Wikiversity:Candidates for Custodianship/Abd 4

If implemented, this will begin my fourth period as a probationary custodian. For reference, see
 * Candidates for Custodianship/Abd filed 2 August 2010‎
 * Candidates for Custodianship/Abd 2 filed 26 December 2010‎
 * Candidates for Custodianship/Abd 3 filed 8 May 2011‎
 * Candidates for Custodianship/Abd (full custodian) (Derived from Abd 3) filed by mentor, 12 September 2011‎

I have often written that I don't need custodian tools to work on topics of interest to me, here. That remains true. I can request deletion with a template or undeletion on a custodian's talk page, as examples, and this is normally handled quickly and easily. However, I have, more often recently, come across situations where it would be substantially more efficient if I had the tools. I will avoid anything controversial as to tool usage. Once again, I consent to the ../Standard stop agreement, (this permanent link), which will serve pending development of clearer policy. --Abd (discuss • contribs) 17:05, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Questions

 * What pushes you to candidate again and again, even you had no support from the community?--Juandev (discuss • contribs) 14:39, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Juandev. On Wikipedia, it's "admins for life" because it is believed that any admin who actually does the job will attract negative comment. There is some truth to that.


 * I made the request because I see work that I can do. It is not controversial work (or if it was controversial at one time, it is no longer.)


 * I have not asked for tools since 2011. I had lots of support then, definitely not "no support." I agreed to "permanent probationary custodianship" to avoid useless conflict. I am not, here, going over what happened then, not unless necessity arises.


 * My being a custodian is not a necessity, but custodianship policy, as it was established by the founders, and was unquestioningly accepted for years, is very important.


 * This is not a request that, by policy, should be controversial, nor is "consensus" required: a mentor agrees and a 'crat implements. It has been that way for many years. The safeguard is that a 'crat would not implement a harmful probationary custodianship, even if a mentor supports. Our policy deliberately allows renewal of probationary custodianship.


 * What happened almost four years ago should be irrelevant. What matters is the mentor and the supervising community. --Abd (discuss • contribs) 16:12, 11 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Abd, what you have you learnt from the three previous probationary custodian periods that you think can make you a better Wikiversity custodian? Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:18, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Patience. --Abd (discuss • contribs) 12:04, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Can you elaborate on how patience would make you a better custodian? -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 13:59, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Since you ask .... In my previous periods, I treated probationary custodianship as if it were being a custodian responsible for site maintenance and keeping Wikiversity safe for users. for a time, in fact, I was doing almost all the regular custodial work. When there were serious issues requiring immediate custodial attention, in a very few cases (two), I treated them as emergencies. See the draft Recusal policy before it was gutted. In particular, the "emergency" section. I followed the draft policy I had written.
 * In another case, I waited 10 days to undo a block placed by a custodian, in my view contrary to policy and necessity. (And I still followed recusal policy, immediately referring the matter to the community.) Because there are now multiple active custodians, and as a probationer, I would instead make a request for action on RCA, the unblock not being an emergency. Not being a ratified Custodian by vote of the community, I would not have the level of granted authority needed for that action. Patience. Trust the community. --Abd (discuss • contribs) 15:36, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Comments

 * I really recommend against going through with this again without a consensus being sought ahead of time. A 4th go around would amount to making even more of a mockery of the process than the 3rd go around did. --SB_Johnny talk 01:02, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree; I'm not inclined to switch on custodian status for a 4th probationary custodianship period unless there is community consensus to do so. This could be done in a separate section below and advertised via Colloquium and sitenotice. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 23:27, 18 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Below on May 10, Abd wrote "I invite all custodians and Wikiversitans to support and guide me through this process." Since then, he has insulted both bureaucrats, insulted a custodian , badgered a probationary custodian , and overwhelmed and confused users to the point where they expressed concern  .  Abd's recent actions have indicated that he has not learned from his previous experiences, and is not prepared to be a custodian or assistant at this time.  I urge User:Marshallsumter to withdraw his support as mentor and give Abd an opportunity to reconsider his approach to be more in line with his own words of seeking support and accepting guidance.  -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 13:31, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
 * This is not a contested process, but comments are invited, as is support and guidance. I'm not seeing any of the latter above. Policy and tradition are being violated here, once a mentor has accepted, process is that a 'crat implements. I'm not going to argue on this page, this is, by policy, an uncontested process. I will respond to charges on Talk. --Abd (discuss • contribs) 15:34, 30 August 2015 (UTC)


 * With respect to Abd's actions listed by Dave Braunschweig above and also commented on by Leutha on other talk pages, I was not consulted ahead of time with respect to any of these. If I was to be mentoring Abd, I nor he were not notified accordingly. Had Abd been a probationary custodian or an "assistant" custodian these actions would not have been involved in either because these actions, at least those I've read so far, are the actions of a Wikiversity user and should be considered accordingly.


 * It was my understanding that if our only two active bureaucrats have agreed not to grant a probationary custodianship to Abd this matter of another probationary custodianship was over and settled. My support for Abd comes from reading his wisdom in approaching some of our problems. That support has not changed. His extensive analyses and descriptions of problems are often thorough and insightful. Keeping things simple is a helpful suggestion which means reduce the analysis to the final steps so that a few points exist from which to make a sound conclusion. I cannot condone insulting others also dedicated to developing Wikiversity.


 * With respect to the probationary custodianship (Abd4), if either of our active bureaucrats changes their mind I will be happy to mentor Abd either as a probationary custodian or an "assistant custodian". --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 22:08, 30 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks. The inaction of bureaucrats establishes nothing, it is not a "settling." However, I am settling this, for now. As to "insulting others," I invite review of my actions. I will note, though, that some routinely interpret criticism as "insults," and I have responded with regard to Dave's allegations on the Talk page, here, I found them remarkable for how misleading they were. Nobody needs to read that if they don't want to. If this candidacy is reactivated, it will be there. --Abd (discuss • contribs) 04:24, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Custodians willing to mentor

 * See User talk:Abd, offer by Marshallsumter
 * I am willing to mentor Abd. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 05:31, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate here if you accept one of the above custodian mentors:
 * I accept Marshallsumter as mentor. I invite all custodians and Wikiversitans to support and guide me through this process. --Abd (discuss • contribs) 17:05, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Withdrawal
I am considering withdrawal. What is important to take to the community, what is worth the possible disruption, is probationary custodianship process, as well as a developing situation that could take us down some old and dangerous detours. My personal candidacy may confuse the issue. So unless substantial support appears, I intend to withdraw this candidacy without prejudice, leaving me more free to address the serious structural problem that showed up clearly in 2010 and 2011, resulting in attempts to change our most innovative custodianship process, that worked extremely well, and that has still been working, though the same basic problem did show up again: unsupervised probationary custodians. I will do this soon, unless requested to continue the candidacy by a user whom I see as standing for Wikiversity and the community. Lack of such a request will not be taken by me as a rejection; after all, I have just given reason for withdrawal. I will remain open to suggestions, complaints, and advice, because I have long been a "quasi-administrator" here. We need more like me, many more. Absolutely, the task I have taken on cannot be done alone. It requires community. --Abd (discuss • contribs) 19:19, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

✅, page link removed from Candidates for Custodianship. We may now focus on the issues of substance, rather than Abd Good or Abd Bad. Comment remains welcome on the attached talk page or my user talk page. If users wish to support my Wikiversity work, please watchlist User talk:Abd, at least look at edit summaries. --Abd (discuss • contribs) 20:06, 31 August 2015 (UTC)