Talk:Stewards/Elections 2024/Votes/~aanzx

Further discussion on my vote

Hi @~aanzx:, I'll reply here to avoid cluttering the voting page.

"Also my point for not working on crosswiki through swviewer is that I am that many times I am proficient in many languages, for example on working on swviewer is if a user is reverting a edit on page which was previously vandalised if they do not have any clue if they do not have understanding of content reverting would probably be waste of time" - I don't understand this. If the problem is that you can't work crosswiki because you don't understand the language, that's something which you do need to improve on, using machine translation where necessary. A GR/GS is normally expected to determine whether an edit is vandalism and react accordingly. Leaderboard (talk) 08:47, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

@Leaderboard, i was just trying explain my point of view on how crosswiki actions should probably not be a valid reason for not endorsing a user as more likely it would be not always right imo, but i understand your and other users thoughts on crosswiki being necessity, which can't be expected from me as i explained above.Thanks for valuable thoughts.~aanzx ^✉ _© 10:14, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @~aanzx:, "crosswiki actions should probably not be a valid reason for not endorsing a user" - and that's correct. I don't actually expect users to have significant cross-wiki experience, and (unlike many others) appreciate that there are may ways to contribute as a steward. However, in that case, you need to show some evidence that you plan to contribute to other areas within the steward toolkit. To give examples: in SE2023, we had two users, both of which I supported, that didn't have significant crosswiki experience. However, both users showed that they could contribute in other ways, by demonstrating their technical proficiencies (which is a field that stewards definitely need). In this year, Lee Vilenski explained on how they could use their experience as a bureaucrat on en.wiki as a steward - similarly a valid answer.

Now looking back at your candidature: "The reason why I am applying for stewards user group is to represent Indian languages within the Wikimedia Steward User Group is vital for fostering inclusivity and accessibility across the diverse linguistic landscape" - as you may have seen, this caused a lot of confusion with voters, who (in my opinion) misinterpreted what you were trying to say. And while focusing on Indic wikis is OK, you need to demonstrate something that you could use to help on these wikis (as above, this can be technical proficiency, antivandalism etc). Your answer to SHB2000's question was "...my application is a major skip from no global permission I am experienced in some steward tools and handling spam reports on off-wikimedia site this is reason why I chose apply for steward user group" - again resulted in considerable confusion with Fandom and your skipping GR/GS, and it's on that light that I made the note that crosswiki experience on Wikimedia is expected if your plan as a steward is to remove vandalism. To be clear, GR/GS is not a pre-requisite in any way, but people applying to become a steward to remove vandalism generally have them.

Put it this way: it's fine that you want to focus on Indic wikis, but what are you going to do there once you're a steward (eg: you could focus on anti-vandalism, which would involve removing spam, nonsense, global-locking users; another option is the technical side, such as maintenance, abuse filters and scripting)? That's completely missing in your statement and answers. Leaderboard (talk) 13:33, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Yeah agree with you, I kind of took it lightly in the early stage of election process where I thought only thing steward group was supposed to do was what I learnt from Steward#Access, steward policy and steward handbook which was not enough since i questions asked were about situations I never faced before so i couldn't answer properly some of questions which i think was major drawback, thanks to pointers from you and other users, I know I can try again in future, being as active as possible in areas of my expertise. ~aanzx ^✉ _© 14:54, 17 February 2024 (UTC)