Meta:Requests for adminship/Majorly

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

Majorly[edit]

Hello everyone! You might know me best from en-Wiki, and as I've been spending a lot of time here as well, I'm going to take the plunge and request adminship. I believe I would be a great help if given the admin buttons. Basically, I'd watch recent changes as I have been doing already, and speedy delete any test or vandal pages that may come up – currently I can only tag them and it is often a while before an admin shows up =) I'd like to help block problem users as necessary too, and close RfDs once they're over. Thanks a lot in advance!

Note: at time of writing I have about 200 edits, and I've been registered for just over two months. --Majorly 09:16, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support You are welcome.--Alnokta 10:44, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --.anaconda 11:36, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Concordo; Orly? --Slade ♠ 13:43, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Jusjih 15:39, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Pschemp 17:26, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Steel ^en:Steel 17:40, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Marbot 18:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nishkid64 21:22, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cbrown1023 21:25, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Afinogenoff 04:15, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support per candidate's good work as an admin and contributor on En. Newyorkbrad 04:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Please note that this is not sufficient reason for an adminship on meta. See the previous votes on User:Pedist's nomination.--Hillgentleman | 書 |2007年02月11日( Sun ), 20:02:53+20:02
  - Please note that I am sure NY-Brad had many other reasons to support, that is probably just the someone he stated. Cbrown1023 talk 20:16, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - Please note that insufficient reason supports nothing.--Hillgentleman | 書 |2007年02月11日( Sun ), 20:02:20+20:02
      - Did you see that hardly anyone else leaves a reason for supporting users? Besides, I think NY-Brad is trying to say that Majorly will carry out the same quality work he does at en.wiki here at Meta-Wiki. Nishkid64 23:42, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        Yes, that's exactly what I'm trying to say, that Majorly is likely to, and indeed has already started to, do the same good work here that he does on En. I will try to be more clear in my comments from now on, in case anyone else wasn't sure what I was saying. Newyorkbrad 01:45, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        Newyorkbrad: Great. --Hillgentleman | 書 |2007年02月12日( Mon ), 05:02:32+05:02
Support --A. B. ^(talk) 20:04, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Eagle 101 20:44, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Flcelloguy (A note?) 00:44, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Grand master ka 04:53, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
+1 --dario vet (talk) 06:59, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Jon Harald Søby 14:07, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sarah E*wart 14:38, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support NoSeptember 03:26, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
NeutralAphaia 07:18, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ya rly MatthewFenton 19:19, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thogo (talk) 01:17, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vote closed. Consensus reached (19/1/2), sysop flag granted. :--M/ 10:02, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]