Talk:Stewards/Confirm/2024
Final decisions (by stewards)
Confirmation discussions will remain open from 29 February 2024, 14:00 (UTC) till 7 March 2024, 14:00 (UTC). This may be extended to two weeks for one or more confirmations at the discretion of the Election Committee if the committee believes further input is required before concluding. The Election Committee will close these discussions and implement the outcome (which also means making a decision in non-obvious cases).
This page is for steward discussion only. Please do not comment in this box unless you are a steward.
The summaries below provide a very strict overview of the most relevant confirmation comments.
Stewards: Please leave your comments right below the boxes after reviewing the actual confirmation comments and your understanding of relevant policies. You may summarize the confirmation discussions in individual comments, but no overall summary is given.
| Status | Candidate | Notes |
|---|---|---|
Under discussion
|
AmandaNP | |
Under discussion
|
AntiCompositeNumber | |
Under discussion
|
Base | |
Under discussion
|
Bsadowski1 | |
Under discussion
|
DerHexer | |
Under discussion
|
Elton | |
Under discussion
|
HakanIST | |
Under discussion
|
Hasley | |
Under discussion
|
Hoo man | |
Under discussion
|
Jon Kolbert | |
Under discussion
|
MarcGarver | |
Under discussion
|
Martin Urbanec | |
Under discussion
|
Masti | |
Under discussion
|
Mykola7 | |
Under discussion
|
RadiX | |
Under discussion
|
Sakretsu | |
Under discussion
|
Schniggendiller | |
Under discussion
|
Sotiale | |
Under discussion
|
Stryn | |
Under discussion
|
Superpes15 | |
Under discussion
|
Tegel | |
Under discussion
|
Teles | |
Resigned
|
Tks4Fish | Did not run for reconfirmation |
Under discussion
|
Vermont | |
Under discussion
|
Vituzzu | |
Under discussion
|
Wim b | |
Under discussion
|
Xaosflux | |
Under discussion
|
علاء |
- Results
Keep: 129 (good coordination of the steward clerks / good actions / professionalism and responsiveness / activity / cordial and patient / no concerns / no comments)
Remove: 0
Neutral: 0
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm obvious support has been demonstrated. — xaosflux Talk 21:45, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear support (unanimous support, even). --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by clear consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 13:49, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 14:36, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm per clear consensus. EPIC (talk) 16:54, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 104 (activity / responsiveness / quickness / professionalism / helpful / tech knowledge / no comments)
Remove: 1 (no comments)
Neutral: 0
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm obvious support has been demonstrated. — xaosflux Talk 21:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear support. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by clear consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 13:50, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm per clear consensus. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:00, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 87 (good activity / useful contributions / helpful / no comments)
Remove: 2 (no comments)
Comment: 1 (Unconvincing reconfirmation statement)
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm obvious support has been demonstrated. — xaosflux Talk 21:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear support. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by clear consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 13:50, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm per clear consensus. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:01, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 85 (truly committed / no issue / great job / truly committed / active / no comments)
Remove: 1 (Replying "o_o" to an IRC report)
Neutral: 0
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm obvious support has been demonstrated. — xaosflux Talk 21:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear support. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by clear consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 13:50, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm per clear consensus. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear consensus. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:02, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 125 (excellent work / great steward / resolute / helpful communicator with WMF / no comments)
Remove: 0
Neutral: 0
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm obvious support has been demonstrated. — xaosflux Talk 23:21, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear support (unanimous, even). --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by clear consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 13:50, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm per clear consensus. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear consensus. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:05, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 60 (good work / no concerns / Thanks for commitment / no comments)
Remove: 0
Neutral: 0
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm obvious support has been demonstrated. — xaosflux Talk 21:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by clear consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 13:51, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm per clear consensus. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear consensus. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:06, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 68 (increased activity / helpful for SRG backlog / no reason to remove / good steward / no comments)
Remove: 5 (not enough activity / no comments)
Neutral: 0
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear support. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by clear consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 13:51, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm per clear consensus. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear consensus. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:06, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 77 (good activity / great anti-LTA work / excellent work / no comments)
Remove: 0
Neutral: 0
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm obvious support has been demonstrated. — xaosflux Talk 21:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear support. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by clear consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 13:51, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm per clear consensus. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear consensus. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:07, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 51 (good anti-vandalism work / more activity is needed / good contributions / little help is helpfuf / no comments)
Weak keep: 4 (more activity would be good)
Remove: 12 (low contributions as steward / pointless steward / too inactive to justify the flag / minimal activity / no comments)
Weak remove: 1 (more activity needed)
Neutral: 3 (concerns about inactivity / not direct benefit from removing / no comments)
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm Vermont (🐿️—🏳️🌈) 17:14, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm - weak consensus, but still falls around the level of support expected to retain steward permissions. – Ajraddatz (talk) 17:20, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm weak consensus, but arguments are mostly centered around low activity levels. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:08, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm weak consensus. — xaosflux Talk 23:22, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by weak consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 13:54, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, I understand the inactivity arguments and think they are valid, but overall, there seems to be a weak consensus to confirm here. Hoo man's activity has increased during the confirmations, and I hope this is sustained too. So, confirm. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, weak consensus. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:09, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, weakly — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 70 (brilliant with proxies / good work / great at clearing backlogs / no concerns / no comments)
Remove: 1 (no comments)
Neutral: 0
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm obvious support has been demonstrated. — xaosflux Talk 21:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear support. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by clear consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 13:54, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm per clear consensus. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear consensus. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:09, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 41 (good activity / more activity would be good / no issue / no comments)
Weak keep: 3 (more activity would be good)
Remove: 1 (activity has not improved in the last year)
Neutral: 1 (concerns about inactivity)
Comment: 1 (Unconvincing reconfirmation statement)
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm obvious support has been demonstrated. — xaosflux Talk 21:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear support. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by clear consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 13:54, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm per clear consensus and with same comment as for Hoo man. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear consensus. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:10, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 101 (worked with many Vietnamese users / One of the best and the most well-known stewards / talented steward / excellent technical knowledge / vandal fighting skills / no reason to remove after a single incident / helpful / active in every area / good work / valuable steward / no issues / no comments)
Remove: 2 (applying different rules to different users as ElectCom / membership in the chapter board)
Neutral: 0
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm obvious support has been demonstrated. — xaosflux Talk 21:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by clear consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 13:54, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm per clear consensus. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear consensus. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:10, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 64 (good experiences / quick on IRC / good acting steward / isolate incidents / good work at locking LTAs / helps in many areas / strong expertise with LTAs / good job / no reason for removal / no comments)
Weak keep: 3 (good work and helpful with quick actions on IRC but lack of response is concerning / should be more responsive)
Remove: 20 (no response / needs to be more responsive / no reply to basic accountability questions / accountability is fundamental / non-responsive / no comments)
Neutral: 11 (productive steward / lack of responses is a bit concerning / communication skills need improvement / should be more responsive / no comments)
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm - I understand the concerns raised, though do not believe it rises to the level of a removal. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️🌈) 17:14, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- I think the concerns are valid, and I know first hand how annoying it can be when stewards who make global blocks aren't available to discuss/deal with the fallout from them. That said, this isn't about my personal opinion - and I think there is still a weak consensus to confirm among the community who voted. – Ajraddatz (talk) 17:21, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- I am concerned that Masti did not respond to a simple question when given multiple opportunities, until it began to pose a problem for their reconfirmation. I also feel that the eventual response is incomplete, and am concerned about the message that re-confirming in these circumstances sends. However, I am judging consensus and not voting in this case. At 77% I find it difficult to see consensus to re-confirm but could be convinced. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:32, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Due to the limited participation in confirmations compared to elections, I tend to be willing to support a bit of leeway (probably no lower than 75% outside canvassing concerns, etc.) and this case falls right at the lower end of what I would be comfortable calling a weak consensus to confirm. Numerically the numbers are very similar between Masti and Hoo man. However, I think there is some value in considering the arguments, and votes to remove due to unresponsiveness are in my eyes a more serious charge than inactivity, so I could also be convinced that this falls into a no consensus to retain situation. – Ajraddatz (talk) 16:42, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Remove there does not appear to be sufficient consensus to retain. — xaosflux Talk 00:13, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm per Vermont. The concerns raised have been valid, but overall there appears to be a weak consensus to confirm. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 94 (great first year as steward / no concerns / thanks / for sure / no comments)
Remove: 3 (concerns about scrutineering and ElectCom / no comments)
Neutral: 0
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm obvious support has been demonstrated. — xaosflux Talk 21:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear support. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by clear consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 13:57, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm per clear consensus. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear consensus. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:11, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 64 (no problems / good work / no concerns / Thanks / no comments)
Remove: 0
Neutral: 0
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm obvious support has been demonstrated. — xaosflux Talk 21:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear support. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by clear consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 13:57, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm per clear consensus. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear consensus. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:11, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 78 (overall good work / great steward / capable of handling complex issues / single incident / no comment)
Weak keep: 2 (one incident unsufficient to remove)
Remove: 21 (locking Gitz6666 / loss of trust / failing to avoid COI / using steward tools on homewiki / no comment)
Neutral: 5 (questioning Sakretsu's understanding of "home wiki" provisions in the Stewards policy / no comment)
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm - a complex confirmation, with apparent canvassing on the support and oppose sides. But overall demonstrates a continued consensus to retain Sakretsu as a steward, especially when looking at the rationales given. – Ajraddatz (talk) 15:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm - per Ajraddatz. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️🌈) 16:54, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm I see a weak consensus to confirm here. It seems like the steward policy might be in need of clarification, but that is out of scope for this discussion. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:47, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm I see a weak consensus here, it should be noted that incomplete information on the primary matter related to opposition (regarding stewardly-specific involvement) is available to most of the participants in the confirmation discussion. — xaosflux Talk 00:21, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by weak consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 14:48, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm This is a bit borderline, but looking at the confirmation and the rationales given, overall there seems to be a weak consensus to confirm. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, weakly – There is a minority that raised concerns over Sakretsu handling Gitz6666's global lock since the Italian Wikipedia is Sakretsu's home wiki. Sakretsu did acknowledge the concerns and that they should have consulted with other Stewards to address the issues that drove the lock. — JJMC89 (T·C) 22:07, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 67 (good anti-vandalism work / no concerns / no comments)
Remove: 0
Neutral: 1 (no comments)
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm obvious support has been demonstrated. — xaosflux Talk 21:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear support. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by clear consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 14:04, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm per clear consensus. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear consensus. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:12, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 85 (work on SRCU / helpful / no concerns / great steward / needed / thanks / no comments)
Remove: 0
Neutral: 0
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm obvious support has been demonstrated. — xaosflux Talk 21:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear support (unamious, even). --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by clear consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 14:04, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm per clear consensus. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear consensus. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:12, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 75 (no concerns / no issues / thanks / no comments)
Remove: 0
Neutral: 0
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm obvious support has been demonstrated. — xaosflux Talk 21:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear support (unamious, even). --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by clear consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 14:04, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm per clear consensus. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear consensus. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:12, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm --Vituzzu (talk) 14:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 110 (often processing SR(G)P / friendly / has some humour / no comment)
Remove: 0
Neutral: 1 (unacceptable comment on SRP)
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm obvious support has been demonstrated. — xaosflux Talk 21:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear support. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by clear consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 14:05, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm per clear consensus. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear consensus. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:13, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm --Vituzzu (talk) 14:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 73 (no concerns / hope can improve on communication / diligent and consistent / thanks / no comments)
Weak keep: 1 (no comments)
Remove: 0
Neutral: 2 (helpful and active steward but communication really needs improving / non-responsive)
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm obvious support has been demonstrated. — xaosflux Talk 21:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear support. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by clear consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 14:05, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm Tack för ditt arbete. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear consensus. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:14, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm --Vituzzu (talk) 14:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 71 (no concerns / good work / no comments)
Remove: 0
Neutral: 1 (no comments)
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm obvious support has been demonstrated. — xaosflux Talk 21:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear support. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by clear consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 14:05, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm per clear consensus. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear consensus. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:14, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm --Vituzzu (talk) 14:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 96 (valuable / brilliant / very professional attitude / friendly / great steward / no concerns / professionalism and responsiveness to LTA locking / helpful and kind / great communication / skilled / no comments)
Remove: 1 (concerns about a meta-wiki block)
Neutral: 0
Comment: 2 (concerns about handling of a WMF researchers request / concerns about opening a new RfC)
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm obvious support has been demonstrated. — xaosflux Talk 21:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear support. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by clear consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 14:05, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm per clear consensus. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear consensus. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:15, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm --Vituzzu (talk) 14:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 85 (valuable steward / no loss of trust / overall great work / responsive / no comment)
strong keep: 1 (precious asset to Wikimedia projects)
Weak keep: 1 (no comment)
Remove: 47 (inappropriate response to critisism / inappropriate comments at Signpost / lost of trust in judgement / no comment)
hard remove: 1 (doxing)
weak remove: 1 (reinforcing a later-overturned global lock)
Neutral: 3 (no comment)
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Remove, regretfully. Vituzzu's on-wiki comments in response to the Gitz6666 case, both on enwiki and on the confirm page, are not what we expect from stewards. This sentiment was voiced by many established contributors and multiple admins/functs on the confirm page, and my perspective basically aligns with Barkeep49's comment. It's important to remember that the audience of our on-wiki messaging about stewards' cases is as much uninvolved observers as it is the person we're replying to: getting heated in responses reflects poorly on the steward who made them, and stewards as a group. Regards, Vermont (🐿️—🏳️🌈) 17:09, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Remove an sufficient consensus to keep has not emerged. — xaosflux Talk 23:25, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Remove No consensus to re-confirm. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:34, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Remove, with regret. The community has spoken. While confirmations aren't the same as elections, the level of support is not sufficient to confirm. Huge +1 to what Vermont wrote as well. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:17, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Remove due to lack of consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 14:47, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Remove, with large regret. I've thought about this for a while, and while I would have personally kept Vituzzu, this is the community's decision and we can't ignore that. So, remove, but also a Weak keep due to Vituzzu's good work throughout the years. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Remove Lack of consensus to re-confirm. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:21, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Remove – A significant minority of the community feels that Vituzzu's responses in the Wikipedia Signpost discussion and their confirmation discussion were unbecoming of a Steward. — JJMC89 (T·C) 21:01, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 78 (no concerns / selfless dedication to projects / no comments)
Remove: 0
Neutral: 0
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm obvious support has been demonstrated. — xaosflux Talk 21:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear support (unamious, even). --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by clear consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 14:06, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm per clear consensus. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear consensus. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:21, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm --Vituzzu (talk) 14:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 88 (working a lot behind the scenes / great first year / positively bureaucratic / activity on VRTS / no comments)
Remove: 0
Neutral: 0
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm clear consensus --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear support (unamious, even). --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by clear consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 14:06, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm per clear consensus. EPIC (talk) 16:55, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear consensus. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:21, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm --Vituzzu (talk) 14:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep: 111 (kind / helpful / highly trusted / very committed / available to provide support for admins / very active / best possible representative for Arab world / thanks / great work / arwiki action was not a steward action / no comments)
Weak keep: 1 (the arwiki issue is not enough to remove when compared to user's activity and transparency)
Remove: 10 (suspicious activity on Arabic Wikipedia / bizarre behavior / no comments)
Neutral: 1 (not a good impression on arwiki mass-logout script removal discussion)
- Note
- You can either choose to leave a comment on every candidate or to confirm/remove all at once. --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm I do not believe the concerns are substantiated. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️🌈) 17:12, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm - consensus to keep and a level of support in-line with expectations for retaining access. – Ajraddatz (talk) 17:25, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm a sufficient consensus to keep has been demonstrated. — xaosflux Talk 23:26, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm Consensus to confirm. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:38, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm, clear support. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by clear consensus. ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 14:06, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm per clear consensus. EPIC (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm Sufficient consensus has been reached to confirmation. ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 17:24, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Confirm --Vituzzu (talk) 14:04, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
All stewards running for confirmation
- Note
- Should you be decided to drop your comment here, please don't forget to add Confirm all or Remove all to your text. The discussion below applies to all stewards listed in the sections above, except the one commenting. Thanks, --Superpes15 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
* Confirm all. For the case mentioned in Sakretsu/Vituzzu's confirmations, which are the ones standing out the most, I'm not sure entirely what has happened or who is in the wrong, but I'm glad they have been responsive and overall they have been competent and active stewards. As for Masti, I am also satisfied enough with the responses to the concerns addressed too. Overall, if they have learned from their mistakes, I don't think it's worth losing active and competent stewards over this, and thus I will still be leaning to confirm all. EPIC (talk) 14:22, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
OK, I've taken a second look at the Vituzzu case, and I do not like what I am reading. I'm not too convinced by either side though, so for now, I will be neutral for that one. Other than that; confirm all as I do not have anything to say about the other stewards than what has already been said. EPIC (talk) 20:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
After some further thought I'm striking this for now as there does not appear to be a consensus to confirm all candidates. EPIC (talk) 14:03, 1 March 2024 (UTC)