Wikibooks:Administrators/Status request archive

From Wikibooks
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This page is an archive of old requests for administrator or bureaucrat rights. Please do not edit this page unless you're archiving.


This discussion has finished. The result was successful


Well, let's see. I started helping this project a few weeks ago when Pmlinediter mentioned it on IRC (heh, if this was RfA i'd be slaughtered for saying that word. ;)). I'd never worked on Wikibooks before, and as there's so much here to be written, it looked great. So I started contributing. I've written a few pages on topics such as card games, Cookbook, music, and intend to continue. I've got about 130 edits and contribute frequently, and would use the extra tools mostly for some page moving where a redirect is really not required (suppressredirect). Another admin to help fight the small amount of vandalism we receive would be helpful too, I monitor the rc feed on and can usually pick up vandalism edits as they are made. Thanks for your comments, GrooveDog (talk) 00:47, 25 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This discussion has finished. Please don't change it.

This discussion has finished. The result was unsuccessful


Hi, i'm requesting bureaucrat access at this wiki. The SEWB community has expanded considerably over the past few weeks, now with about 7-10 active users, and i think we've gotten to the size where we could do with some bureaucrats, instead of being dependent on the stewards at Meta for things like +sysoping and bot requests. I'm among the most active users here (i usually check the RC at least a few times a day), so I would likely be able to respond to any bureaucrat tasks in a timely manner. I have bureaucrat access at SEWQ and the English Wikinews, so i already am familiar with what bureaucrats do. :-) Regardless of this RfB's result, i'm here to stay. Thanks for your consideration, Tempodivalse [talk] 00:42, 14 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support - We need a bureaucrat. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 00:47, 14 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support a local bureaucrat. If needed I can run for this right as well. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:48, 14 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose I really hate to oppose anyone, especially someone who's helped so much with the WB namespace of this project so much. It's really not that I don't trust you, I truly do believe that you'd be a good judge of consensus and trust you and everything. It's really your lack of mainspace contribs. I don't intend to sound like a certain anger-filled page, it's just that in all seriousness, to save this project (it's up for being closed), we need contributions in the mainspace, new books/pages and the like. You just don't have those, you make spelling corrections and other gnomey things (that's extremely helpful, btw) but at the moment we need our active contributors to get into building our content rather then worrying about our project side. Meta can handle our requests for the moment, we have no active bots and everyone here has SUL so no one will really need renaming atm. A week or so of full, mainspace contributions and I'd have absolutely no problem supporting you. Just my two cents. GrooveDog (talk) 01:12, 14 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Well really per GrooveDog. Please contribute to the mainspace first. This vote might change if you do such work. Pmlineditor  08:12, 14 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Okay. Groovedog brings up a good point that mainspace expansion, rather than admin-related maintenance, is needed to help save the wiki from closure. I'll try to create some new books, thanks for the suggestion. :-) Cheers Tempodivalse [talk] 13:28, 14 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    No hard feelings or anything. :) Just that atm we really don't need to be worrying about new sysops/bureaucrats, we need to worry about how long this project will last. We have 400 pages in the mainspace, and I just feel as if the people representing this wiki as leaders (bureaucrats) need to demonstrate that we are indeed trying to help. Thanks, GrooveDog (talk) 20:48, 14 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose per GD. Razorflame (talk) 03:43, 19 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Result: Not promoted. Sorry, but there is no consensus to promote. Pmlineditor  07:54, 25 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This discussion has finished. Please don't change it.

This discussion has finished. The result was successful

Maximillion Pegasus

Maximillion Pegasus is an active editor here, and i think he can be trusted with admin privs, being an admin at SEWT and SEWQ. As such, i'm nominating him for the position - and we can never have too many admins. :-) Tempodivalse [talk] 18:27, 14 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Do you accept my nom? Tempodivalse [talk] 18:27, 14 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Result: Consensus has formed; Maximillion is now an admin. Pmlineditor  17:45, 21 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This discussion has finished. Please don't change it.

This discussion has finished. The result was successful


Hi all, I'm requesting access to the sysop tools so I can help with various maintenance tasks, including blocking open proxies and simplifying MediaWiki pages. I'm somewhat active here, and I check in once or twice a day to look for unproductive edits. I'm an admin at multiple wikis, including the English Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons, so I do have quite a bit of experience with adminship. Thanks, –Juliancolton | Talk 00:29, 14 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support - Sure. Tiptoety talk 00:30, 14 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Trusted, and reasonably active. Don't see why not. Tempodivalse [talk] 00:42, 14 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support - Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 00:47, 14 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support - Someone who has mainspace edits, trusted clearly. I was under the impression that Mediawiki interface message "translations" were done at betawiki:, however I may be mistaken. Just give him the tools already. :) GrooveDog (talk) 01:14, 14 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • strongly Meh, no brainer. Definitely yes. Pmlineditor  08:12, 14 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Result: Consensus has formed; JC is now an admin. Pmlineditor  15:44, 21 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This discussion has finished. Please don't change it.

This discussion has finished. The result was successful


Well, TDV said most of it for me. I'm sufficiently active in the mainspace (48% of my edits) and have been simplifying the MW interface. I'm a sysop on simplewp and a crat on simplequote, and I'd like to help out. Thank you, Pmlineditor  08:33, 14 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support Trusted. Tempodivalse [talk] 13:28, 14 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support - Yes, we definitely need a local bureaucrat. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 18:24, 14 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • NeutralFor the sole reason that imo at the "stage" our community is at we don't really need a bureaucrat. This is really the "other half" of my oppose to TDV, imo Meta can handle requests that crats do if we need them. We have the standard bot policy (automatic approval pretty much), no one needs to be renamed and sysops are few. I like that you've contributed more to the mainspace but at the same time we need more pages written then sysops promoted. As with TDV as well, I fully trust you to not abuse this tool but I can't support because honestly we don't need a crat right now. GrooveDog (talk) 03:31, 15 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just one thing, we currently have 4 RfXes. In the past 2-3 weeks, we've had 7 RfXes compared to about 1 previously, ie, the number has doubled. Being a crat does not create problems in article writing. If we have RfXes, then if a crat closes it, it will be easier than going to meta - making a request etc. etc. I like keeping things local. Pmlineditor  10:08, 15 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well done on answering the hidden question. :) Change to Support. GrooveDog (talk) 12:57, 15 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This discussion has finished. Please don't change it.

This discussion has finished. The result was successful, user promoted


Hello friends. I am requesting +sysop here. I am an administrator at the English Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons, Simple Wikiquote, am a member of the foundations OTRS team, and have rollback rights on a number of other simple projects. I am requesting the tools primarily to assist with responding to cross-wiki vandalism, along with blocking open proxies. Thank you for your consideration, Tiptoety talk 02:35, 4 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support - Trusted user, could definitely help with maintenance. –Juliancolton | Talk 02:43, 4 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Tempodivalse 02:50, 4 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support This is the second time I !voted for you in a week :P. Pmlineditor  05:24, 4 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Just one question: If you want to be an admin here, then why do you want this project to be closed? Pmlineditor  13:13, 4 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Because it lacks use, active editors, and active administrators (something I am trying to change). That said, the project is still here and as such, I might as well try and improve it, protect it from vandalism, and who knows maybe editing here will change my mind. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 18:12, 4 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support - Sure, why not. Maximillion Pegasus 17:32, 4 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose; Sixteen edits and sixteen hours of edits is, by far, not enough to even think about adminship. MC8 (b · t) 20:16, Sunday October 4 2009 (UTC)
    Oh, and I granted rollback. MC8 (b · t) 20:18, Sunday October 4 2009 (UTC)
    First, thank you for roll back. Second, as I stated, the main purpose for this request would be to assist in responding to cross-wiki vandalism/attacks and blocking open proxies (which I do quite regularly [1], [2]). I do not feel either of those require a certain number of edits to be able to do. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 20:21, 4 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose per MC8's reasons. Griffinofwales 02:23, 8 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • support per my own reasons... my reason? I guess I trust you. Huib talk 16:03, 8 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment The other two have had their flag granted at meta, but since consensus is not yet clear on this request, I believe it should stay open a little while longer. Maximillion Pegasus 15:56, 9 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Not active enough and not enough editing activity here. Razorflame 00:51, 10 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Yes Wants to protect the project, trusted on 5 other wikis or whatever as an administrator, confident he'll be alright. GrooveDog 20:12, 12 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support SUL 21:35, 12 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Consensus seems pretty clear now. I think Tiptoety can be promoted at this point. –Juliancolton | Talk 22:34, 12 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Noted on meta. GrooveDog (talk) 00:03, 13 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Promoted by steward Mardetanha. Pmlineditor  07:49, 13 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This discussion has finished. Please don't change it.

This discussion has finished. The result was successful, user promoted


Hi, I'm Pmlinediter and I'd like to request sysop here. I'm a sysop at SEWP and SEWQ and have got experience with the bit. I'm fairly experienced here to and would like to assist the other sysops. Also, on a side note, I wonder WHY 2 others requested sysop exactly when I was going to :P Pmlineditor  05:17, 4 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Flag granted at meta. Maximillion Pegasus 15:54, 9 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This discussion has finished. Please don't change it.

This discussion has finished. The result was successful, user promoted


Hallo, i'm requesting administrator status here. Although there's no current pressing need for extra sysops, there have been several times in the past when either I or another user have needed administrator attention, but could not get a response from either of the two semi-active sysops for a long time. I check in here at least a few times a day, and could easily react to vandalism and other admin tasks that the other sysops might miss. I'm a bureaucrat at en.wikinews and simple.wikiquote, and an admin at several other wikis, so i can probably be trusted not to abuse the bits. :-) Thanks for your time, Tempodivalse 02:50, 4 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Flag granted at meta. Maximillion Pegasus 15:54, 9 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This discussion has finished. Please don't change it.

This discussion has finished. The result was rollback granted


I'm not by any means the most active editor here, and I don't plan on becoming one. However, I would like access to the rollback tool to use during the occasional vandalism attacks. I have prior experience with adminship on three WMF projects. If rollback is ever locally enabled (doubtful), I'd likely resign adminship. Thanks, –Juliancolton | Talk 05:22, 24 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support - changed in support.I support this rollback request xD. Abigor 10:22, 24 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I never said I wanted to block new "users". I said we should block automatically-created malbots. Moreover, I don't intend to do any blocking here; I simply want rollback. –Juliancolton | Talk 16:07, 24 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I just gave you rollback rights :-) Are still running for admin? Abigor 17:50, 26 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you! In that case, I withdraw this request. Cheers. –Juliancolton | Talk 17:52, 26 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This discussion has finished. Please don't change it.


Adminship restored by a steward. Juliancolton 19:16, 21 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello friends,

I would like to ask you to restore my rights here on simple.wikibooks. I am back for a month or so and missed my tools multible times when reverting vandalism or tagging test articles for speedy delete.

I let a steward remove my right beter a period of inactitety and I was in that period not thinking about coming back. I am still a administrator on Commons a administrator and bureaucrat on Incubator. I hope nobody opposes in restoring my flags (admin and importer)

Best regards, Abigor 08:59, 21 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • This is rather uncontroversial; Abigor resigned in good standing. Please restore his rights at his request. PeterSymonds 13:03, 21 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Per PS. I would just get on and have it requested at Meta. Goblin 17:51, 21 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • 'admin flag Restored by a steward Thanks that you still trust me :) Abigor 18:00, 21 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

American Eagle

Hello all! I am User:American Eagle ( talk edit watch contribs history links logs localspace delete block ), I am requesting to be granted the +sysop flag, firstly, because I know how to be an administrator, and have much experience in that field (with hundreds of deletions, tens of blocks, etc.). Secondly, I plan to help fight vandalism (with rollback, especially), delete pages, block vandals if needed, etc. on Simple English Wikibooks (as there are only two active admins currently), and also to work on protected/MediaWiki: pages. Finally, I am doing this because adminship isn't a big deal. I hope to help this community grow, and the Delete|Block|Protect buttons will only help in that expedition. Thank you. :) TheAE talk 23:34, 24 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support Sure, why not? No reasons not to promote this user. Cheers, Razorflame 23:38, 24 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Although there's no big reason to deny the flag to AE, there is virtually no third-time-vandalism needing a block, pages are deleted often, and rollback isn't really needed (it's only one click more!). Although I am not very active on-wiki, I monitor the Recent Changes feed, and delete pages as soon as I come across them. According to vvv's edit counter (with a replag of 5 or so days), you only have 75 edits. Maybe you should expand them first? Regards, Microchip08 (talk) 17:52, 25 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
On Simple English Wikiquote, which receives even less vandalism than Simple English Wikibooks, I have over 440+ deletions (see here), as well as many other administrative actions (totaling 687). I did this with virtually no vandalism at all. Even though I may not only use it for vandalism, MC8, I still have much use of the tool. And I also had a low edit count when I became an administrator on Simple English Wikiquote, but it gradually added up. TheAE talk 18:50, 25 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Personally, I feel that I have the deletions front covered (although I may be wrong). Other admin actions are rarely needed, so why do we need another administrator? Regards, Microchip08 (talk) 19:12, 25 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, you do a good job of keeping on top of things. But that wasn't really my point. I mean, I use the administrator tools for non-vandalism as well. I use it to delete and protect projects I work on, and it would be such a waste to add {{delete}} to all 440+ (as above) deletions. It is just a few tools that I use fairly often, and can help with if needed, not really that another administrator is desperately needed. TheAE talk 19:41, 25 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A quick CTRL+F search of your contribs shows that "delete" only comes up once in an edit summary... so it's not fairly often that you use it on this wiki. Regards, Microchip08 (talk) 19:44, 25 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry, re-reading that it sounds very cold. Regards, Microchip08 (talk) 19:45, 25 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't mind. My point is, adminship truly isn't a big deal. It really only is a few buttons given to those who will use it properly. Before becoming an administrator on Simple English Wikiquote, I didn't have many QDs (or Fast deletions) either. I just use it from time to time, and it would only be a benefit to the community, not a harm. TheAE talk 21:44, 25 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  1. Oppose you are to new, and there isn't a big nead for a new admin. Abigor 22:30, 25 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  • I have decided to withdraw this request, and an administrator may properly close this request. Thank you all for the comments. TheAE talk 23:42, 27 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Microchip08 (talk)

Hi there, I'm User:Microchip08 ( talk edit watch contribs history links logs localspace delete block ), and I'd like to apply for administrator status on Simple English Wikibooks. I understand that there has already been a recent suucessful request for adminship, but there are several reasons I would like the flag/think I deserve the flag:

Please bear in mind that when using toolserver tools, there is a replag of around three or four weeks, so edits are pretty much out of sync! The replag should be fixed by mid-Febuary, according to the toolserver people.

I'm not an admin on any Wikimedia project, but I am trusted with the flag on various other wikis: Mibbit, SoGeekItHurts and YourWiki. I have c.5000 edits on all Wikimedia projects combined, and am trusted with rollback on English Wikipedia and Simple English Wikipedia, so I know how to use the flags (although I'm still going to test the tools in my userspace before I 'go live'!). I'm active on many IRC channels, so I can be reached quickly in an emergency.

Please consider my application, and please remember that this isn't a vote. Give reasons for your support, or your oppose. Thank-you. Regards, Microchip08 (talk) 10:18, 30 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Requested at meta. Regards, Microchip08 (talk) 21
34, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Done, I am now an administrator. Thankyou for your support. Regards, Microchip08 (talk) 17
01, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Support - It sure feels good to know that there is at least someone taking care of this wiki. Chenzw 12:54, 30 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thankyou! Good luck on your RfB ;) Regards, Microchip08 (talk) 17:04, 30 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Feel free to come and edit more, of course. Regards, Microchip08 (talk) 22:20, 30 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Pleasant interactions and plenty of helpful edits to this project. PeterSymonds 19:02, 30 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Yay! Thanks! Regards, Microchip08 (talk) 19:03, 30 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support - :O Is that a !voting template I see above? MC8 will surely block you when he gets promoted ;) MC8: you'll do a fine job as an admin, and you have my utmost respect ;) Cheers, BG7even 19:26, 30 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thankyou. Consider this your thankspam, GoblinBot3. Chenzw, consider yourself blocked for a period of 3.14 fortnights, grr. Regards, Microchip08 (talk) 22:07, 30 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support - Active user here that deserves the tools. Maximillion Pegasus 15:27, 1 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

* Support - I am not inactive, my goat broke my finger and it hurts like hell so I am not able to type a lot on the moment. But you have my full support. Abigor 21:53, 1 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Oppose - This sets a very bad precedent on this wiki for administrators to be promoted so quickly after joining. The deletion backlog is one page that should not be deleted because there is some content that needs to be merged with another page. Your number of edits is large, but the majority of your mainspace edits are minor, removing whitespace using an automated tool right before you requested adminship. This suggests you were padding your edit count. Looking at the list of supporters only Abigor has made enough edits to this project to be considered eligible to vote. I appreciate your efforts on this project, but what is the rush to be an admin? There is not much admin work needed here, and such loose standards will only cause a headache in the future. --Ezra Katz 20:45, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I requested adminship (Diff) before I started AWBing(diff). The deletion backlog was mainly cleared yesterday, after returning from a relatively long break. The rush is that at the time of requesting adminship, there are no active administrators. Abigor had 4 edits, you only edit periodically, and the other administrators barely edit at all. Regards, Microchip08 (talk) 20:58, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Taking Wikipedia's criteria in account, I have the required 500 edits and have been here for 3 months. I have a a 60% edit count, as of five weeks ago, so that disregards the AWB edits of yesterday, and still leaves a large edit count. Regards, Microchip08 (talk) 21:08, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • With respect, Ezra, your last 50 edits go back to January 2008. We could use some more activity among the present admins, in my opinion. PeterSymonds 21:11, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I respectfully change my vote to support. My previous objection was unfounded and your record definitely warrants adminship.--Ezra Katz 03:24, 3 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support because this user is a definitive active editor here on this site. Definitely will use the tools for the benefit of the Wikipedia. Cheers, Razorflame 22:07, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Microchip really cares about this project. He deserves it. Shapiros10 01:57, 3 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support I'm not active here, but know Chippy from Wikipedia and IRC, and I trust him to be a good admin :) Majorly 20:36, 3 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support — Sure. RyanCross (talk) 07:50, 4 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose - Canvassing - Abigor 21:51, 5 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Is this a fair vote. I see voters with only 2 edits, with the first one here. And this wiki is very inactive. But you have 10 voters. We don't have so much different edittors here. Why did the come to vote here? Did you ask them? Abigor 21:35, 5 February 2.
Urgh. There were a few "go edit Wikibooks, please" in IRC, but some of these users (Ryan, Chenzw, Abigor, Ezra) weren't even on IRC at the time. Even if these users were discounted, we'd end up with BG7 [edited before RfA], Ezra, Maximillion, Abigor & possibly RyanCross. Therefore, it's still a pass, although it may push me down to a temp. adminship. You'll notice that a few of these tiny-edit editors also voted for Abigor. Regards, Microchip08 (talk) 21:40, 5 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't think the votes from three persons can count.
Malory : 1 edit this year on the rfa none edits in 2008.
Shapiros10  : First edit is your rfa, second one talkpage message.. No edits after that.
Chenzw : Inactive for almost a year, comes back and vote and no real edits after that.

You will stil pass the vote. Abigor 21:51, 5 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Utterly pathetic, Abigor. Seriously. I found this on my own. Majorly 22:12, 5 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am not utterlu pathetic, I just find it very hard to believe that you will not edit for more than a year and than return to only make a vote. He will get the admin rights, I have no problem with that. But people who are not active on a project shouldn't vote on something. Abigor 22:22, 5 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That particular comment, Majorly, was a bit... harsh. Regards, Microchip08 (talk) 22:22, 5 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I didn't say you were pathetic, I said the comment was. What's wrong with supporting people? Like my vote will even change anything. Majorly 22:32, 5 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Result: A non-admin can close this because a steward has already promoted Microchip08. Congratulations on becoming an administrator MC8! Razorflame 17:22, 6 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]


This request was closed and the result was: Administrator status was granted. Sj 01:57, 22 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I am requesting administrator right on this nice wiki. The wiki is very small and there are not many edits a day. I am active here on a daily basis. And can react soon in case of Vandalism.

The lack of admins can cause problems for this wiki. I have requested steward help lattely because the speedy delete category was still full after 3 months. I hope the community grant me this extra rights, I am already a admin on Commons. Abigor 21:42, 14 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support Good admin on Commons; photosubmissions OTRS respondent; active here. For what it's worth, I regularly patrol the vandalism on all four simplewikis, and see Abigor's name rather frequently (not as a vandal, I hasten to add!). There is a need for active admins, and Abigor is a fine candidate who has my trust. PeterSymonds 17:43, 15 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Per PeterSymonds. None of the current admins are particularly active. (at least not here, anyway). Maximillion Pegasus 17:48, 15 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Active editor, reverts vandalism, etc. Overall, a great asset to simple.wikibooks and other projects. ★ Braingle (Contact me + Contribs) 23:06, 15 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support; obvious reasons. Microchip08 (talk) 08:03, 16 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support - I'm not that active here, but I have been, so I think I can be allowed a !vote ;). I'm also planning on becoming active here and will mainly work on "back end" stuff at first, rather than content, which will come later. Ooops... Off Topic ;) Good Luck! BG7even 20:58, 18 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Back end stuff? What back-end stuff? Regards, Microchip08 (talk) 20:59, 18 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Lol like prettying up interfaces, templates and stuff. Categorising, template writing. De-redlinking project pages ;) Hope that's ok? BG7even 21:03, 18 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • Okai... when will you start, :P? Regards, Microchip08 (talk) 21:06, 18 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
          • Lol once i've cleared up some stuff at SEWP ;) I'll be over soon. My bots can come too if needed ;) Thanks, BG7even 21:09, 18 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Although you have done many edits in the last couple weeks (which are greatly appreciated!), I cannot support your request for admin status. A candidate for admin needs to show many edits over several months to qualify. This in no way reflects a lack of trust. The time criteria is there to show that the editor has a long term commitment to the project. If you continue to work as you have for a couple months I will support your adminship without hesitation. There is plenty to do here without using the admin tools and I hope you continue to help this project! --Ezra Katz 22:56, 20 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]



From Meta Microchip08 (talk) 15:47, 5 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Template:Sr-request Thank you! ѕwirlвoy  20:37, 1 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fixed template and title Abigor talk 20:57, 1 January 2009 (UTC) Reply[reply]
  • Strong Oppose - User didn't do any edits on this project. (I know its not needed to vote but I need to give my opinion on this one) Abigor talk 21:00, 1 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Note, I'm an admin on another project and a soon-to-be in a few months on another hopefully. ѕwirlвoy  21:04, 1 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Note, this here is not the place for votings/discussions that should be done locally, thanks for Your understanding, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 22:54, 1 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not done

, no local request/voting, no status, sorry, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 22:54, 1 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]




I am requesting admin. status for Meta. If I am inactive for more than 2 months, you can revoke me. Please either support or reject the idea in the space below.

  • Oppose. You still haven't done many edits, and you've been inactive here since June. If you come back strong, I will likely change my vote. --Cromwellt|talk|contribs 11:07, 3 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I am requesting administrator status on Meta. WillieWallieWoo 21:19, 31 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Oppose. You have been here only a very short time, and don't have much of a track record. If/when you do, I will consider changing my vote. --Cromwellt|talk|contribs 11:07, 3 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am requesting administrator access on Meta. Gmcfoley 08:33, 14 December 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request withdrawn Gerard Foley 23:12, 18 February 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I am requesting admin access on meta. If you support this idea, please mention it here. --Cromwellt 20:51, 20 February 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]


From meta:

  • Because there are no bureaucrats, I am asking to become an administrator here on the meta wiki. Michael 11:42, 9 December 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]