This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Ikan Kekek for Bureaucrat
As I'm the only active bureaucrat at the moment, I would like to nominate Ikan Kekek to assume the same responsibilities. Even though we can always fall back on stewards for bit-flipping tasks, I think it's nice to have local bureaucrats who understand the community and local consensus. Ikan is undoubtedly trustworthy and probably the most level-headed active editor here, myself included. His record as an administrator is sterling and I absolutely trust him with the power to add and remove admin status. What say you? -- Powers(talk)17:10, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support - Power made the right choice. Best wishes to you IK but just be careful not to block or desysop someone in haste by assuming that the account is hijacked. [1]. --Saqib (talk) 11:58, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
SUPPORT - Everyone knows Ikan is an invaluable Wikivoyage contributor who's been patrolling and editing here pretty much every day for several years. Just flip that bit already! --ϒpsilon (talk) 16:40, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
User:Ground Zero quickly established himself as a valuable user and has continued to be very active and helpful ever since his first edit last January (user contributions here). He's shown a strong commitment to improving the site in the interest of travelers and has been involved in just about every aspect of the discussion and activity that take place here. He's had some disagreements with me and one or two other folks on just how much content to cut in streamlining articles; that's well within the normal range of differences among people of good faith (I consider the disagreements between the two of us not much more than marginal, myself). You can see at User talk:Ground Zero#Admin? that he has agreed to serve as an admin if the rest of us want him to. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:31, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Is the relative lack of votes an indication of a lack of enthusiasm? There have been no negative votes so far, but I'm not too comfortable with a 6-0 vote as a consensus; are 7 votes required? But please keep the context in mind: We need more admins. If any of you lack strong confidence in the nominations I'm making, please contact people you would prefer and see if they'd be willing to take on the admin's mop and pail. There are certainly other good choices, but either way, I think we should thank anyone who's willing to take on the work. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:26, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I believe that the lack of votes is just down to fewer contributors being familiar with Grond Zero's work than (for example) yours. It would be good for some more admins to weigh in. Maybe AndreCarrotflower ? Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:29, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I appreciate the nomination and the support of those who have commented above. I've been an active contributor only since the beginning of the year. If people would rather wait until I have a longer track record, I won't be offended. Ground Zero (talk) 11:33, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
In consideration of the fact that Ground Zero giving more time to Wikivoyage instead of his home wiki Wikipedia where he's admin, I am comfortable with giving him mop and bucket. He's an experienced Wikipedian and I am pretty sure he will make a great Wikivoyager as well. Until we see some sort of opposition in this nomination, we shouldn't be hesitant to switch the bits. --Saqib (talk) 16:30, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I was holding off on voting here, because I find the issue of draconian content streamlining that Ikan brought up in his introductory remarks to be a legitimate concern. However, upon further reflection, I suppose that's not an issue that has much to do with the sysop tools per se. I'll support this nomination. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 16:47, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As you can see from looking through User:DaGizza's output, he has been an extremely helpful and prolific editor. Most of his edits have been of the "wikignoming" type, though a more thorough search will show participation in policy and organizational discussions in the Pub and in vfd. I would think everyone would trust him to use admin tools wisely, and he has expressed enthusiasm about helping to combat vandalism and picking up the slack from the admins who have resigned.
Support an experienced Wikipedian who could be a great addition to WV community. Your contributions were missed last year. I hope you will be more active from now on. --Saqib (talk) 16:34, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I was busy IRL last year and wasted time on other things but my life is more settled now. I'm also trying to move beyond maintenance and gnoming towards more content creation. Gizza (roam)01:59, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
