Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Administrator/Diego Grez 4

Candidacy withdrawn by applicant. --Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 12:37, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi guys. How many times have I done this. I hope you don't consider this disruptive. Well, I'm afraid I failed last time because of ME fiasco. I have been admin-coached by Jtneill, who seems to be a very good person as well. I have always wanted to do archiving =) Probably you could think I get too heated sometimes, but I hope you consider I always try to do my best, and will try to help always as I could. I spend almost all the day online, and I feel I could do well, to help our project. Have written +60 articles, and I hope you consider this humble request, Diego Grez return fire 02:25, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Comments

 * Note: Prior requests, at 17 April 2010, 11 May 2010, 11 June 2010. Has not even been two weeks, since the last unsuccessful one. -- Cirt (talk) 03:41, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I am inclined to a weak oppose vote. Not over Diego's involvement in the ME fiasco (my own was far more spectacularly ill-judged), but for a desire to engage in archiving work with a less-than-stellar command of the nuances of English. --Brian McNeil / talk 23:40, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Brian. My English isn't certainly perfect, but I try to do my best when I write articles. I don't think why should it be a major problem. Thanks for your comment, by the way! Diego Grez return fire 23:42, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Votes

 * It's been less than two weeks since you withdrew your last request. What's the big rush? :-) ATM, it's not as if there is an admin drought; we have plenty of people around to do everyday tasks. While I once again reitirate that I really appreciate your contributions to Wikinews, I know you have our best interests in mind, and I'd like to see you keep editing, my concerns from the previous requests haven't yet completely gone away and I'm not totally comfortable supporting this request. While trying not to sound condescending, my suggestion would be to buckle down for the next two or so months, help us improve Wikinews, try to be a little more level-headed, and don't worry so much about adminship. Seriously, it truly shouldn't be a big deal, especially on a small wiki like this. :-) Tempodivalse [talk]  03:57, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Tempodivalse, many thanks for your vote. I understand your point. I think my words have been misunderstood on my last requests, or maybe my behaviour doesn't let you think about a different position. I know there's no real rush, and I was afraid to ask once more for this, and you know, I try to be helpful whenever I can. I have been in mentoring for some time with Wikiversity's Jtneill, and the rest of the warm Wikiversity community, who has done a great work teaching me how to use the thingies properly. I'd like to point out that I have knowledge of Wikinews' policies, and I don't think I could break anything, and even in doubt, I could ask someone of the many admins that live on IRC. --Diego Grez return fire 17:49, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm decideing to disregard the last request as, IIRC, current admins were also involved in the incedent for which it was opposed. Diego has been more than helpfull and trustworthy IMHO. --RockerballAustralia c 10:21, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
 * - ZooFari (talk) 19:49, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * , but I think another two months will do you more good.  — fetch · comms  23:56, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Regretfully (I seem to remember telling you last time that another month and I'd give my support), but your actions during the Matthewedwards mess left me with a bad taste in my mouth. It's not that you're judgement was spectacularly bad (well, I guess it was bad, but it wasn't worse than anyone else's, and it's not like you've done obviously stupid things since), it's how you communicated during that.  Something about how you talked to people seemed like it fit the situation extremely badly, and showed lack of clue in general. I'm specifically thinking of this and this, which, IMO, displayed a lack of good judgement, but during the whole mess in general it didn't seem like you displayed the restraint/tact/diplomacy/whatever that's essential to smooth communication.  And so it doesn't seem I'm basing my entire judgement on one incident, I'd also cite this as another example of when it (at least to me) seems like you're jumping on people too fast and when it's unnecessary; in short, a lack of tact when dealing with others. My advice is roughly the same as Tempo's: just try to work in the mainspace for a while, keep up your article-writing (which is generally very good, by the way), and try to think more carefully about what you say.  C628 (talk) 00:25, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Meh. I think I was a bit overheated and the Spanish terms differ from English, and I must have been much 'offensive' than I thought. I deeply reproach that stupidity... but I think I have said (more than twice) that that won't happen more. I'm aware that sysop is such a very sensitive thing, and I don't think I could do bad with it or something, after all, I have been sysop-ing on MediaWiki.org for a while too. Diego Grez return fire 00:29, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * , more or less per C628. Considering the Matthewedwards incident, I cannot support your candidacy. Your behavior in the IRC channel and on-wiki are too concerning for me to support. Your judgments are occasionally made too quickly, and you quickly revert yourself. I don't feel that you have the right qualities to be a mature, level-headed sysop. Sincerely, Blurpeace  00:41, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I hadn't read Tempodivalse's note about withdrawing only two weeks ago. It only furthers my belief that you are not ready for the responsibility's of properly managing a Wikimedia project. Regretfully, Blurpeace  00:43, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Everyone commits errors, and everyone there were overheated. The 2-weeks ago rfa was just a 'try' and it failed so deeply because of these matters, the same ones you, tempo and c628 pointed out. I try to be as much helpful and possible and I don't think I could be a danger with the pow. --Diego Grez return fire 00:47, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * People do not rework their personalities in two weeks to a month. You illustrated that you were not ready for the tools then, and your quick reapplication illustrates it now. I think you need to take a step back and spend some time regaining the full trust of your fellow community members. It's clear that most editors here have less than strong support for your candidacy. Why don't you take a few months, and prove our concerns wrong? Sincerely, Blurpeace  00:53, 30 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Good journalist. Seems to be doing fine as a janitor at MediaWiki.org.  However, although admins behaved badly, we should still take temper into account in a request for permissions, which discourages me from offering my full support at this moment.  --InfantGorilla (talk) 13:15, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * (like all my other votes for you requests for sysop) Sorry, but during the Matthew Edwards incident, you weren't very level-headed and you tend to jump rather quickly to positions then quickly change which concerns me, but otherwise you're a great journalist. — Mike moral  ♪♫  03:44, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * . I'll not support anyone for adminship who contests an unsuccessful RfA so soon, regardless of how they may have improved. Anyone with four RfAs in one year wants it too much -- and therefore does not understand what adminship means. It's not a tour-of-service medal. — μ 23:38, July 1 2010 (UTC)

I withdraw this candidacy; and I do it happy with three supports I got. I'll give time to the time, and thanks to everyone who voted! Diego Grez return fire 23:56, 1 July 2010 (UTC)