Stewards/Confirm/2015/Snowolf

logs: rights, globalauth, gblblock, gblrights | translate: translation help, statement

• Remove Remove The mark has now been a bit overstepped, at some point enough is enough. Not only was Snowolf an instrumental member of the last year's ElectCom which unjustly revoked Jusjih's steward access, but also treated other users, mainly on IRC, in a quite disrespectful manner while criticising other user's involvement and actions whenever possible without contributing much with regards to solving the underlying problems himself. My confidence in him as a steward has clearly suffered and I hope said confidence may recover someday, but for now I cannot support another term of stewardship, sorry. Vogone (talk) 18:02, 8 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep trusted --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:05, 8 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep While I may not always agree with him, I think that Snowolf is one of the best stewards we have. He is extremely active, he is responsible, and, in my experience, he neither acts without reason nor is unwilling to engage in discussion and consensus. In my opinion, Wikimedia projects as a whole greatly benefit from his being a steward and would lose out should he not be confirmed. -- Avi (talk) 18:19, 8 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep--Vituzzu (talk) 19:01, 8 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep. Érico Wouters (msg) 19:10, 8 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• This is a hard one for me. For years I have always found their comments insightful, if at times a little blunt. However, over recent months I have been dismayed and uncomfortable at their manner of interacting with other stewards; I feel that in their quest to be always "right" they have forgotten that we are a collaborative project. The global renamers debacle was one such instance [1]; while enwiki doesn't govern Meta, I would expect stewards to know better than to disrupt a process to prove a point and engage in filibustering, and in the follow-up conversation some of their explanations brought up even more concerns, though I will let them speak about that if they wish.
  
  But on reflection, they did most of the work in setting up the election, and the balance of my interactions with them have been positive, and I generally agree with most of their opinions so Neutral Neutral because I can't support, but I don't really want to remove either. I'm really sorry about this. --Rs chen 7754 19:26, 8 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep --Uğurkent ^talk 19:31, 8 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep - trusted --Rax (talk) 20:03, 8 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Remove Remove Per Vogone. Eurodyne (talk) 20:03, 8 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep --Aplasia (talk) 20:15, 8 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep Ptjackyll (talk) 21:55, 8 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep Armbrust (talk) 22:19, 8 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep--DangSunM (talk) 23:09, 8 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep. Green Giant (talk) 23:13, 8 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep — NickK (talk) 23:37, 8 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Neutral Neutral Per Vogone's reasoning. --Atcovi (talk) 23:40, 8 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep. Good work. MBisanz ^talk 00:26, 9 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• remove Snowolf and Barras have shown impossible behaviour in the first election of global renamers and disappointed me a lot by doing this. Even if the Wikimedia Foundation has given us only a short time frame to organize these elections, all stewards and bureaucrats were invited to discuss on the mailinglists and talk pages the proposed policies and procedures which have been prepared by some stewards. Instead if doing so or raising their concerns on the very same, designated discussion places during the elections, they blatantly opposed the innocent candidates whose user rights we steward have taken over without any compensation, suddenly coming out of nowhere, and who we invited to help us with global renames, sharing knowledge, spreading the workload, etc. By doing this, they did not only do harm to the candidates themselves without any valid reason and confused them, they also harmed the steward by making them look like users who either cannot find consensus or accept it (besides disrespectfully trampling on the preparation work or their fellow colleagues). Briefly, I do not expect from a steward to troll elections simply for making a point. That's what I do not understand as collegial behaviour and worthy of stewards. As far as I remember, they did not apologize for this childish behaviour yet which is inacceptable as well and baffles me. —DerHexer (Talk) 01:08, 9 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]

  I am disappointed to hear you thought my actions were childish. I assure you they were undertaken with the greatest misgivings and sadness, and were done in good faith. I hardly relished the thought of doing so, and did so only to allow the community to properly review the procedure with the extra 24 hours given by my oppose and I struck my votes the moment people were actively discussing the policy. I genuinely attempted to minimize the disruption of my actions as disrupting the process was not my goal, and I have never done anything like this in 7 years as a Wikimedian, and will not do so again in the future. That my actions were found objectionable by people whose experience and judgement I profoundly trust was quite humbling and lead to a lot of soul-searching. This is an episode which will never happen again and I certainly regret the issues it caused. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 01:43, 9 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]

• Keep Please do not remove per above. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:45, 9 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Neutral Neutral Not very active (worse than Shizhao), but if he want to keep his right, he will do so.--GZWDer (talk) 01:52, 9 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep--Jusjih (talk) 03:45, 9 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Remove Remove - makes mistakes, which are understandable, especially if the person was fed a one sided story. But it is a person's responsibility to comment on the project which action is taken on. If you can take action, you can comment on it, and not just on meta. Ignored requests for comment to be displayed. Sidelight12 (talk) 03:57, 9 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Neutral Neutral (S)he is active and good steward, but this log and his comment contradicts, as "I have done so now", but it wasn't and eventually got removed by Trijnstel. CUOS things are really powerful thing that he should not make that kind of mistakes. — Revi 04:34, 9 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep I do not condone the global renamers protest, but I understand that it was done in good faith, plus the comment from Snowolf above. Pundit (talk) 07:37, 9 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep --FriedrickMILBarbarossa (talk) 07:49, 9 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep --Lepido (talk) 08:17, 9 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep --Herby ^{talk thyme} 09:43, 9 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Weak Keep Keep - Rschen7754 raises concerns that I agree with, however overall I think that Snowolf does good work as a steward. Ajraddatz (talk) 10:01, 9 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep Matanya (talk) 11:52, 9 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep--Syum90 (talk) 12:02, 9 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep KTC (talk) 13:11, 9 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep No one is perfect, so Snowolf isn't either. But I've always added much value to his opinion and would like him to stay. Trijnstel _talk 13:34, 9 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Neutral Neutral --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 14:46, 9 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep - although I've had a few disagreements with Snowolf, he is usually very helpful and responsive. I wasn't very active around the time of the global renamer incident above, but frankly, I agree with Snowolf that 24 hours is not enough time for people to comment on Meta rights requests. Meta requests should follow the Meta:Snowball policy which forbids "snowball" closures, because Meta has very few users who comment on most discussions, and they can't be expected to see everything within 24 hours. That having been said, the POINTy actions were unnecessary, and I can understand why the 24 hour period was introduced (because the renamers would essentially be regaining their rights). PiRSquared17 (talk) 20:40, 9 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep — Arkanosis ^✉ 21:48, 9 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep for me Snowolf is a a "troubleshooter", hence the fast action.--AldNonymous ^Bicara? 02:10, 10 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep MoiraMoira (talk) 11:47, 10 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Remove Remove - M. E. nicht geeignet. --ST ○しろまる 23:09, 10 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep agree with PiRSquared17 (first sentence). ~ DanielTom (talk) 00:50, 11 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep --Abd (talk) 02:21, 11 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep --Az1568 (talk) 06:49, 11 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep - Mainly per PiRSquared17. I can see why some would find the style of engagement uncomfortable at times (although personally I don't) but if ever there was a case to apply net positive it is here. Snowolf is clearly deeply concerned with making sure the right thing is done, thinks carefully and their thoughts are always wise and valuable. QuiteUnusual (talk) 11:40, 11 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep Widr (talk) 12:27, 11 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Remove Remove Mjbmr (discussion • contribs) 06:42, 12 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep – Excellent steward. Tony (talk) 09:41, 12 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep -- with my respect and admiration. Hard working, with excellent judgment and an ever-pleasant disposition. Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 13:32, 12 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep Jianhui67 ^{talk ★contribs} 05:32, 13 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep Matiia (talk) 18:24, 13 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Remove Remove Marcus Cyron (talk) 21:15, 13 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep I don't see why it will be the opposite because he knew how to really take care of steward's tasks, and I agree with PiRSquared Grind24 (talk) 22:18, 13 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Remove Remove He is definitely not the Snowolf i knew years back..somethings changed..--Ste moc 06:01, 14 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep - Kind and competent steward. --Andyrom75 (talk) 17:39, 14 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Remove Remove IMO some their action on IRC were supporting one party in a conflict situation, while more neutrality is expected from a steward. I no longer trust them. Ankry (talk) 19:52, 14 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep Begoon (talk) 06:12, 15 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep --Pracchia-78 (talk) 14:37, 15 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep I think it's better to have a helpful and experienced steward, despite of that sometimes unsuitable tone towards other users, than not having him. --თოგო ^(D) 16:13, 16 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep Wikiklaas (talk) 13:18, 17 February 2015 (UTC) - Personal experience: most friendly, helpful and knowledgeable steward when it comes to assisting good-faith users.[reply ]
• Keep Keep --Irwin Dime 02:36, 19 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Remove Remove, Conny (talk) 15:38, 19 February 2015 (UTC).[reply ]
• Keep Keep --Doc.mari (talk) 18:17, 19 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep - A great steward I really enjoyed working with in the past years on many different areas! -Barras talk 12:32, 20 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep --Tremonist (talk) 16:57, 20 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep.—Teles «Talk to me ˱_{C L @ S} ˲» 17:25, 20 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep Sarah (SV) ^talk 05:36, 21 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep Sensible steward. All good. Elfix 09:57, 21 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep --Enfcer (talk) 11:40, 22 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep -- Wagino 20100516 (talk) 08:49, 24 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep StudiesWorld (talk) 11:27, 24 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep — billinghurst sDrewth 11:50, 24 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep BethNaught (talk) 13:35, 24 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Remove Remove [2] Frakir (talk) 19:30, 24 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep Definitely. ///EuroCar GT 02:03, 25 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep Glaisher (talk) 16:59, 25 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep --Zyephyrus (talk) 21:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep --Harlock81 (talk) 23:13, 25 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep --FiliP ██ 00:05, 26 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep - Biosthmors (talk) 15:29, 27 February 2015 (UTC) [reply ]

• Steward confirmation statements 2015