Meta:Requests for oversight/Mardetanha

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

Mardetanha

Yeah another self-nomination , per this discussion i felt having OS flag would help me doing my job in meta , i have used OS flag several times in Meta ,with recent development on Oversight system it is really helpful now ,so if community truest me with OS Flag i would be happy to act as OS on meta.general information about me I am one the recently elected stewards and am holding sysop and bureaucrat flag on several projects & i am one of active SWMT members --Mardetanha ^talk 09:14, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

1. Certainly. We need more Oversighters, and Mohsen fits the bill well. Good luck. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 09:19, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
2. Yes, very trustworthy. MBisanz ^talk 09:25, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
3. sure --Thogo (talk) 09:30, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
4. A favor —Dferg (talk) 09:38, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
5. Support - per Anonymous Dissident. →Na·gy 09:43, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
6. Support Barras 10:29, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
7. Support --GT5162 ^{(我的对话页)} 11:39, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
8. samþykkt, --birdy geimfyglið _(:> )=| 14:29, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
9. Support –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:09, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

   Question: do we need more than one oversighter, or do the stewards count? If so, is there any point in this vote? Majorly talk 14:47, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

   We need more oversighters in general; I think that's the general feeling. After the new features were installed, the userright became much more useful for Meta. Hence, more needed and desired. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 14:49, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

   To clarify, I meant do we need someone else to run besides Mard, as per policy 2 or more are required. I just thought meta might be an exception with the stewards. Majorly talk 14:58, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

10. Never mind, forgot Drini and Mike had been reinstated. Support Majorly talk 14:59, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
11. Support I don't even have to think about it. Huib talk 15:33, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
12. Sure. --Erwin 19:58, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
13. Sure Cbrown1023 talk 21:10, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
14. Support Az1568 (talk) 23:05, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
15. Support Known, trusted and valued user. --ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 23:49, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
16. Yep J.delanoy^gabs_adds 01:07, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
17. A favor, certamente. Alex Pereira ^falaê 12:45, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
18. Support --Meno25 13:01, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
19. Support SPQRobin ^(inc!) 14:37, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
20. Support He's done it previously, is meta-active, and overwhelmingly trusted. Kylu 02:21, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
21. Support iAlex 10:29, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
22. Support we need more than 3 oversighters.--Kwj2772 (論) 10:32, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
23. Support Finn Rindahl 00:21, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
24. Support, good steward. --_~Innv^s: 09:03, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
25. Support Leinad 17:30, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
26. Support excellent person imho. oscar 22:17, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
27. Support Nishkid64 (talk) 20:34, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
28. Why was I not informed, sir?  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 22:54, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
29. no —DerHexer (Talk) 19:38, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
30. Support Mikhailov Kusserow (talk) 09:34, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

---

30-0 votes. Therefore closed as successful. --Thogo (talk) 10:37, 24 April 2009 (UTC)