Meta talk:Requests for adminship/Archives/2012
 | Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in 2012, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion or the archives index. |
Elligibility
According to Meta talk:Administrators, there is no consensus for CU or Bureaucrat status alone on another wiki to be an acceptable criterion to be an admin on Meta. Leave all comments there.Jasper Deng 22:56, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
- Per the poll on this page, Meta talk:Requests for adminship##Silly_poll_for_the_preceeding_question adminship is really the only acceptable option. It was specifically agreed that checkuser was not acceptable either. Ajraddatz (Talk) 23:18, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
- Silly poll indeed. PeterSymonds (talk) 23:19, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
With that, I'm going to re-revert Billinghurst's revert.Jasper Deng 23:26, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
- Silly poll indeed. PeterSymonds (talk) 23:19, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
We might be able to do another poll, but first I'd like Billinghurst's comment.Jasper Deng 23:30, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
- No real point in doing another poll, and also no real point in changing it. There is no real reason to fix this particular wording, since various polls and discussions have established content-wiki adminship as a requirement... another poll isn't really needed either. Ajraddatz (Talk) 23:34, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
- The whole fact is this is about criteria for eligibility to put forward a nomination that is then voted upon and where there is no automated acceptance. What is trying to be achieved here? Is anything broken? Are there any candidates getting through who are unacceptable? For where this is an "existing" wording, my observation is that there is no consensus for a change to modify the criteria, especially when this hasn't been put to the whole community, just tucked away on this talk page. billinghurst sDrewth 01:18, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Autopatrolled [moved]
How does one get a user auto-patrolled status (so that all their new articles are automatically marked as patrolled)? [Sorry if this is the wrong place to ask!] --Redaktor (talk) 21:55, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
- You are already flagged "autopatrolled" and yes, this is the wrong place ;-)
- Actually there is no place to request this flag on meta, admins decide whom to give this flag. a×pdeHello! 15:59, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
- Actually WM:RFH would be a better place to ask IMHO. Requests on this page are usually for higher rights that require community discussion. Regards. —Marco Aurelio (Nihil Prius Fide) 22:31, 3 April 2012 (UTC)