Meta:Requests for adminship/Fuzheado

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

Fuzheado[edit]

Feels funny to ask after this many years, but here it goes. :) I've been around since 2003 with all the requisite edits on en: and meta:, am a sysop on en:, am on internal-l, have worked on Wikimania all three years, etc. The impetus for asking for sysop now: as one of the moderators for the Wikimania selection process, it's become necessary to do more page shuffling and housekeeping, but also blocking trolls that are popping up on the Talk pages of the bidding process. Would help immensely, thanks. -- fuzheado 08:01, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support this user seems experienced and trustworthy. Anonymous Dissident 08:47, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support ~~(but please fix the email this user from your preferences.)~~ --M/ 09:01, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose this user is virtually inactive on Meta since April and before April was inactive since October 2006; never really involved in real Meta stuff and, btw, I'm not inclined to support a RfA for someone that has a soft redirect to some other wiki as user page, sorry. --Brownout^(msg) 09:06, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Fair enough, I've created an actual userpage with links. I'd point out I've been editing Meta for four years now, about as long as I've been an admin on en:, so clearly I kind of know what's going on. :) -- fuzheado 11:30, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - I personally think the organization level activties related to the Foundation can be thought as "Meta stuff" in a broader meaning, and Andrew is one of few Asian editors who are involved in this sphere, even earlier than me.--Aphaia 12:12, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - You kind of know what's going on, but are you familiar with the meta deletion policies?Hillgentleman 13:18, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - I'd tend to trust he won't delete the front page without checking first... but a fair question. ++Lar: t/c 16:06, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - Fair question but I assume Andrew won't get involved janitor areas (sorry if I am wrong) ... and no, he won't delete main page :) --Aphaia 01:22, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      - Aphaia, lack of familiarity with the policies is a most common reason not to give out sysop flags. Either he has the flag or he has not. If Fuzhedao wants the sysop flag, he should know the deletion policy. Hillgentleman 03:02, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support (but please fix the email setting) and for the convenience, either this nomination succeeds or not, temp sysop are better to be granted him as soon as possible, in my opinion. --Aphaia 10:36, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- E-mail was in my profile already but not sure why it didn't register, so I've resaved the Preferences. Hopefully that will fix things. Thanks. -- fuzheado 11:30, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - There's a bug around that, it happens on Commons too. ++Lar: t/c 16:06, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - Eh. Thanks Andrew and Lar. Anyway it is not so a big deal ... your mail address are easily to retrieve from Wikimedia mailinglist archives .. but rules are rules, and I esteem formality too. :D --Aphaia 01:26, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      - Maybe we should just put in the guidelines for adminship "go set your mail up again, even if you think you did already, and test it by mailing yourself" :) ++Lar: t/c 10:01, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support and per Aphaia, absolutely grant Fuzheado a temp sysopship (with scope limited to the bid related stuff) ASAP, without waiting for this permanent to succeed, as the need for it is blazingly clear to me. ++Lar: t/c 11:46, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support without question. Cary Bass ^demandez 12:01, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support, no doubt! Snowolf 12:30, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support, obviously. I really think we should have an exception in the meta sysop rules for those of us involved with the Foundation's work who need access, however. James F. (talk) 13:28, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- How do you delineate what constitutes Foundation's work and what doesn't? Does it include working for the chapters, which are independent but related to the foundation? Hillgentleman 14:10, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I think we need to thrash this out separately, perhaps on the talk, since it seems new policy is sought. This RfA is probably not the place to decide the issue. I agree it's worthy of further consideration... the last thing we want to do is impede foundation work, and not all of it goes onto the wikimediafoundation wiki, much of it is here. But we also have to address valid questions such as those that Hillgentleman raises. ++Lar: t/c 16:06, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Related talk may be found on this talk page. Who should be eligible to be sysop candidate. And I agree with Lar this is not the place to discuss it, at least.--Aphaia 01:28, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support, of course. Andrew needs the tools and he is definitely trustworthy. He is wise enough to ask the tools to be removed if he feels he doesn't need them any more. guillom 14:50, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - FrancoGG ^{( talk )} 19:09, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
+ trustworthy. Cbrown1023 talk 20:01, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Given the user's proficiency and history with WM projects, coupled with the very clear need for the tools, I have no reservations. EVula // talk // 20:27, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Trustworthy and has a good use for the tools now and likely will in his future Wikimedia endeavors. FloNight 02:45, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - but you already knew I would say that -- Tawker 05:24, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support of course. oscar 07:40, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Overly qualified. Giggy\^Talk 11:13, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yay Andy! --filip ⁂ 11:15, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A. B. ^(talk) 21:33, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fabexplosive The archive man 13:36, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
support --.snoopy. AKA dario vet · (talk) 05:39, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Marbot 10:30, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Joe 17:37, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Closed

Fuzheado is now a sysop. Majorly (talk) 00:06, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]