Meta:Requests for bureaucratship/Lar

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

Lar (bureaucrat)

Info about me: Lar (talk • contribs • count • logs • page moves • block log • CA • email) - my matrix of wiki accounts and activities

Unfortunately, it would seem that Majorly has apparently retired. While I strongly hope that's not permanent and that he comes back, I think it might be a good idea to have an extra bureaucrat here, he's been doing a fair bit of the promotions, bot flags and renames. The other active crats COULD pick up the slack, to be sure, and I don't think anyone has any serious doubt that they've been doing a fine job, and that they would if needed. But I'm willing to help share the workload here. I think many of you know me by now, this is not my first time before you here at meta requesting your trust. I'm already an admin and checkuser here, as well as being an admin, bureaucrat and checkuser on commons, and an admin and checkuser on en:wp. I'd sincerely appreciate your support and, as I do at Commons, I pledge to carefully evaluate consensus before acting to grant permissions or rename users. ++Lar: t/c 11:47, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I think Majorly is back as I see recent edits. That's awesome! I do feel an extra bureaucrat here would be useful in any case. I am thankful for the wide support I've received so far. If there are any questions or concerns please do not hesitate to ask, here or wherever. My talk page and email are always open. ++Lar: t/c 15:17, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ - oops, spelt it wrong Support without question --Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:50, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support Very strong support. Sarah Ewart 12:14, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M/ 13:14, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thogo (talk) 15:42, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
who Opposes? --Aphaia 15:51, 19 September 2007 (UTC) It's not me, at least.[reply]
Support (and I think that Aphaia's oppose above is really a support too... Cary Bass ^demandez 17:22, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support and yes Aphaia's oppose is a support.. :P ----Comet styles 17:42, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Nick1915 -^{all you want} 17:51, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support This support is not an oppose Finnrind 18:26, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --birdy geimfyglið _{(:> )=|} 19:03, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Needed and trustworthy. FloNight 19:34, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
+ I trust him. Cbrown1023 talk 19:57, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Whole-heartedly, no reservations. EVula // talk // 20:33, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support of course. --Meno25 21:18, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support without question. A very trustworthy user. ElinorD 21:37, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support they've shown they have the responsibility it takes to be a 'crat. I see no problems here :) ARkY // ¡HaBLaR! 22:08, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - FrancoGG ^{( talk )} 23:27, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - No problem with Lar having bur access. Thunderhead 23:33, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --.snoopy. AKA dario vet · (talk) 12:52, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --oscar 23:59, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Random Editor 02:52, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
（+）支持 Hillgentleman 11:43, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Anonymous Dissident 09:43, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support, obviously. Snowolf 11:11, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. James F. (talk) 14:02, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. :) — Kalan ? 15:15, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A. B. ^(talk) 20:14, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Additional generic endorsement. —{admin} Pathoschild 20:36:06, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Support - Piling on :) Giggy\^Talk 03:05, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted.: --.anaconda 10:15, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, everyone. (well, maybe except Herby and Aphaia, couple of kidders they are... :) ) ++Lar: t/c 13:17, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]