Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2018-08/User:Surjection for admin

User:Surjection for admin
Nomination: I hereby nominate as a local English Wiktionary Administrator.

Surjection has been around since February this year and is very active, mostly working on Finnish, but also reverting serious amounts of vandalism. Since s/he is not an admin, this tends to lead to tiresome vandal revert wars until an actual admin turns up. Please see a little prior discussion at User_talk:Surjection.

Schedule:
 * Vote starts: 23:07, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Vote ends: 23:59, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I think it's customary for admin votes to run for two weeks. Per utramque cavernam 05:58, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
 * OK, changed. I used the default; maybe that must also be changed? Equinox ◑ 21:04, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I've done so at . Per utramque cavernam 09:55, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I should have kept my mouth shut. Can't we give him the admin tools already? Per utramque cavernam 19:27, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
 * No admin is on, so probably no bureaucrat either. S URJECTION ·talk·contr·log· 19:28, 9 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Vote created: Equinox ◑ 23:07, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Acceptance:
 * Languages: fi, en
 * Timezone: UTC+02:00 or UTC+03:00 on DST
 * S URJECTION ·talk·contr·log· 23:08, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Support

 * 1)  as leet nominat0r Equinox ◑ 23:17, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
 * , been watching the Recent changes and it was heated. ～ POKéTalker（═◉═） 23:29, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
 * 1)  PseudoSkull (talk) 03:42, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
 * , --Robbie SWE (talk) 18:57, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) . Per utramque cavernam 05:58, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
 * 2) . For anyone who noticed and is curious, I see that Surjection was suspected of being a sock of long-term problematic editor Diabedia over at en.wiki, but they don't seem to have been very careful — every indication to me is that Surjection was reverting various Diabedia socks. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 06:53, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
 * 3) . John Cross (talk) 09:57, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
 * 4)  ←₰-→  Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  11:32, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
 * 5)  per above and below. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 20:53, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
 * 6)  I see nothing to fear from giving this editor the admin bit. bd2412 T 12:45, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
 * 7)  Fay Freak (talk) 10:51, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
 * 8)  communicates well, and counters vandalism. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:37, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
 * 9)  —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 19:26, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
 * 10)  — Ungoliant (falai) 21:32, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
 * 11)  — Surjection is responsive and forthcoming, not to mention very hard-working and goal-oriented.  Allahverdi Verdizade (talk) 13:22, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
 * 12)  — justin(r)leung { (t...) 13:48, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
 * 13)  — Julia ☺  ☆ • formerly Gormflaith • 22:44, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Abstain

 * 1)  One particular admin I supported this year couldn't be trusted, and caused me a lot of trouble. Once bitten, twice shy. DonnanZ (talk) 16:07, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I advise not to base all admin votes on the perceived problems with one particular admin. Each person is individually different, so they should be evaluated on an individual basis. PseudoSkull (talk) 01:22, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I haven't voted against, this is just a shot across the bows. DonnanZ (talk) 07:09, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
 * 1)  for a few missing edit summaries. Otherwise, I would support. Jusjih (talk) 01:31, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I think that I actually make fewer edit summaries as a result of your bizarre criterion. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 03:27, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Comments

 * . Has a sense of humour--New WT User Girl (talk) 21:55, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
 * This vote has been discarded since the above user is a Wonderfool sock. PseudoSkull (talk) 03:17, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Decision

 * Passes 17–0–2. Needs a bureaucrat:, ? Per utramque cavernam 08:19, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Made it so. SemperBlotto (talk) 08:24, 17 August 2018 (UTC)