Meta:Requests for adminship/Vermont

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

22/0/0: 100% - Promoted. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 15:52, 23 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vermont[edit]

Vermont (talk • contribs • deleted user contributions • logs • block log • abuse log • CentralAuth • stalktoy) Bureaucrats: user rights management.

Ending 23 June 2019 15:52 (UTC)

Hello! I'm Vermont, an administrator on the Simple English Wikipedia and a Global Rollbacker/Global Sysop. Recently, I've noticed there are a lot of times when there's no meta admins online to deal with incidents of vandals and LTA's on metawiki. (notably this account that prompted me to request today) I request Administrator permissions mainly to be able to deal with vandalism and long-term abusers on metawiki which I encounter frequently on IRC and patrolling with SWViewer. Thank you, Vermont (talk) 15:52, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support trusted. Tomybrz Bip Bip 15:54, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I know them as a sysop in sewp. They are calm, collected and composed when dealing with difficult situations. I shall note they are competent in sysop tools (which is why they are applying) in general with local effects. I am not afraid of them having access to tools with global effects as they have modified filters in sewp and deals with fairly enough crosswiki issues to be able to handle the content. For the rest of the tools this access will bring, I trust they will not abuse them and will ask more experienced people if needed. Having community trust as GR/GS is another plus. Frankly I see no reason to deny this to give us the help we need. Thanks for volunteering. --Cohaf (talk) 16:05, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
sewp ?! --Eihel (talk) 16:55, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
SimplEWiki (SEwp). Sorry for the weird acronym. Simplewiki will be better. --Cohaf (talk) 16:56, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Incredibly helpful user with relevant experience as a global sysop and sysop on simple. – Ajraddatz (talk) 19:15, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Without a doubt. Trijnstel_talk 21:39, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per my standard that anyone who is a trusted user elsewhere should be granted rights at meta on request if they are reasonably active here. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:57, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 02:20, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Very helpful over IRC, and having them this bit will add something to it. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 02:35, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Absolutely. No-brainer. Hiàn (talk)_{/editing on mobile account.} 04:20, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support, however I would caution against being too firm on the rules (example: [1][2]) --Rs chen 7754 04:30, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support no concerns here.--HakanIST (talk) 13:13, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support be careful with AbuseFilter here, it is wide reaching. — xaosflux ^Talk 13:20, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jianhui67^{talk★contribs} 14:48, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 18:11, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:28, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support --DannyS712 (talk) 19:00, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes. —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 20:24, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.. why not?--BRP^ever 00:52, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Of course.--Aldnonymous^Bicara? 01:06, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support—94rain ^Talk 15:29, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Turkmen ^talk 05:44, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Ammarpad (talk) 11:42, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 20:35, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above request page is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Comments about this page should be made in Meta:Babel or Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat.