Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Bureaucrat/TUFKAAP

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for bureaucratship. Please do not modify it.

TUFKAAP

Currently, we have 3 active bureaucrats. Overall, we have 7, four are inactive. I've been around for a few years... as in Wikinews' first year... 2005. I wouldn't mind taking on the small but still important tasks bureaucrats have, as such, I'm going to nominate myself. --TUFKAAP (talk) 02:18, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

Do you feel there is anything that needs to be done as a bureaucrat? Basically is there any specific reason as to why you nominated yourself, other then to help? Bawolff ☺☻ 02:45, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No and no. --TUFKAAP (talk) 04:35, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Technically we were started in November 2004 (but 2004 doesn't really count as a year). :P Bawolff ☺☻ 02:36, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, I guess I should have clarified that 2005 was Wikinews' first full year. Since 2004 was more or less two months, and most of the time spent in beta. --TUFKAAP (talk) 02:41, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

Generally Support. My only concern is that I'm not sure more beurrocrats are needed. I see no evidence of back logs (maybe bots, but i think that is a result of the bots approval process than any fault of the beurocrats). I definitly trust TUFKAAP to fulfil this role. Bawolff ☺☻ 02:41, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I was actually thinking of nominating TUFKAAP (talk · contribs) the other day, disappointed I did not get the opportunity but I am glad he decided to put himself up for it. TUFKAAP is already trusted as a sysop for a longtime, and will continue to serve the project well in this added capacity as a bureaucrat. Cirt (talk) 05:21, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - we do not really need more bureaucrats, but if TUFKAAP wants to be one then I see no reason why not to give him the flag. --Cspurrier (talk) 19:21, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support TUFKAAP will make an excellent bureaucrat as he is a great admin and editor. --PatrickFlaherty (talk) 19:28, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support I actually feel that while not vital, one more bureaucrat would be a better number, just to make sure we always got one handy. TUFKAAP is a great candidate and has my full support. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 19:39, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 12:27, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel (talk) 04:26, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Brian McNeil / ^talk 08:05, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: It has now been over seven days since this discussion started, with unanimous consent in support. I think it can be closed as successful and the candidate promoted. Cirt (talk) 18:00, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I withheld from voting; thus I close this with promote Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 07:23, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of the Admin's page or the talk page of the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.