The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Yesterday, User:Davidwr removed my vote from Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/Nihonjoe 4 (see [1]). I was stunned that a non-bureaucrat would do this. I believe I have the same privilege as everyone else does of voting in RfBs and RfAs. When I found it, I reverted the removal, noting that it was improper to remove my vote (see [2]). This was my first opportunity to undo this improper action. Yes, it was after the close, but it was my first chance to do so. I then noted that nobody except a bureaucrat had a right to remove my vote [3]. I never actually thought a bureaucrat would remove anyone's vote. I don't think it's ever happened before? I was absolutely floored, astonished, gobsmacked when WJBscribe came along and re-removed my vote (see [4]). Worse, he then used his admin privileges to force his preferred version [5].

I must ask; do I or do I not have the privilege of voting in RfBs and RfAs? --Hammersoft (talk) 15:37, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Please, let sleeping dogs lie. --MZMcBride (talk) 15:50, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Your vote has not been removed as can be seen from the current version of the page. You are still listed there under "Neutral". The only thing that was moved was your comments, and they are visible on the talk page. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 15:52, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I made an edit on this vote and explained it, but since we're discussing it, I guess I should explain again: the software that checks for duplicate votes was attributing Hammersoft's vote to Davidwr and showing that davidwr had voted twice, so I changed the "#" to ":", so that we wouldn't have multiple people running the report to try to figure out what the duplicate vote was. - Dank (push to talk) 15:53, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I was one of those people, so thank you fixing it. Hammersoft, can I ask why you didn't put your paragraph into the Discussion section? -- Soap ^Talk/_{Contributions} 15:56, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

• Because it was a neutral vote. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:24, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Note: If a 'crat needs my input on this matter please drop a line on User talk:Davidwr or drop me an email. If I do not respond within a day to a user talk message, drop me an email. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 16:03, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

• I most emphatically am not a sleeping dog on this. It is not proper to have my vote removed. Marking as neutral, and removing my comments, you might as well remove everyone else's comments. Does anyone really think there wasn't substantial discussion about the issue on the rest of the RfB? Perhaps we should all work so hard to remove everyone's comments. Make RfA/RfB a straight vote. No need for bureaucrats then. --Hammersoft (talk) 16:43, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I understand your ire, but the final version of the page includes the fact that you opted neutral and a link to your comments. As such, your suggestion to it being the equivalent of removing all the !votes is over the top. Whether or not it was the right thing to do, I'm not discussing here - I'm more interested in addressing your obvious discomfort. I think the problem stemmed from you heading your !vote as a comment - it is of course a grey area, but comments would normally go in the discussion section or the talk page. I anticipate your comeback that just about everything on an RfA or RfB page should be comment, but if you can manage to see it dispassionately, it's not as bad a situation as your opinion being entirely removed from the page. Hope that helps, at least a little. --Dweller (talk) 17:00, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

• My opinion was entirely removed from the page. Perhaps I should just vote in future RfAs/RfBs with "Oppose <reason withheld because I'm not permitted to post my opinion>"? No, I'm not dispassionate about this. This was a crap decision. And then to have the page protected immediately after my vote was forcibly removed by the same editor? ArbCom has de-admin'ed people over similar stunts before. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:11, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
• All I'm asking for here is for my vote to be restored to its proper place, and for WJBscribe to be admonished for using his administrator tools inappropriately. You can reference Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Principles#Administrators, "Administrators have been granted the power to ... protect pages... [This] abilit[y] must ... never be used to "win" a content dispute." and Wikipedia:Protection_policy#Content_disputes, "Administrators should not protect or unprotect a page to further their own position in a content dispute." I'm not trying to create a firestorm or create headaches for WJBscribe. But, he has acted inappropriately and his actions need to be undone and he needs to be shown how his actions were improper to prevent future problems such as this. WJBscribe is a conscientious person. I doubt he'll make the same error twice. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:06, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

In your state of upset, you're teetering over the line of reasonableness now, which is why I advised you to calm down and I've fast lost sympathy with you. You are factually inaccurate. A neutral !vote from you remains on the RfB and I for one will neither be undoing WJB's action, nor criticising him for it. I'd further advise you to moderate your language here and elsewhere on wiki. Finally, please read the instructions on this page. This is not a place for grievances and if you want to take this further, WJB's talk page is the place. But if you do go there, keep civil, or you'll end up talking yourself into bother. This thread is closed. --Dweller (talk) 10:33, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

• A bureaucrat acted inappropriately in his actions as a bureaucrat and the bureaucrat's noticeboard isn't the place to take it? And you make a claim that I am being unreasonable. How so? Is it unreasonable to expect that my vote should not be deleted (it has, in fact, been deleted and still not counted)? Is it unreasonable to expect that a bureaucrat, who voiced opinion on the RfB in question, shouldn't be putting himself in the position of attempting to control what content goes onto it in violation of ArbCom precedent? What language is it you expect me to moderate? I placed no attack upon WJBscribe except to call his actions into question. If that counts as violating WP:NPA, then block me now because I fully intend to continue in this manner should I find other editors acting in inappropriate ways. We have noticeboards, in part, to call people's actions into question. I did so. There's nothing uncivil about that in any respect. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:44, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I quote you "This was a crap decision". That's uncivil. Please desist from posting here on this subject, and go to WJB's talk page. Civilly. --Dweller (talk) 15:01, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.