Wikiquote:Requests for bureaucratship/Pmlinediter

This discussion is finished. Please do not change it. You can add comments to another page, but not here.

Closed as successful, unanimous support. Congratulations! Tempodivalse [talk] 13:03, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

[change] Pmlinediter

Pmlinediter (talk • changes)

End date: 10 October 2009

Hello, I am Pmlinediter and I'm here requesting crat access. I've been an admin for more than 1 month (~40 days) and have got over 300 logged actions. I'm also a sysop at Simple 'Pedia and a Global Rollbacker. Recently, I've seen quite a few number of RfAs coming up here and the closing crats have been !voting. If I'm promoted, then I think that I can help in such cases. RyanCross and Coppertwig aren't really active, so we have 2 active crats, both of whom participate in RfAs. If I am promoted, then I believe I can only help the community with the tools. I've about 1.3k edits and I think I can be trusted. Thank you for your consideration. Pmlineditor ∞ 10:15, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Candidate's acceptance: Self nom

[change] Support

1. Support It never hurts to have additional bureaucrats. Tempodivalse [talk] 13:39, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
2. We don't really need any more crats, but I see no compelling reason to deny PM the extra bit. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:46, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
3. Good user. Net positive. I don't see why he shouldn't have it, as other crats aren't necessarily active, etc... Yotcmdr (talk) 16:15, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
4. Agree with Julian. This project probably has no need for another 'crat, but I see no harm in it. Pmlinediter is trusted, so why not. The way things are going though, soon every admin will also be a 'crat. :-P Tiptoety (talk) 17:35, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
5. Sure, Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 20:11, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
6. Echoing what Tiptoety said. Griffinofwales (talk) 18:21, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
7. Support I know Pmlinediter from the English and Simple English Wikipedias. I trust him to use the bureaucrat tools with caution. Warmly, –Katerenka (talk • contribs) 19:43, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
8. Since some of our bureaucrats aren't as active as they should be (*cough*), I have no problems adding another member to the bureaucrat team. :) — RyanCross (talk) 03:15, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
9. Support per above. Razorflame 00:49, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

[change] Oppose

[change] Comments

This discussion is finished. Please do not change it. You can add comments in another part.