Two new bureaucrats

Two new bureaucrats promoted

Last week, the Signpost reported that seven administrators were nominated to be bureaucrats. This week, the Signpost will report the results of the nominations.

Successful nominations

Deskana (talk · contribs · rights · renames) Closed at 21:12, 10 July 2007 (UTC) Final tally: 117/12/3

Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/Deskana 2

Deskana had an unsuccessful nomination that closed on 30 January 2007. User:Raul654 closed this nomination as successful and promoted him.


Andrevan (talk · contribs · rights · renames) Closed at 03:00, 11 July 2007 (UTC) Final tally: 78/12/2

Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/Andrevan3

Andrevan has had 2 unsuccessful nominations. The first which closed on 16 November 2004 can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/Andrevan. The second which closed on 3 September 2005 can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/Andrevan2. User:Raul654 closed this nomination as successful and promoted him.

Unsuccessful nominations

Majorly (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) Closed at 13:41, 4 July 2007 (UTC) Final tally: 35/12/2

Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/Majorly 2

Majorly had an unsuccessful nomination that closed on 5 April 2007. The nomination was withdrawn by Majorly. He withdrew with the statement, "This does not have a chance of passing. I agree and admit to being confrontational, but I thought that I could be trusted to view others opinions. Some of the comments have been fair; some not, some just really hurtful, the kind I'd like to see banned from RfAs. There's several people I knew would oppose me, but not this much, and it's quite funny how they say I should assume good faith morer, when they are not themselves. I'm probably one of the top five users active on RfAs; I've commented in hundreds, been pleased to nominate 10+ new admins, and even though I carefully explained why I question people, it seems certain users do not want me as a Bureaucrat. There's 5 other nominations up at this time - mine has the honour of being the only one to fail, so I'm going to close it early, since it hasn't the slightest chance when people oppose others as willingly as they do. It's ironic, the guy who tries to eliminate horrible, unhelpful opposes gets a load of them thrown back in his face. Ah well...".


Husond (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) Closed at 18:39, 10 July 2007 (UTC) Final tally: 80/22/3

Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/Husond

User:Raul654 closed this nomination as unsuccessful. There were various concerns including ones involving his ability to determine consensus in an RFA.


A Man In Black (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) Closed at 10:31, 11 July 2007 (UTC) Final tally: 29/38/5

Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/A Man In Black

User:Andrevan closed this nomination as unsuccessful. A Man In Black's block log resulted in multiple opposes to his nomination.


RyanGerbil10 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) Closed at 02:13, 12 July 2007 (UTC) Final tally: 33/14/5

Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/RyanGerbil10 2

User:Cecropia closed this nomination as unsuccessful. RyanGerbil10's ability to determine consensus in a Request for Adminship was a major concern in the nomination.


Ral315 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) Closed at 01:31, 13 July 2007 (UTC) Final tally: 124/27/6

Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/Ral315

User:Raul654 closed this nomination as unsuccessful. The fact that Ral315 would continue as editor of the Signpost was a major concern in the nomination.

+ Add a comment

Discuss this story

Signpost issue

"The fact that Ral315 is the editor of the Signpost was a major concern in the nomination."

Not quite. The concern was that he would continue as editor. Haukur 11:08, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks! I will fix that. FunPika 11:11, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you! Haukur 11:33, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

JodyB

"User:JodyB had given an additional support after Raul654 closed the nomination. It was reverted by User:WJBscribe 4 minutes later."

Why is this relevant at all? SalaSkan (Review me) 01:22, 18 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

5 April

Why do we have commentary on, and a large quotation from, an April RFB? This article is terribly confusing and badly laid out imho. --kingboyk 23:01, 24 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]




       

The Signpost · written by many · served by Sinepost V0.9 · 🄯 CC-BY-SA 4.0