Meta:Requests for adminship/PeterSymonds

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

PeterSymonds

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

Hi all! I'm here to nominate PeterSymonds for adminship here on Meta. He's an experienced sysop on enwiki, simplewiki and commons as well as an OTRS-agent. He's currently a temporary admin here due to the Fundraiser, but I think we'd benefit from having him as a regular admin to help out on various areas. I hope you share my thoughts. Good luck! -Barras 18:17, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is nice, thank you. I'm watching Meta quite closely at the moment so I'll help out where I can. PeterSymonds 18:19, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support - of course, as nom... -Barras 18:17, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Maximillion Pegasus 18:32, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I've had nothing but positive interactions with PeterSymonds, and I have no doubt that he would make good use of the tools. Ajraddatz 18:59, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support & thanks for helping. --dferg ^{☎ talk} 19:00, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support, obviously. I didn't understand why he applied for temp in the first place when he could just get the permanent tools just the same. I've have a very positive impression of PS both here and on enwiki. Jafeluv 20:14, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. --Erwin 20:42, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support sure , highly trusted Mardetanha ^talk 20:48, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
of course, not only as one of the main operative pillars of the fundraiser 10/11 --Jan eissfeldt 22:17, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wutsje 22:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly oppose - Vapmachado 00:02, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
any reasons ? or just opposing without any rationality Mardetanha ^talk 00:04, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
User appears to have a history of trolling, both from his block log here, on pt.wikipedia, on br.wikimedia and on pt.wikimedia. Ajraddatz 00:24, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Having oppose vote from Trolls just makes me more sure about his capability & competency Mardetanha ^talk 00:35, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest to the closing bureaucrat completly ignore this !vote as void. --dferg ^{☎ talk} 08:45, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would not call Vapmachado a "troll", as the term implies intent to disrupt. I have no difficulty in assuming good faith of Vapmachado, and considering his "oppose" here and his post to foundation-l concerning this RFA to have been made in complete sincerity. I may think Vapmachado is wrong about just about everything and has little to no idea how Wikimedia works at all, but that's a matter of disagreement rather than of assumption of bad faith on his part - David Gerard 21:55, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M/ 00:08, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support --- @lestaty ^discuţie 00:20, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Of course. Grunny (talk) 00:27, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes, certainly James (T C) 01:03, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- DQ (t) (e) 01:20, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support I had always assumed he was one frankly. fr33kman 06:45, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support. JenVan (talk) 09:32, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Highly trusted. –BruTe ^talk 10:28, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support - no issues for me. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:33, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support --WizardOfOz ^talk 13:21, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support - has my full confidence and support. --Philippe 13:23, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support --თოგო ^(D) 13:43, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Mardetanha.” T_eleS (T _{PT @ C G}) 17:58, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support He has my trust. Ruy Pugliesi^◥ 18:07, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support definitely trusty - Hoo man (talk) 19:30, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nathan^T 19:35, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Béria Lima ^msg 20:08, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Node ue 20:09, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support TeunSpaans 20:40, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support - David Gerard 21:04, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support --FiliP ██ 21:41, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this RfA was canvassed in foundation-l. 88.51.156.38 21:40, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but firstly mentioned their by the only opposer and also it is not PeterSymonds' fault that people "discuss" his RfA there. -Barras 21:49, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite - it was anti-canvassed by Vapmachado, who I thank for having drawn my attention to it. To his credit, he did not suggest voting in any particular manner. Thread - David Gerard 21:51, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
While I don't think it appropriate to raise a meta RFA on foundation-l, not meta-l, I thank Vapmachado for having drawn my attention to it. I would like to join the choir: Vapmachado didn't suggest anything: just posting some URLs including this page. --Aphaia 12:36, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sa vh ^ñ 21:42, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Vapmachado. ℳono 23:17, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support trusted elsewhere, continue that trust here billinghurst sDrewth 10:57, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support why not? --Aphaia 12:36, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Of course ! -- Quentinv57 ^(talk) 13:11, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support. :) — Tanvir • 16:19, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Peter has been an enormous resource for the fundraising team, combined with his regular work on OTRS and en.wiki, I can't think of a better candidate.Theo10011 00:48, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Peter has been a fantastic help to me, personally, and to the entire fundraising team.- Dmgultekin 00:58, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not enough edits and trolls IRC too often. Ottava Rima (talk) 22:40, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Why not? Metal BRasil ^{@ #} 05:38, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ar son - sure! - Alison ^❤ 06:45, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rock drum (talk·contribs) 18:00, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't personally like him, but he would make a good admin anywhere. In fact, I'm surprised he isn't currently an admin here. Kiko4564 18:14, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. --Mercy 14:00, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Trolls should get admin automatically. Pmlineditor ∞ 16:54, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Pmlineditor.--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 22:57, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes please. NonvocalScream 23:23, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support per this and Pmlineditor. sonia 00:35, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Laaknor 01:35, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cbrown1023 talk 03:15, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support LeinaD (t) 11:37, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think yes. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 22:19, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
support —DerHexer (Talk) 23:20, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PeterSymonds is our most recent admin, Mardetanha ^talk 23:22, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]