Meta:Requests for bureaucratship/Majorly

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

I'd like to request bureaucratship here. I've noticed recently that the Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat page is often quite backlogged for user rename requests, and it seems the only active elected bureaucrats are M7 and MaxSem, who both seem to be pretty busy at the moment. Generally, the other bureaucrats are busy with their steward duties and do not always have time to check the page for requests. I check various pages here everyday, including the above page so I'd get requests done smoothly. I'd also close the adminship requests, but I'd mostly like to get the user rename backlog cleared. I've been a sysop here for 5 months, and I'm also active as a sysop on Commons, Enwiki and Simplewiki. Some might like to know I withdrew from a request for bureaucratship on enwiki just over a week ago. However, this request is totally unrelated to that, I just want to see that page cleared :) Thanks for your comments. Majorly (talk) 23:52, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Support We have backlogs and I trust Majorly with those extra tools. Cbrown1023 talk 23:55, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• I confess that I was actually considering standing for 'crat here myself. The list of crats here is long: [1] but Majorly is right, the load falls (for good and valid reasons) on just a few hardworking folks. What put me off was the statement, above, that "the requirements are much more stringent". I'm not sure what they are exactly. In my book they are few, except for being experienced, an all around hardworking and trustworthy user, and the sort we can rely on to apply common sense and good judgement. I think Majorly is a bit new for the role, but is a hard worker and I trust him. Support (at least partly so I don't have to keep thinking about standing myself :) ) ++Lar: t/c 00:15, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• yes, I support Majorly--Nick1915 - ^{all you want} 00:22, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Andre (talk) 02:05, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support ... thanks for serving. --A. B. ^(talk) 03:35, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support I am persuaded that Meta could use another crat and from my knowledge of Majorly I believe he would do a good job. WjBscribe 04:03, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Aphaia 04:10, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Yep, ok with me --Herby ^{talk thyme} 07:06, 12 July 2007 (UTC) I have considerable respect for this wikimedian's work around the projects. However in a prospective 'crat I would wish to see balance & even judgment in an Rfa which is not in my opinion shown here. With regret therefore I  Oppose --Herby ^{talk thyme} 07:00, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note that Herbythyme nominated the user. I really can't see what's wrong with my oppose. I'd have opposed any other candidate with similar credentials. Majorly (talk) 14:07, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Indeed and if the RfA fails for any reason so be it. Your opinion is valued. However the rapid changes of opinion seem to me to be inappropriate for someone seeking to be a 'crat. I have already said I appreciate what you do, I have voted for you as an admin & would do so again but not as a 'crat --Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:17, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • I removed my oppose. I was angry after arguing with candidate when I made the oppose, and now deeply regret doing it. I've reinstated my support, which is my real opinion of him :) I would never, ever let personal issues affect my work as a 'crat. Majorly (talk) 16:00, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • With reflection & reading the comments from Majorly I have decided to strike my vote --Herby ^{talk thyme} 15:30, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Support --M/ 16:12, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• For Cary Bass ^demandez 17:07, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --birdy geimfyglið _{(:> )=|} 19:56, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Thogo (talk) 20:51, 12 July 2007 (UTC) Thank you for volunteering.[reply]
•  Support --dario vet (talk) 20:54, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Filnik 20:54, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support as Lar, whose recitation of the characteristics that one should like to see in a prospective bureaucrat seems quite right. Joe 05:22, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support - Great user. Adambro 17:25, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Paginazero - Ø 20:11, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• support Helios 20:15, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support From seeing this user active on other wikis, they would definately be a great crat. TheFearow 00:58, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support I supported his nom for cratship at en.wikipedia, and I was sad that that failed. If he cant become a crat there right now, then it would be good to see him use the tools here. AnonymousDissident 08:38, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support I've seen Majorly particularly on the en wikipedia; he would make a good bureaucrat here. Sr13 08:42, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Ooswesthoesbes 08:44, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Roosa _(Talk) 16:10, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support, of course! Snowolf 19:44, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Marbot 20:24, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support of course ;-) --Fabexplosive The archive man 14:55, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Would do a good job. --.anaconda 15:04, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vote closed, bureaucrat flag granted

--M/ 17:36, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]