Wiktionary:Requests for permissions/Archive 7

Requests for adminship

User:Nirmos

Hi. I am Nirmos. I would like to update JavaScript here. JavaScript pages are in the MediaWiki namespace. Only admins can edit in the MediaWiki namespace.

If this is not done, things will break in November.

I have done this at other projects. You can see which projects on my user page. --Nirmos (talk) 12:17, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support. --Brett (talk) 12:32, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Do you plan to stay around here and help out when you're finished, or are looking to take the flag for a temporary period. (I ask only because that's what we should tell the stewards at the end of all this.) StevenJ81 (talk) 20:36, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, StevenJ81. All projects need to be updated before November, so unfortunately I don't have time to stay around and help. When I'm done, I'll ask the Stewards on meta to remove my rights. Of course, if the community insists that I stay in case anyone might need technical help in the future, I don't mind, but I can't offer any help with the usual admin tasks like deleting or protecting pages, or blocking users. Nirmos (talk) 03:16, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi back to you, Nirmos. That's fine. Just wanted to know what your plans were. We certainly appreciate the help. StevenJ81 (talk) 03:49, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done.--Brett (talk) 12:49, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Pkbwcgs

I would like to become an admin on Simple English Wiktionary because I meet the Criteria for adminship. I have been actively participating at Wiktionary for a while, I understand the basic policies, I have a good understanding of the formatting structure, I always learn from my mistakes and make an effort to not make them again and I get on well with the users and contributors. I also made more than 250 edits here and I understand the basic policies. I also made more than twenty entries on the main space. Pkbwcgs (talk) 21:13, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support.--Brett (talk) 21:38, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hiàn (talk) 02:15, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Meeting the criteria for adminship is only a guideline. However, looking at the contributions that you have made to this wiki, a majority of them are just simple cleanup edits and you have created less than 20 entries manually (which disregards plural forms). It's a good start to understanding our policies and formatting structure, but I can't see if you are applying your understanding correctly. Please contribute more to this wiki first before asking for adminship again. Thanks! --Hydriz (talk) 08:24, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'd beg to differ. While his entry creation is low, he does manage to catch pages that require deletion; obviously, manually asking each time would be tedious. Hiàn (talk) 18:43, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Although it shouldn't influence my vote here and isn't in the criteria for adminship, the fact is that you are blocked on the Simple English Wikipedia (and were previously blocked on the regular English Wikipedia). Unless you can address that somehow, I'm not sure that you are trustworthy enough. J9 91 15:55, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hydriz, thanks for your reply but in what way am I not 'understanding policies and formatting structure'? Pkbwcgs (talk) 12:30, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

J991, I don't think that block is needed anymore. Especially, when I am behaving and contributing to other Wikis better. I have made a query on my talk page for unblock but there has been no problems. Pkbwcgs (talk) 18:56, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments. However, I still think another active administrator will be useful. Pkbwcgs (talk) 20:45, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Because you are now unblocked on simple wiki, I struck out my oppose vote. J9 91 17:05, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Closed for lack of consensus. Please, try again in the future.--Brett (talk) 19:34, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would still like to wait for three months if it is possible. Pkbwcgs (talk) 19:43, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you're going to become an administrator in three months' time if you don't start dealing with permissions requests more professionally. Your persistence to leave this request open is getting quite tiresome. J9 91 19:56, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I do deal with permission requests professionally. However, it can be frustrating when it closing, especially without a consensus. Pkbwcgs (talk) 20:03, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But sometimes requests are closed for that reason. We cannot promote unless there is clear general support from the community. J9 91 14:23, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I will apply again soon as there is a shortage of admins on Wiktionary. There is only one active administrator and one rarely-active administrator. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:53, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Pkbwcgs (2nd nomination)

We only have one active administrator on Wiktionary. I would like to become an administrator I have made more than 900 constructive edits on Wiktionary. I also get on well with other Wiktionary editors and I would like to help out. I am a trusted and experienced editor here. I definitely meet the criteria of adminship and I would like to help out here. Pkbwcgs (talk) 20:45, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support.--Brett (talk) 21:42, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support. hiàn 03:23, 9 February 2018 (UTC)NeutralAfter taking a look at your cross-wiki work, it certainly seems you have an issue with collecting hats. Trusted user, yes, but I cannot outright support a hat collector. Sorry. hiàn 04:34, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Pkbwcgs: Please set up an email for your account. hiàn 22:28, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@hiàn: I will later. However, is it possible to have it only for Simple English Wiktionary. I don't want email for Wikipedia. Pkbwcgs (talk) 22:37, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I will set email tomorrow. I just don't want email for any other Wikis except Simple English Wiktionary. Pkbwcgs (talk) 22:41, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ehehe~ I don't think that's possible, perhaps place an email on your user page? hiàn 04:29, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Hiàn: Done - I modified setting on Wikipedia to disable users from emailing me. I created an account that is different to all my other accounts as I don't want to give away my real name when sending emails. Pkbwcgs (talk) 08:41, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Hiàn: Can you elaborate on the claim of hat collection? --Hydriz (talk) 05:28, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@hiàn: I think you do mean [1]. It is not really an issue. If I want a right, I can ask for it. At the moment, I am a file mover and reviewer on Wikipedia, I am autopatrolled and a file mover on Commons, autopatrolled on English Wiktionary and autopatrolled and rollbacker here. I do use my rights regularly, I don‘t just keep them to show off. Pkbwcgs (talk) 07:26, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Brett: What do you think? Pkbwcgs (talk) 15:58, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not worried about autopatrolled, that's not supposed to have any effect on editing. I'm worried about your request for file mover on en.wiki, having done one move. Please see below comment for more info. hiàn 21:54, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Examples would be the file mover request on en.wiki, one of a few. It seemed that Pkbwcgs requested file mover on the basis of having the right on Commons, and I was thinking that they used the right on Commons to gain the right on en.wiki. If that was the case, I'm assuming this would continue on a larger scale with the sysop right. If there's anything else, then ask. hiàn 21:54, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@hiàn: That's wrong. See my edits today. The sysop tools would've been very useful to me as I reverted lots of vandalism. I could have just blocked those users and deleted the pages in the blink of an eye. Pkbwcgs (talk) 21:59, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just noting, you can use {{ping}} with a lowercase now, if it's more convenient.

Anyways, isn't it a bit fishy how our vandalism rate spiked recently? It might be me overreacting, but there have been cases where users used socks to vandalize, and revert using their main accounts in an attempt to increase their edit count or gain more flags. Either way, the recent vandalism is quite convenient for yourself, eh? hiàn 22:06, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@hiàn: Not at all. However, I think that the recent IP who was blocked for a week created another vandalism-only account and used it to vandalise. I still reported it to Brett and the users got blocked. The thing is, if I had the sysop tools, I would've deleted all the pages and blocked the users immediately. With only one active admin, it took one hour for the IP editor and the sock to be blocked. Still all the bad pages haven't been deleted yet. It is very important that there are more admins. I watch new changes very regularly. Pkbwcgs (talk) 08:59, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also, what do you mean by saying that the recent vandalism is "convenient" to myself. Pkbwcgs (talk) 09:00, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I made a claim against you, and immediately after, we get an IP vandalizing, allowing yourself to prove your point about the tools. I don't think the vandalism spike was accidental. hiàn 14:05, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@hiàn: So, what do you think about me getting the tools? Pkbwcgs (talk) 14:09, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm certain you'll do a fine job. hiàn 14:11, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That is good. Thanks for your comment. Pkbwcgs (talk) 14:13, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Brett: I think you can close this one now. Pkbwcgs (talk) 15:29, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Okay. Jianhui67^{talk★contribs} 07:32, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This user, although very active, appears to have many competence issues that need to be worked on before I would be comfortable supporting adminship. There's the claim of hat collecting, and the "suspicious" timing of the recent vandals, but my main problem is that this user constantly asks admins to do things that are not their business. Administrators will deal with things when they have the time to do them. J9 91 15:51, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@J991: Sometimes, things are urgent like dealing with major vandalism issues and disruptive users. With only one admin, urgent things can be a problem as they can't be done straight away. I can understand administrators are busy in real life. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:11, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Secondly, what is meant by 'suspicious timing of the recent vandals'? Also, I am not hat collecting. I am requesting to be a administrator because I will need these tools and they come in useful regularly. I regularly watch New Changes and if I don't have these tools, it will mean that I have keep asking administrators to do them and there is only one active administrator. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:15, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the top of the page, it says that adminship 'is not a big deal'. As for the suspicious vandals, I was referring to User:Hiàn above. Although the suspicious vandalism may be a coincidence, it's still probably wrong that someone suspected of socking should become an admin. J9 91 16:21, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also, sometimes global sysops deal with vandals if there are no local admins around. J9 91 16:21, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@J991: I am not socking! Why do you think I am socking? Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:24, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

At first I was mainly referring to User:Hiàn, but now I've got some new evidence. Firstly, nearly all the vandalism is happening when you are online. Secondly, all the vandalism is coming from UK IP addresses. Thirdly, on Simple English Wikipedia, you have edited a lot of articles about London trains, suggesting you are from the UK. I have a suspicion that you are logging out to vandalize which is socking, and will probably get your account blocked if proven. Unfortunately, there are no checkusers here. J9 91 16:34, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@J991: You can check but I am not socking and I am absolutely confident about this. You can contact a CheckUser to do a check but I know that I am definitely not socking. If you want, I can tell the number my IP address starts with. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:40, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@J991: Both IPs are from the UK, I just done a check. However, they are not related to me. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:43, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't really request a check over on meta because users aren't supposed to link accounts and IP addresses. Most of the vandalism was done by IPs, except for that one account. J9 91 16:45, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@J991: As before, I am absolutely fine with you to ask to do a check but I know what my IP address I use and it is definitely not any of those IPs. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:47, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am not at all scared or worried because I know that I haven't been socking. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:49, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@J991: I am happy to disclose the first two digits of my IP address (which don't even match any of the other IP addresses who vandalised). I can do this by email if you want. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:56, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The IP was also attacking me in their edit summaries whilst editing. If I was actually socking, why would I want to attack my username? The IP created pages like User talk:PkIt is me.bwcgs and User:Pkbwcgs (with blatantly bad content) and used edit summaries to attack my username (however they have been deleted). Pkbwcgs (talk) 17:03, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, really? you want to get adminship now? is that the reason why you asked me for admin powers on test2? Artix Kreiger (talk) 04:00, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Artix Kreiger: J991 is making false allegations of me socking. I wasn‘t socking and in fact, the IP was attacking my edits. I am a trusted and regular editor here. I don‘t need to sock. Pkbwcgs (talk) 06:39, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Here is where you can get my IP address. One day (and this only happened once), I was sending a comment and I realised that I accidentally was logged out. This is where it happened. The revision got deleted due to my privacy concerns so only English Wikipedia admins can check this. An admin can look at this revision and quickly determine that my IP address does not match any of the IP addresses which were used to vandalise. The next revision quickly determines that I changed the signature quickly because I accidentally gave my IP address away. See [2]. An English Wikipedia admin can quickly check these two revisions and determine that none of the IP addresses who have vandalised are related to me. Can the admin who checks these two revisions please not give out my IP address. If you check this, you can quickly rule out that I haven't used IPs to vandalise. Pkbwcgs (talk) 09:49, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Artix Kreiger: Don't worry. It will not be proven. I can let this go all the way to CheckUser but I will not be proven at all. In fact, I feel more confident in gaining admin rights here. I am absolutely 100% certain, I haven't socked and even if this goes to CheckUser, this will not be proven because I haven't socked. Thanks for your comment. Pkbwcgs (talk) 10:13, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Hydriz:, after start of this requestx, he asked me for admin tools for testing. It ended up being testing out what admin tools are like, not code. Artix Kreiger (talk) 04:21, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Artix Kreiger: I am not testing admin tools on this Wiki. I actually want these tools as a trusted user to be able to help out the community. I have been here for more than a year and have more than 1,200 edits so there is no reason why I shouldn't be an admin here. It is not about cross-wiki work, it is about what I am been doing here. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:27, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn - I will try again later. Retired, as well. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:28, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I thank everyone that have provided their input in this request for adminship. I would like to take this opportunity to remind all participants involved to remain civil and not resort to personal attacks (especially with certain parts of the socking accusation) on other editors. While Pkbwcgs has withdrawn his request, but looking at the past two RfA attempts, I would like to impose a 3-month ban on Pkbwcgs for any new request of any rights in the hope that there is sufficient time spent by Pkbwcgs to improve himself constructively before requesting for a new user right. Hence, Pkbwcgs may only request for new rights after 25 May 2018. Thank you. --Hydriz (talk) 04:36, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hiàn

Hi all. If you aren't familiar with me, I'm Hiàn, an active editor here and I am requesting adminship here. I've been editing for a little under a year, making nearly 1.8 thousand edits and 500 pages (including plurals and the like). But I certainly hope numbers won't sway your vote.

I'm an autopatroller and rollbacker, having been given those rights in December of 2017 and February of this year and have been active in page creation and anti-vandalism. I've been active on IRC patrolling recent changes and understand local policies and guidelines. I'm familiar with where and when to use the tools. Aside from that, I have been of the mindset that we have enough sysops here, but things change and I feel my activity levels will prove an asset. Hiàn (talk) 22:10, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK with me.--Brett (talk) 22:32, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That would be a yes from me. I think he's rather kind with words. His response to my request for autopatroller, (link) really convinced me he has the soft tone that is expected from an administrator. Also, he is finely tuned to the culture and style of simple Wiktionary. Give the admin tools to Hian! Tyler de Noche (talk) 22:48, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind words anon. Would you be willing to confirm you're Tyler de Noche? Hiàn (talk) 22:47, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hiàn, Fixed. Tyler de Noche (talk) 22:48, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hian will be a fine admin. Yes from me too.-BRPever (talk) 12:56, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

He’ll make a great addition to the simple wiktionary as an administrator. Yes from me. Vermont (talk) 14:23, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Closed as successful.--Brett (talk) 12:36, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for bureaucratship

User:Hydriz

Now that Barras has stepped down, we are only left with just one bureaucrat. I believe I should step up and help out with handling bureaucrat tasks (of course, not like we have much of it) just in case. Though not the intended use of the permission, having the bureaucrat flag will be useful in dealing with mass deletions via the bot flag if we are to be hit by a spambot. Thanks! --Hydriz (talk) 12:43, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

support, a second (active) crat will be good! -Barras talk 21:27, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jianhui67^{talk★contribs} 00:56, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support, sure. Happens so rarely, I never remember the protocol. How long would you like me to wait? --Brett (talk) 01:07, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Probably about 2 weeks or until most of the active users have given their input. :) --Hydriz (talk) 01:18, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - Seven days is the normal RfX time usually, at least when there are enough votes and three votes now looks quite good. I only prolonged requests when there were too few votes. -Barras talk 11:08, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support mhm. Eurodyne (talk) 23:30, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Brett - I guess you can close this one now. :) -Barras talk 21:00, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Closed as successful. I'll make the rights changes.--Brett (talk) 21:13, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! --Hydriz (talk) 01:01, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for autopatroller

None at this time

Requests for rollback

User:Trunzep

Trunzep · (talk · contribs · deleted · cross-wiki · change count · entries created · auto edits · logs · block log · rights log · google (assign permissions)

Hey I've been an active user on simple wikip and also a temporary admin at Swahili confirm here. I would use my knowledge on the wikis to transform the site. Regards. Trunzep (talk) 14:32, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not done With only 8 edits to this wiki and very limited number of contributions across Wikimedia projects, I am declining this task. Please contribute more using the undo button first before requesting for the rollback rights again. Thanks! --Hydriz (talk) 09:32, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hiàn

I would like to nominate Hiàn to be a rollbacker for Simple English Wiktionary. Hiàn is already a rollbacker at English Wikipedia and Simple English Wikipedia and I have no doubt that Hiàn will be reliable with rollback. Hiàn also made 1,204 edits for Simple English Wiktionary. Pkbwcgs (talk) 15:06, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the gesture, but it isn't necessary. Vandalism here is easy to patrol, and is often patrolled by the time I begin editing. hiàn 19:19, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Hiàn: Thanks for your comment. Are you still interested in rollback or would you like to withdraw? Pkbwcgs (talk) 21:10, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll let it stand, though I'd like the closing sysop to take my comment into consideration. hiàn 23:53, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Pkbwcgs (talk) 09:23, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done Trusted user. An extra bit of tools would not hurt. --Hydriz (talk) 05:33, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Vermont

Vermont · (talk · contribs · deleted · cross-wiki · change count · entries created · auto edits · logs · block log · rights log · google (assign permissions)

I’m a sysop on the Simple English Wikipedia, and when watching the CVN feed I sometimes find vandalism here. Rollback would be very beneficial in dealing with that. Vermont (talk) 01:46, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fine with me.--Brett (talk) 14:06, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Brett, Is this request accepted? Vermont (talk) 23:09, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like there should be more discussion, but if nobody complains by Monday, lets call it done.--Brett (talk) 00:10, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Brett. No one seems to have complained so far; is there usually more discussion for rollback requests? Vermont (talk) 00:52, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done.--Brett (talk) 10:19, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Operator873

Operator873 · (talk · contribs · deleted · cross-wiki · change count · entries created · auto edits · logs · block log · rights log · google (assign permissions)

I am very active in #cvn-simplewikis and frequently revert vandalism here. I request the perm to further that endeavor. Operator873 (talk) 17:34, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Hydriz (talk) 17:49, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for removal of rights

Tempodivalse

Tempodivalse (talk • changes • e-mail • blocks • protects • deletes • moves)

Hi all! I would like to propose to remove Tempodivalse's admin and crat rights as per his inactivity for over one year. His last actions/edits on this project where in February 2014. I've informed him on his talk page right now. Keep in mind, there is no need rush this, the request can kept open for a week or two and if necessary even longer. -Barras talk 00:57, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support removal certainly as proposer. -Barras talk 00:57, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support He can reapply in the future if active again. --Hydriz (talk) 01:53, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support unfortunately. Jianhui67^{talk★contribs} 10:39, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support as completely inactive. --George (Talk · Contribs · CentralAuth · Log) 17:39, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looking here, it seems that all usually active people voiced their opinion, so I'm going to close this now as successful request to remove the rights. The last comment here is nine days ago and I doubt we will get much more input. Tempodivalse's rights are beeing removed now. I will handle the admin bit locally and request the removal of his crat rights on meta. -Barras talk 18:29, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Crat right has been removed, see diff. -Barras talk 18:44, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Inactive bots

I propose removing the bot status of the many bots that are currently inactive. Based on the database report, they are:

Looking at the tasks that they do on Wiktionary:Bots, I can safely say that they are being handled by the more active bots, so it is safe to remove the bot flags on these bots. Its better for us too, in case they make accidental edits that are unintended, causing large scale disruption. The respective operators have been contacted on their talk pages. --Hydriz (talk) 13:02, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support - However, I wonder if we really need to vote on that. Bot flags are usually granted per bureaucrat discretion without real need for input from outside. As such the flag should be allowed to be removed the very same way. I know I did that on other wikis already, not sure if we also use that common sense rule, which probably isn't written down here. -Barras talk 13:12, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Currently, I don't need the flag for my bot BOTijo. You can remove it. Emijrp (talk) 19:02, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I now removed the flags from all listed bots as they are inactive. If any of the bots wants to run the bot again, they can just ask for the flag back. -Barras talk 19:04, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Eurodyne

Eurodyne (talk • changes • e-mail • blocks • protects • deletes • moves)

Dear Community, I regret to inform you that I would like to step down as an admin from this wiki. I currently don't have the time to contribute to simplewikt anymore, as I get busier with school and other activities. Please remove my rights. Thank you. Eurodyne (talk) 03:06, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done -Barras talk 07:56, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tygrrr

Tygrrr (talk • changes • e-mail • blocks • protects • deletes • moves)

Hello, Tygrrr has been inactive since July 16, 2014 and his last logged action was back in 2012. I propose removing his admin status on grounds of inactivity. Also, this request will remain open as long as deemed necessary. Thanks! --Hydriz (talk) 13:51, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

support removal - I've never been a fan of people holding rights they never really use. -Barras talk 22:25, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
support --~~Golden_burg111 14:24, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done I believe this is open for a lot longer than it should. --Hydriz (talk) 16:41, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Arbitrarily0

Arbitrarily0 · (talk · contribs · deleted · cross-wiki · change count · entries created · auto edits · logs · block log · rights log · google (assign permissions)

Arbitrarily0 has been inactive since August 17, 2017 and the last logged action was in 2016. I propose removing admin status on the grounds of inactivity. Also, as with all requests, this request will remain open as long as deemed necessary. Thanks! Hydriz (talk) 09:53, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fine with me -- perhaps I will re-request admin rights if I become active again. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 16:01, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Remove per above - procedural removal. Hiàn (talk) 01:07, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Removal with good faith. If he comes back to edit, we could possibly grant it back. Tyler de Noche (talk) 14:06, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done Appreciate your service to the community. Please feel free to request your rights again when you get active. --Hydriz (talk) 14:31, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]