Meta:Administrators/confirm/bureaucrat chat

Archives: January 2008 | April 2008 | July 2008 | October 2008 | January 2009

Bureaucrats: The below discussion is transcluded.

Non-bureaucrats are invited to leave commentary on the talkpage. Please do not do so here.

Users voluntarily relinquishing rights during the confirmations

edit

Users which were uncontroversial closes

edit

Closes requiring discussion

edit
The following discussion is closed.
  • Discussion link: click here
  • Rights under confirmation to be discussed: sysop, bureaucrat
  • Vote counts:
    • sysop: 11   Keep, 4   Remove, 73%
    • bureaucrat: 10   Keep, 5   Remove, 67%
  • Status:    In progress

  • I think there is enough consensus to keep both rights here. Though the magic % is close, there is at least one vote that is contradictory (Alexanderps quotes me, and says to remove, but I changed to keep). Majorly talk 00:24, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Discussion link: click here
  • Rights to be confirmed: sysop, bureaucrat
  • Vote counts:
    • bureaucrat: 11   Keep, 6   Remove, 65%
  • Status:    In progress

    • Result: This is pretty close, but I think there is consensus here to keep both rights. Also judging by the original vote, it was only 10% off the 75% mark, so no need to take further action here. Majorly talk 23:48, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Discussion link: click here
  • Rights under confirmation to be discussed: sysop, bureaucrat, checkuser
  • Vote counts:
    • bureaucrat: 9   Keep, 7   Remove, 56%
    • checkuser: 9   Keep, 7   Remove, 56%
  • Status:    In progress

  • On Checkuser, Anthere does not appear to meet policy regarding activity with the tool - she has not used it in over a year, so that should result in an automatic removal. Other arguments presented to keep CU are along the lines of "it's Anthere" and "she can watch other CUs". WRT the second point, we already have several elected CUs on this wiki, who are perfectly capable of watching each other. I personally do not see the need for an extra, who hasn't used it for over a year. And "it's Anthere" tells us nothing about anything.

*As for bureaucrat, bearing in mind I voted to remove, there is no consensus to remove it in the discussion. Though the % is the same for CU, CU has policies regarding inactivity that ought to be followed. Majorly talk 00:24, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Result was bureaucrat and CU removed. Majorly talk 23:56, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


  • Discussion link: click here
  • Rights under confirmation to be discussed: sysop, checkuser
  • Vote counts:
    • sysop: 7   Keep, 12   Remove, 37%
    • checkuser: 5   Keep, 14   Remove, 26%
  • Status:    In progress

  • Checkuser is a fairly clear remove. Adminship is, as the other devs, unnecessary, even a keep voter (Cometstyles) points this out (Keep - sysop, though he really doesn't need it). It seems there is a fair consensus to remove sysop too. Majorly talk 00:27, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Discussion link: click here
  • Rights under confirmation to be discussed: sysop, bureaucrat
  • Vote counts:
    • bureaucrat: 14   Keep, 3   Remove, 82%
  • Status:    In progress

  • Discussion link: click here
  • Rights under confirmation to be discussed: sysop
  • Vote counts:
    • sysop: 11   Keep, 3   Remove, 77%
  • Status:    In progress

  • Discussion link: click here
  • Rights under confirmation to be discussed: sysop, bureaucrat, checkuser
  • Vote counts:
    • sysop: 8   Keep, 10   Remove, 44%
    • bureaucrat: 7   Keep, 11   Remove, 39%
    • checkuser: 7   Keep, 11   Remove, 39%
  • Status:    In progress