Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/Kansan
- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship, request for bureaucratship, request for checkusership, or request for oversightship. Please do not modify it.
Kansan[change source]
Kansan (talk • changes • e-mail • blocks • protections • deletions • moves • right changes)
| RfB of Kansan |
|---|
| global contribs · pie chart · edit count · list user · blocklog ·contribs · deleted blocks · protects · deletes · moves · rights |
| Last comment by: ShakespeareFan00. |
| There are 18 administrators, and 5 bureaucrats (28%). |
End date: 20:18, 30 April 2011 (of course, the two crat rule applies)
Kansan has shown even temper and maturity in every action taken. I've reviewed the contributions, and looked at actions taken as an administrator. I have nothing but confidence that this maturity will translate over to actions as a crat. I am left without doubt that the maturity and competence will be added to the crat working group, as a net benefit. Thank you for your consideration. Jon@talk:~$ 20:04, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Candidate's acceptance: Thank you for your kind words. I accept this nomination. Kansan (talk) 20:17, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support[change source]
- Kansan has my fullest support - He is fairly active, seems to be well-respected by the community. He has the authority necessary for such a position, and I currently see no reason why he should not get the flag.--Eptalon (talk) 20:10, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, no reason not to. --SEPTActaMTA8235 20:12, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- crat support Per my above. Jon@talk:~$ 20:13, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 23:06, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Has proven himself trustworthy and dedicated. Either way (talk) 23:32, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- No-brainer. --@jersey+ 23:39, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Sure, why not. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 08:07, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- He has my full support. --The Three Headed Knight (talk) 14:23, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose[change source]
Comments[change source]
Not that it makes much of a difference, but for this process of gaining bureaucratship, I always was in the opinion that people should nominate themselves. But as said, just a comment, not really important or something. Best, -Barras (talk) 08:44, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- For cratship it was I thought it was intended to be the opposite, that you should already have your two supports before asking....but it probably doesn't actually matter. -DJSasso (talk) 18:20, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.