Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/Archer7
- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a permissions request that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.
I nominate Archer7 for bureaucrat status. I will also add this nomination at meta. If you support this nomination, please say so here. --Cromwellt|talk|contris 02:55, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I would like to withdraw my nomination for the same reasons as Freshstart, at least until this is sorted out. Archer7 | talk 21:56, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose - this nomination is purely political. Archer7 in particular does not have the proper judgement or experience decide adminstions, since he cannot deal with even fellow admins on a mature level. -- Netoholic @ 03:51, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm sorry if I came across rather immaturely, but I was rather furious at the time. About your block, I would have done it to any other user, it was nothing against you. However, I don't think your actions were appropriate for a bureacrat. Archer7 | talk 09:29, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. As I pointed out on meta not long ago, all nominations are by definition political, and all oppose votes are too. I think that Archer7 is an excellent candidate for bureaucrat, since he respects the rights of other users. I admit my bias, since it was my rights he has defended. But that does not lessen the validity of this nomination. Having another bureaucrat or two shouldn't bother you, Netoholic, unless you are desperate to keep that power all to yourself. You nominated yourself for CheckUser ostensibly to avoid power abuses, but you don't want any other project bureaucrats who would prevent that same issue. If I'm wrong about your fear of other bureaucrats, nominate one yourself. --Cromwellt|talk|contris 09:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Do it later: Archer7 is certainly a candidate to consider to become bureaucrat. Hoever, given the recent conflict (which involves Archer7/Netoholic/Crommwellt) I don't think a rational decision can be reached now. Try again later on, in a month's time, when people have calmed down. -- Eptalon
- Comment. Please note that Archer7 did not nominate himself: I nominated him. --Cromwellt|talk|contris 11:45, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment:I am aware of both entries not being put up by the candidates. All I am trying to say is that common users out there are too taken up with a possible abuse of admin rights/possible overrreactiion of an admin. Any decision taken now will highly be emotional. Such decisions usually do not stand later scrutiny. We have lived with the current situation for at least 6 months. What is anothe month to wait for people to calm down? (Also appies to nomination of Freshstart below) -- Eptalon
- Oppose. -- aflm (talk) 17:48, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Support I have seen Archer7 act maturely as an admin and I believe he is ready for a new set of tools to help Simple. DaGizza 12:39, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.