Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Removal/TUFKAAP (bureaucrat)
- The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Bureaucrat access removed on meta, per policy --DannyS712 (talk) 21:07, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
Per WN:PeP -- no bureaucrat activity since 2012 (!) that I can find * Pppery * it has begun... 01:57, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
Stats
edit
Questions and comments
edit
Comment It doesn't make sense to do this kind of stuff without asking the user first. With TUFKAAP one can't even pretend they haven't been around in recent times (though honestly it'd be courteous to inquire first even if they hadn't). --Pi zero (talk) 02:19, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- I'll inquire on their user talk (unless someone beats me to it). --Pi zero (talk) 02:35, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- On double-take, no need. --Pi zero (talk) 04:11, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Pi zero: close reverted - PeP says that not using privileges is also a reason for loss of access, separate from edits - "No use of either priv in past 12 months" --DannyS712 (talk) 19:35, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- Triple-take, then. Quite right. --Pi zero (talk) 19:38, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Pi zero: close reverted - PeP says that not using privileges is also a reason for loss of access, separate from edits - "No use of either priv in past 12 months" --DannyS712 (talk) 19:35, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- On double-take, no need. --Pi zero (talk) 04:11, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- I'll inquire on their user talk (unless someone beats me to it). --Pi zero (talk) 02:35, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- Filing a request at SRP --DannyS712 (talk) 19:39, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- 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 current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.