Meta:Requests for adminship/Glaisher

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

Glaisher (talk • contribs • count • logs • page moves • block log • CA • email)

Ending 8 April 2014 15:23 UTC

Hello, I would like to propose Glaisher as an additional Meta-Wiki administrator. He is a highly active cross-wiki contributor, and through his work tackling global vandalism, there are numerous occasions when he would find the administrator tools useful. His contributions to this project clearly show the need for the few extra tools. As an active user here at Meta, I have no doubt his use of the tools will be for the benefit of the project, and hope you will all agree. -Barras talk 15:18, 1 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

I accept. Thanks, --Glaisher [talk] 15:21, 1 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

• Support Support as nom. -Barras talk 15:23, 1 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support He is quite active on Meta, has made 500 or so speedy deletion requests since July (!), and has been involved in many areas of Meta and cross-wiki work. In addition, I trust his judgement. I just hope this isn't an April Fools' Day prank. PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:26, 1 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support I've always found Glaisher to be a competent and good user, who will no doubt benefit from access to the sysop kit here. Ajraddatz (talk) 15:32, 1 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support I have to agree with the users above here. Glaisher is a quite reasonable and competent volunteer and it's a pleasure to work with him. Vogone talk 17:12, 1 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support though I agree with PiRSquared. --Rs chen 7754 17:50, 1 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support Sure. — ΛΧΣ ²¹ 18:08, 1 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• support —DerHexer (Talk) 18:15, 1 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support DUHHHHHHHHHHH :D --Golden _{burg 111} 19:22, 1 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support ~ DanielTom (talk) 19:26, 1 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support --Kolega2357 (talk) 19:28, 1 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support I don't know about the benefit though :p John F. Lewis (talk) 19:31, 1 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

  See the nomination: "He is a highly active cross-wiki contributor, and through his work tackling global vandalism, there are numerous occasions when he would find the administrator tools useful." Vogone talk 19:35, 1 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

  Obvious joke should be obvious... John F. Lewis (talk) 19:36, 1 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

  Yes, indeed. So please make it obvious next time. Vogone talk 19:37, 1 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

• Support Support - Hoo man (talk) 22:12, 1 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support. Obviously. LlamaAl (talk) 00:56, 2 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support --Defender (talk) 01:14, 2 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support -- Wagino 20100516 (talk) 01:26, 2 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support ----Shanmugamp7 ^(talk) 04:55, 2 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:18, 2 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support Well duh, it's too obvious.--AldNon ^Ucallin?☎ 11:19, 2 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support, certainly. Trijnstel _talk 17:36, 2 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support why not? --Alan ^(talk) 19:25, 2 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support--Mr Wiki Pro (talk) 19:28, 2 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support As always has very positive contributions and is a great vandal fighter. --Reception123/Receptie123 (talk) 04:53, 3 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support – Yes please. T C N7JM 04:55, 3 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support but I would advise caution with rangeblocks - I would like it if you would clear with a CheckUser before making a rangeblock purely based on blocks on other wiki, as you did on MediaWiki.org.--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:57, 3 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support SupportSupport SupportSupport SupportSupport SupportSupport SupportSupport SupportSupport SupportSupport Support  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:06, 3 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

  Wow! It seem strongest possible support..... Wagino 20100516 (talk) 01:12, 4 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

  Or would that include two more supports ;)? Ajraddatz (talk) 02:16, 4 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

• Support Support all seems kosher. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 14:50, 3 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support --Stryn (talk) 15:34, 3 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support sure — TBloemink _talk 21:18, 3 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support Jianhui67 ^{talk ★contribs} 23:11, 3 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support Courcelles 19:19, 4 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support, per Billinghurst. Sa vh ^ñ 08:18, 5 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support Why not? -FASTILY 09:34, 7 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]
• Yes, please. Thanks for your work here and elsewhere. Mathonius (talk) 03:29, 8 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Done unanimous support. Good luck and use the tools wisely. Matanya (talk) 14:23, 8 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

(for the sake of transparency, i did a mistake here and granted the right an hour earlier due to day light saving stupidity.) Matanya (talk) 14:26, 8 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Closed as successful, unanimous support.

--M/ (talk) 16:06, 8 April 2014 (UTC) [reply ]