Meta:Requests for permissions/Archive 5

__NOINDEX__

Yrwanna (Bot)
User: Yrwanna ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Bot Reason:

Additional comments: Can you register a bot on my account?

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.  Why do you want to get this right? ~'Sourav Halder'  08:48, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Comments/Questions
 * Hi. Usually we give the bot right to separate accounts. What is your reasoning for this request? Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 14:43, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Comments/Questions

Brownlowe.2 (Wiki creator)
User: Brownlowe.2 ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Wiki creator Reason: I want to be able to help out with wiki creations, reduce wait time, and take stress off of other creators.

Additional comments:

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * As I don't know the user well.-- 06:41, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Yep, that’s true! However, I want to address the fact that I’m committed to helping others. Brownlowe.2 (talk) 16:10, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, could you tell me about your translations to "ase" then? It looks like a copy of the original English version at least from my screen.-- 17:01, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
 * That’d be American Sign Language. There isn’t a real script, so I tend to do it just to add a language. Brownlowe.2 (talk) 19:07, 13 March 2020 (UTC)


 * "" I don't want a wiki creator that would do it just because they can. Zppix (Meta &#124; CVT Member &#124; talk to me) 20:06, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The translations to ASL show that they just clicked a button and went ahead without thought. We don’t even support the ASL translations as far as I can see. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  21:04, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
 * It appears no one is in favor of this request. Brownlowe.2 (talk) 18:03, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Lēnin (Wiki creator)
User: Lēnin ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Wiki creator Reason: I want to help Miraheze become.Want to help create a wiki, and I'm aware that the number of wiki creations is low. I want to create a wiki in Bengali and English

Additional comments:

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * You can request a wiki by clicking here. Otherwise, I do not believe you are ready for advanced rights. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  16:32, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks But I want to improve at Miraheze. Trust me once.Lēnin (talk) 16:36, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * You have to earn trust. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  16:38, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * How can I qualify for trust? Lēnin (talk) 16:48, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep interacting with the community, requesting valid wikis, translating pages and it will naturally appear. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  16:51, 24 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Please also confirm that you have not previously used an account at Miraheze. I have asked a Steward to look into a raised concern. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  16:51, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks Lēnin (talk) 17:00, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

シュヴァルツ (Wiki creator)
User: シュヴァルツ ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Wiki creator Reason: I knew that the number of Wiki creators was low, so I want to help with the work of making wikis.

Additional comments:

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * The user has over 4000 contributions globally, and I trust this user for what s/he has done on Japanese wikis. Given that there aren't many active wiki creators around (resulting in checking over 40 requests yesterday), we definitely need more wiki creators.-- 06:45, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Given the time zones of other users, I think that the time he is awake will contribute to miraheze.However, it must be noted that his age is less than 18 years old.I'm concerned that the requested wiki may contain harmful information under the age of 18.(e.g.alcohol,cigarettes,Game fan site with violent expression)When you create a wiki, it might not be a big deal because it doesn't contain any content.--松 (talk) 10:39, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Wiki creators do not have to check all the request (if a wiki creator thinks s/he is not capable, s/he can leave it to other wiki creators). Moreover, what wiki creators can see is not the wiki itself but the reasoning of the request (and if a wiki is not private, anyone can see it regardless of the permissions). He is (or at least, he claims to be) around 17 and age does not matter a lot in this case.-- 16:37, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
 * If he is 17, my concerns will be removed.--松 (talk) 23:37, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I quite like the possibility of another Wiki Creator, and I will side in favor of this user. WickyHoney (talk) 07:44, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * This user seems trustworthy enough 16:22, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Trusted user. --そらたこ (talk) 16:03, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Seems trustworthy to me and we could always use more Wiki Creators. Bonnedav (talk) 02:09, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
 * good user -Lēnin (talk) 16:32, 24 March 2020 (UTC) 'blocked user and sockpuppet
 * The lack of English skills concerns me, and I would recommend that this user only creates Japanese wikis. DeeM28 (talk) 08:19, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * We could always use another hand in wiki creation --EK ● 📝 ● 🌎 14:13, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * This user seems perfectly capable, and this site could use more Wiki creators. Brownlowe.2 (talk) 17:59, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

LeoJun (sysop)
User: LeoJun ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: sysop Reason: I am a Taiwanese from the Asian region, which is convenient for language relations. I think several administrators are needed in the Asian region to facilitate the maintenance of the operation of the system! At the same time, I will frequently go online to check and assist users who need help! I urge everyone's support. Help and affirmation. Additional comments:

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * User's edit history is non-existant, user does not understand the role of a sysop on Meta, ETC ETC. Zppix (Meta &#124; CVT Member &#124; talk to me) 00:10, 15 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Because she's made little contributions now. ~'Sourav Halder'  04:25, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't believe they are ready yet as they have too little contributions here. Sorry, but I don't believe this is the moment. Hypercane  (  talk ) 04:50, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

(Oversight)
User: User: ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Oversight

Reason: I would make a good steward because I have been experienced with using fandom and have used it for 2 years I am helpful and I am good at computers and helping out. I would never give any personal information to anyone I would keep it all private I am trustworthy I know I been here a short period of time but I think i can do this. i am good with managing wikis and blocking trolls when needed i am good with all kinds of wiki things i think i can do this.

Additional comments:

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * to put it bluntly, not snowball chance in hell. Zppix (Meta &#124; CVT Member &#124; talk to me) 17:08, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

SonicSpeedrunner (Bot)
User: SonicSpeedrunner ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Bot Reason:

Additional comments:

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * Question: What exactly does the bot do? The only edit on meta appears to be a human edit. Please note that bot accounts are not for human edits. Please see Bots. -EK ● 📝 ● 🌎 01:39, 21 April 2020 (UTC)


 * doesn't seem to be related to metawiki at all. The bot operator is someone whom I've never interacted with AFAIK. Zppix (Meta &#124; CVT Member &#124; talk to me) 22:28, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Per Zppix -EK ● 📝 ● 🌎 22:39, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

SoyokoAnis (Bureaucrat)
User: SoyokoAnis ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Oversight Reason:

Additional comments: Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Way too early in my opinion and you have not even became a sysop yet. I would recommend starting your own wiki, become a better known member of the community, and then come back in about 4-5 months and request sysop. For now, I am going to have to say no to this. Best -EK ● 📝 ● 🌎 19:06, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Comments/Questions

{

Paul Ahyi (sysop)
User: Paul Ahyi ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: sysop Reason:

Additional comments:

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * The user is currently not significant to get this right -- Sourav  Talk... 03:11, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I wanna block a user from stop editing. Why?
 * I am not a block user now,I have been released from the blockade subject to certain conditions.You were not created to get this term now.You can get this right later if you edit better. -- Sourav  Talk... 05:02, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Paul Ahyi (Wiki creator)
User: Paul Ahyi ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Wiki creator Reason:

Additional comments:

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions

Amanda Catherine (Wiki creator)

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Successful. John (talk) 18:30, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

User: Amanda Catherine ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Wiki creator Reason: To assist in cleaning out and preventing extensive backlogs in Special:RequestWikiQueue. I've noticed some backlogs going back several days (not the case as of writing, but that should never happen). IMO wikis should not be backlogged in the request queue for more than 48 hours, 72 hours at the absolute maximum. Now that I expect to be active again, I believe that I can help achieve this.

Additional comments: I previously held wiki creator rights, granted in July 2019. I voluntarily resigned in late August without being "under a cloud" or any other scrutiny (Special:Diff/81395) due to my unexpected wikibreak related to personal issues. However, given that I expect to be more active here, although perhaps not as proflic as I once was, I believe that I can volunteer as a wiki creator which I think is one of the most important volunteer positions to make sure there is no shortage of. Amanda Catherine (talk) 14:10, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * 1) --  Sourav  Talk... 17:34, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * 2) I abstained for the request last year because I did not know much about Amanda. It seems to me now that she is capable to be a wiki creator and because she resigned and was not removed I have no problem with her being wiki creator again. DeeM28 (talk) 18:12, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * 3) I have good feelings about this user. WickyHoney (talk) 19:46, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * 4) I don't see any problem with denying permission. She seems willing to help. Hispano76 (talk) 02:37, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * 5) I know her from the past, she seems capable.  Hypercane  (  talk ) 07:11, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * 6) She seems capable for Wiki Creator rights.  12:27, 27 April 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

Cocopuff2018 (Wiki creator)
User: Cocopuff2018 ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Wiki creator Reason: i am Coco i am a helpful user and active pretty much daily i think i should get this role because i am good at Helping out with request, i would be able to check for request daily and even though i am kind of new i want to start with something small so i think this would be a good start for me and i fell more wiki creators could be used around here.

Additional comments: i have been experienced with fandom and i am capable of handling request like these i think i should be given the opportunity to help others as i am good at doing so.

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions


 * The user does not appear to be active on Meta (has less than 25 edits in the just under a month they have had an account), which is the only real criteria for wiki creator IMHO besides "not a jerk, has a clue". Additionally, the user failed to format this request properly despite there being boilerplate when opening a new request that clearly indicates what to change and what not to change, and they also didn't sign their comments here. Both of these things put question marks around the "has a clue" part of the general criteria for any permission. On top of that, being experienced with another hosting provider (such as Fandom as indicated) does not on its own indicate merit for wiki creatorship here, because every hosting system has a different style of handling new wikis. If I recall correctly, Miraheze is the only free host that actually requires you to request a wiki, and therefore experience with another host where users can create their own wikis on their own really does not demonstrate anything in terms of fulfilling the "has a clue" clause. Finally, the fact that the user is not active on Meta means that I cannot properly confirm that they satisfy the "not a jerk" clause since I have no record of how they interact with the local community here. Amanda Catherine (talk) 01:20, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Amanda Agree with this -- Sourav  Talk... 07:10, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I know that he's nice and helpful, but other than that I don't really know how he'd perform. I saw him confront a user that blocked him before, he said they were abusing rights, and I agree that the user was abusing rights, but Coco seemed pretty unprofessional during the incident. WickyHoney (talk) 01:32, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * The 4th edit on Meta is a request for permissions. With not enough edits and a seeming tendency to hat collecting I would oppose this at this time. DeeM28 (talk) 08:05, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * While I believe that the user has good intentions, I also am aware that they have engaged in Sockpuppetry. Because of this, I cannot support. -EK ● 📝 ● 🌎 15:07, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

TheBuzzOnMaggieYes CaillouNo (sysop)
User: TheBuzzOnMaggieYes CaillouNo ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: sysop Reason: So I can block people who break the rules, stop vandalism, and protect pages from vandalism, edit wars, etc.

Additional comments: I won't abuse my Sysop power, I promise! Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * Way too new to Meta -EK ● 📝 ● 🌎 20:27, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * No previous edits on Meta. Bonnedav (talk) 20:31, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * First things first, the elephant in the room: inappropriate username. Or at least, username with questionable appropriateness. That's an automatic deal breaker. However, username issues aside, I concur that with no previous edits on Meta, this user is not qualified to hold any advanced permissions, let alone sysop which is one of the largest and one where the most trust is required. Additionally, the request reason does not demonstrate a good understanding of what a Meta sysop would actually do on a regular basis. Edit wars in the true sense of the term almost never occur here, and pages are rarely protected as a result of vandalism (most high-importance pages are preemptively protected to prevent vandalism from happening). Vandalism on Meta quite frequently (but not always) goes hand-in-hand with cross wiki disruption and therefore is usually handled by a steward or CVT member, not just a Meta sysop. These are the kind of things that I would expect a candidate for Meta sysop, especially one who is not already a CVT member or a steward, to have mastery knowledge about. The fact that the user failed to sign their initial comments, while a minor issue, also doesn't help their cause. Sorry, but no. Amanda Catherine (talk) 22:14, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Sario528 (Wiki creator)

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Successful John (talk) 12:32, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

User: Sario528 ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Wiki creator Reason: I am requesting the wiki creator right to help manage the request log and ensure our users receive prompt attention. I have read and understand the Content Policy.

Additional comments: I am also a retired editor on various WMF projects, primarily EN wiki. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/Sario528

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * 1)  Got common sense, helpful, polite, known. No reason why not.  ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  17:51, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * 2)  I have gotten to know this user on IRC and I find them to be reasonable, active, and most of all friendly. I see no reason not to support this request. -<span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 20px lightskyblue, -4px -4px 20px HotPink;font-weight:bold;">EK ● 📝 ● 🌎 18:02, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * 3)  I've also seen Sario around on IRC and I think they could do a good job as wiki creator and helping out. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 16:48, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * 4)  I see no reason why not. WickyHoney (talk) 20:18, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * 5)  this person seems to be trustworthy and I think they will be capable of this job! DeeM28 (talk) 11:04, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 * 6)  No objections form me. Bonnedav (talk) 07:27, 18 May 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

MrJaroslavik (Wiki creator)
<div class="boilerplate metadata discussion-archived" style="background-color: #F2F4FC; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #aaa">
 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Request Successful. John (talk) 11:18, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

User: MrJaroslavik ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Wiki creator Reason: Hey, I have seen that there was many requests for wikis, I am available and I want to help, so i request Wiki Creator rights. I have readed page about Wiki Creators and i understand Content Policy. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me. Thanks for the considering.

Additional comments: For info about me, you can see my UserPage.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 08:41, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * I do not know this user well but they have some community experience and we do need more wiki creators. -<span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 20px lightskyblue, -4px -4px 20px HotPink;font-weight:bold;">EK ● 📝 ● 🌎 18:48, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * nothing against, active, got common sense, trusted on wmf projects. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  18:49, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Active, friendly, familiar with MediaWiki wikis, and as a bonus, is familiar with several languages. Sario528 (talk) 19:04, 20 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Cocopuff2018 (talk) I will Oppose for now the reason is there has been Some Request this month i do not fell as if we need another one at the moment maybe in a month or so Sorry i just do not fell its needed.  5:39, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Having someone that knows more than two different languages as a Wiki Creator is definitely a win. WickyHoney (talk) 22:53, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Trusted multilingual user, sounds good to me. Bonnedav (talk) 22:56, 20 May 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

Examknow (sysop)
<div class="boilerplate metadata discussion-archived" style="background-color: #F2F4FC; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #aaa">
 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Passed. Southparkfan (talk) 21:06, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

User: Examknow ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: sysop Reason: I would like to request sysop rights on Meta as I would like to get more involved on-wiki and I feel like becoming sysop would be a great way to do that. I could help with admin tasks such as deleting spam/accidental pages and dealing with any LTAs or vandals that might come our way. Our current sysop group here is rather small and I feel like it would be good to have some new members of the team.

Additional comments: It is also worth noting that have worked with and know how to use the abuse filters and I have developed many bots for Miraheze on IRC.

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions


 * 1)  I personally feel that you will do well, and I like that you know things about the Abuse Filter and bots. You certainly are quite active, so I will be supporting as of now. WickyHoney (talk) 06:56, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 2)  as well. We can definitely always use more local Meta administrators, I think, as the Stewards and System Administrators all wear so many hats. Looking at your number of attached accounts and the bot(s) on one or more of them, I probably would've thought you'd go for Global Sysop given your express interest in counter-vandalism efforts (and we can also use more global sysops, I think), but you've got a purpose as a local administrator, and we do need more of them, as you stated, so I have no problems supporting. Dmehus (talk) 20:03, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * GS isn't active on meta and shouldn't act when local admins can but yes, I agree EK would be a great GS. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  06:56, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 1)  Very active user, that is already extremely helpful on IRC. Will be a good addition to the Meta sysop team. Sario528 (talk) 20:09, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 2)  No reason not to.  ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  06:56, 11 June 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

MrJaroslavik (limited sysop)
<div class="boilerplate metadata discussion-archived" style="background-color: #F2F4FC; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #aaa">
 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Success for 1 month. John (talk) 11:18, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

User: MrJaroslavik ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: sysop Reason: Hey, i know, i am not here for long time, but i need any sysops perms. I work on pages intended for translation and sometimes it is necessary to delete part of the translation (for example after translation unit sorting change) + any pages are fully locked (protected), so i cannot edit it. Rights for mark pages for translation are great too (it is necessary after aby for example category or typo update). I know about TA but it don't have right for pages deletion. This is request for limited time only adminship (1 month), any questions? Ask me. Thanks for consideration. Update 23.5.2020: I will work yet on Templates: This involves create/edit documentation; edit locked (protected) pages;  creating new templates/edit existing templates/redirecting to templates;  maybe  semi/protect of highly used templates,...--MrJaroslavik (talk) 12:33, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Additional comments: For more information, see my contribs and my requests at AN.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 07:12, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * 1)  your translations seem fine from the checks performed, got a use, you are trusted. Be careful, sensible and ask if you need help :)  ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  10:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * 2)  This delegation of administrative permissions is a bit unusual but the user seems to be trusted so I do not think it is that bad as long as the user only uses the permissions for that purpose and nothing else. DeeM28 (talk) 15:19, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * 3)  I think that when you couldn't edit those translation pages alone, you shouldn't have edited (pasted delete) them and  should only made a request to AN. When I first looked at those edits(ex, this version), I mistakenly recognized your edits as vandalism. --そらたこ (talk) 01:35, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
 * 4)  Fairly active on meta, knows a language that I don't believe is known by any of the current admins, has a genuine use case, and is trusted on WMF. I would actually probably support granting indefinite sysop as long as they don't abuse during this period. If it is made temporary and not extended, then in light of their translation contributions, I believe they shuld be allowed to keep Translation Administrator after their sysop period, and maybe Rollbacker as well. So that they may continue to contribute to meta in an increased capacity. Bonnedav (talk) 14:14, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
 * 5)  I thought this over, and I will issue a supporting vote. WickyHoney (talk) 00:08, 31 May 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

Rock (Wiki creator)
<div class="boilerplate metadata discussion-archived" style="background-color: #F2F4FC; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #aaa">
 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * ❌ Per the comments above, it is a bit too early to request wiki creator at this time. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 06:28, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

User: Rock ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Wiki creator Reason: I want to help with wiki requests and believe that I can be active when others are not there. And I know its principles.I know my short edits but I have experience about wiki.

Additional comments: Why I want to get this right?

Answer: Because I want to help Miraheze

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * Comments/Questions
 * 1)  Can i Just say your reasoning is weak and the fact your not really giving a strong reason of why you should be given this role. Can you please explain how you plan to use the role? i Don't Feel your reasoning is strong enough? --Cocopuff2018  20:35, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 2)  Your reason is not sufficient, and you haven't made enough of a mark on this wiki to portray yourself as a good candidate for this position. WickyHoney (talk) 20:50, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , very regrettably, per the above. I really dislike opposing candidates and would've preferred to abstain (that is, not provide opposition but not support either) per, well, the candidate's own lack of any provided explanation they understand the role, Content Policy, and Dormancy Policy. As well, while not necessarily a reason to oppose, per my own criteria, I am also somewhat troubled that this request was made merely eight minutes after the candidate requested re-addition of administrator and bureaucrat rights. As I stated elsewhere, I would strongly suggest, here or there, creating a personal sandbox and performing some constructive editing and writing sample tests. Thanks. If all of that were done, I'd be happy to potentially support in another month or two. Dmehus (talk) 21:35, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 1)  Lets start with this...First off your reasoning is not strong enough. Another thing is the amount of local edits you have I would like to see more edits out of you then maybe a vote from me can come in the future I would suggest sticking around and getting to know more users, learning more about Miraheze/meta before your request is considered for my vote. Sorry --Cocopuff2018  23:39, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 2)   --MrJaroslavik (talk) 04:11, 2 July 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

Dmehus (Wiki creator)
<div class="boilerplate metadata discussion-archived" style="background-color: #F2F4FC; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #aaa">
 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Successful. John (talk) 19:00, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

User: Dmehus ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Wiki creator Reason: Looking through our current list of wiki creators, I see that we have about 23 wiki creators; however, of those, only about 12 have been active in the past thirty days. Given that we're all volunteers, we can't reasonably mandate a certain number of hours of activity per week. Plus, it's the summer season, so many are on vacation, some for extended periods. We should ideally aim to have all wikis created in less than 24 hours, subject to the requests providing sufficient explanation as to the requested wiki's scope and so forth. Finally, since we're all in different timezones, we should ideally aim to have 2-3 wiki creators from each of the timezones, as this should allow for absences, short periods of inactivity, etc., whilst still ensuring there's always a wiki creator available. Seeing a lot of wiki creation requests outstanding for several days in the past week, and similar to MrJaroslavik's request at the top of this page on wanting to help out with the wiki creation backlog, and having read our Content Policy and Dormancy Policy several times, I feel that I can make a positive contribution in this area (in addition to my contributions over at Public Test Wiki). Dmehus (talk) 20:04, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Additional comments:

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions


 * 1) i think he would make a great Wiki creator. --Cocopuff2018  20:23, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 2) Reason above. --Just Amelia (talk) 07:19, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 3)  the user seems helpful and I think he would do well as a wiki creator! DeeM28 (talk) 17:11, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 4)  no reason.Rock (talk) 15:09, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 5)  I suppose I will support for now. WickyHoney (talk) 19:01, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

Cocopuff2018 (Wiki creator)
<div class="boilerplate metadata discussion-archived" style="background-color: #F2F4FC; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #aaa">
 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Unsuccessful. John (talk) 19:04, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

User: Cocopuff2018 ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Wiki creator Reason: i Think I should become wiki creator BECAUSE I Have Experience and know what to Do and what not to do currently there are less This month and I would make sure to Not accept Request with a not vary valid reason I’m good at being patience and been around at miraheze for awhile now I am active and interact on the discord server and help out when I can I Interact with the users of miraheze as well and think I Am trustworthy of this role as wiki creator I’m kind to everyone and Am patience and assume good faith. If there’s a Time were I don’t know If I should approve or decline a request I’ll leave it for someone else to do and will only accept wiki request within the  gudlines I’m good at following gudlines,managing wikis, dealing with vandalism and of course Running wikis I’m 2+ years experienced in running wikis.

Additional comments:

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * 1)  Have you read the Content Policy and Wiki creators guide? If a wiki request said "Wiki to work on stuff" would you decline or accept? Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 09:33, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 2)  While I have had very limited interactions with this user and I do agree that Cocopuff2018 could've better elucidated their nomination's reason to indicate their knowledge of the Content Policy, I did have one positive interaction with the user on Discord in which they looked at an outstanding wiki creation request from a user and said, at the same time as I was composing my own response to the user, that the the wiki requestor's description was not adequate enough. They also suggested improvements, not as detailed as my response, but still sufficiently detailed enough that it would've been clear to the wiki requestor had Cocopuff2018 been a wiki creator. So, for that reason, I personally have no objection to Cocopuff2018's nomination. A clearer explanation from Cocopuff2018 would move me more firmly from the no opposition to clear support column. Dmehus (talk) 13:15, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
 * hi so if someone said a wiki to just work on i will decline this request clearly has not enough detail to prove why the wiki should be created i will also ask them for more details of what there plans are to do with the wiki --Cocopuff2018  14:41, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 1)  You say you are patient, which you misspelled, but I do not think you are patient enough because you seem like you are in a hurry to type. You also misspell way too often to provoke any serious authority from you; with me at least. Please act like this is a job, not an achievement. WickyHoney (talk) 07:16, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 2)  Your reason is unfortunately enough to push me from  to . It's full of grammatical and spelling issues and clearly rushed which is exactly what it says you won't do.  ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  14:29, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 3) Symbol support vote.svg Weak support and no opposition The typographical errors and rushed self-nomination for the position, identified by WickyHoney and RhinosF1 above, do give me pause, but as I said above, I have no real reason to oppose as we do need more than one more wiki creator. The user does have a clue with regard to our Content Policy and I have seen instances on Discord in which the user stated how they would handle certain borderline requests. So, call this a moral support, with the view to a strong(er) support in another month or two. When and if you renominate yourself, I would strongly encourage you to make use of the "show preview" button before posting your nomination. A fully formatted nomination, mostly free of small typos (a couple exceptions are always forgivable, if you correct them right away), would likely see you supported unanimously or near unanimously. Dmehus (talk) 15:25, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 4)  I like the idea of having more users and users being encouraged to volunteer more but I do not think that this user is ready yet for the task of being wiki creator and I do not know if they would have enough judgement to take care of requests. I think it would be best to wait and show that you are capable. DeeM28 (talk) 17:15, 26 June 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

MrJaroslavik (sysop)
<div class="boilerplate metadata discussion-archived" style="background-color: #F2F4FC; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #aaa">
 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Extended Indefinitely. John (talk) 19:05, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

User: MrJaroslavik ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: sysop Reason: Good evening all. As probably you know, about a month ago, I was request a temporary sysop rights. Now I would request permanent sysop rights. Unfortunately, I failed to complete all the tasks as I intended, only a part. In part, this was because I was handling (patrol) of new pages on the Czech Wikipedia (due to coronavirus is backlog of new pages long). Now I will have a lot of free time (summer holidays) and I think I can also help with other administrators tasks, such as blocking LTA, deleting, granting rights, ... And of course I will complete all tasks I wanted this month. Any questions? Ask me. Thanks for consideration. Regards-- MrJaroslavik (talk) 22:14, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Additional comments: for my previous requests, see sections above --MrJaroslavik (talk) 22:14, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions


 * 1) He's Helpful around meta and plus we could use another Admin  i think its a great idea. --Cocopuff2018  20:23, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 2) I do think Meta could use another Administrator. This user appears trustworthy, and is very polite. WickyHoney (talk) 23:54, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 3) Got a clue, got a purpose, and is friendly. Whether we need more local Meta administrators is really secondary, in my view. If someone articulates well their purpose and intended use of the tools, then they meet my criteria and should be accepted. Dmehus (talk) 00:25, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 4) Helpful, no reason to not give indefinite, full adminship.  ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  14:25, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 5)  looking at contributions this user has done a very good job here fixing templates and even helped combat vandalism today! I am confident that MrJaroslavik can do a great job if his admin rights are kept. DeeM28 (talk) 17:17, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 6)  Helpful user. Rock (talk) 15:11, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 7)  --そらたこ (talk) 11:34, 2 July 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

PowerDagger15 (Wiki creator)
User: PowerDagger15 ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Wiki creator Reason: I want to fix the issue of wikis getting created too slowly

Additional comments:

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * Please tell us how you action the following request(s). (Please reply to each individually, copying the indentation for each question above and adding a single colon per WP:LISTGAP.):
 * Sitename reads as "Star Wiki" and description reads "for fun, chat and stuff."
 * A wiki containing writings and information depicting what life would be like if the Germans had been victorious in World War II.
 * A wiki, sufficiently defined topicly, which epouses non-mainstream, far-right (or far-left) views and information, some of which may be factually correct but some of which may not.
 * A wiki, sufficiently defined topicly, which may have the same or similar purpose or scope as existing wikis but which isn't a wholly duplicate mirror of an existing wiki.
 * --Dmehus (talk) 16:41, 17 July 2020 (UTC)


 * 1)   May I first mention, you have a weak reason to be requesting Wiki Creator. After looking at your edits, I would like to see more edits out of you before requesting to become a wiki creator, and would like you to prove to me and others that you are willing to take the responsibility of the role along with earning trust at the moment I have not seen enough evidence to prove you are ready to take this role, to me it looks like you rushed when you made this request and just want the role without a good reason attached to it. And due to your weak reason only proves you're not ready to become a Wiki Creator and you were rushing when making this request may I recommend you try again in a few months? Thanks and Happy Editing!!! --Cocopuff2018  22:11, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 2) I have seen that you have made many good edits around miraheze in total, and I would like to support you, but your reasoning is not really detailed, and it is not really a proper reasoning. In addition, you did not answer the questions. Maybe read up on the rules, keep going with your contributions, and re request in a few weeks, and you would likely get it! --TFFfan (talk) 11:16, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 3) Per the candidate's own lack of a clear rationale in their nomination statement and the fact that they've yet to answer any of the questions posted, several days in to the nomination. Put simply, I can't assess whether the candidate understands Content Policy and Dormancy Policy, which are crucial for wiki creators to understand. So, on that basis alone, I can't support, but I also can't oppose, either. Dmehus (talk) 19:00, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , because I have yet to see an answer to the question Dmehus asked, Also, the reason is feeling a bit vague. The good thing is that you made decent edits on all wikis. Maybe next time in a month make the reason stronger, answer the questions, and read the Content Policy, and Dormancy Policy and I'll make a . Thanks! 20:57, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) I noticed you made many decent edits, however I have to oppose this, as I believe your reasoning is insufficient to become a wiki creator at this time. 08:56, 22 July 2020 ］ |

TFFfan (Wiki creator)
User: TFFfan ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Wiki creator Reason: I have not made that many edits on wikis, and I only own 1 wiki. However, I have noticed there is not that many wiki creators, and I really want to help miraheze expand, and I would like to grant or deny wiki requests.

Additional comments: I have looked over the rules, and I do understand how they work, and I really would love to help out Miraheze expand.

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * Please tell us how you action the following request(s). (Please reply to each individually, copying the indentation for each question above and adding a single colon per WP:LISTGAP.):
 * Sitename reads as "Star Wiki" and description reads "for fun, chat and stuff."
 * A wiki containing writings and information depicting what life would be like if the Germans had been victorious in World War II.
 * A wiki, sufficiently defined topicly, which epouses non-mainstream, far-right (or far-left) views and information, some of which may be factually correct but some of which may not.
 * A wiki, sufficiently defined topicly, which may have the same or similar purpose or scope as existing wikis but which isn't a wholly duplicate mirror of an existing wiki.
 * --Dmehus (talk) 16:40, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Here is my answers
 * 1 Deny, because the wiki would be used for a chat room, because a wiki is not a forum.
 * 2 Accept, because it provides an account of what life would be like, and it provides historically accurate information. It could be used for educational purposes.
 * 3 Accept, because it could be an educational resource for political students looking for information about issues on all areas of the political spectrum, and for people wanting to get information about different sides of things, including the farther sides.
 * 4 Deny, because the content policy states that "A wiki must not create problems which make it difficult for other wikis." This could create difficulties in the other wiki, and could cause a dispute between editors, and cause others to not edit in good faith.


 * I hope this answers your questions. Thanks for asking! --TFFfan (talk) 16:54, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for answering so quickly. I will not respond with the answers to the questions until after the other candidate has answered. Dmehus (talk) 17:02, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Since you and have now answered the questions and the other request has been closed, I can try and provide you some guidance with respect your answers. Your answer to Q. 2 and 3 were correct, though I would just add that, for Q. 3, there could be other acceptable use cases as well. For Q. 1, we could have wikis that are, predominantly, used as forums, so you would be right to "deny" that request, but you would be denying it because there is not a clear topic. We need more information. For Q. 4, you would also be right to deny this request, but could've just clarified your response with a bit more information. So I would say you got all the answers correct, but for Q. 1 and 4, your rationales were either partially incorrect or could've been better articulated. As I say, though, your answers were great considering these were somewhat tough questions for a wiki creator that aren't often asked at Requests for permissions. Overall, great job! :) Dmehus (talk) 21:29, 24 July 2020 (UTC)


 * , possibly somewhat weak, per my positive interactions with and their responses. Some responses had varying degrees of correctness; other responses could've been improved. Nevertheless, nothing stands out, on its own, as a reason to either abstain or oppose. Crucially, the candidate is acting in good-faith in all or substantially all of their contributioons. Moreover, the candidate has shown a strong capacity to learn from their mistakes, which effectively nullifies any incorrect or somewhat incorrect responses they may have given above. If in doubt, ask questions of colleagues and/or follow-up with the requestor for more information, and you should do fine. Dmehus (talk) 18:27, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 1)  You seem like  a good candidate but I would like for you to make more edits and do a more work.  I also fell it's a bit early to consider you for wiki creator.  Try again in a few months and we will go from there thanks and happy editing --Cocopuff2018  22:14, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , A good candidate, you seem to answer the questions pretty well. But is it a little bit too early? Overall, a good candidate. 17:45, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 1)  You seemed to have answered the questions that Dmehus mentioned. I am supporting this because if your answers to those questions, in particular you referenceing the policy, displaying you have knowledge of it, and therefore I believe you would make a good wiki creator.  08:58, 22 July 2020 ］ |
 * 2)  I don't see any problems.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 16:59, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Universal Omega (Wiki creator)
User: Universal Omega ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Wiki creator Reason: I want to become a wiki creator, not just to be one, but in order to help out the Miraheze volunteers in any way I can. So I want to start out by helping out with this. It allows me to assist them with this position. The Miraheze volunteers are already extremely busy, and I just want to diminish their workload in any way I possibly can.

Additional comments: I understand I have not been around on Miraheze for as long as most, but I do believe I understand enough about how Miraheze is run to be able to successfully be a wiki creator. Even if I do not get to be a wiki creator to assist, I hope someone else does, if only to assist the already extremely busy, and very accommodating Miraheze volunteers. Even if I am unable to help in this capacity, I do hope to continue to assist in a non-positioned capacity whenever I can. Thank you.

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * Please tell us how you action the following request(s). (Please reply following the format of the above two open requests.):
 * Sitename reads as "Star Wiki" and description reads "for fun, chat and stuff."
 * A wiki containing writings and information depicting what life would be like if the Germans had been victorious in World War II.
 * A wiki, sufficiently defined topicly, which epouses non-mainstream, far-right (or far-left) views and information, some of which may be factually correct but some of which may not.
 * A wiki, sufficiently defined topicly, which may have the same or similar purpose or scope as existing wikis but which isn't a wholly duplicate mirror of an existing wiki.
 * --Dmehus (talk) 05:51, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Here is my answers to those.
 * Deny, because for one, the description is a bit vague saying "and stuff", and secondly a wiki is not meant for chatting. If you want something just to chat with, then Discord would be a better option than a wiki.
 * Accept, because wikis are meant to contain historical information. Although this may be a non-factual wiki, it still depicts historical information.
 * Accept, although some information may be non-factual, that is their choice. This type of wiki may be beneficial for certain audiences looking for certain material.
 * That one depends, I think it'd warrant a delay in either decision until an investigation is conducted whether or not it may cause difficulty, violate the policies of Miraheze, or does create duplicate content, that may lead to violation of copyright rules, or causes damage to the already existing, more established wiki.
 * 06:35, 22 July 2020 (UTC) ］ |
 * , Thanks for answering so quickly. I will not respond with the answers to the questions until after the other candidate has answered.
 * Since you and have now answered the questions and the other request has been closed, I can try and provide you some guidance with respect your answers. Your answers to Q. 1 through 4 were correct. For Q. 1, we could have wikis that are, predominantly, used as forums, as you would be right to "deny" that request, in a procedural fashion because there is not a clear topic. We need more information. For Q. 4, you would also be right to deny this request, and you hit the nail on the proverbial head with your rationale. Your response to Q. 4 was also impressive as you would be wise to probe for more information. As I say, though, your answers were great considering these were somewhat tough questions for a wiki creator that aren't often asked at Requests for permissions. Overall, great job! :) Dmehus (talk) 21:34, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
 * As another matter, would you mind updating the timestamp format for your signature as . The small font and font colour are not problems, but if that comma, UTC parenthetical, and the fully spelled out month aren't there exactly, the bot has trouble reading the timestamps correctly and won't archive threads in which you've posted last to the thread. Dmehus (talk) 06:50, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * As long as someone else posted in the same thread with the standard timestamp, it will be archived. It's just that those with non-standard is ignored when calculating the time to decide whether to archive them. (And no, I am not going to support any other timestamps other than MW default.) &mdash; <tt>revi</tt>  06:57, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , thanks for your reply. I honestly hadn't expected you to have the ability, or desire, to read the notifications/pings where Revibot is mentioned. Thanks for the added information, and I'm in complete agreement with you that we should all be using standard timestamps (adjusted only for font face or size); however, that doesn't seem to be occurring. We've had a number of threads on other Meta noticeboards in which another user, who also uses a transcluded signature (which doesn't seem to be the issue), uses a non-standard timestamp that omits the comma following the time, inserts hyphens between the date elements, abbreviates the month, and does not include the "UTC." If it simply ignores that comment because of the non-standard signature timestamp, how come it didn't archive the threads according to the previous comments (in the same thread) that had the standard timestamp format? Dmehus (talk) 15:13, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I understand where you are coming from, however, I do understand the Content Policy at least enough to do the job successfully (I did read it entirely), although, I have also read the dormancy policy, and know and understand it enough to have seen that the dormancy policy is not handled by wiki creators (it states: "All wikis eligible for deletion will be deleted at the discretion of the system administrators," although that is not exactly the core of the policy, it does mention system admins, not wiki creators, which is my point here, it also mentions stewards in it, but nowhere does it mention wiki creators at all), although it is still crucial for wiki creators to understand and know, it is not as big of a deal as knowing the content policy, as the content policy is the major determinate in whether a wiki should be created or declined. None-the-less, I respect and understand your opinion and vote here. Thank you!  19:18, 23 July 2020 (UTC) ］ |


 * Some of your answers were either fully or somewhat on point; other answers weren't quite right or were incorrect. Nevertheless, from my interactions with you on Discord, you have a solid technical aptitude and I'm reasonably comfortable with your willingness to heed advice from other wiki creators. If in doubt, defer. If you are unsure, ask on Discord or IRC and you should do just fine. Dmehus (talk) 06:50, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * You seem like a good candidate, and it appears you read the rules with your answers to the questions. I think that you could work great as a wiki creator. --TFFfan (talk) 10:03, 22 July 2020 (UTC)


 * it's a bit early I think give it more time --Cocopuff2018 17:02, 23 July 2020 (UTC)


 * I think it's early, but this user is nice InspecterAbdel (talk) 18:25, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Good user overall. CircleyDoesExtracter  ( Circley Talk  |  Global   |  Email the Cloud ) 14:17, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

そらたこ (Wiki creator)
User: そらたこ ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Wiki creator Reason: I only support Japanese requests. Before, when I was invited by 松, I didn't run for because there were two active creators who are native speaker of Japanese. These days, they are not so active, so I run for the creator. I will resign when they become active again. You won't need to use Google Translate to decide whether to approve or decline. --そらたこ (talk) 08:13, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Additional comments:

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * 1) . Another wiki creator with knowledge of the Japanese language will benefit. I assume you know and understand Content Policy, Dormancy Policy, etc. Thanks for your volunteering. --MrJaroslavik (talk) 08:22, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 2)  per nominee's statement and above. I like that they will only focus on Japanese requests as that's what they're comfortable with and, per  above, we do need more Japanese and really any wiki creators that speak any of the Asian languages. So, this LGTM. Dmehus (talk) 14:11, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , I strongly support as Japanese requests are uncommon, and it will make Japanese Requests faster. CircleyDoesExtracter  ( Circley Talk  |  Global   |  Email the Cloud ) 14:16, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 1)  we need some Japanese People for wiki request I think it's a good idea.  --Cocopuff2018  23:05, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 2)  As per users and description above. We need someone who can understand Japanese to create wikis. --TFFfan (talk) 23:28, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 3)  per above.  13:19, 28 July 2020 (UTC) ］ |
 * 4)  InspecterAbdel (talk) 20:19, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 5) 　I'm glad she/he accepted my invitation.--松•Matsu (talk) 23:05, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 6)  I maintain my strong support above, but did just want to add that I would encourage  to consider maintaining their wiki creator user rights, even if the previous Japanese wiki creators return from relative inactivity. We can always use more wiki creators from the Asian region. Dmehus (talk) 01:33, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

^sithjarjar^ (CheckUser)
<div class="boilerplate metadata discussion-archived" style="background-color: #F2F4FC; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #aaa">
 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * ❌ - CheckUser and Oversight rights will not be granted except under exceptional circumstances. Also this page only allows users to request CheckUser on Meta and no other wikis. If you need to request a checkuser, please use Stewards' noticeboard instead.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 15:31, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

User: ^sithjarjar^ ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: CheckUser Reason: I need this right on, as it may help me deal with vandalism and possible sockpuppetry-I already got one vandal on the Main Page there. Requesting Oversight for the same reason. ^sithjarjar^ (talk) 15:25, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Additional comments: I know I’m supposed to request on the local wiki, but that’s not actually possible, because there’s no system for granting it there... ^sithjarjar^ (talk) 15:25, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

^sithjarjar^ (Oversight)
<div class="boilerplate metadata discussion-archived" style="background-color: #F2F4FC; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #aaa">
 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * ❌ - CheckUser and Oversight rights will not be granted except under exceptional circumstances. Also this page only allows users to request Oversight on Meta and no other wikis. If you need to request a oversight, please follow page Oversight instead.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 15:32, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

User: ^sithjarjar^ ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Oversight Reason: Per above request. Note that I’m requesting on Reborn Wikipedia, not here. ^sithjarjar^ (talk) 15:27, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Additional comments:

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

Cuddly Rainbow Guardian (Wiki creator)
User: Cuddly Rainbow Guardian ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Wiki creator Reason: there are many wikis being requested that violate the content policy, such as wikis with no purpose or ones that supposedly promote hate, like most of the so called "remakes" of reception wikis. i saw that one of the wikis requested recently sounded like a remake of an already existing wiki, toxic fandoms & hatedoms. the original reception wikis were obviously made for the sole purpose of constructive criticism. i am even an admin on one of them myself (which is unfavorable wikis and users, to be exact,and we avoid drama.) also, i want to create people's wikis, but sometimes give further explanations to them and help the creators out. a majority of the ones i want to create are things from my field of interest, like animation, television, and art.

Additional comments: i dunno.

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * 1)  That's a valid reason. --GondorChicken (talk) 17:36, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 2)  I've never heard of this user, I suggest they wait until they have more contributions globally and/or on meta. Zppix (Meta &#124; CVT Member &#124; talk to me) 17:42, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 3)  I'm somewhat familiar with the user, over at Public Test Wiki where they requested testing permissions, but have yet to make use of them. Importantly, I don't get a good enough sense from your reason that you understand and can apply Content Policy to wiki creation decisions, so my oppose is strictly weak on that basis as we do need more wiki creators. Dmehus (talk) 17:46, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 4)  I am pretty familiar with this user and has a okay reason, but there is a bit of issue with applying Content Policy onto wiki creation decisions. However, I can give an abstain as we do need a little more wiki creators.  CircleyDoesExtracter  ( Circley Talk  |  Global   |  Email the Cloud ) 18:10, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 5)  I don't think this user understand our wiki creation policy's and feel its a bit early  I would suggest making more edits and trying again in a few months (: --Cocopuff2018  18:24, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 6)  per. above  17:23, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 7)  Per above.  21:04, 19 August 2020 (UTC) ］ |

Dmehus (sysop)
<div class="boilerplate metadata discussion-archived" style="background-color: #F2F4FC; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #aaa">
 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Successful. John (talk) 17:09, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

User: Dmehus ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: sysop Reason: Meta is one of my two home wikis (the other being Public Test Wiki) where I am most active. Indeed, my edits on Meta comprise more than 60% of my total global edit contributions on Miraheze. On Meta, I am particularly active on all the noticeboards, answering users' questions, as a wiki creator and translation administrator, fixing broken redirects and double redirects, adding forgotten or missed signatures and timestamps to users' posts, adding to and creating informational content pages, and just generally performing a lot of WikiGnome- and WikiJanitor-type edits that, together, help to improve Meta overall. Additionally, I am also active as a patroller on Meta and, in the course of both my patrolling and WikiGnoming, frequently encounter pages that either require (a) deletion or (b) a retitling, where a trailing redirect would be unhelpful and/or unnecessary. Finally, as part of that maintenance and upkeep, I am still finding the need for certain templates (i.e., resolution templates, soft redirect templates, interwiki link templates, and similar). Speaking privately with other Meta administrators, there was a general agreement that certain enhanced tools (notably,,  , and  ) would be useful to me as part of my continued maintenance and content writing that I bring to Meta.

Over the near- to medium-term, with the  flag on my account, I intend to resolve outstanding issues with redirects (whether broken, double, or some other issue), improve the categorization of the templates on Meta, and implement a redirect categorization scheme to better track and categorize redirects (especially cross-namespace redirects), in addition to daily   chores like monitoring and actioning Category:Candidates for deletion, tending to requests on the Meta administrators' noticeboard, and all of the other daily tasks I've already been doing.

Over the medium- to long-term, I have a couple ideas that I've discussed with and others, privately and principally on Discord, aimed at improving the overall user experience for Meta users (especially new users). Drafts of these ideas would be built and tagged as such, and would be used a mock-ups to build community support for implementing the ideas in a future community discussion.

Finally, while not the primary focus for my reason for requesting Meta administrator user rights, several days ago where was an instance where there were no local Meta administrators or stewards available on Discord and, in the course of my patrolling, I noted a nonsense/attack-style page that I immediately tagged for deletion. Had I had already been a Meta administrator, I could've simply deleted the page and the sockpuppet account of an LTA user could've been blocked before it had had a chance to make more than a single edit. So, having another Meta administrator, based in the Pacific time zone (UTC -07:00), especially one who is also the most active non-administrator user on Meta, would be very beneficial in (hopefully very rare) cases like this.

I welcome any question(s) users may have and look forward to your supporting my request for permissions. Dmehus (talk) 20:31, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Additional comments:

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions


 * 1)  hes a good user why not. --Cocopuff2018  22:54, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 2)  Easily one of the most active users on Miraheze Meta. And his contributions for Miraheze speak for themselves. I am giving my full support!  23:45, 10 August 2020 (UTC) ］ |
 * 3)  Likely one of the most active users on Miraheze Meta. I can easily make big support, but it's slightly a bit too fast, to be honest, but still. One of my favorite users on Meta.  CircleyDoesExtracter  ( Circley Talk  |  Global   |  Email the Cloud ) 01:21, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 4)  Arguably one of the best and active user.  02:22, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 5)  Considering that she/he is currently running for Consul and Interwiki administrator at the same time.I'm worried that her/his work will be too much.However,there is no reason to disagree, so we will consider weak support.--松•Matsu (talk) 15:50, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your supporting my candidacy and, in particular, for your concern for the workload, which I feel quite strongly is definitely manageable. Many system administrators, stewards, and Meta administrators frequently hold and manage multiple roles. Having concluded my post-secondary studies as a library technician and not working on a permanent full- or part-time basis, I have a lot of time, and am treating my Miraheze volunteerism as though it were a full-time job. Consistent with Code of Conduct provision #5, if my other life priorities were to change in a materially significant way that I were no longer able to contribute as actively in the past, I would plan for a gradual withdrawal of certain roles that I could still manage. As well, while multiple roles may seem like a lot of involvement, it's really not. For example, currently, the requests for interwiki table additions are very minimal (though, through my wiki outreach efforts and planned future changes to be discussed with the community, there may be more requests). In tandem with those changes, with the local outreach, we should also see more local interwiki administrators appointed, and have a more streamlined global interwiki requests system that, together, create a more efficient process. Similarly, I take WP:NODEADLINES seriously, and use that in my managing my workload, bumping things that take higher priority. Anyway, I hope this addresses your concern for my ability to juggle the workload, but it's really about providing me, as a very active user, with the necessary tools and bits that actually make my workload management both much easier and more efficient. Dmehus (talk) 16:21, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) As summed up by others.  ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  14:33, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 2) User shows extreme competency on-wiki and I believe this user can only do better with sysop user rights! Zppix (Meta &#124; CVT Member &#124; talk to me) 16:08, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 3) User is productive. --GondorChicken (talk) 01:37, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 4) I agree with the above points made.  Hypercane  <font color="#8152C6">(  talk <font color="#8152C6">) 03:35, 18 August 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

Cocopuff2018 (Wiki creator)
<div class="boilerplate metadata discussion-archived" style="background-color: #F2F4FC; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #aaa">
 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Unsucessful. John (talk) 17:12, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

User: Cocopuff2018 ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Wiki creator Reason: It has been a few months now and I am ready to request wiki creator so here is why I want to be a wiki creator because I want to help out more...not just because I want wiki creator for the heck of it, but with this role it will let me help out more and I understand I may have had a little bit of an "Oops" on the Discord server with 2 users and I am extremely sorry but want to move on from that and keep helping others and help out the community. I have read all I need to know about becoming a wiki creator and would like to do more around here now here is my proposal. While being wiki creator, an advanced user, has said he would help to guide me in this next step. However if you oppose me, then I will not be able to learn how to advance in this kind of stuff and I think wiki creator is a good start for me. If a user gives a reason like "Just Because," I will decline the  request and ask them to give me a better reason for it to be created I understand how to handle this role and am ready to reach the next level.

Additional comments:

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * I don't know anything about this user. 01:12, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The user does seem to understand Miraheze and it's content policy, and we could always use more help with wiki creations. 01:28, 18 August 2020 (UTC) ］ |
 * We do always need more wiki creators and I'm reasonably comfortable the user has a decent grasp of Content Policy to fulfill the responsibilities. Take heed of all the advice given from fellow wiki creators, in terms of feedback on your wiki creations. I would also strongly recommend, but wouldn't necessarily require, that asks different wiki creators to peer review their declines and approvals, especially the approvals, for the first 30 days or so, and implement any constructive criticism and feedback given. Dmehus (talk) 01:33, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Immature and doesn't maintain a consistent stature. --GondorChicken (talk) 01:36, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * @GondorChicken I can say I highly disagree with you I am mature and I don’t even know you how can you even say I’m inmuture I am a mature young man and disagree with your vote towards me and I am fully Muture enough to handle wiki creator and can fully maintain a status atleast give me a shot at wiki creator to prove you wrong. --Cocopuff2018  01:53, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * User is incompetent and cannot follow Code of Conduct, I do not trust him with any advanced user right including wiki creator, and wont in the near future. Zppix (Meta &#124; CVT Member &#124; talk to me) 01:54, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I also find the fact they call violating the code of conduct an "Oops" unsettling. Zppix (Meta &#124; CVT Member &#124; talk to me) 02:10, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * @Zppix dude I want to help out too how am I suppose to help out if I cannot be wiki creator ?? I mean people do change and I can follow the code of conduct I made some mistakes but i dislike your comment for reasons and dishonor your comment towards my request I can Do the impossible and I am trying to earn trust what happend via discord and irc should have no effect on my request --Cocopuff2018 02:08, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Theres plently to do, clerking, etc... as long as you follow local policies, but at this time in my capacity as a system administrator and a volunteer I do not feel you are competent and able to follow global policies enough to have wiki creator Zppix (Meta &#124; CVT Member &#124; talk to me) 02:12, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * because @Zppix your never gonna support me for anything like I am trying to change and you cannot seem to accept that or see it I’m sorry but same thing Still dishonor your response toward my vote --Cocopuff2018 02:15, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * @Zppix and just fyi I want to help out if you would let me do something around here for god sake people change too you know you’ll never see good in me ever again --Cocopuff2018  02:17, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * its not up to you... and this just proves your not competent enough to hold advanced user rights thinking you can choose what votes are valid or not. Zppix (Meta &#124; CVT Member &#124; talk to me) 02:19, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * @Zppix how I earn your trust back? You’ll never support me on anything and I am aware I don’t make the calls for god sake it’s like your the ghost always going to be behind me to always oppose me And I worked hard Clearly you cannot see any good in me and it’s pretty sad as if --Cocopuff2018 02:23, 18 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I feel that this user does not have a good enough judgement to be able to effectively create wikis and determine which wikis should be created or not. Based on their recent behavior on Discord and their disregard for the CoC, I would not support them for wiki creator. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 04:46, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , at least for now. Please display for us, the community, that you are willing to do the work of a wiki creator, even without the rights. Contact users on their talk pages about potentially problematic wiki requests. Discuss how they can be improved, or why they won't be approved (e.g. Code of Conduct or Content Policy violations). Please know and acknowledge that only a minority of volunteer work (I'm talking like 2 clicks max when it comes to wiki creation) consists of clicking some extra buttons. You can always volunteer the best you can without the tools. I hope to see you back here soon! dross  (t • c • g) 05:22, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Absolutely not. 1) I don't believe you know all needed policies. 2) You are not eligible for any advanced right, by me.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 06:02, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't trust you with a penny if I'm honest. You know full well this is extremely premature based on the recent events and everyone else has long said enough. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  17:08, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't know what happened on non-wiki such as Discord, based on his/her replies on this request, his/her comments at Zppix's talk and his/her recent Wiki requests, I think he/she is not good for the Wikicreator now. --そらたこ (talk) 03:45, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Alternative proposal idea - a time-limited wiki creator?
 * Given the above concerns, there are clearly some outstanding issues, mainly relating to trust. Is it possible that we could potentially support a time-limited wiki creator role (say, for 30 days)? I realize this would require the candidate to re-request this user right in that timeframe, but at the same time, it would allow the candidate to demonstrate that they're going to meaningfully take to heart the guidance of their fellow wiki creators. If they do not take the guidance, then the community will likely be reluctant to re-confirm their status in a month's time. Dmehus (talk) 02:26, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I echo my reasoning above. Zppix (Meta &#124; CVT Member &#124; talk to me) 02:29, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree with doughs Proposal --Cocopuff2018 02:36, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I support cocopuff as wiki creator, because we do need wiki creators, I like this idea. There may have been passed issues, but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. 02:39, 18 August 2020 (UTC) ］ |
 * As I said on Discord to, I thought it was a bit few weeks too early to request wiki creator, but I'm willing to assume good-faith here. If the approvals were so problematic in that thirty day timeframe, any Mirahezian can make a request for revocation to stewards at Stewards' noticeboard, citing appropriate evidence of WP:IDHT-type behaviour that the temporary wiki creator isn't taking heed of the advice given. Dmehus (talk) 02:43, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * In this section, it's a bit mysterious that voting will take place.The only purpose of this section is whether or not the candidate accepts the proposal to re-run for a limited time.The candidate has accepted this, so it's better to close this poll entirely and wait for the request to be sent again.--松•Matsu (talk) 03:11, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * When I created this sub-section, it was originally only intended to serve as a discussion on formulating an alternative proposal. The initial idea I put out there was actually to, instead of the above section passing, this idea, or the more formulated idea that stemmed from this, was to see whether there would instead be support for the candidate to serve as wiki creator on a temporary basis. If they did not resubmit a new application on this page before the temporary right had expired, then they would no longer be a wiki creator. Nonetheless, the discussion does seem to be moot now, and it's probably best for the candidate, as I suggested to them, to put some distance between their applications for global or Meta user rights. suggested a timeframe of three months on his user talk page, which seems reasonable. Dmehus (talk) 12:31, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Absolutely nonsensical proposal.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 06:05, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry I think it's too early in my words. 13:33, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * --GondorChicken (talk) 17:03, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * no, they just need to wait a few months. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  17:08, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * --そらたこ (talk) 03:45, 19 August 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

Reception123 (Bureaucrat)
<div class="boilerplate metadata discussion-archived" style="background-color: #F2F4FC; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #aaa">
 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Successful. John (talk) 14:11, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

User: Reception123 ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Bureaucrat Reason: Reception123 needs little introduction, as one of the early system administrators, a current Global Sysop, and one of one of the two longest currently serving, community elected Code of Conduct Commission commissioners. Currently, Meta only has the two founding bureaucrats, John and Southparkfan, both of whom hold multiple roles as either a steward and lead Site Reliability Engineer, in John's case, or as the director of the system administrators and technical team-nominated board director, in Southparkfan's case. Given Reception123's level of activity on Meta, which is currently not outpaced by any other Meta user, he should be able to ensure local Meta permissions requests, bot account requests, interface administrator requests, and any local Meta RfCs are closed within a reasonable timeframe. As well, as part of prudent business continuity best practices, it just makes sense to have more than two local bureaucrats in case one is sidelined temporarily for reasons of illness, power outage, or similar. So, with that, I'm pleased to nominate Reception123 to this position, and kindly ask that you wait until the candidate has accepted before !voting.

Nominated by: Dmehus (talk) 15:37, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

I accept the nomination. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 15:51, 21 August 2020 (UTC) I would like to thank Dmehus for the nomination, and while there are not many things to do as Meta bureaucrat besides close permission requests and RfCs, I think I could be useful and handle things quicker, especially since the two current bureaucrats have many other responsibilities and work to do as Dmehus also pointed out. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 15:51, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Candidate's indication of acceptance
 * Candidate's nomination acceptance statement

Additional comments:

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * 1)  As proposer. Dmehus (talk) 15:53, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 2)  Now if I could give an even stronger support I would, I fully support Reception123 as bureaucrat.  15:55, 21 August 2020 (UTC) ］ |
 * 3)  Reception is working on Miraheze strong since 2015, and I can guarantee that he will be ready for bureaucrat.  CircleyDoesExtracter  ( Circley Talk  |  Global   |  Email the Cloud ) 15:59, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 4)  I like your reasoning but can you also point out other things you will do with this high rank and or other task you will use this role for? --Cocopuff2018  05:30, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * As I said in my acceptance message, there are not too many things that bureaucrats on Meta can do. If I am elected, I will close successful local requests such as sysop, for example as well as close any local RfCs in which I am not implicated. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 05:35, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 1)  we need another crat and he'll be helpful with closing requests --Cocopuff2018  05:47, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 2)  --Lakelimbo (talk) 06:13, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 3)  She/He is actively proposing and discussing at RfC, optimizing the meta user group.I think it is essential to be a bureaucrat to carry out this task smoothly.--松•Matsu (talk) 06:50, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 4)  Without a doubt. You've been around since the beginning and clearly showed the trust and capabilities for it.  ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  07:12, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 5)  Well-known and trusted user who is very active on meta, sounds good to me. Bonnedav (talk) 07:36, 22 August 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section