22, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
3. Even if you were an admin before, you still need to prove that you are willing to take responsibility of the role again. In your request here you didn't list any specific reason for why you want to be an admin again, and if you will use these rights responsibly. Like what Yoshifan and Trig have mentioned above, I'm a bit wary of your recent edits. They haven't really been significant enough for admin rights so I'm gonna have to oppose. OrderSquid38 [Talk] 03:48, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Comments

• @OrderSquid38 What does the phrase "I'm a bit wary of your recent edits. They haven't really been significant enough for admin rights so I'm gonna have to oppose." mean? The user is reapplying for admin rights that they had before - does one have to make significant, heavy edits before reapplying for a position one had, and used responsibly? Sure, I understand people saying that expectations have not been made clear again, but opposition partially based off of recent edits that don't seem to have any problem with them is a bit odd. Please let me know if something was actually wrong with those edits, but I'm a bit perplexed.

Thanks, Xando (talk) 14:12, 2 February 2024 (UTC)