Meta:Requests for adminship/Vituzzu

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a closed Meta-Wiki request. Please do not modify it.

Support = 29, Oppose = 0, Neutral = 0 → 100 % Even discounting my vote, this RfA obviously meets the 75% of support threshold for promotion and therefore passes. User:Vituzzu is now a regular administrator for Wikimedia Meta-Wiki. Congratulations! —Marco Aurelio (Nihil Prius Fide) 21:35, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Vituzzu

• Vituzzu (talk • contribs • count • logs • page moves • block log • email)

Scheduled to end: 31 October 2011, 21:45 UTC

Hi there! Today I want to nominate Vituzzu for adminship here on meta. As you all surely know, he's been recently elected as a steward.

As a steward, you always see the admin buttons, and here on meta, where the stewards work, it is usually hard to not use the buttons. Of course could he just perform the action, but there are probably people who don't really like this (which is perfectly understanable). Adding QD tags or asking others on IRC to do the work he could just do with his steward flag works, but it is rather unproductive. Vituzzu is fairly active here and could surely assist our current admin team very well. Vituzzu belongs also to the SWMT-Team. It would be quite good for him to be allowed to edit the related blacklists here on meta (technically he's already able, but you know ;-)) As a steward, he is already widely trusted. I think every steward should just get the sysop mop on meta if they want (at least for their term), but since we don't have a rule for this, I happily nominate people here.

I hope that you agree with me and support him. Good luck! -Barras 21:43, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Barras, yes it will be definitely useful for me!

--Vituzzu 21:46, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

• Support - As nom! -Barras 21:43, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
• Yes, "di corsa". --M/ 21:49, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
• support, boring. —DerHexer (Talk) 21:57, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
• Support, not much deleted contribs (only 10 atm), but as he would like to use it for the global spam blacklist, it's fine by me. Trijnstel 22:01, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
• Support, finally :p Ajraddatz (Talk) 22:08, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
• Support I always imagined he was one ;) Béria Lima ^msg 22:15, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
• Support - I have 81 deleted contribs, but Vituzzu is a much better candidate than me. :) Stewards should have adminship and everything else by default. Why are we still wasting time voting for these things? Ottava Rima (talk) 22:28, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
• Support, no problems here. Jafeluv 22:54, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
• Support - default support for stewards. Tiptoety ^talk 01:23, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
• Aye. — [ Tanvir | Talk ] 01:49, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
• Yes.” T_ele^s (T _{@ L C S}) 03:25, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
• per tip. Support. Matanya 07:22, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
• Support If a setward couldn't be trusted with the admin flag than who could? Jamietw 08:15, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
• &Nyes --თოგო ^(D) 09:50, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
• Sim! Ruy Pugliesi^◥ 10:18, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
• Support He's a steward. Theo10011 11:57, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
• Support He's trustful :) a×p_de^Hello! 12:47, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
• Support I have said it before quite often - stewards should be welcome to admin rights here while they are stewards. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 15:02, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
• Support For sure! ^Email Vaibhav ^Talk 16:47, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
• Support: agreeing with Barras. Mathonius 17:48, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
• Support, and per DerHexer, boring :) Do we really need to go through this? I support Barras' proposal that admin here be automatic for stewards, at least during their term. (And why not after, if they're engaged admins?) -Pete F 04:31, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
• A favor, per above. Alex Pereira ^falaê 11:03, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
• Support mickit 12:07, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
• Support Ma certo! :) --Reder 19:29, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
• Sure - Hoo man (talk) 22:14, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
• Support... yawn. Many voters wrote what common sense suggests: if a Steward (nota bene, a very highly trusted user everywhere) spares some time to perform admin actions here what should prevent them to perform such actions? what kind of users would disapprove this? - εΔω 07:53, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
• Support, ma certo que sì! —Marco Aurelio (disputatio) 12:20, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
• Support e scusa il ritardo :)--Frigotoni ...i'm here; 17:49, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
• Support --WizardOfOz ^talk 20:49, 31 October 2011 (UTC)