Commons:Administrators/Requests and votes/Lar (de-adminship)

Request withdrawn by the requester, see [1]

Lar (de-adminship)

Links for Lar (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth)

Scheduled to end: 20:33, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

On May 6th and 7th User:Lar deleted a lot of images referring as Out of project scope Commons is not your pornsite, not needed to have an entire series of similar pics and similar reasons. According to COM:PS:

Wikimedia Commons is a media file repository making available public domain and freely-licensed educational media content (images, sound and video clips) to all. It acts as a common repository for the various projects of the Wikimedia Foundation, but you do not need to belong to one of those projects to use media hosted here.

Actually it is possible that third party projects do use media on the commons directly from its servers. Media therefor does not necessary have to be used in any WMF project for being useful. User:Lar deleted files which actually were within the scope of the project.

Under no circumstances an administrator should act on jumping on an already rolling train (in this case on Mr. Wales' train) without having serious reasons for doing so. User:Lar did not have such reasons. He even did not consider about the effects his deletion orgy would have on other projects like Wikipedia, Wikibooks, Wikinews, Wikisource, or Wikiquote, even in other language versions. Doing so he damaged at least one of those projects.

The debate is not wether or not images are porn, bad quality, unneeded or whatsoever reason User:Lar gave in the deletion log but there should under all circumstances be held a regular RFD discussion and a consensus in this discussion should be reached. However, User:Lar decided in all instances in question by his own discretion. It is not an administrator who decides which image is educational and which is not. The community is deciding this. Therefor User:Lar abused his rights as an administrator.

He also fed more heat into an already high-emotional discussion and acted therefor inappropriate for an administrator.

But the most serious problem is what impression about Commons or any other WMF project had been sent to the outside: the signal is "WMF projects can be influenced by any opinion pressure group" -- like it happened last week after Fox TV reported about porn on the Wikipedia. The next time it might be other groups, possibly fundamentalists on political, religious, and/or scientificial themes, and I fear that Wikipedia will loose its independence and its neutrality. The word censorship was issued in critical discussions throughout a lot of projects on the crisis, including German, Dutch and other European Wikipediae. Therefore he damaged the image of the Wikipedia and the reliability on the Wikipedia in its whole.

An example of by Lar deleted files is:

File:Ashley_Taking_a_Shower_07.jpg, used on French Wikibooks, leading CommonsDelinker to vandalize fr:b:Photographie/Thèmes/Le nu

Considering all this I feel that Lar should be de-administered. --Matthiasb (talk) 18:33, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

Remove --Matthiasb (talk) 18:33, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Cut it out. Even if any admin deleted in error, the haphazard and unclear instructions given from on high are to blame, not any individual admin. Wknight94 ^talk 18:50, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Let's stop going after other volunteers who are here to help. FloNight ♥♥♥ 18:55, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This request is absurd. Move on. Bastique ^{☎ appelez-moi!} 18:58, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I've checked out some images recently deleted by him, and all of them are really out of project scope or simply have an inacceptably poor quality. That's never ever comparable to Jimbo's deletion which did also concern useful images. Please do not overdraw. --S^[1] 19:05, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I concur with Wknight94. Even if deletions weren't perfectly backed up by our policies, the statement issued by the WMF Board of Trustees indicated that such deletions were urgently required. I suggest to go through these deleted files, post them at COM:UDEL, or alternatively turn them into regular deletion requests. We do not need any more drama, we have to move forward. And, finally, this attempt to desysop Lar does not follow our policy: De-adminship requests that are opened without prior discussion leading to some consensus for removal may be closed by a bureaucrat as inadmissible. --AFBorchert (talk) 19:05, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note that this request for desysop was discussed at the German WP (de:w:Wikipedia Diskussion:Kurier) as well as on User talk:Jimbo Wales. Therefore this request is admissible. --Matthiasb (talk) 19:09, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This has to be discussed at Commons on one of the public pages as, for example, COM:AN/U. --AFBorchert (talk) 19:15, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Says who? (Otherwise: en:WP:IAR, as did other, you f.ex.) --Matthiasb (talk) 19:35, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have ever read the policy? And you haven't even notified Lar. --AFBorchert (talk) 19:39, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Matthiasb, judging by the voting so far, I would recommend don't bother continuing - this is a silly and embarrassing exercise. Wknight94 ^talk 19:43, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Bastique. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 20:09, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above... — Dferg (talk) 20:18, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, I'd suggest closing this one early. Blurpeace 20:39, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I fail to see where Lar acted in bad faith. Tiptoety ^talk 20:49, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

halda, aknot whot, --birdy geimfyglið _(:> )=| 21:25, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

KeepIf Lar can't be trusted I don't know who can be.KTo288 (talk) 21:33, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep... somebody wants to see heads roll? Can we please get on with this without more artificial drama? --Dschwen (talk) 21:42, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this conflict is about policies, not people. Let's concentrate on discussing which policies we should have, instead of picking individuals for deadmin-proposals. --Church of emacs (talk) 21:44, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This request are absurd and stupid! Grow up! Obelix (talk) 21:47, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per KTo288. odder (talk) 22:06, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and close per Commons:Administrators/De-adminship policy, as there were no previous discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems and apparently no consensus for removal --Justass (talk) 23:52, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep i agree with Justass --Jan eissfeldt (talk) 00:01, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and concur with AFborchert, Blurpiece, Wknight94, Justass - this should be closed SatuSuro (talk) 01:01, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as per Justass, Tiptoety and KTo288. This needs to close, nothing productive about this. --Captain-tucker (talk) 01:38, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment My talk page is always open if people want to discuss something with me. This seems a bit over the top as a way to get my attention,. ++Lar: t/c 04:02, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I trust Lar enough to let him keep the buttons. Huib talk 04:32, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, of course. Cheers, Jack Merridew 06:17, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above. --Geitost (talk) 06:53, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep a bit hot-headed, -jkb- (talk) 07:49, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hier hat ein Administrator zum Schaden des Datenbestandes versucht sich im Schein des Allmächtigen zu sonnen. Jemand der meint sowas nötig zu haben ist als Admin gänzlich ungeeignet. Weissbier (talk) 08:26, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as per the rationale voiced by AFBorchert, Justass and others. The nominator obviously did neither try any communication with Lar nor notify him of this request, quite disappointing. In addition, such a revenge-driven request (proof, if you need it:[2] abstrafen = punish) does not support the healing of our community, that we need now. --Túrelio (talk) 10:27, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep wat. -FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 21:18, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The request has been withdrawn, someone should close this. –Tryphon ^☂ 21:23, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and closed it + protected the page as it seems it is the common practice. Should you have any question, I will be glad to answer you on my talk page. — Dferg (talk) 21:32, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrewal of request

I am withdrewing my request considering two reasons. First, the constructive discussion I had with FloNight and Túrelio on my talp page. Second was Gregory Maxwell's statement. Both of them showed me that the Commons are not without hope yet and that still reasonability is important here. However some of the statements made above are not. Some of them are indeed personal attacks, especially that of Obelix.

Many of the files had been deleted as out of project scope without considering wether they're used or not. Deleting files which are used in any WMF project is harmful and it is vandalism, except for the content is illegal. It is vandalism because of CommonsDelinker unlinks those images. Simply undeleting on commons often is the smallest part of the reverting process. One image, f.ex. which got deleted, was used in 30+ language versions. Who will fix those? A.F. Borchert, who is advising to move on. Okay, A.F., go ahead. Don't ask for others to move on, move first.

Because of deletioning used images for other reasons then copy or law violations is vandalism. There can't be a discussion on that. I urge User:Lar to reconsider the second statement in this edit which at that point of the affair wasn't very helpful but over the top. --Matthiasb (talk) 20:03, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]