Wikipedia:Áheitan um embætisstøðu

Frá Wikipedia, hin frælsa alfrøðin

Áheitan um embætisstøðu er ein síða har tú kanst nominera teg sjálvan ella onnur til at blíva ein Wikipedia embætisstjóri.

Núverandi politikkur á tí føroyska Wikipedia er at geva embætisstøðu til tey sum gjarna vilja hava tað, sum alment eru kend fyri at verða ein virkin veitari á Wikipedia.

Ger eina áheitan um embætisstøðu niðanfyri og so vil ein umboðsstjóri syrgja fyri restini.

Um tú stuðlar ella ikki stuðlar eina tilnevning kanst tú vísa soleiðis:

*{{stuðlar}} (''grundgeving'') --~~~~ verður til Stuðlar (grundgeving) --tín undirskrift
*{{partaleysur}} (''grundgeving'') --~~~~ verður til Partaleysur (grundgeving) --tín undirskrift
*{{stuðlar ikki}} (''grundgeving'') --~~~~ verður til Stuðlar ikki (grundgeving) --tín undirskrift
*{{viðmerking}} (''grundgeving'') --~~~~ verður til Viðmerking (grundgeving) --tín undirskrift

Tilnevningar[rætta wikitekst]

Brúkari:EileenSanda[rætta wikitekst]

Eg vil fegin søkja um at gerast Embætismaður/kona her á føroysku Wikipediuni. Eg havi verið virkin síðan november 2009 og eri mestsum hvønn dag inni her. Eg upprætti greinar, rætti málsligar villur hjá øðrum og afturstilli vandalismu, sum hendir rættiliga ofta, og sum úrslit av tí eri eg eisini við til at sperra brúkarar í ávís tíðarskeið fyri at fyribyrgja uppaftur meira herverk. Eg skrivi restina á enskum eftirsum her eru fleiri útlendskir brúkarar sum eru aktivir her enn føroyskir, í løtuni í hvussu so er.

In English: Hi, I would like to ask, if I could become a beaurocrat. I am Faroese and have been active on the Faroese Wikipedia since November 2009 and admin since 16 October 2011, and now I would like to become a bearoucrat also. It happens that I could use the extra instruments of a beaurocrat. I hope other users will support my request, thanks. EileenSanda (talk) 17. feb 2014 kl. 08:46 (UTC)[reply]

Niceley[rætta wikitekst]

Eg hevði við gleði vilja verið embætisstjóri í tí føroyska wikipedia:) Eg haldi at tað er naka eg kann gera, eisni eri eg tann mest aktivi brúkarin á tí føroysku wikipedia. Eg havi sent fyrispurningar til fleiri brúkarar og biðið um teirra stuðul. Niceley 13. oktober 2009

  • Stuðlar Sera væl arbeið, og so nógv! — Erik 13. okt 2009 kl. 19:39 (UTC)[reply]
  • Stuðlar Sera virkin á tí Føroysku Wikipediu — Bjarni 1. nov 2009 kl. 13:31
  • Stuðlar ikki Eg eri samdur í at Nicolai ger nógv gott á Føroysku útgávuni av Wikipediu. Dugi tó ikki at síggja at tað er neyðugt við einum embætisstjóra aftrat.
Ein embætisstjóri hevur tríggjar uppgávur: 1. Broyta navn á Wikipedia brúkarum sum vilja hava tað broytt. 2. Seta bot status á brúkarar sum uppfylla basis treytur og vilja hava bot status. 3. Seta sys.op. status á brúkarar sum uppfylla basis treytur og vilja hava tað.
Eg meini ikki at tað hevur verði nakar trupuleiki við at fáa loyst hesar trupuleikar. Hinvegin meini eg at tað er brúk fyri fleiri umboðsstjórðum (serstækliga føroyskum, tá vit hava brúk fyri fleiri at rætta málsligar villur)
Sum dømi kan nevnast at danska wikipedian hevur tveir embætismenn.
Um tað verður neyðugt í framtíðini við eyka embætismonnum vil eg sjálvandi stuðla Nicolai tá. uackor 1. nov 2009 kl. 16:52 (UTC)[reply]
  • Viðmerking Apologies for writing in English, the alternative for me would be Norwegian here. As a native Norwegian speaker I understand a bit of Faroese but can't write it- Noticing this somewhat uncomfortable situation I like, on my own initiative, to offer an outside view - my understanding of Faroese is limited, so is my knowledge of this project, so apologies in advance for any misinterpretations on my part. I describe this situation as "uncomfortable" given that at most projects, the one task assigned to 'crats (embætisstjóri) that is not just a technical matter is judging consensus in elections like these - in this situation where Quackor is the only current 'crat and also the only one to opppose (so far) - that makes a neutral closure rather difficult. (I take it that this project doesn't have guidelines detailed enough to make closing just a matter of counting votes and calculating %). So, here's my opinion:
  1. Quackor is right that there doesn't seem to be a need for another 'crat in order to get the number of tasks that technically demand 'crat-flag done. As far as I could tell, only 34 logged actions in recent years demanded 'crat-flag, 32 done by Q. and 2 by stewards.
  2. Quackor has for longer or shorter periods been inactive at this project. That may indicate that some requests would be dealt with quicker if also another user had 'crat-flag.
  3. Noone seem to doubt Niceleys capabilites or trustworthyness, Quackor also says they would support him if there would be a need for more 'crats.
  4. Some other projects, Wikipedia in Spanish the biggest AFAIK, automatically give 'crat-flag to all admins, the rationale being that they don't want 'crats to be a sort of admin+ class.
  5. To myknowledge, most other projects avvoid having just one user with a particular right or access level, even if the workload is close to neglible - typically when assigning rights like oversight or Check-user locally at smaller projects. Having at least two users with access to any rights makes the project a lot less vulnerable.

Based on my 1 contra and 4 pro observations, I would ask Quackor to reconsider their oppose above. I do not feel like adding a supportvote myself (not even sure if I'm eligble to vote, this is my edit number 20 here) - this community, however small you may be, should decide a matter like this yourself. I think you, in particular Q. and N., should try to talk this more over and reach some kind of common ground or understanding. Deciding this based on counting votes from more or less active members of the community doesn't really seem like a good solution. Best regards, Finnrind 2. nov 2009 kl. 17:03 (UTC)[reply]

  • Viðmerking Først av alt, det er supert at så mange engasjerer seg! Ser at både Finnrind og Jörgen B foreslår at meg og Quackor bør diskutere det oss imellom først. Vil bare legge til at jeg for første gang henvendte meg til han med dette i juni 2008 (se på hans diskusjonsside). Denne siden er et resultat i at diskusjonen våre imellom ikke førte frem. Jeg mener det er svært viktig og få mer enn én byråkrat. Det vil f.eks. gjøre at det tar betydlig kortere tid for brukere å bytte brukernavnet. Bedre det, enn at alt skal stå og falle med at denne ene brukeren med byråkrat-rettigheter dukker opp. Niceley 3. nov 2009 kl. 07:40 (UTC)[reply]
  • Viðmerking OK, I will continue in English. First some comments for Finnrind points:
  1. Yes, the bureaucrat task can not be said to be time consuming.
  2. I am studying, therefore the lack of activity. Though I do follow Village pump discussion, my discussion and request for-pages via RSS.
  3. I am not sure this is a good idea. There is a reason that most Wikipedias do not have this rule. (from en.: expectations for potential bureaucrats are higher and community consensus must be clearer)
  4. I agree, there should be more bureaucrats.
Now to the candidate at hand. Why the stalling of the candidates request to be a bureaucrat -- well i did not think that he was ready. Here is my assessment of the candidate:
  • He makes a lot of edits.
  • He gives all new users the standard greeting.
  • He reverted edits by vandals.
  • His faroese language skills are relatively low. This implies that we get:
  1. Spelling errors
  2. Grammatical errors
  3. A lack in the quality of the articles written
  • Ignoring the obstacles posed by the faroese language there are still problems with the language.
  • He does not follow Wikipedia style guides very well:
  1. All new articles should be in at least one category.
  2. Most new articles should have basic sections: See also, External links, References.
  3. Include a reference to sister projects if possible (i.e., Commons etc.)
  4. Generally an admin should promote concise/neutral ways of writing articles, e.g., an article about a car should start something like I car is a motor vehicle used... not Everybody likes cars....
  • Finally these are a No-Go in Wikipedia
  1. Copying of text without citing.
  2. Uploading images which have a copyright and restating them to be GNU Free Documentation License.
In conclusion I think Niceley does a good job with the administrative part but there is some lacking in the content part.
This was my finally say about the candidate.
Now for the Faroese Wikipedia as a whole.
Unfortunately it has been hard to get native faroese speakers to write articles and therefore it has been both helpful and constructive to have foreign people writing for the -pedia. Sadly this has in my opinion had some negative effects. Being that the first a native person sees when he enter the faroes wikipedia is a (in some sense) badly written article, without basic structure (wiki style guide) this might discourage a person which we really need (no offence) from contributing to the project. Off course I do not want to discourage non-faroese people to contribute, but I think that because of the size of the language/country and thus the native-faroese-contributors the majority of the contributors to the faroese wikipedia are non-faroese and therefore they need to be more strict when trying to write in a language the do not know. Otherwise the errors will propagate and continue to be there for a long time.

uackor 3. nov 2009 kl. 11:34 (UTC)[reply]

PS. Being the only bureaucrat this unfortunately gives me some pretend admin+ property. But Wikipedia does not work like this but by using discussion and consensus to reach agreement. Therefore I have no problem with the current vote for bureaucrat although I do think that the voters should only be people who contribute to the Faroese Wikipedia project. Looking at the people who have voted here, until now, no one can be stated to properly fulfil the property of being an active contributor to the Faroese Wikipedia (hope I do not offend anybody, that is not my intention, but I am trying to be fair (to the faroese wikipedia in a sense)).
  • Viðmerking Several of the problems Quackor addresses are more general, and probably shared by several other small wikipedias. These issues belong to the kind of stuff for which I'd like to have a consensus among the bureaucrats, once there are several. This is one reason why I think a continuing discussion should come first, and a possible elevation to the buerocrat status later. Three specific comments:
  • About the former discussion: The issue has indeed been up before. However, from Niceley's side almost all of it consisted of arguments for him becoming a bureaucrat. Quackor argued against, but IMHO he also tried to initiate some discussions about policies. Niceley has only answered this with concrete promises of not abusing the bureaucrat powers (which is good), but not much more. IMHO you need to discuss broader issues.
  • About categorising: Quackor is right; but I think that Niceley has not quite understood how categorising is done. I made a suggestion about categories for Nobel prize winners; Niceley answered that this was a good idea, and that we might ask Quackor to fix it. (This is an abbreviation; I hope I do not misinterpretate you, Niceley; you may read the whole exchange at the very end of the section Brúkarakjak:Niceley#Spursmál.)
Niceley, in general experienced editors add categories to new articles while they write them. Since the very little I've done at fo:wiki mostly has concerned categories, I'm willing to explain this and my ideas about categories here at your user talk or elsewhere; but you also might want to re-read part of the instructions on how to edit. You may read it in no:wiki or en:wiki; there are the same types of category trees on most wikis.
Actually, most things with categorising any editor can do. A few may be reserved to administrators (like renaming categories). I do not think that any categorising rights with any importance in practice are reserved for bureoaurats.
  • About renaming: Niceley, you have mentioned the potential problem with long waiting times for people who wish to change user identity. Is this a problem in practice? In other words, could you mention one or two concrete examples where Quackor's long absences from editing actually lead to problems? If you can, I think that that would strengthen the reasons for acting now considerably. Otherwise, I see no real trouble in waiting for another year or so. Jörgen B 3. nov 2009 kl. 13:42 (UTC)[reply]
  • Viðmerking I will have to make a respons to the comments - especially the one from Quackor:
  • First to Quackor – I think your comment was highly unfair. It doesn’t look like there’s too many things I’ve done here according to you. Just to let you know - I’ve been placing “stubs” on small articles, categorized articles, making templates (for instance: flagicons, states/terrirorries in the U.S., etc), corrected articles (for example from grammatical errors – even from your articles! Reference - 1. you write “Finland” while three of my Faroese dictionaries says “Finnland” would be the right translation, 2. In the same article you have errors like two letters, while it should have been one), translated lots of articles after requests, posting the article of the month several times, made “pictures of the month” a lot of times, blocked vandalizing users, contacted new users not only with the ‘standard greeting’ as you indicate, placing links to similar articles/relevant web pages, linked words and the list goes on and on.
In general, I’ve been the one who kept this Wikipedia in activity. While you contribute a few times now and then, most times to update your discussion page and not contribute with other stuff at all (for instance welcome users, write articles, etc.). The last days though, you’ve been very active here, something that I really appreciate :)
And when you mention that I have both spelling and grammatical errors – can you please explain that? Because every single one of the articles I’ve been placing here, have been corrected and approved by friends/family of mine that speaks Faroese fluently. So it seems quite strange to me, but if it’s so – can you please correct the errors when you find them? Because not one of my articles have been corrected for language-errors. And I think it would have been a much better idea if you corrected my errors, wrote it on the articles discussion-page and/or sent me a message about it.
When it comes to the uploading of new pictures, remembering sources and adding external links and references to each and every article – this is all things that I admit that I’ll have to become better at.
If the bureaucrat-rights is not some kind of ""admin+ status"", why don’t you give all the administrators on the Faroese Wikipedia bureaucrat-rights, like they for instance have done on the Spanish Wikipedia? That would be a great solution and should make most of us satisfied Quackor;)
  • And to Jörgen B – I did not understand how to categorize, but thanks to you, I’ve learned it today. Thanks! But I can’t quite understand why it should have anything to do with me being able to change nicknames or not (not that forgetting to place 'external links' have anything more to do with it though). Niceley 4. nov 2009 kl. 18:30 (UTC)
  • Viðmerking The position you apply for does include a certain responsibility for the whole Faroese wikipedia. As I said, I think that if we have two mainly responsible persons, you and Quackor, they should more or less share the views on how the fo:wiki is to be improved. Not in details, necessarily, but anyhow broadly. Quackor brought up categorisation ar one of the problems, from his point of view. I didn't, but I had noted the problem, and I do think that it would be good if both of you work in the same direction in this field (among others), if you are to share the main administrative responsibility for this wikipedia. I'm happy if my explanations are of any help in achieving this. That's all.
About names of countries: I suggest that fo:wiki should try to follow the suggestions on]. In this particular case, that would mean "Finnland", as Niceley's dictionaries suggest. However, this is a detail; I know very well that constructing sentences in a languague one isn't used to may lead to rather strange results, from the native user's point of view.
(Within parenthesis, another question: What dictionaries do you own? I just have the classical Jacobsen-Matras: Føroysk-donsk orðabók (and its older origin in Færøsk anthologi), the dictionary part of Lockwood: An introduction to modern Faroese, and finally Lindberg-Hylin: Färöord, lítil føroysk-svensk orðabók. I'd be interested in finding other dictionaries, too.) Jörgen B 4. nov 2009 kl. 21:42 (UTC)[reply]
I only have two Faroese dictionaries: "Færøysk-nynorsk ordbok" (Egil Lehmann, 1987) and "Føroyskt-ensk orðabók" (George Vaughan Chichester, 1985). I usually use a lot of the online dictionaries, such as the one from Freelang, Orðabókagrunnurin, this one or the online version of Webster's Dictionary. Niceley 5. nov 2009 kl. 14:49 (UTC)
Thanks! Jörgen B 5. nov 2009 kl. 16:21 (UTC)[reply]
  • Stuðlar I'm writing this comment in english since it looks like english is the language used. I'm from the norwegian wikipedia and thought I should step by to give my support to niceley. If he's not appointed as a bearucrat after all this support I think niceley should contact someone from another wikipedia and rapport it as misuse.... It looks like most people want him to be a bearucrat and quackor should respect that. Bazzy11 4. nov 2009 kl. 22:54
I will not contact anyone from another Wikipedia, but rather talk it over with Quackor and the other users here at the Faroese one. But don't misunderstand, I appreciate your support very much!! Niceley 5. nov 2009 kl. 07:19 (UTC)
  • Viðmerking I know what my contributions are and they are not what this request is about and certainly do not include sentences such as The controversial Moore owns many documentaries which are highest on the top list of documentaries which have won most films in again.
To the request at hand, I see no real contributes to the Faroese Wikiepdia voting here. Is it because there are no active contributors to the Faroese Wikipedia at the moment? If this is the case then I think this is wrong place to be discussing this because there won't really be any vote. I propose then that we discuss the broader issues on your discussion page and if (when) we come to an agreement I give you bureaucrat status. uackor 6. nov 2009 kl. 07:47 (UTC)[reply]
  • Viðmerking I second Quackor's suggestion, which I think is sensible. I hope that neither you nor Niceley will mind if I check in on the discussion om Niceley's home page, and perhaps make an occasional remark now and then. Jörgen B 6. nov 2009 kl. 17:42 (UTC)[reply]
  • Viðmerking Da har jeg startet gjenåpnet diskusjon med Quackor på hans diskusjonsside. Tusen takk til alle som har bidratt :-) Niceley 2. mars 2010 kl. 18:41 (UTC)