Jump to content

Meta:Requests for oversight/Mike.lifeguard

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
< Meta:Requests for oversight
This is an archived version of this page, as edited by John Vandenberg (talk | contribs) at 00:13, 10 July 2008 (→‎Support: +1). It may differ significantly from the current version.

Mike.lifeguard

I guess I should return the favour. When this came up a few days ago (in part as a result of an oversight I did, and some discussion among stewards and others, and then on Babel) Mike was one of the people I immediately thought of for this role. I enjoy working with him as a fellow CU and trust him implicitly in that role, and think he's eminently suited to this task as well. He's been showing his mettle in a variety of roles as time goes on:

and I think he can handle this additional duty with finesse and aplomb. I hope you'll support him!

Thanks Lar. If the community trusts me, I'm happy to serve in this role.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 02:37, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Support Support - as nominator ++Lar: t/c 02:30, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose Oppose I'm sorry, while I trust Mike, he's been an admin for just over 2 months. I'd rather this task went to more seasoned users. Majorly talk 02:32, 8 July 2008 (UTC) That was a bad reason to oppose, there's no reason why a newer person can't do the job. Support Support Majorly talk 02:58, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support Support Trusted user and already familiar with this sort of sensitive work. Kylu 05:38, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support Support & strongly. Mike is someone who has grown tremendously in stature & ability in the time I have known him. Highly capable & very sensitive. Just the requirements for Oversight. He is very active here. There are few Wikimedian I would trust more. --Herby talk thyme 06:56, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support Support but it's necessary oversight in meta? --.snoopy. 07:26, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support Support Although he doesn't have experiences with oversighting, Mike is very reliable and always calming, which makes him a good candidate for this job. --Thogo (talk) 10:17, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support Support I trust Mike with these tools and believe he is suited with these tools. --Kanonkas 11:53, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support Support Trustworthy candidate. Nishkid64 (talk) 22:06, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support Support - Mike has my trust, and he should fill out the role well here. ----Anonymous DissidentTalk 05:02, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Mike has my 105% trust. —Giggy 05:57, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support Support, he is trusted, but as snoopy, I don't see much need for oversight on meta, however, if people think its needed, let them do it, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 15:18, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support Support -- Bryan (talk|commons) 20:01, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support Support John Vandenberg 00:13, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Neutral

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Meta:Requests_for_oversight/Mike.lifeguard&oldid=1079185"