Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for oversightship/Kansan

< Wikipedia:Requests for oversightship
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship, request for bureaucratship, request for checkusership, or request for oversightship. Please do not modify it.


Closed as successful: 28 supports/0 Opposes. Per meta criteria 25 supports and a ratio of 80 % needed. Request will be made on meta. -Barras (talk) 14:56, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kansan change

Kansan (talk • changes • e-mail • blocks • protections • deletions • moves • right changes)
RfO of Kansan
global contribs · pie chart · edit count · list user · blocklog ·contribs · deleted blocks · protects · deletes · moves · rights
Last comment by: ShakespeareFan00.

End date: 20:51, 24 November 2010 (UTC)



I am nominating Kansan (talk • changes • e-mail • blocks • protections • deletions • moves • right changes) for oversighter. Kansan is a mature and thoughtful admin who is very active. He is over 18 years of age and willing to identify himself to the WMF. He's always polite in doing his work and is very trustworthy as an admin. We could use another OS because I want to step down as an OSer. I rarely use it and think Kansan can make better use of it than I can; especially since I'm not fully able to be active at the moment. I also think Kansan's active times are good for an OSer to be online. Kansan gets on well with everyone so is a natural choice for me to nominate. Thanks for partaking. fr33kman 13:08, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate's acceptance: I accept. Kansan (talk) 19:31, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support change

  1. fr33kman 13:08, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 20:00, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Strongly support Is polite and helpful as far as I have interacted with him. Makes helpful edits to articles, many times just after reverting vandalism to that article. Chemicalinterest (talk) 20:13, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Yes please. I think it would be really good to have another one with this tool and Kansan is surely trustworthy and responsible. I think he can make good use of the additional tool. Especially oversights (or better suppressions) should be done speedily and not wait long. Any additional help here from trusted people is a good thing. I hope he gets the required 25 supports to pass. Good luck! -Barras (talk) 20:18, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support Macdonald-ross (talk) 20:54, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  6. I don't see a lot of revision deletes, and they would be a good indicator as to how active a user would use oversight as they are quite similar. The revision deletes that are there are good, and once upon a time we didn't have this tool and had to judge based on levels of trust. The level of trust is 100% there, and I think Kansan will do great with this extra tool.--Gordonrox24 | Talk 21:25, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support An excellent and responsible user who will make good use of this tool. Grunny (talk) 23:22, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support an active and responsible admin. --Peterdownunder (talk) 04:45, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support an active admin deserves it.-- Tdxiang 05:10, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support Absolutely. :) A wonderful person, a dedicated editor, and a very active, mature, and sensible administrator who would make a good oversighter. —Clementina talk 05:23, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support Of course. He's an active and responsible administrator who will do well at being an oversighter. --Bsadowski1 05:36, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support Absolutely/Per Clem Purplebackpack89 05:49, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Strong support - He is simple, respected, quiet, kind, active, clever, and most of all, honest and sincere beyond all doubts. It surprises me of how much he knows about wikipedia, despite his quite short time here compared to other administrators; another wonderful explanation of his maturity and sensibility. In short, I very strongly support Kansan and heartily applause Fr33kman's wiseness in nominating him to such a nice pair of tools that seems to fit his entire character so exactly. ♥ingly, Bella tête-à-tête 05:57, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Chenzw  Talk  16:04, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  15. wiooiw (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Exert 02:39, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  17. I wouldn't break this wikibreak to support anyone else. ;) openstrings 21:56, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Strongly support Frozen Windwant to be chilly? 03:17, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support  Hazard-SJ  ±  03:22, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  20. --Yottie =talk= 09:27, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Nifky^ 02:20, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Pmlineditor ∞ 11:32, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  23. -- Mentifisto 12:40, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  24. --vector ^_^ (talk) 07:01, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Strong supportI believe Barras, Chemicalinterest, Clementina, Belinda and Gordonrox24 said all that needs to be said about the candidate :) —Ғяіᴆaз'§Đøøм • Champagne? 07:23, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Nah. Goblin 10:15, 24 November 2010 (UTC) I ♥ GoblinBots![reply]
  27. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:18, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Gotanda (talk) 10:49, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose change

Neutral change

Comments change

Optional question: Would you oversight the posting of a home address in any Wikipedia page? --Chemicalinterest (talk) 15:54, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. One of the approved uses for Oversight as per Wikipedia policy is to oversight identifying private information of private individuals (including readers, editors, etc.), and home addresses are one of the examples given (as well as personal information of public figures that is not public knowledge. Kansan (talk) 18:31, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If a logged in user posts his own home adress on his user page and then one month later decides to remove it and requests you to oversight it. What would you do?” TeLeS (T @ L C S) 06:48, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The key phrase is "for individuals who have not made their identity public". If a user has publicly volunteered this information, by Wikipedia policy, this would not be an approved use of oversight. However, the user would be free to request deletion of their userspace. Kansan (talk) 18:30, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. ” TeLeS (T @ L C S) 21:23, 19 November 2010 (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.
Retrieved from "https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_oversightship/Kansan&oldid=8893293"