Meta:Requests for adminship/Church of emacs

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

Church of emacs[edit]

Scheduled to end: 0:20, March 10 2010

Church of emacs (talk • contribs • count • logs • page moves • block log • CA • email), de-N, en-3, fr-1

Dear fellows!

I’d like to propose Church of emacs for adminship on metawiki where he mainly improves templates and system messages, and therefore could be of use to the buttons. He recently assisted in organizing the 2010 Steward elections. Furthermore, Church of emacs helps out on IRC, having joined countervandalism channels #cvn-meta, #cvn-sw, and #wikimedia-stewards. Beside metawiki where he did more than 800 edits, Church of emacs is since 2006 an active Wikimedian on multiple wikis, e.g. the German Wikipedia (where he’s sysop and oversight) and MediaWiki.org (where he became a sysop and coder).

Church of emacs accepted his nomination.

Kind regards, —DerHexer (Talk) 00:20, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

support per nom. :P —DerHexer (Talk) 00:21, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support so he stops complaining about protected edit requests not getting done. ;P Only half teasing! Cbrown1023 talk 00:32, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - imho a highly qualified, nice & competent user. Definitely a good addition to the team. Thanks for offering to help. — Dferg (talk) 00:44, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Sure. Tiptoety ^talk 00:54, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ayuh. -- Avi 01:56, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support!I thought you were already a good admin! --Egmontaℨ♤ 02:37, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support sure. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 02:42, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Of course; trusted and active. Pmlineditor ∞ 05:49, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per DerHexer. Lauryn Ashby (d) 06:01, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Bsadowski1 06:07, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Nick1915 -^{all you want} 08:23, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for helping. Finn Rindahl 11:13, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, trusted, active. —Innv {ru-ws} 11:20, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Support sure --Jan eissfeldt 12:02, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. --თოგო ^(D) 12:22, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support --.snoopy. ✉ 12:39, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Barras ^talk 14:05, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Also creator of mw:Extension:FlagPage and has SVN commit access. Probably safe to say he knows the software. :) Kylu 17:30, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - of course. Philippe 18:02, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support --WizardOfOz ^talk 18:23, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, certo! --M/ 18:56, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
support buecherwuermlein 20:06, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M.L 21:56, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes. Razor flame 23:26, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Let's all become members of the Church of emacs (but vi is still better :-D) -- Menti fisto 15:11, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support of course --oscar 18:43, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support bastique ^demandez! 19:25, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support I was going to be the nom :D --Mardetanha ^talk 20:24, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support I could see him possibly doing a good job. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 20:37, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Definitely trusted + no big deal. (Though I'm with Mentifisto.) –SJ + 10:29, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- @lestaty ^discuţie 11:28, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support psh linux is better James (T C) 11:42, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. --Erwin 18:20, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, no worries. Cirt (talk) 23:41, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

34/0/0 passed--.snoopy. ✉ 07:33, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]