Global sysops/Vote

The following discussion is closed: This proposal passes, but without the "Global blocks" related rights.

---

This proposal's raw rating is : 1385 / 1802 (76.9%).

One of the main points of concern about this proposal is the ability of global sysop to globally block accounts. (supports 39, 209, 422, 520 / opposes 5, 6, 13, 25, 50, 67, 77, 82, 89, 102, 148, 171, 180, 187, 217, 231, 242, 248, 252, 327, 331, 349, 387 ; plus all the people that voted "as per" them)

The proposal should have been closed a whole month ago. The most viable compromise seems allow the proposal while removing this litigious bit.

so.

The Global Sysop proposal is accepted, with the following rights removed from its original formulation :

• Bypass global blocks (globalblock-exempt)
• Disable global blocks locally (globalblock-whitelist)
• Make global blocks (globalblock)
• Remove global blocks (globalunblock)

DarkoNeko 04:11, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

The global sysops vote is over.

Global sysops (Vote)

العربية:

(ساعدنا في ترجمة هذه الرسالة)

جميع أعضاء مجتمعات ويكيميديا والذين يحققون المعايير التالية مدعوون للتصويت على مقترح المشرفين العامين:

• لدية أكثر من 150 إضافة في مشروع واحد على الأقل
• قد قام بالتسجيل قبل أكثر من ثلاثة أشهر على الأقل

وسيستمر التصويت من الساعة 00:00 1 يناير 2010 (ت.ع.م) حتى 23:59 31 يناير 2010 (ت.ع.م), وبعد وقت محدد سيتم استعراض النتائج وتطبيقها.

مصرى:

( ساعدنا فى ترجمة الرساله دى)
مشروع فكرة السيسوب العام "Global Sysops". هنا]

و تم فتح التصويت على الفكره و ينتهى التصويت فى 31 يناير.

جميع أعضاء مجتمعات ويكيميديا و اللى يحققون الشروط دى مدعوين للتصويت على مقترح السيسوب العام:

• يكون ليك حساب مسجل
• يكون ليك 150 تعديل فى مشروع ويكيبيديا واحد على الأقل
• يكون مر على تاريخ تسجيلك تلات شهور على الأقل

و هايستمر التصويت من الساعة 00:00 1 يناير 2010 (ت.ع.م) حتى 23:59 31 يناير 2010 (ت.ع.م), وبعد وقت محدد هاتتعرض نتايج التصويت و تتطبق.

Беларуская:

(дапамажыце перакласьці гэтае паведамленьне)

Усе сябры супольнасьці Wikimedia, якія адпавядаюць наступным крытэрам, запрашаюцца да галасаваньня наконт кандыдатаў у глябальныя адміністратары:

• 150 правак прынамсі ў адным з праектаў
• 3 месяцы з даты рэгістрацыі

Галасаваньне трывае з 00:00 1 студзеня 2010 (UTC) да 23:59 31 студзеня 2010 (UTC), пасьля чаго будуць прынятыя і абвешчаныя вынікі.

Български:

(помогнете ни да преведем това съобщение)

Всички членове на обществото Уикимедия, които отговарят на следните критерии, са поканени да гласуват в предложението за глобални сис-опове:

• Трябва да имат регистриран акаунт (регистрация)
• 150 редакции върху поне един проект
• Поне 3 месеца регистрация

Вотът ще тече от 00:00, 1 Януари 2010 (UTC) до 23:59, 31 Януари 2010 (UTC), след което ще се проведе безпристрастен очерк и резултатите от вота ще влязат в сила.

Bosanski:

(Pomozite nam sa prevodom ove poruke!)

Svi članovi Wikimedija zajednice, koji ispunjavaju navedene kriterije, su pozvani da daju svoj glas na glasanju o uvođenju grupe globalnih administratora:

• 150 izmjena na najmanje jednom projektu
• najmanje 3 mjeseca prijavljen

Glasanje traje od 1. januara 2010. u 00:00 sati (UTC) do 31. januara 2010. u 23:59 sati (UTC). Poslije glasanja, rezultate će objaviti jedna neutralna osoba.

Català :

(ajudeu a traduir aquest missatge)

Tots els membres de la comunitat de Wikimedia que compleixin tots els criteris que segueixen a continuació estan invitats a votar la proposta sobre administradors globals:

• Estar registrat
• Haver fet 150 edicions en almenys un projecte
• Haver-se registrat fa més de 3 mesos

La votació tindrà lloc des de les 00:00 de l'1 de gener de 2010 (UTC) fins les 23:59 del 31 de gener del 2010 (UTC), i serà seguida d'una revisió independent per a determinar el resultat.

کوردی:

( هاوکاریمان بکە لە وەرگێڕانی ئەم پەیامەدا)

هەموو ئەندامێکی دامەزراوەی ویکیمیدیا کە ئەم مەرجانەی خوارەوەی تێدابێت، بانگهێشتکراوە بۆ دەنگدان لەسەر ئەم پرۆژەئامادەکراوە global sysops :

• پێویستە هەژمارێکی خۆی هەبێت
• لانی کەم لەیەکێک لە پرۆژەکانی ویکیمیدیادا ١٥٠ بەشداری هەبێت
• ٣ مانگ تێپەڕیبیت بەسەر ئەندامەتییەکەیدا

ئەم دەنگدانە لە ڕێکەوتی ١.١.٢٠١٠ - کاتژمێر ٠٠:٠٠ بەکاتی گشتی بەردەوامە تاکوو ٣١.١.٢٠١٠ کاتژمێر ١٢:٠٠ شەو بەکاتی گشتی، پاش کۆتایی دەنگدان کەسێکی سەربەخۆ دەنگەکان دەژمێرێت و ئەنجامەکەی ئاشکرا دەکات.

Čeština:

(help us translate this message)

Všichni členové komunity Wikimedia, kteří splňují následující kritéria, jsou zváni k hlasování o zavedení uživatelské skupiny globální správci:

• Uživatel musí být registrovaný
• Musí být registrovaný 3 měsíce a déle
• Na jednom z projektů Wikimedia musí mít 150 editací a více

Volby startují 1. ledna v 00:00 (UTC) a budou trvat do 31. ledna do 23:59 (UTC), poté proběhne nezávislé vyhodnocení a výsledky vejdou v platnost.

Dansk:

(Hjælp os med at oversætte denne besked)

Alle medlemmer af Wikimedia-fællesskabet, som opfylder de følgende kriterier er inviteret til at stemme om forslaget globale administratorer:

• Skal have en registreret konto
• 150 redigeringer på mindst et projekt
• 3 måneders registrering

Afstemningen vil blive afviklet fra kl. 00:00, den 1. januar 2010 (UTC) indtil kl. 23:59, den 31. januar 2010 (UTC), hvorefter en upartisk gennemgang udføres, som vedtager resultaterne.

Deutsch:

(Hilf uns bei der Übersetzung dieser Nachricht!)

Alle Mitglieder der Wikimedia-Gemeinschaft, die folgende Kriterien erfüllen, sind eingeladen, an der Abstimmung zur Einführung der Benutzergruppe globaler Administrator teilzunehmen:

• 150 Edits in mindestens einem Projekt
• mindestens 3 Monate registriert

Die Abstimmung läuft vom 1. Januar 2010 um 00:00 Uhr (UTC) bis zum 31. Januar 2010 um 23:59 Uhr (UTC). Nach der Abstimmung wird von einer neutralen Person das Ergebnis bekannt gegeben.

Dolnoserbski:

(Pomagaj nam toś tu powěźeńku pśedłožyś)

Wše cłonki Wikimedijowego zgromaźeństwa, kótarež docynjaju wšykne slědujuce kriterije su pśepšosone na wótgłosowanje wó naraźenju ku globalnym administratoram:

• Musyš měś zregistrěrowane konto wót 3 mjasecow
• 150 změnow na nanejmjenjej jadnem projekśe

Wótgłoswanje běžy wót 1. januara 2010 00:00 goź. (UTC) do 31.januara 2010 23:59 goź. (UTC). Pótom neutralny wužywaŕ pśeglědajo a dajo wuslědki k wěsći.

Ελληνικά:

(βοηθήστε μας να μεταφράσουμε αυτό το μήνυμα)

Όλα τα μέλη της κοινότητας του Wikimedia που καλύπτουν τα ακόλουθα κριτήρια προσκαλούνται να ψηφίσουν την πρόταση για global sysops:

• 150 επεξεργασίες σε τουλάχιστον ένα εγχείρημα
• 3 μήνες εγγεγραμμένος

Η ψηφοφορία θα διαρκέσει από 00:00, 1 Ιανουάριος 2010 (UTC) έως 23:59, 31 Ιανουάριος 2010 (UTC), μετά την οποία θα γίνει μια μη-φατριαστική αποτίμηση και θα ανακοινωθούν τα αποτελέσματα.

English:

(help us translate this message)

All members of the Wikimedia community who meet all of the following criteria are invited to vote on the global sysops proposal:

• Must have had a registered account for at least 3 months
• 150 edits on at least one project

The vote will run from 00:00, 1 January 2010 (UTC) to 23:59, 31 January 2010 (UTC), after which time a non-partisan review will be undertaken and the results enacted.

Esperanto:

(Helpo pri la traduko de tiu noto!)

Ĉiuj membroj de la vikimedia komunumo, kiuj plenumas la sekvajn kriteriojn, invitiĝas partopreni en baloto pri la enkonduko de la vikipediista rajto globala administranto:

• 150 redaktoj en almenaŭ unu projekto
• registriĝo ekde almenaŭ 3 monatoj

La baloto daŭras de la 1-a de januaro 2010 00:00 h (UTC) ĝis la 31-a de januaro 2010 23:59 h (UTC). Post la baloto la rezulto anonciĝos fare de neŭtrala persono.

Español :

(ayúdenos con la traducción de este mensaje)

Todos los miembros de la comunidad Wikimedia que cumplan los siguientes requisitos están invitados a votar en la propuesta de administradores globales:

• Tener una cuenta registrada
• 150 ediciones en al menos un proyecto
• 3 meses de antigüedad de registro

La votación comenzará el día 1 de enero de 2010 a las 00:00 horas (UTC) y finalizará el día 31 de enero de 2010 a las 23:59 horas (UTC), a partir de ese momento comenzará un estudio independiente de los votos para determinar el resultado.

Euskara:

(Lagun gaitzazu mezu honen itzulpenarekin)

Ondorengo baldintzak betetzen dituzten Wikimedia komunitateko kide guztiak gonbidatuak daude administratzaile globalen inguruko bozketara:

• Gutxienez 150 aldaketa proiektu batean
• 3 hilabete baino denbora gehiago izatea proiektuan

Bozketa 2010 urtarrilaren 1eko 00:00etan (UTC) hasiko da eta 2010eko urtarrilaren 31eko 23:59etan (UTC) amaituko dam une horretatik aurrera bozken ikaste independentea egingo emaitza determinatzeko.

فارسی:

(به ما در ترجمه این متن کمک کنید)
از تمامی اعضای انجمن ویکی‌مدیا که دارای شرایط زیر هستند دعوت می‌شود تا در رای گیری برای طرح پیشنهادی: راهبرسراسری سیستم شرکت کنند:

• کاربر تایید شده باشد
• حداقل 150 ویرایش در یکی از پروژه‌ها داشته باشد
• 3 ماه از زمان ثبت نام او گذشته باشد

رای‌گیری از یکم ژانویه 2010 ساعت 00:00 آغاز خواهد شد و در 31 ژانویه 2010 ساعت 23:59 به پایان خواهد رسید.نظر سنجی‌هایی که پس از پایان زمان مقرر ثبت شوند بی تاثیر خواهند بود.

Suomi:

(auta meitä kääntämään tämä viesti)

Kaikki seuraavat kriteerit täyttävät Wikimedia-yhteisön jäsenet kutsutaan äänestämään globaaleja ylläpitäjiä koskevasta ehdotuksesta:

• ainakin 150 muokkausta vähintään yhdessä hankkeessa
• tunnuksen rekisteröimisestä kulunut vähintään 3 kuukautta

Äänestys pidetään 1. tammikuuta 2010 kello 00:00 (UTC) – 31. tammikuuta 2010 kello 23:59 (UTC), minkä jälkeen suoritetaan puolueeton äänestyksen arviointi ja tulokset pannaan täytäntöön.

Français :

(Aidez nous a traduire ce message)

Tous les membres de la communauté Wikimedia ayant atteint les critères suivants sont invités à voter sur la proposition des administrateurs globaux :

• 150 modifications sur un projet
• Enregistré depuis plus de 3 mois

Le vote est ouvert du 1 janvier 2010 00:00 (UTC) au 31 janvier 2010 23:59 (UTC), après un décompte impartial sera effectué, et les résultats annoncés.

Frysk:

(Help ús dit berjocht oer te setten)

Eltsenien yn de Wikimedia-mienskip dy't foldocht oan de folgjende easken wurdt útnoege om te stimmen oer it foarstel foar globale behearders:

• Jo moatte in brûkersnamme hawwe,
• dêrmei op syn minst 150 bewurkingen op op syn minst ien projekt dien hawwe,
• en trije moanne as dy brûker registrearre wêze.

De stimming rint fan 1 jannewaris 2010 01:00 (CET) oant 31 jannewaris 2010 00:59 (CET), wêrnei't de risseltaten ûnpartidich beskôge en útfurdige wurde sille.

Galego:

(axúdanos a traducir esta mensaxe)

Todos os membros da comunidade da Wikimedia que reúnan os seguintes requirimentos están convidados a participar na votación de administradores globais:

• 150 edicións en, polo menos, un proxecto
• Rexistro desde hai, polo menos, 3 meses

A votación irá desde as 00:00 do 1 de xaneiro de 2010 (UTC) ata as 23:59 do 31 de xaneiro de 2010 (UTC); despois, farase un escrutinio imparcial e publicaranse os resultados.

Alemannisch :

(Hilf is bi dr Ibersetzig vu däre Nochricht!)

Alli Mitglider vu dr Wikimedia-Gmeinschaft, wu die Kriterie erfille, sin yyglade, mitzmache an dr Abstimmig fir d Yyfierig vu dr Benutzergruppe globale Ammann:

• 150 Edit in zmindescht eim Projäkt
• zmindescht 3 Monate regischtriert

D Abstimmig lauft vum 1. Jänner 2010 am 00:00 Uhr (UTC) bis zum 31. Jänner 2010 am 23:59 Uhr (UTC). No dr Abstimmig wird vun ere neutrale Person s Ergebnis bekannt gee.

עברית:

(סייעו לנו לתרגם הודעה זו)

כל חברי קהילת ויקימדיה אשר עומדים בקריטריונים להלן מוזמנים להצביע על ההצעה למנות מפעילי מערכת גלובליים:

• בעלי חשבון משתמש
• לפחות 150 עריכות באחד המיזמים
• בעלי ותק של שלושה חודשים כמשתמשים רשומים

ההצבעה תימשך מ-00:00, 1 בינואר 2010 (UTC) עד 23:59, 31 בינואר 2010 (UTC), אז תבוצע הערכה של התוצאות וההחלטה תיכנס לתוקף.

Hrvatski:

(Pomozite nam prevesti ovu poruku!)

Pozivaju se svi članovi zajednice Wikimedija koji udovoljavaju idućim kriterijima neka glasuju o prijedlogu uvođenja globalnih administratora:

• 150 uređivanja na najmanje jednom projektu
• najmanje 3 mjeseca prijavljeni

Glasovanje traje od 1. siječnja 2010. u 00:00 (UTC) do 31. siječnja 2010. u 23:59 (UTC). Nakon glasovanja neutralna osoba pregledat će glasove da bi se utvrdio konačni rezultat glasovanja.

Hornjoserbsce:

(Pomhaj nam tutu zdźělenku předłožić)

Wšitcy čłonojo Wikimedijoweho zhromadźenstwa, kotřiž spjelnjeja slědowace kriterije, su přeprošene na wothłosowanje wo namjeće ke globalnym administratoram:

• Dyrbiš zregistrowane konto wot 3 měsacow měć
• 150 změnow na znajmjeńša jadnym projekće

Wóthłoswanje běži wot 1. januara 2010 00:00 hodź. (UTC) do 31.januara 2010 23:59 hodź. (UTC). Potom neutralny wužiwar budźe wuslědki přepruwować a wozjewjeć.

Magyar:

(Kérjük, segíts más nyelvekre is lefordítani ezt a szöveget!)

Ez a szavazás a globális adminisztrátori jogosultság bevezetése felől hivatott dönteni. Minden szerkesztő – legyen az bármely Wikimédia társoldalról való – jogosult szavazni, ha:

• van felhasználói fiókja, és
• ehhez kapcsolódóan legalább 150 szerkesztése legalább 1 társoldalon, és
• a regisztrációja 3 hónapnál régebbi.

A szavazás kezdete: 2010. január 1. 0:00; vége: 2010. január 31. 23:59. Az összesítést független (a szavazáson részt nem vett) szerkesztők végzik majd.

Interlingua:

(adjuta nos a traducer iste message)

Tote le membros del communitate Wikimedia que satisface tote le sequente criterios es invitate a votar super le proposition de administratores global:

• Debe posseder un conto registrate
• 150 modificationes in al minus un projecto
• 3 menses de registration

Le voto essera aperte de 00:00, le 1 de januario 2010 (UTC) a 23:59, le 31 de januario 2010 (UTC). Postea un revision impartial essera interprendite e le resultatos promulgate.

Bahasa Indonesia:

Semua anggota komunitas Wikimedia yang memenuhi syarat berikut diundang untuk memberikan suara di proposal global sysops:

• Telah membuat 150 suntingan setidaknya pada satu proyek, dan
• Telah terdaftar minimal 3 (tiga) bulan.

Pemungutan suara akan dilaksanakan dari pukul 00.00, 1 Januari 2010 (UTC) hingga pukul 23.59, 31 Januari 2010 (UTC). Setelah 31 Januari tersebut, semua orang ternasuk yang tidak berhak suara, dapat melihat hasil akhir pemungutan. Hasil tersebut dapat dipertangungjawabkan dan akan ditetapkan.

Italiano:

(aiutarci a tradurre questo messaggio)

Tutti i membri della comunità di Wikimedia che soddisfano i criteri seguenti sono invitati a votare la proposta per gli amministratori globali:

• 150 modifiche su almeno un progetto
• 3 mesi di registrazione

La votazione si svolgerà dalle 00:00 del 1 gennaio 2010 (UTC) alle ore 23:59 del 31 gennaio 2010 (UTC), dopo di che sarà presa una decisione imparziale e il risultato verrà messo in atto.

日本語：

(このメッセージの翻訳を手伝ってください)

以下の基準を満たすウィキメディア利用者は、グローバル管理者の提案についての投票に参加してください:

• ログインユーザーであること
• 少なくとも一つのプロジェクトにおいて150編集以上
• アカウント登録後、3か月以上

投票は、2010年1月1日00:00(UTC)から2010年1月31日23:59(UTC)まで行われます。投票終了後、無党派（non-partisan）による投票チェックが行われ、結果が確定します。

ភាសាខ្មែរ៖

(សូមជួយបកប្រែសារនេះ)

សមាជិកគ្រប់រូបរបស់សហគមន៍វិគីមេឌាដែលបំពេញលក្ខខណ្ឌខាងក្រោមត្រូបានអញ្ជើញអោយចូលរួមបោះឆ្នោតនៅក្នុងសំនើសេវាភិបាលសកល៖

• អ្នកត្រូវតែមានគណនីចុះឈ្មោះរួចរាល់ហើយយ៉ាងតិច៣ខែ
• មានកំណែប្រែយ៉ាងតិច១៥០នៅលើគម្រោងមួយ

ការបោះឆ្នោតនឹងប្រព្រឹត្តទៅចាប់ពីម៉ោង ០០:០០ ថ្ងៃទី១ មករា ២០១០ (UTC) ដល់ម៉ោង ២៣:៥៩ ថ្ងៃទី៣១ មករា ២០១០ (UTC)។ បន្ទាប់ពីនោះបុគ្គលកអព្យាក្រិតនឹងធ្វើការត្រួតពិនិត្យរាប់សំលេងឆ្នោតនិងប្រកាសលទ្ធផល។

한국어:

(번역을 도와주세요!)

다음 조건을 만족하는 위키미디어 프로젝트의 모든 참여자들은 글로벌 관리자의 도입 제안에 대한 투표에 참여할 수 있습니다.

• 적어도 1개의 프로젝트에서 편집 횟수가 150회 이상
• 계정 등록 이후 3개월이 지나야 함

이 투표는 2010년 1월 1일 00:00 (UTC)에서 2010년 1월 31일 23:59 (UTC)까지 열립니다. 그 후에 적절한 의견을 종합하여 결과를 발표할 것입니다.

Македонски:

(помогнете ни да ја преведеме оваа порака)

Сите членови на заедницата на Викимедија кои ги задоволуваат сите долунаведени критериуми се повикуваат да гласаат по предлогот за глобални администратори:

• Регистрирана сметка веќе 3 месеци
• 150 уредувања на барем еден проект

Гласањето ќе трае од 00:00, 1 јануари 2010 (UTC) до 23:59, 31 јануари 2010 (UTC). Потоа ќе се изврши независен преглед и пребројување, и резултатите ќе бидат објавени.

Bahasa Melayu:

(Bantu kami menterjemah pesanan ini)

Semua ahli komuniti Wikimedia yang memenuhi semua kriteria berikut dijemput untuk mengundi cadangan penyelia sejagat:

• Mempunyai akaun berdaftar
• 150 suntingan di satu projek
• 3 bulan berdaftar

Undian bermula pada 00:00, 1 Januari 2010 (UTC) hingga 23:59, 31 Januari 2010 (UTC). Selepas itu kajian tak berpihak akan diadakan dan keputusannya dijalankan.

Nederlands:

(Help vertalen)

Alle gebruikers van Wikimedia projecten worden uitgenodigd te stemmen over het voorstel voor globale moderatoren, mits men voldoet aan:

• minimaal 150 bewerkingen op minimaal één project
• minimaal 3 maanden voor aanvang van de stemming geregistreerd

De stemming is open van 1 januari 2010 1:00 (CET) tot 31 januari 2010 0:59 (CET), daarna zal de uitslag door een neutraal persoon bekend worden gemaakt.

Occitan :

(Ajudatz-nos a traduire aqueste messatge)

Totes los membres de la comunautat Wikimedia qu'an atench los critèris seguents son convidats a votar per la proposicion dels administrators globals

• 150 modificacions sus un projècte
• Enregistrat dempuèi mai de 3 meses

Lo vòte comença a 00:00 lo 1èr de genièr de 2010 (UTC) fins a 23:59 lo 31 de genièr de 2010 (UTC), aprèp lo quel un contraròtle sera efectuat e los resultats anonciats.

Kapampangan:

(saupan yu kami king pamaglikas ning kapabaluan a ini)

Deng anggang kayanib ning comunidad a Wikimedia community a makibat kareng makatuking condicion o kapaliarian, agkatan lang magbotu king munikala dikil kareng global sysops:

• Kailangan, atin lang makarehistrung account
• 150 edit king e kukulang king metung a proyectu
• 3 bulan a makarehistru

Maliari ing pamagbotu manibat 00:00, 1 Enero 2010 (UTC) anggang 23:59, 31 Enero 2010 (UTC), at kaibat na niti, marapat ing metung a pamaniuring alang kakabiran (non-partisan review), at papaliari do reng resulta.

Polski:

(pomóż nam przetłumaczyć ten komunikat)

Wszyscy członkowie społeczności Wikimedia, którzy spełniają poniższe kryteria, są uprawnieni do głosowania nad propozycją utworzenia uprawnienia globalnego administratora:

• wykonało się co najmniej 150 edycji w jednym z projektów
• posiada się konto zarejestrowane co najmniej 3 miesiące temu

Głosowanie rozpoczyna się 1 stycznia 2010 o godzinie 00:00 (UTC), a zakończy 31 stycznia 2010 o godzinie 23:59 (UTC). Po tym czasie niezależna osoba sprawdzi poprawność głosowania i zatwierdzi wyniki.

Português :

(ajude-nos a traduzir esta mensagem)

Todos os membros da comunidade Wikimedia que cumpram os seguintes requisitos estão convidados a votar na proposta de administradores globais:

• 150 edições em pelo menos um projeto
• 3 meses de registro

A votação começará às 00:00, 1º de Janeiro de 2010 (UTC) e terminará às 23:59, 31 de Janeiro de 2010 (UTC); a partir desse momento começará um estudo independente dos votos para determinar o resultado.

Русский:

(помогите нам перевести это сообщение)

Все участники сообщества Викимедиа, соответствующие нижеприведённым критериям, приглашаются к участию в голосовании по предложению о глобальных администраторах:

• 150 правок хотя бы в одном из проектов
• 3 месяца с момента регистрации

Голосование начнётся 1 января 2010 в 00:00 и будет длиться до 23:59 31 января 2010 года (UTC), после чего будут подведены независимые итоги и оглашены результаты.

Slovenčina:

(pomôžte nám preložiť túto správu)

Všetci členovia komunity Wikimedia, ktorý spĺňajú nasledujúce kritéria sú pozvaný voliť na návrh globálnych administrátorov:

• Mať registrovaný účet
• 150 úprav na minimálne jednom projekte
• 3 mesiace od založenia účtu

Volenie bude prebiehať od 00:00, 1. januára 2010 (UTC) do 23:59, 31. januára 2010 (UTC), po ktorom bude nasledovať neutrálny posudok a výsledky budú prijaté.

Српски / srpski:

(Помозите нам са преводом ове поруке!)

Сви чланови Викимедија заједнице, који испуњавају наведене критеријуме, су позвани да дају свој глас на гласању о увођењу групе глобалних администратора:

• 150 измена на бар једном пројекту
• најмање 3 месеца пријављени

Гласање траје од 1. јануара 2010. у 00:00 сати (UTC) до 31. јануара 2010. у 23:59 сати (UTC). После гласања, резултате ће објавити једна неутрална особа.

Svenska:

(Hjälp oss översätta detta meddelande)

Alla medlemmar i Wikimedia-gemenskapen som uppfyller följande kriterier uppmanas att rösta om förslaget globala administratörer:

• 150 redigeringar på minst ett projekt
• 3 månaders registrering

Omröstningen kommer att pågå från 00:00, 1 januari 2010 (UTC) till 23:59, 31 januari 2010 (UTC), varefter en opartisk översyn kommer att göras som fastställer resultatet.

ไทย:

(ช่วยเราด้วยการแปล)

สมาชิกของประชาคมวิกิมีเดียที่มีคุณสมบัติครบตามที่ปรากฎด้านล่างนี้ได้รับเชิญให้ลงคะแนนเพื่อเห็นชอบหรือคัดค้านการมีผู้ดูแลระบบสากล (Global Sysops):

• ต้องมีชื่อบัญชีผู้ใช้ที่ลงทะเบียนแล้ว
• มีการแก้ไขอย่างน้อย 150 ครั้งในโครงการใดๆ
• ลงทะเบียนมาแล้วอย่างน้อย 3 เดือน

โดยการลงคะแนนจะเริ่มต้นตั้งแต่วันที่ 1 มกราคม 2010 (พ.ศ.2553) เวลา 00:00น. (ตามเวลาสากล UTC หรือ 7.00น. ตามเวลาประเทศไทย) จนถึงวันที่ 31 มกราคม 2010 (พ.ศ.2553) เวลา 23:59น. (ตามเวลาสากล UTC หรือ 6.59น. ของวันที่ 1 กุมภาพันธ์ ตามเวลาประเทศไทย) หลังจากเวลาดังกล่าว คำวิจารณ์และการลงคะแนนจะถูกรับรองและจะดำเนินการตามผลคะแนนเสียงส่วนใหญ่

Türkçe:

(bu iletiyi çevirmemize yardımcı olun)

Wikimedia Topluluğunun aşağıdaki koşulları sağlayan tüm üyeleri küresel sistem yöneticiliği önergesini oylamaya davet edilmektedir:

• Herhangi bir projede en az 150 değişikliğe,
• 3 aylık üyeliğe sahip olunmalı.

Oylama eşgüdümlü evrensel saate göre 1 Ocak 2010 saat 00:00'dan, 31 Ocak 2010 saat 23:59'a kadar sürecek ve ardından tarafsız bir incelemeden sonra sonuçlar yasalaştırılacaktır.

Українська:

(допоможіть перекласти це повідомлення)

Усі користувачі спільноти Wikimedia, що відповідають таким критеріям, запрошуються до голосування з приводу кандидатів у глобальні адміністратори:

• не менше 150 редагувань в одному з проектів
• не менше 3 місяців з дати реєстрації

Голосування триває з 00:00 1 січня 2010 (UTC) до 23:59 31 січня 2010 (UTC), після чого будуть підбиті підсумки і оголошено результат.

Tiếng Việt:

(giúp chúng tôi dịch thông báo này)

Mời tất cả các thành viên cộng đồng Wikimedia thỏa mãn các tiêu chí sau tham gia bỏ phiếu cho đề xuất bảo quản viên toàn dự án:

• Phải mở tài khoản được ít nhất 3 tháng
• Có 150 sửa đổi tại ít nhất một dự án

Cuộc bỏ phiếu sẽ bắt đầu từ 00:00, 1 tháng 1 năm 2010 (UTC) đến 23:59, 31 tháng 1 năm 2010 (UTC), sau đó sẽ được một người trung lập duyệt lại và thông báo kết quả.

粵語:

(幫手譯)

參加全域管理員方案投票嘅用戶須要符合下列要求︰

• 喺至少一個計劃編輯多過一百五十次
• 註冊超過三個月

投票期：2010年1月1號00:00（UTC）至2010年1月31號23:59（UTC），之後就會覆核選票同埋公布結果。

文言:

(助譯之)

全域有秩方案票選，凡與者，

須編典，至少一部，且纂之多於百又五十，

並增簿迄今，三月有余。

票選始於己丑年十一月十七，終於己丑年十二月十七，爾後核之而不頗，並布其果。

中文（简体）：​

(help us translate this message)

参加全域管理员方案投票的元维基维基人需要符合下列条件:

• 在至少一个计划，编辑次数不少于150次
• 注册超过3个月

投票时间：2010年1月1日00:00（UTC）至2010年1月31日23:59（UTC）。之后将会作出中立的方案并颁布结果。

中文（繁體）:​

(協助翻譯)

全域管理員方案投票參與者須符下列要求︰

• 於至少一個計劃中編輯逾一百五十次
• 註冊逾三個月

投票期：2010年1月1日00:00（UTC）至2010年1月31日23:59（UTC），及後會覆核選票並公布結果。

Yes

Please place your vote at the bottom of the list.

NuclearWarfare has contributed to wikis which will be affected

As proposer[1] NW (Talk) 00:00, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - NuclearWarfare checked by (RT) 03:07, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

Maximillion Pegasus is a sysop on an affected wiki

Maximillion Pegasus 00:05, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Maximillion Pegasus checked by (RT) 03:07, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

Barras is a sysop on an affected wiki

Barras ^talk 00:07, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Barras checked by (RT) 03:07, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

Jamesofur has contributed to wikis which will be affected

James (T|C) 00:07, 1 January 2010 (UTC) I think this is an important position that has long been needed to help the stewards, in the end those who get the bit need to be carefully chosen because of the sensitivity of working with small and growing communities but needed still.

1.  Eligible - Jamesofur checked by (RT) 03:07, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

2. I don't see why not.--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 00:14, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Gordonrox24 checked by (RT) 02:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

VasilievVV is a sysop on an affected wiki

vvv^t 00:14, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - VasilievVV (vvv) checked by (RT) 02:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

J.delanoy has contributed to wikis which will be affected

J.delanoy^gabs_adds 00:15, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - J.delanoy checked by (RT) 02:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

Katerenka may have contributed to kwwiki, which is an affected wiki

···Katerenka (討論) 00:39, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Katerenka checked by (RT) 02:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

Lar has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Care in choosing these folk is key but this is a needed and useful thing. ++Lar: t/c 00:43, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Lar checked by (RT) 02:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

2. delirious & lost ☯ ^~hugs~ 01:34, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Deliriousandlost checked by (RT) 02:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

WizardOfOz is a sysop on a wiki which will be affected

--WizardOfOz 01:51, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - WizardOfOz checked by (RT) 02:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

Tempodivalse is a sysop on an affected wiki

 Support This is a good idea. Tempodivalse [talk] 03:04, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Tempodivalse checked by (RT) 02:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

2. support. There are good reasons for it; individual wikis can opt out altogether; and problems with individual global sysops can be addressed as explained. Rd232 11:58, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Rd232 checked by (RT) 02:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support Why not !!! [✖ not eligible]

    Not eligible Rechecked. Unsigned vote is by Jaymondy (see evidence), who is not entitled to vote (see here and also here) - Jaymody checked by (RT) 04:05, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

GSMR has contributed to wikis which will be affected

GSMR 03:08, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - GSMR checked by (RT) 02:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

Bart0278 has contributed to wikis which will be affected

--Bart0278 03:11, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Bart0278 checked by (RT) 02:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

MisterWiki has contributed an English page to a wiki which will be affected

--MisterWiki (talk) 03:16, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Not eligible Vote actually by Fire in the Hole (see evidence) who is not eligible to vote (see here and also here). Later duplicate vote from same account - Fire in the Hole (signed as MisterWiki) checked by (RT) 01:02, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

2. IRTC1015 03:19, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - IRTC1015 checked by (RT) 02:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

   I agree. --Awesong 03:25, 1 January 2010 (UTC) [✖ not eligible—VasilievVV]

    Not eligible Rechecked. At the time of voting had not been registered for at least 3 months (see here and also here) - Awesong checked by (RT) 01:14, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

Laaknor is a sysop on a wiki which will be affected

Help needed! Laaknor 03:26, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Laaknor checked by (RT) 02:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

Masrudin has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Masrudin 03:29, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Masrudin checked by (RT) 02:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

Kwj2772 is a sysop on a wiki which will be affected

Kwj2772 (msg) 03:48, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Moved vote Rechecked. See evidence here and also here - Kwj2772 checked by (RT) 01:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

2. --Jivee Blau 03:52, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Jivee Blau checked by (RT) 02:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

   Yes. Wq-man 03:55, 1 January 2010 (UTC) [✖ not eligible—VasilievVV]

    Not eligible Rechecked. At the time of voting had not been registered for at least 3 months (see here and also here) - Wq-man checked by (RT) 02:25, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

Juliancolton has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Durr. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:55, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Juliancolton checked by (RT) 23:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

2. PeterSymonds 03:58, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - PeterSymonds checked by (RT) 23:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Nifky? has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Nifky? 04:24, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Nifky? checked by (RT) 23:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

   Ganondolf 04:33, 1 January 2010 (UTC) [✖ not eligible]

    Not eligible Rechecked. Does not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here). - Ganondolf checked by (RT) 00:02, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

TRYPPN's home wiki will be affected

YES. This facility to be provided only for 3 years. Further, after 3 years also, if no one want to become a Administrator within the Project, then it means that there is no real responsible person in the project. So, if it happens like that then the project should be closed down and no help should be provided from outside the project. --TRYPPN 04:36, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - TRYPPN checked by (RT) 23:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Mike.lifeguard has contributed to wikis which will be affected

The proposal adequately addresses the main issues I had, and will result in large benefits for our smaller wikis. It should be implemented sooner rather than later.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 04:45, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Mike.lifeguard checked by (RT) 23:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

blurpeace has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Definite necessity for our smaller projects. –blurpeace ^(talk) 08:33, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - blurpeace checked by (RT) 23:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Ejs-80 has contributed to wikis which will be affected

All help is welcome, and any project can opt-out if the community feels that they don't need (or want) it. –Ejs-80 08:38, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Ejs-80 checked by (RT) 23:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

2. A fine proposal in favor of our smaller wikis. IShadowed 08:45, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - IShadowed checked by (RT) 23:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Tiptoety has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Per my comments at Talk:Global sysops. Tiptoety ^talk 09:07, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Tiptoety checked by (RT) 23:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

2. Those small projects would benefit a lot from this. ≈ Chamal ^talk ¤ 09:52, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Chamal N checked by (RT) 23:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Herbythyme has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Long overdue --Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:45, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Herbythyme checked by (RT) 23:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

2. Yes BejinhanTalk 12:30, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Bejinhan checked by (RT) 23:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

3s has contributed to wikis which will be affected

3s 13:11, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - 3s checked by (RT) 23:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

ZorroIII has contributed to wikis which will be affected

ZorroIII 13:58, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - ZorroIII checked by (RT) 23:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Leinad has contributed to wikis which will be affected

LeinaD (t) 14:16, 1 January 2010 (UTC) cross-wiki patrollers are very helpful and part of them should have GS priviliges

1.  Eligible - Leinad checked by (RT) 23:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Ulflarsen has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Ulflarsen 14:38, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Ulflarsen checked by (RT) 23:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support --Ellysse 15:43, 7 January 2010 (UTC) [✖ not eligible—VasilievVV]

    Not eligible Agreed, does not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project and at the time of voting and had not been registered for at least 3 months (see also here). - Ellysse checked by (RT) 23:16, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Bjoertvedt has contributed to wikis which will be affected

-- Bjoertvedt 14:50, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

1. Please log in to vote (diff). vvv^t 22:35, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Subsequently logged in (see here) - Bjoertvedt checked by (RT) 23:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Kjetil_r is a sysop on a wiki which will be affected

--Kjetil_r 16:04, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Kjetil r checked by (RT) 23:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Erwin is a sysop on a wiki which will be affected

Would definitely be helpful. --Erwin 16:07, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Erwin checked by (RT) 23:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Dungodung is a sysop on a wiki which will be affected

I'm a bit skeptical about global blocks, but the rest of the permissions seem fine. --FiliP ██ 16:08, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Dungodung (FiliP) checked by (RT) 23:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

DerHexer has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Same as dungy. —DerHexer (Talk) 16:17, 1 January 2010 (UTC) P.S.: Longer German explanation: w:de:Benutzer:DerHexer/Blog#Global_sysops

1.  Eligible - DerHexer checked by (RT) 23:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Jon Harald Søby has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Jon Harald Søby 16:19, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Jon Harald Søby checked by (RT) 23:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Multichill has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Multichill 17:29, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Multichill checked by (RT) 23:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

2. Atluxity 17:43, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Atluxity checked by (RT) 23:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

3. (moved vote) - Some users said vandalism etc. on small projects is a bigger problem than I thought. The proposal seems to be fine. Lolsimon 18:11, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Lolsimon checked by (RT) 23:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

4. Petter Bøckman 18:19, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Petter Bøckman checked by (RT) 23:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

5. Vigorous action 18:29, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Vigorous action checked by (RT) 23:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Fruggo has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Fruggo 18:43, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Fruggo checked by (RT) 23:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

2. Sustructu 19:29, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

   Please confirm that you are actually nl:User:Sustructu. vvv^t 22:53, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Reinstated, looks fine (See here and also here) - Sustructu checked by (RT) 21:53, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Vito Genovese has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Per Mike.lifeguard--Vito Genovese 20:45, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Vito Genovese checked by (RT) 23:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Coffee has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Coffee (talk) 20:46, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Coffee checked by (RT) 23:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

2. Seddon 20:56, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Seddon checked by (RT) 21:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

IAlex has contributed to wikis which will be affected

iAlex 20:59, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - iAlex checked by (RT) 21:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Mezelf14 has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Mezelf14 21:07, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Mezelf14 checked by (RT) 21:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Prince Kassad has contributed to wikis which will be affected

-- Prince Kassad 23:39, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Prince Kassad checked by (RT) 21:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

DaB. has contributed to wikis which will be affected

--DaB. 23:42, 1 January 2010 (UTC) Why not. As long as they don't interfere in middle and big wikis.

1.  Eligible - DaB. checked by (RT) 21:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

2. --StG1990 23:51, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - StG1990 checked by (RT) 21:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Smial has contributed to wikis which will be affected

-- smial 23:52, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Smial checked by (RT) 21:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Jake Wartenberg may have contributed to wikis which will be affected

⇌ Jake Wartenberg 02:18, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Jake Wartenberg checked by (RT) 21:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

ZaDiak is a sysop on a wiki which will be affected

--ZaDiak 02:24, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - ZaDiak checked by (RT) 21:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Bibliomaniac15 has contributed to wikis which will be affected

bibliomaniac15 02:25, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Bibliomaniac15 checked by (RT) 21:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Cirt has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Cirt (talk) 06:04, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Cirt checked by (RT) 21:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Pmlineditor is a sysop on a wiki which will be affected

Yes. Pmlineditor ∞ 07:45, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Pmlineditor checked by (RT) 21:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Harrywad has contributed to wikis which will be affected

-Harrywad 11:28, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Harrywad checked by (RT) 21:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Putnik is a sysop on a wiki which will be affected

— putnik 12:24, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Putnik checked by (RT) 21:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

MF-Warburg is a sysop on two wikis which will be affected

--MF-W 13:26, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - MF-Warburg (MF-W) checked by (RT) 21:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Cumulus has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Cumulus 14:49, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Cumulus checked by (RT) 19:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support lightening the load on stewards with this supporting role. ~ Ningauble 16:14, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

   Ningauble is a sysop on a project which will be affected by a shift in steward workload. Ningauble appreciates the assistance provided by stewards when no administrators were patrolling, and does not appreciate attempts to deprecate the votes of those who have a valid interest in the outcome. ~ Ningauble 20:01, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Ningauble checked by (RT) 19:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support Sounds good. Glacier Wolf 16:55, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Glacier Wolf checked by (RT) 19:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

A333 has contributed to wikis which will be affected

A333 19:12, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - A333 checked by (RT) 19:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

2. --Peroxwhy2gen 08:46, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Peroxwhy2gen checked by (RT) 19:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

EdBever has contributed to wikis which will be affected

EdBever 08:57, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - EdBever checked by (RT) 19:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Red 81 has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Red 81 10:41, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Red 81 checked by (RT) 19:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Lampak has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Lampak 11:05, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Lampak checked by (RT) 19:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

2. I think we have to help small projects, because they can’t help themselves and vandals can very easily at the beginning of their ‘life’. Tajniak2 14:31, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Tajniak2 checked by (RT) 19:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Taketa has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Taketa 15:12, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Taketa checked by (RT) 19:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

2. Beany 23:49, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Beany checked by (RT) 19:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

3. MBisanz ^talk 01:31, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - MBisanz checked by (RT) 19:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Robotje has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Robotje 09:46, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Robotje checked by (RT) 19:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Mhaesen has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Mhaesen 11:01, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Mhaesen checked by (RT) 19:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

2. Good idea! Aku506 12:23, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Aku506 checked by (RT) 19:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Erik1980 has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Erik1980 13:57, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Erik1980 checked by (RT) 18:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Herr Kriss is a sysop on a wiki which will be affected

Herr Kriss 18:23, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Herr Kriss checked by (RT) 18:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Mwpnl has contributed to wikis which will be affected

m:Mark W (Mwpnl) ¦ talk 19:20, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Mwpnl (Mark W) checked by (RT) 18:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

2. ken123 19:26, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - ken123 checked by (RT) 18:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Ency has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Ency 19:34, 4 January 2010 (UTC) pl why not

1.  Eligible - Ency checked by (RT) 18:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

2. EMeczKa 20:02, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - EMeczKa checked by (RT) 18:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Merdis has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Merdis 20:05, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Merdis checked by (RT) 18:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Aotearoa has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Aotearoa 20:09, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Aotearoa checked by (RT) 18:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Trivelt has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Trivelt 21:14, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Trivelt checked by (RT) 18:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

2. Willking1979 01:50, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Willking1979 checked by (RT) 18:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

RubiksMaster110 has contributed to wikis which will be affected

RubiksMaster110 04:08, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - RubiksMaster110 checked by (RT) 18:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

Angela has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Angela 04:59, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Angela checked by (RT) 18:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

2. Phantomsteve 15:43, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Phantomsteve checked by (RT) 03:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

The Evil IP address has contributed to wikis which will be affected

--The Evil IP address 22:59, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - The Evil IP address checked by (RT) 03:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

   Annotations of which voters are affected ends here currently; please help add more.

2. Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 02:17, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Logan checked by (RT) 03:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

3. – Innv | d | s: 02:39, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Innv checked by (RT) 03:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

4. Karol007 ✉ 02:53, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Karol007 checked by (RT) 03:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

5. -- Avi 04:09, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Avraham (Avi) checked by (RT) 03:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

6. - miya 06:02, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - miya checked by (RT) 03:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

7. --Bsadowski1 06:12, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Bsadowski1 checked by (RT) 03:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

8. -- Razorflame 06:18, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Razorflame checked by (RT) 03:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

9. Gdarin | talk 10:21, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Gdarin checked by (RT) 03:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

10. Cycn 11:01, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Cycn checked by (RT) 03:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

11. --Kaganer 13:26, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Kaganer checked by (RT) 03:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

12. Diegusjaimes 14:58, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Diegusjaimes checked by (RT) 03:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

13. --Jan eissfeldt 17:38, 6 January 2010 (UTC) of course

     Eligible - Jan eissfeldt checked by (RT) 03:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

    User:8BitHero 20:45, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

    ineligible to vote (not enough edits) James (T|C) 00:44, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. Does not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also here). - 8BitHero checked by (RT) 04:24, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

14. --Thunderhead 21:51, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Thunderhead checked by (RT) 03:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

    94.224.94.149 23:26, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible IP can't vote; log in required - 94.224.94.149 checked by (RT) 04:13, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

15. Kafziel 01:36, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Kafziel checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

16. --Taichi - (あ！) 01:38, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Taichi checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

17. Frank 01:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Frank checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

18. NativeForeigner 01:42, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - NativeForeigner checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

    Valicore 01:45, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    ineligible to vote (not enough edits) James (T|C) 00:44, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. See also here - Valicore checked by (RT) 19:19, 15 February 2010 (UTC).

    Odehammar 01:45, 7 January 2010 (UTC) The stewards must need help, as this proposition has been made. Granting more users stewardship is complicated, as they are already too few. Ergo, this proposition seems to be a solution, at least for now.

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Odehammar checked by (RT) 12:49, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

    Jeffwang16 01:46, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

    ineligible (not enough edits) James (T|C) 01:00, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. Also not registered for 3 months, see also here - Jeffwang16 checked by (RT) 19:19, 15 February 2010 (UTC).

19. Addihockey10 01:47, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Addihockey10 checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

    Stinging Swarm 01:48, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You do not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project and at the time of voting you had not been registered for at least 3 months. --(RT) 23:52, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

20. Emrahertr 01:49, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Emrahertr checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

21. Geni 01:50, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Geni checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

22. ZooPro 01:51, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - ZooPro checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

23. Bradybd 01:52, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Bradybd checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

24. Please, this will be helpful. Ceranthor 01:53, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Meets eligibility criteria; no unified login, but link provided - Ceranthor checked by (RT) 22:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC).

    Andrew Petersen 17:54, 6 January 2010 (PST) Alright, then!

    Ip vote, claimed account not eligible James (T|C) 01:22, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. Voter was not logged in (see evidence) - 76.201.63.246, BlueSatoshi checked by (RT) 12:49, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

25. Guettarda 01:55, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Guettarda checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

    Deehh 01:52, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

    User is ineligable (not enough edits) James (T|C) 01:30, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. See also here - Deehh checked by (RT) 14:13, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

26.  Support I see no reason why not, as along as the right people are chosen for the role. Argyle 4 Life 02:02, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Argyle 4 Life checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

    —§ stay (sic)! 02:03, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Snake311 checked by (RT) 02:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC).

     Not eligible Links between wiki accounts are unproven, so cannot verify eligibility to vote - a unified account or a link from Meta user page was required for identification - Snake311 checked by (RT) 17:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

27. Syohei.A(talk) 02:06, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Araisyohei (Syohei.A) checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

28. Blodance 02:08, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Blodance checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

29. Saebjorn 02:14, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Saebjorn checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

30. Sander Fraga 02:18, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Sander Fraga checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

31. Ryan Postlethwaite 02:21, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Ryan Postlethwaite checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

32. oscar 02:21, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Oscar checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

33. DrNegative 02:22, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - DrNegative checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

34. Maxima m 02:23, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Maxima m checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

35. Evalowyn 02:25, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Evalowyn checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

36. Mind the gap 02:28, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Mind the gap checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

    Gravedig2 2:31 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Gravedig2 checked by (RT) 21:52, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

37. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:38, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Ktr101 (Kevin Rutherford) checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

38. On en-wiki we have many admins that can quickly respond to problems. There are not nearly as many admins on other projects and there is huge potential for pressing matters to get incredibly backlogged. Having global admins will help alleviate this problem. Valley2city^‽ 02:43, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Valley2city checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

39. Even the little projects should have people looking out for them. AP1787 02:45, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - AP1787 checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

40. Tarheel95 02:47, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Tarheel95 checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

41. As primarily an en user, and the only other language I understand is Malay, it is unlikely I will ever be involved in a project needing global sysops, but it sounds like it will be a good idea for those that need it Nil Einne 02:51, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Nil Einne checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

42. Editor182 13:54, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Editor182 checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

    OurDigitalVision Please be more responsible

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - OurDigitalVision checked by (RT) 21:52, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

43. I don't see why not. Bloodmerchant 03:01, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Bloodmerchant checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

44. Yes, but there is potential for serious misunderstandings caused by language issues Thparkth 03:02, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Thparkth checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

    Yes Mimar77 03:07, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months (see here and also here) - Mimar77 checked by (RT) 21:52, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

    Darkbluesun 03:11, 7 January 2010 (UTC) As wiki gets bigger, this could be the answer to make sure the information stays accurate and clean. On the other hand, this move could seriously slow progress couldn't it? I'll have to trust the stewards. They do a lot of the dirty work.

    user ineligible (not enough edits) James (T|C) 02:22, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Darkbluesun checked by (RT) 12:10, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

45. billinghurst 03:18, 7 January 2010 (UTC) Absolutely.

     Eligible - Billinghurst checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

46. Carl 03:22, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Meets eligibility criteria; no unified login, but link provided - Radiocrazy (Carl) checked by (RT) 22:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC).

47. --Taweetham 03:25, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Taweetham checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

48. Commander Keane 03:26, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Commander Keane checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

    This has tremendous potential to improve the capacity of smaller projects, and to encourage a sort of broad-based community. I look forward to seeing how this will operate Steve Joseph 03:31, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Steve Joseph checked by (RT) 21:52, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

49. Perey 03:32, 7 January 2010 (UTC) Makes perfect sense to me. Clearly the stewards need the help, or else this would have been a non-proposal.

     Eligible - Perey checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

50. This change is long overdue, as experience with chr wikipedia demonstrated a few years ago. Wikiacc (§) 03:36, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Wikiacc checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

    iSquishy

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - iSquishy checked by (RT) 21:52, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

51. Yes. Teinesavaii 03:41, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Teinesavaii checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

52. Zwilson14 03:43, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Zwilson14 checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

53. Shooter16101 03:52, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Shooter16101 checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

54. Yes. --The New Mikemoral 03:55, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - The New Mikemoral checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

55. DerAndre 04:03, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - DerAndre checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

    Yes, Fully support --Bentoman 04:02, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Bentoman checked by (RT) 21:52, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

    Adi4094 04:08, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

    User ineligible (must have registered before October 1st) James (T|C) 02:32, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months (see here and also here) - Adi4094 checked by (RT) 12:49, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

    --§Triple.Rhu 04:10, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. Vote was actually by 트리플루 (see evidence) who was registered for less than 3 months with insufficient edits (see here and also here) - 트리플루 (Triple.Rhu) checked by (RT) 23:47, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

56.  Support Shivashree 04:22, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Shivashree checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

57.  Support Calebrw 04:13, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Calebrw checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

58. Yes, --Sarumo74 04:18, 7 January 2010 (UTC).

     Eligible - Sarumo74 checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

    Mr. Anon515 04:19, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Mr. Anon515 checked by (RT) 23:47, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

59. --Bellayet 04:25, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Bellayet checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

60. --Atu 04:27, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Atu checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

61.  Support As long as it's not abused, it's a good idea. For.--Maximz2005 04:33, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Maximz2005 checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

62. Yk Yk Yk 04:41, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Yk Yk Yk checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

63. Yes. Magnefl 04:50, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Magnefl checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

    --Fischy 04:55, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Fischy checked by (RT) 23:47, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

    Terence 05:01, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Terence checked by (RT) 02:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC).

     Not eligible Links between wiki accounts are unproven, so cannot verify eligibility to vote - a unified account or a link from Meta user page was required for identification - Terence checked by (RT) 17:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

64. Yes. Logical proposal providing necessary help. Ezratrumpet 05:06, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Ezratrumpet checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

65. Juan Miguel 05:08, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Juan Miguel checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

66. --J Hazard 05:10, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - J Hazard checked by (RT) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

67. If help is needed then we should help Chaosdruid 05:25, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Chaosdruid checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

    Yes. We need a way to quickly stop vandalism. Eric Scubeesnax 05:26, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Scubeesnax checked by (RT) 02:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC).

     Not eligible Links between wiki accounts are unproven, so cannot verify eligibility to vote - a unified account or a link from Meta user page was required for identification - Scubeesnax checked by (RT) 17:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

68. Yes. Seablade 05:31, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Seablade checked by (RT) 02:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC).

69. Jamesjiao 05:34, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Jamesjiao checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Yes Noraft 05:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

    User ineligible (registered after October 1st 2009)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months (see here and also here) - Noraft checked by (RT) 12:49, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

70. Alvaro qc 05:40, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Alvaro qc checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

71.  Support Yes --Delivi 05:42, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Delivi checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

72. Because the projects are allowed to opt-out. -- kh80 05:46, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Kh80 checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

73.  Support. It is very good idea. Mondalor 05:48, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Mondalor checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

74. Geanixx 05:58, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Geanixx checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

75.  Support I think it goes without saying that Global sysops should be chosen very carefully from a pool of multi-lingual users with considerable experience in several different wiki's. Considering the brutal scrutiny local sysops candidates undergo, I don't think quality control and carefree sysopsing on a global scale is a concern. Angrysockhop 06:08, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Angrysockhop checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

76.  Support IlyaHaykinson 06:09, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - IlyaHaykinson checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

77.  Support Aldo samulo 06:23, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Aldo samulo checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

78. Nixón 06:27, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Nixón checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

79.  Support The wikis that are this small need the extra help, and as long as the Global sysops are picked carefully, I think that the idea is an excellent way to make sure they get that help. Trinity507 06:31, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Trinity507 checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

80.  Support IVP 06:32, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - IVP checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support --84.60.37.89 06:34, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

    Ip vote, please login to vote James (T|C) 02:54, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

81.  Support nat ^{Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?!} 06:36, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Nat checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

82.  Support --Labant 06:38, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sadly you are [ineligible to vote because you registered on October 4th 2009 (the requirement is October 1st) If you have an old account that is eligible to vote please feel free to use that and your opinion is of course still welcome and you can join in on the discussions. James (T|C) 03:45, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked and reinstated. At the time of voting Labant had been registered for 3 months on de wikipedia and had sufficient edits, meeting the eligibility criteria set out at the head of this page (see here) - Labant checked by (RT) 19:11, 15 February 2010 (UTC).

83. Kv75 06:45, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Kv75 checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support'd. perhaps wikis on external sites elect to be included in this list, if they feel that they would be better off with the aid of these obviously-very-qualified editors. I assume wikis about specific topics are not under Wikimedia's administration, but if they are being overrun with vandals or have administrators fighting, these sites could issue a metaphorical call for help through whatever medium we set up. The next version of the wiki software could include a tag of whether or not to allow these people power, and they (the external wikis) could add themselves to the privilege list. Sompm 06:46, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Sompm checked by (RT) 23:47, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

84.  Support--Shizhao 06:55, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Shizhao checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

85. --Heiko 06:57, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Heiko checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

86. Hohohob 07:03, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Hohohob checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

87.  Support - Wysprgr2005 07:10, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Wysprgr2005 checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

88. --Djlordi 07:14, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Djlordi checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

89.  Supportמתניה 07:23, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - מתניה checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

90.  Support Dovi 07:24, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Dovi checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

91.  Support --Caponer 07:53, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Caponer checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

92.  Support CaribDigita 07:56, 7 January 2010 (UTC) I read through many of the "No"s and I believe Global sysops might be able to guide new upstart projects in the right direction until they get more established. As it was stated, if it just simply deleted because it is small, then nothing new will ever obtain the chance to become firmly established.

     Eligible - CaribDigita checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support seems to be a good idea, to support understaffed wikis --Nickaat 08:06, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Nickaat checked by (RT) 23:47, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

93.  Support Kimchi.sg 08:08, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Kimchi.sg checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

94.  Support - seems like a good idea--Pianoplonkers 08:11, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Pianoplonkers checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support CntRational 08:13, 7 January 2010 (UTC) Sure.

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - CntRational checked by (RT) 23:47, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support --Petri 08:14, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

    User ineligible (not enough edits) James (T|C) 03:58, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible The Petri account does not have sufficient edits (see also here); possibly the same user as Pjr, but no link provided - Petri checked by (RT) 13:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

95.  Support - if a project still has the right to decide if global sysops should have admin rights in their project, then yes. Cavernia 08:15, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Cavernia checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support -- Clamiax 09:16, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Clamiax checked by (RT) 23:47, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

96. Great idea! —what a crazy random happenstance 08:38, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Happenstance checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

97. --DS-fax 08:42, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Hat600 (DS-fax) checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

98.  Support +1 I think that this would avoid SURP and other cross wikis problems. --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 08:46, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Tyw7 checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

99.  Support Merlissimo 08:47, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Merlissimo checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

100.  Support In the early stage of the project, someone who don't know project's language may get admin right for maintenance. After the project grow enough, that admin right might be questioned by newcomers, as they don't have neither consensus nor RfA. Global sysop can avoid those situation, I think. If it was mandatory for all project, I might say No. --Peremen 08:48, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Peremen checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

101.  Support Kenrick95 08:49, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Kenrick95 checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

102.  Support --Wvk 08:51, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Wvk checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

103. --Treublatt 08:53, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Treublatt checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

104.  Support VMS Mosaic 08:54, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - VMS Mosaic checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

105.  Support --Lutz Terheyden 08:56, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Lutz Terheyden checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

106.  Support --Faizhaider 08:57, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Faizhaider checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

107.  Support, I like this idea. --Mercy 09:00, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Mercy checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

108.  Support --Ragimiri 09:08, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Ragimiri checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

109.  Support good idea for small projects --Tlusťa 09:10, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Tlusťa checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

110.  Support Reduction of Steward - workload by distributing "simple" admin tasks on adminless wikis. --Guandalug 09:14, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Guandalug checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

111.  Support While I have grave reservations about adding in extra levels of hierarchy (K.I.S.S.), after carefully reading through this I can see the point of it so I support it. Mathmo 09:21, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Meets eligibility criteria; no unified login, but link provided - Mathmo checked by (RT) 22:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC).

112.  Support --Vigilius 09:22, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Vigilius checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

113.  Support - Very efficient way to improove the organization of "understaffed" projects. Leujohn ^(talk) 09:24, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Leujohn checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

114.  Support I have personally been part of many small-languages Wikipedias where a shortage of admins doing trivial (ie. non-controversial) tasks has slowed the project's growth. DaGizza 09:31, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - DaGizza checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

115. --Euku 09:33, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Euku checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

     --Fschubert 09:54, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     user ineligible (account created after October 1st 2009) James (T|C) 23:58, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Fschubert checked by (RT) 16:29, 13 February 2010 (UTC).

116. Weak support. Generally a good idea but I have a queasy feeling about global blocks. According to Global blocking, such blocks would extend to all WMF wikis, even those outside the global sysop scope. Which is OK as long as a global sysop's main task is combatting massive blatant vandalism on very small projects, so I'd say give the proposal a try and see how it works out.--GrafZahl (talk) 10:10, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - GrafZahl checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

117.  Support Makes sense. rursus 10:11, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Rursus checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

118.  Support -- Klaus Eifert 10:16, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Klaus Eifert checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

119.  Support Yes/Kyllä --Jepse 10:19, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Jepse checked by (RT) 15:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

120.  Support Seems sensibly bounded by parameters. --Dweller 10:26, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Dweller checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

121.  Support--Rsmn 10:30, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Rsmn checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

122.  Support --Harald Haugland 10:32, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Harald Haugland checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

123.  Support Very sensible idea for projects just getting started. --Clarince63 10:36, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Clarince63 checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

124.  Support --Wedderkop 10:33, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Wedderkop checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

125. Great idea. Pitke 10:35, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Pitke checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

126.  Support A well-thought-out way to give small wikis the boost they need to get their act together. Freederick 10:48, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Freederick checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

127.  Support A Very Good Thing, especially for the small wikis, especially since any that wish to opt out can do so. Andrew Dalby 10:55, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Andrew Dalby checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

128.  Support Seems like a good idea. Alan16 10:58, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Alan16 checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support A stimulating way to get admins of small wiki's who don't want to be "overruled" to do their work. Rmeoung 11:04, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 22:23, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

129.  Support I like the idea very much that small projects get more help in the beginning and can more easily grow. :-) There are so many languages in this world, we don't have just these few that have already a Wikipedia. --Geitost ^diskusjon 11:07, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Geitost checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

130.  Support Sahmeditor 11:11, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Sahmeditor checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

131.  Support ThorJH 11:13, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - ThorJH checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

132.  Support Razimantv 11:22, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Razimantv checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

133.  Support There seem to be enough restrictions, like ability of projects to opt out that I think there are enough checks that this will be net good. Jbolden1517 11:27, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Jbolden1517 checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

134.  Support notafish }<';> 11:28, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Notafish checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

135.  Support --თოგო ^(D) 11:29, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Thogo (თოგო) checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

136.  Support Support blindspots can create significant problems for the project as a whole. SamJohnston 11:30, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - SamJohnston checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

137. Working on a small wiki myself I can see this being something of a Godsend for most. Garden 11:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Garden checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

138.  Support Daniel (‽) 11:43, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Dbmag9 (Daniel) checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

139.  Support Seems good to me. I am a Sysop on the Wikis I have, I know how hard it is to keep them "clean" Knee427 11:49, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Knee427 checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

140.  Support Absolutley WilliamF1two 11:53, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - WilliamF1two checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support I agree with the folks who say that a small wiki without enough admins shouldn't be shut down. It may someday grow into something great. JulieSpaulding 11:59, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Not eligible JulieSpaudling account is ineligible (see here and also here); actual vote was by Artic Night (see evidence), who has not provided links and has not unified their account - JulieSpaulding checked by (RT) 17:10, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

141.  Support. The ability to hit vandals across the various language wikipedias will be a net positive. Mjroots 12:03, 7 January 2010 (UTC) ( Admin Mjroots on en.wiki)

      Eligible - Mjroots checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

142.  Support. Very useful for our job at SWMT. --Lucien leGrey (m · es) 12:06, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Lucien leGrey checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

143.  Support we'll be very useful for the little project (even on the french wikisource, we're short of admin sometimes !). Cdlt, VIGNERON * ^discut. 12:14, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - VIGNERON checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

144.  Support --ThT 12:20, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - ThT checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

145.  Support Vladimir.frolov 12:21, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Vladimir.frolov checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

146. --alexscho 12:31, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Alexscho checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

147.  Support Tomatoman 12:33, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Tomatoman checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support Trdsf 12:35, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     You are not eligible for voting. – Innv | d | s: 07:09, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also here) - Trdsf checked by (RT) 19:35, 15 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support--Cyrillic 12:38, 7 January 2010 (UTC) Seems like a good idea.

      Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Cyrillic checked by (RT) 02:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC).

      Not eligible Links between wiki accounts are unproven, so cannot verify eligibility to vote - a unified account or a link from Meta user page was required for identification - Cyrillic checked by (RT) 17:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

148. --Nemo 12:45, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Nemo bis checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

149.  Support Mheart 12:51, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Mheart checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

150.  Support --Pitlane02 12:53, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Pitlane02 checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support Doktorbuk 12:53, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Doktorbuk checked by (RT) 02:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC).

      Not eligible Links between wiki accounts are unproven, so cannot verify eligibility to vote - a unified account or a link from Meta user page was required for identification - Doktorbuk checked by (RT) 17:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

151. ⇦REDVERS⇨ 13:04, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Redvers checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

152.  Support --BokicaK 13:05, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - BokicaK checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

153.  Support - As much as I despise most of the janitors on the English Wikipedia, I do recognize that their existance is necessary. This proposal seems perfectly rational and unlikely to cause strife for the small projects it will effect given its opt-out clause. Nutiketaiel 13:06, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Nutiketaiel checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

154.  Support - While it would probably be preferable to have a larger, more active stewards corp (which if it existed would negate the need for this proposal), we don't. Chrism 13:16, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Chrism checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

155.  Support - Proposal seems rational and for the betterment of the entire Wiki community. --Mwilso24 13:18, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Mwilso24 checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

156.  Support J-L Cavey 13:19, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - J-L Cavey checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

157.  Support I agree, small wiki have problems to get sysop. Vasiľ 13:22, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Vasiľ checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

158.  Support Will help us get at cross-wiki vandals who use small wikis to create malicious accounts. NawlinWiki 13:29, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - NawlinWiki checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support 194.41.152.158 13:37, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     • IP ineligible to vote. John Vandenberg 02:41, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

159.  Support Muro de Aguas 13:44, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Muro de Aguas checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

160.  Support Tostan 13:55, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Tostan checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

161.  Support Conaughy 13:59, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Conaughy checked by (RT) 02:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support I think this is a good way to improve small wikis -- HF cars and sets 14:04, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 17:34, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

162.  Support Good idea. Raychut 14:06, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Raychut checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

     Yes. Tgkprog 14:07, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 17:28, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

163. Yes. Swatjester 14:11, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Swatjester checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

164.  Support Evet! --Goktr001 14:12, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Goktr001 checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

165.  Support I support. Albertus Aditya 14:18, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Albertus Aditya checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

166.  Support Linedwell@frwiki 14:38, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Linedwell checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

167.  Support --FischX 14:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - FischX checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

168.  Support--VincenzoX 14:50, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - VincenzoX checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

169.  Support --амдф 14:54, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Amdf (амдф) checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

170.  Support --TheGrimReaper NS 14:56, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - TheGrimReaper NS checked by (RT) 17:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

171. --Sanbec 15:00, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Sanbec checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

172. Joe N 15:02, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Vote made by an IP -Barras ^talk 18:06, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked and reinstated. Voter logged in (see evidence); registered in 2007 and had sufficient edits (see here and also here) - Joe N checked by (RT) 16:29, 13 February 2010 (UTC).

173.  Support A sensible extra layer of defense against mass vandalism attacks. Durova 15:03, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Durova checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

174.  Support --Frank schubert 15:08, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Frank schubert checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

175.  Support I have no reason not to vote on this good idea... A idea that helps wikipedia, why don't vote? SunProj3cT 15:14, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - SunProj3cT checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

176.  Support -- small wikis need some help. Renata3 15:18, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Renata3 checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

177.  Support Taking a hit for the little guy sounds good to me. Neelix 15:19, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Meets eligibility criteria; no unified login, but link provided - Neelix checked by (RT) 22:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC).

178. Sandstein 15:20, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Sandstein checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

179.  Support. Since trust is not a matter of languages -- Vwm 15:22, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Vwm checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

180.  Support Christian Giersing 15:30, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Christian Giersing checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

181. Don't agree with the silly support templates but chalk this up as a support Spartaz 15:36, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Spartaz checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

182.  Support --Engelbaet 15:41, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Engelbaet checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support IF handled with care, it's worth a try. Especially potentially useful for small Wikip-projects --ArchiSchmedes Talk 15:42, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 17:23, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

183.  Support for small wikis only, where stewards were (and still currently are, I suppose) performing such anti-vandalism tasks. --Paginazero - Ø 15:53, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Paginazero checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

184.  Support --ゆきち 15:59, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Yukichi99 (ゆきち) checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

185.  Support This is an important tool to help moribund languages or ones whose users are not very net-savvy to get a leg up. Warmest Regards, :)—_thecurran Speak your mind ^{my past} 16:15, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Thecurran checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

186.  Support Carolfrog 16:18, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Carolfrog checked by (RT) 02:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC).

      Eligible Rechecked. Login account now unified - Carolfrog checked by (RT) 11:31, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

187.  Support Neeters 16:19, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Neeters checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

188.  Support Juliabackhausen 16:21, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Juliabackhausen checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

189.  Support -- zur887 16:21, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Zur887 checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

190.  Support --Morten Haan 16:24, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Morten Haan checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support robaco 16:21, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     robaco would have been entitled to voted later in the voting period - however at the time of voting 150 edits had not been reached (137 on pt wiki). --(RT) 17:19, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

191.  Support --Lépton ^✉ 16:28, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Lépton checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

192.  Support --Transmissionelement 16:30, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Transmissionelement checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

193.  Support --Jonathan Groß 16:37, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Jonathan Groß checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

194.  Support Sensible approach to solving a real problem. FloNight 16:37, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - FloNight checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support --TheBestPilarYouWillEverSee 16:40, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - TheBestPilarYouWillEverSee checked by (RT) 22:53, 10 February 2010 (UTC).

195.  Support –neurovelho 16:42, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Neurovelho checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

196.  Support. JamieS93 16:45, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - JamieS93 checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

197.  Support Kubłok31 16:50, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Kubłok31 checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

198.  Support /Poxnar 16:56, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Poxnar checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

199.  Support Tpt 16:57, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Tpt checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

200.  Support Tuvalkin 17:00, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Tuvalkin checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

201.  Support Hosiryuhosi 17:08, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Hosiryuhosi checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

202.  Support --FlügelRad 17:13, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - FlügelRad checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

203.  Support Fantastic idea, as long as they are not annoying and act "the hard man". Conay 17:16, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Conay checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

204.  Support --Anthony Ivanoff 17:17, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Anthony Ivanoff checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

205.  Support this idea. Actually it has already been tested in Wikia (helpers), and it works. Wassily Steik 17:19, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Meets eligibility criteria; no unified account, but link provided - Медиа (Wassily Steik) checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

206.  Support Hrcolyer 17:21, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Hrcolyer checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

207.  Support Catherine 17:24, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - CatherineMunro (Catherine) checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support Jyka 19:27, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Jyka checked by (RT) 22:53, 10 February 2010 (UTC).

208.  Support With caution, as per Kimdino. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 17:29, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - OwenBlacker checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

209.  Support Kaldari 17:31, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Kaldari checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

210.  Support Arkuat 17:35, 7 January 2010 (UTC) The opt-out by local consensus is very important to me; it looks as if a project with 10 administrators, 3 of whom are active at any given time, can opt-out by consensus. Otherwise I wouldn't support.

      Eligible - Arkuat checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

211. Laser brain 17:38, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Laser brain checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

212.  Support Ateria 17:43, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Ateria checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support Braveheart09 17:46, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Braveheart09 would have been entitled to voted later in the voting period - however at the time of voting 150 edits had not been reached. --(RT) 17:15, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

213.  Support The Anome 17:47, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - The Anome checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

214.  Support Migt be useful for small african wikis JAn Dudík 17:47, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - JAn Dudík checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

215.  Support Will be good for smaller Wikis. But let´s see if is it working or not. --Chmee2 17:50, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Chmee2 checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

216.  Support SBC-YPR 17:52, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - SBC-YPR checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

217.  Support --DieBuche 18:07, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - DieBuche checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support Why not? Clearly, many smaller projects need this. Innotata 18:19, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). At the time of voting you had not been registered for at least 3 months. (You registered on 7 January 2010). --(RT) 17:10, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

218.  Support Stefaniak 18:25, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Stefaniak checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

219. Support. -AlexSm 18:26, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Alex Smotrov (AlexSm) checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

220. Support --M/ 18:30, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - M7 (M/) checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

221.  Support Rajiv Varma 18:37, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Rajiv Varma checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

222.  Support --Amrum 18:53, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Amrum checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

223. Very yes. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:55, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Amorymeltzer (Amory) checked by (RT) 18:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support --Pattiz 18:57, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Pattiz checked by (RT) 22:53, 10 February 2010 (UTC).

224.  Support Yo creo que esto es algo bueno para la wiki ya que hay muchos vandalos--Moms10 19:03, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Moms10 checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

225.  Support Cocoaguy^talk_contribs‽ 19:04, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Cocoaguy checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

226.  Support --Krdan 19:05, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Krdan checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

227.  Support Raysonho 19:05, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Raysonho checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

228.  Support --Toobaz 19:15, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Toobaz checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support --Dunshocking 19:29, 7 January 2010 (UTC) Happy to support the majority vote; thanks for the vote!

      Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Dunshocking checked by (RT) 22:53, 10 February 2010 (UTC).

229. --Thalan

      Eligible - Thalan checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

230. Seems useful. No such power than stewards --Sargoth 19:37, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Sargoth checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

231.  Support Sebk. 19:41, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Sebk. checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

232.  Support --Amir E. Aharoni 19:43, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Amire80 (Amir E. Aharoni) checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

233. Izno 19:44, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Izno checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support --Skamecrazy123 19:48, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Skamecrazy123 checked by (RT) 22:53, 10 February 2010 (UTC).

234.  Support - Eric-Wester 19:49, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Eric-Wester checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

235.  Support -- Cozzycovers 19:55, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Cozzycovers checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

236.  Support Good idea. I believe it can help the projects. --egg 19:56, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Egg checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

237.  Support Seems a good idea - Lnegro 20:02, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Lnegro checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

238.  Support I wonder about knowledge about local languages (and of the sustainability of a project with less than 10 admins over the long term). There are good practical reasons stated in the oppose section below (such as the need for global admins to exercise sensitivity with respect to allowing smaller wiki to develop autonomously) but in essence this seems quite practical. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid (coṁrá) 20:04, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Rannpháirtí anaithnid (coṁrá) checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

239.  Support - Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) 20:10, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Jeffrey Mall checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

240.  Support GameOn 20:12, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - GameOn checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support - Armageddon11 20:15, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Armageddon11 checked by (RT) 22:53, 10 February 2010 (UTC).

241.  Support - Rainmonger 20:17, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Rainmonger checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

242.  Support I think this will be a very helpful position for developing the smaller Wikipedia projects and it seems like very little harm can come from this, so I support it. I Feel Tired 20:18, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - I Feel Tired checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

243.  Support --Alterego 20:27, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Alterego checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

244.  Support – ClockworkSoul 20:32, 7 January 2010 (UTC): This seems like a good idea in principle, and I'll be interested to see how it develops.

      Eligible - ClockworkSoul checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

245. Shii 20:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Shii checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

246. --Osd@ruwiki 20:46, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Osd checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

247. --Philippe 20:52, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Philippe checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

248. --Enemenemu 20:54, 7 January 2010 (UTC) Looks like a solution for a problem

      Eligible - Enemenemu checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

249.  Support Sole Soul 21:02, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Sole Soul checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

250. --AFBorchert 21:05, 7 January 2010 (UTC) I assume that small wikis will profit from this solution. Most vandalisms or spam postings are in English or other major languages, not necessarily in the language of the small wikis. Similarly, copyright violations can be in many cases handled without knowing the wiki's language.

      Eligible - AFBorchert checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

251.  Support – Lumos3 21:06, 7 January 2010 (UTC) Small Wikis need the protection of the whole community or they may be vunerable to disruption which in turn will reflect on the reputation of the whole of Wikipedia.

      Eligible - Lumos3 checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support Gkarpljuk 22:09, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 02:06, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

252.  Support Wikipedia is big; around 3 million articles by 20 million users. However lots of the amount is vandalism which should be reduced if the idea comes true. Jeremjay24 21:18, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Jeremjay24 checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

253.  Support Pschemp 21:20, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Pschemp checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support Knuddel8 22:21, 7 January 2010 (CET) I support that. I don't think the volunteers will abuse their rights and I don't think that their will be any volunteers chosen who aren't serious enough.

     Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 02:02, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

254.  Support Absolute power corrupts absolutely; it's a Good Thing this isn't absolute power. Dhatfield 21:23, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Dhatfield checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support IzzyReal We as a collective entity need to protect the smaller articles. So Heck yeah!

     Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 01:55, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

255.  Support --Dreaven3 21:26, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Dreaven3 checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support --cslatlantis 16:28, 8 January 2010 (UTC) Totally great idea. Too many people have been screwing up the facts.

     Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 01:50, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

256.  Support --Gereon K. 21:32, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Gereon K. checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

257.  Support --Daemorris 21:35, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Daemorris checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support --Ding1dong 21:41, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 01:46, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

258.  Support As long as we are admitting that this is a work around until the smaller wikis can better handle the scourge of internet flaming. I think that inter-wiki cooperation is part of the core of the Wikipedia spirit.--Adam in MO Talk 21:44, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Adamfinmo (Adam in MO) checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

259.  Support --Abaumg 21:46, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Abaumg checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

260.  Support Nbarth 21:50, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Nbarth checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

261.  Support Unusual? Quite ^TalkQu 22:00, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - QuiteUnusual checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

262.  Support - Vinvlugt 22:13, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Meets eligibility criteria; no unified login, but link provided - Vinvlugt checked by (RT) 22:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support -  Kaltxì Na'vi!  22:18, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

     You are ineligible to vote (registration before October 1, 2009 is required). --Church of emacs talk 23:32, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

      Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Na'vi checked by (RT) 12:49, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

263.  Support -- Sounds interesting and worth a go. DD2K 22:25, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - DD2K checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

264.  Support -- All Wikipedias bear the same logo, while quality is varying. Global sysops can support the local stewarts, esp. blocking of vandals etc. -- Vertigo Man-iac 22:36, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Vertigo Man-iac checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

265.  Support – This sounds like a very good idea. We desperately need more structures for inter-wiki communication and coordination, as well as filling a role that the stewards are unable to manage through shortage of numbers. I would be keen to see proposals for meetings of the GSs every ?three months or so, possibly with the stewards. Tony1 22:02, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Tony1 checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

266.  Support I like this idea --Adrille 22:38, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Adrille checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

267.  Support --Zinnmann 22:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Zinnmann checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

268.  Support ok -Kacembepower 22:40, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Kacembepower checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support G8crash3r 22:40, 7 January 2010 (UTC) Great idea. I think I can help out if given the opportunity.

     Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You do not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project and at the time of voting you had not been registered for at least 3 months. --(RT) 01:40, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

269.  Support I support the motion Endo999 22:52, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Endo999 checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

270.  Support - Much needed. -- Avenue 22:56, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Avenue checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

271.  Support --ysangkok 22:58, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Ysangkok checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

272. Majorly talk 23:07, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Majorly checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

273.  Support I agree with the idea behind this as long as the opt-out is there. Woody 23:08, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Woody checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

274.  Support --Pelz 23:10, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Pelz checked by (RT) 19:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

275.  Support - I support whatever will provide help for smaller wikis. -- Atama頭 23:16, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Atama checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

276.  Support - We need effective ways and tools against vandalism. I hope this will help! --Ulanwp 23:21, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Ulanwp checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

277.  Support --Computerjoe 23:27, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Computerjoe checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

278.  Support -- Montgomery 23:36, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Montgomery checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

279.  Support I agree with Paginazero. --Fredericks 23:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Fredericks checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

280.  Support Makes sense to me.-LtMuldoon

      Eligible - LtMuldoon checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

281. Yup. Makes perfect sense. BG7 23:45, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Bluegoblin7 (BG7) checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

282.  Support --MoRsE 23:52, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - MoRsE checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

283.  Support --Schmendrik881 23:58, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Schmendrik881 checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

284.  Support Adambro 00:05, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Adambro checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

285.  Support --Something12356789101 00:08, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Something12356789101 checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

286.  Support Royalbroil 00:12, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Royalbroil checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

287.  Support --Emes 00:28, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Emes checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

288.  Support Fetchcomms 00:33, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Fetchcomms checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support --Rab777hp 19:32, 8 January 2019 (EST) This is necessary because it helps keep the level of control up, and also deals with the question of allowing more stewards in or not.

     Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 01:34, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

      Support I think this is a reasonable way to maintain a level of nessacary controll, and continue to foster an productive environment for the free exchange of ideas. Rampant unicorn 00:51, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 01:29, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

289.  Support I'm not convinced this will solve all the issues it is supposed to, but it's certainly worth a try Wefa 00:53, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Wefa checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

     Annotations start here

290.  Support AndrewRT 00:55, 8 January 2010 (UTC) Sounds reasonable and positive, with the greatest potential for harm neutralised through allowing opt outs. In practice I think it's naive to think the idea that global sysops will remain strictly limited to "urgent abuse and non-controversial maintenance" and would not end up with the same power structure attributes that en-wp admins have. Likewise, I'm not positive about asking stewards to make the decision (they should be strictly implementing community decisions only). Nonetheless, still support. AndrewRT 00:55, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - AndrewRT checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

291.  Support bonne idée --Ofol 01:03, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible - Ofol checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

St. Alex has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support --St. Alex 01:03, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - St. Alex checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support --E020613 01:37, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - E020613 checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support Definitely a good idea. —MC10 (T•C•L•EM) 01:54, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - MC10 checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support Sneaky 013 01:59, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Sneaky 013 checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Wesha has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support -- Wesha 02:06, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Wesha checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Ukexpat has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support --Ukexpat 02:08, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Ukexpat checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

2. Support, sounds like a good idea--Jac16888 02:09, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Jac16888 checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support --Giants27 Talk to Me 02:11, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Giants27 checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Wikitiki89 has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support --Wikitiki89 02:13, 8 January 2010 (UTC) The only thing I have to say is that I think the requirements for number of admins should be changed because I feel that ten admins or three active admins is not nearly enough admins.

1.  Eligible - Wikitiki89 checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support Themfromspace 02:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Themfromspace checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

3. --Jodoform 02:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Jodoform checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support--Christian Lindecke 02:18, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Christian Lindecke checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support GreenReaper 02:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - GreenReaper checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

the ed17 has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Yup, but we need to be sure that these people are unequivocally and completely trusted before appointing them to a position like this. Ed (talk) 02:28, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - The ed17 (Ed) checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support Slark 02:25, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Slark checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support --Patar knight 02:27, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Patar knight checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support Seems sane enough and commensurate with the problem. --Kay Dekker 02:29, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Kay Dekker checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support Nothing I can think of that would make this a bad idea. --Shirik 02:31, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Shirik checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Starblind/Andrew Lenahan has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support Andrew Lenahan 02:39, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Starblind (Andrew Lenahan) checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support ~fl 02:41, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Fl checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support Bouchecl 02:48, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Bouchecl checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support BfPage Hey can I be one of those sysops?

    Eligible - Bfpage checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Jack Merridew has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support — a very good idea. Cheers, Jack Merridew 02:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Jack Merridew checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support Jamie314 02:33, 8 January 2010 (UTC) This is fine, provided there is adequate moderation. As others have said, we don't want to create power issues or invite abuse.

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Jamie314 checked by (RT) 23:04, 10 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support--Personplacething 02:06, 8 January 2010 (UTC) I strongly agree with this proposal.

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Personplacething checked by (RT) 23:04, 10 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support--9548coolgirl 20:14, 7 January 2010 (UTC) This is the best idea I've heard of. I for one support this cause. Oh, and my vote is yes.

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - 9548coolgirl checked by (RT) 23:04, 10 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support --Plommespiser 19:30, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Plommespiser checked by (RT) 23:04, 10 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support--jmans25 20:14, 7 January 2010 (UTC) This is good, as long as they get a lot less privileges than anmins. We DON'T need another group with the same privileges than admins.

   Sorry, you are ineligible for voting. John Vandenberg 16:06, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also here) - Jmans25 checked by (RT) 23:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support --Deanmullen09 21:09, 7 January 2010 (UTC) In the word of the hopi indians "those who cannot accept change will fall dead with their own fear of that change" so why not?

   Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). At the time of voting you had not been registered for at least 3 months. (You registered on 26 October 2009). --(RT) 22:07, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

2. Tentative  Support Shoefly 18:21, 7 January 2010 (UTC) This change should not create any power monopolies.

    Eligible - Shoefly checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support Christopher Pritchard 18:14, 7 January 2010 (UTC), I support as I feel that it will allow for more people to focus on editing, with less people needing to be sysops (as the global ones can take care of this)

    Eligible - Christopher Pritchard checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support User: Gullit Torres, I support because I think it'll get better the the Wikipedia's jod, chosing the best people and increasing the articles.

    Eligible - Gullit Torres checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support Carptrash 17:47, 7 January 2010 (UTC) I'll try anything . . . . ...... once.

    Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Carptrash checked by (RT) 02:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC).

    Not eligible Links between wiki accounts are unproven, so cannot verify eligibility to vote - a unified account or a link from Meta user page was required for identification - Carptrash checked by (RT) 17:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support (Wiki id2 16:41, 7 January 2010 (UTC))

   Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). At the time of voting you had not been registered for at least 3 months. (You registered on 16 November 2009). --(RT) 21:57, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

5.  SupportKimdino 15:03, 7 January 2010 (UTC) Care needs to be taken on appointment of these people though. I believe they will need to operate with a light touch. They must also realise that they are subsidiary to the wiki 'owners' and only providing a supporting role. Certainly, as stated elsewhere, no hitlers.

    Eligible - Kimdino checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

   {{Orion11}} Yes, thats good —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 79.229.164.197 (talk • contribs) 2010-01-07T14:20:57 (UTC)

   Anon vote. John Vandenberg 08:34, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked. Voter was not logged in (see evidence); Orion11 did not log in to vote (see here) - 79.229.164.197, Orion11 checked by (RT) 12:49, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support I think this is a great idea, provided care is taken in choosing the right person for thejob. It will go wrong if we recruit people who are likely to go all superior and start being nazi on editing. TomBeasley 13:18, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

   Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). At the time of voting you had not been registered for at least 3 months. (You registered on 20 November 2009). --(RT) 21:53, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

    SupportFindiver13:17, 7 January 2010 (UTC) I like the above wording : "start being nazi on editing"

   Sorry, you are ineligible for voting. John Vandenberg 16:06, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also here) - Findiver checked by (RT) 19:35, 15 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support DarioAlvarez

   Sorry, you are ineligible for voting. John Vandenberg 16:06, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also here) - DarioAlvarez checked by (RT) 19:35, 15 February 2010 (UTC).

6. --Teepoet 10:19, 7 January 2010 (UTC) Yes.

    Eligible - Teepoet checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

   James Brian Ellis 08:32, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

   Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). At the time of voting you had not been registered for at least 3 months. (You registered on 13 December 2009). --(RT) 21:49, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

7. WngLdr34 04:32, 7 January 2010 (UTC) I for one support our new Sysop overlords (seriously though there are too many mods we need supermods, hells yes.

    Eligible - WngLdr34 checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

8.  Support with obvious need for careful thought in the selection process. Kafka Liz 03:05, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Kafka Liz checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Closedmouth has contributed to wikis which will be affected

--Closedmouth 03:18, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Closedmouth checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support I think this is a good thing as long as one is qualified and this does not start an issue of power abuse. Canyouhearmenow

    Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Canyouhearmenow checked by (RT) 02:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support A vandal can run wild on a smaller wiki with only rollbackers around to control them. Any viable project has enough local privileges to close deletion discussions, run RfA's, etc. But, as I understand the proposal, global sysops are for blocking vandals, removing obvious spam/attack pages, etc- things that need done ASAP, not when the stretched thin local admins are online. Bradjamesbrown 03:23, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Bradjamesbrown checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Roberto de Lyra has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support Good idea. Roberto de Lyra 03:24, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Roberto de Lyra checked by (RT) 22:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support I like this idea, it will hopefully further prevent vandalism on the wikis. --Thejetset1 03:39, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Thejetset1 checked by (RT) 16:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support Steven Walling (talk) 03:42, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Steven Walling checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support Seems like a good idea. Can't see why this wouldn't be beneficial to the smaller wikis. --FlyingPenguins 03:45, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - FlyingPenguins checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support Seems to be a very reasonable proposal to me. Basket of Puppies 03:50, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Basket of Puppies checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support I'm not entirely sure whether its really necessary to give them global blocking rights, but that's not enough to make me oppose. The removal process is close to zero-tolerance, which is good. Mr.Z-man 03:57, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Mr.Z-man checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

6. Llakais 03:58, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Llakais checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Paradoctor has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support If the admins go berserk, we kick them out. Meanwhile, if it promotes efficient use of our human resources aka fellow users, I'm all for it. Paradoctor 04:12, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Paradoctor checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support Hopefully will reduce vandalism, and I trust that the selection process will be thorough enough to ensure this isn't just another title people try to rack up.--BaronLarf 04:25, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - BaronLarf checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support I think this is a great idea. I see no reason to oppose this motion. Rintaminator 04:27, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Rintaminator checked by (RT) 16:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

Grandmasterka has contributed to wikis which will be affected

EMPHATIC  Support. This is a long overdue solution to the abuse of small projects. Grandmasterka 04:29, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Grandmasterka checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support. I hope that this will reduce vandalism, while protections mentioned will prevent abuse. Tigerhawkvok 04:40, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Meets eligibility criteria; no unified login, but link provided - Tigerhawkvok checked by (RT) 22:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC).

3. Very much in  Support of this proposal. This way, there would be less spam and suspicious activity in the wikis. wishfulanthony 05:01, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Wishfulanthony checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support Jclemens 05:10, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Jclemens checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support Tm93 05:18, 8 January 2010 (UTC) Small wikis need experienced "sysops" to help them grow.

    Eligible - Tm93 checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support Rudyramjet I am relativly new to the Wiki experiance and I appreciate it when I'm questioned. The steward has always told me why something is supect and what steps are needed to unblock or validate information. I contribute but certainly don't want this project tainted. The reason I contribute is because I believe in the free exchange of solid, verifiable information. We should try this out gang. If it turns into what is "feared" than do like what we are doing now and change it again! To do nothing is not the answer. 17:10, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Rudyramjet checked by (RT) 16:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

6.  Support Sensible way to help small wikisJohn Quiggin 05:57, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - John Quiggin checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Sirozha has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support nice practise for small wikis --Sirozha 05:58, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Sirozha checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support Ozob 06:01, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Ozob checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Dcoetzee has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support My own experience with Mediawiki-based projects has taught me that some projects require time to reach the critical mass of volunteers needed to sustain it. These fledgling projects require careful care and watchfulness to grow into mature ones. To abandon the small wikis would be analogous to deleting all stubs. Dcoetzee 06:08, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Dcoetzee checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support As long as projects can opt-out, I think there is little damage that can be done and a lot of help that could be offered. -- Onee 06:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Onee checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

3. Quiddity 06:24, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Quiddity checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Graeme Bartlett has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Support only purpose is to assist. Graeme Bartlett 06:28, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Graeme Bartlett checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Brücke-Osteuropa has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support -- Brücke-Osteuropa 06:31, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Brücke-Osteuropa checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Woraponboonkerd has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support -- Worapon B. ^talk 06:49, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Woraponboonkerd (Worapon B.) checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

EVula has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Easiest choice I've made all day. Absolutely. EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:57, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - EVula checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support --Tholau Definitly YES 087:32, 8 January 2010 (UTC) :)

   Only 1 edit (this vote). Erik Warmelink 09:31, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked. Insufficient edits, see here and also here - Tholau checked by (RT) 23:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC).

.snoopy. has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support --.snoopy. ✉ 07:33, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - .snoopy. checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Orderinchaos has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support --Orderinchaos 07:34, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Orderinchaos checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support --JohnMarcelo 07:37, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - JohnMarcelo checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support --newspaperman 07:38, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Newspaperman checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support Makes sense -- this will help the smaller projects. --MCB 07:45, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - MCB checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support Needed it for years. Biem 07:50, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Biem checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

6. --Revvar 07:56, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Revvar checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Maedin has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support Main opposes seem to be: "they won't know the languages" and "will abuse power". I'm impressed with how confident people are that a few people can control several wikis without having any of the language skills. Clearly a steward and maintenance type role that will benefit smaller wikis and hopefully help them grow; and responding to opposes about focus taken from larger projects: I'm quite ready for en wikipedia and other large wikipedias to take a back seat to other parts of the Wikimedia Foundation; as I see it, greater involvement in the smaller projects naturally enhances the quality and quantity of information lacking from the larger projects anyway. Maedin\^talk 08:00, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Maedin checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support --2thuriel 08:08, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

   Sorry, you are ineligible for voting. John Vandenberg 16:06, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also here) - 2thuriel checked by (RT) 19:35, 15 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support --Klaws 08:11, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Klaws checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support --Starwiz 08:17, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Meets eligibility criteria; no unified login, but link provided - Starwiz checked by (RT) 22:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC).

4. Suppport Ged UK 08:20, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Ged UK checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Gabriel Kielland has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support -- Gabriel Kielland 08:40, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Gabriel Kielland checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

2. --Eriklindroos 08:46, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Eriklindroos checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Clem23 has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Support Clem23 08:51, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Clem23 checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support -- Andre315 08:53, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Andre315 checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support Pipedreamergrey 08:55, 8 January 2010 (UTC) I'm all for anything that will foster a sense of community among the smaller wikis.

    Eligible - Pipedreamergrey checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Leolaursen is a sysop on a wiki which will be affected

 Support Leolaursen 08:57, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Leolaursen checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Physchim62 has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support Physchim62 09:00, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Physchim62 checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support There's no reason to deny it. - Ellif 09:01, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Galadrien (Ellif) checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support Don't think this needs to be a different permission than the existing ones, but someone should get those rights, I agree. -- Windharp 09:02, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Windharp checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Redagavimas is a sysop on an wiki which will be affected

 Support --Redagavimas 09:07, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Redagavimas checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Stifle has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support Stifle 09:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Stifle checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support --Patangel 09:22, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible At the time of your vote, you had been registered for 3 months (see here) as specified in the multilingual header of this page. However a contested view is that registation should be 1 October 2009 (shown here) - Patangel checked by (RT) 21:44, 3 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support Mpadowadierf 09:29, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Mpadowadierf checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Murgh has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support Murgh 09:32, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Murgh checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Altenmann has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support Altenmann 09:37, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Altenmann checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support Bschandramohan

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Bschandramohan checked by (RT) 18:55, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support Ahmad87

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (although number of edits on fa wiki now exceeds that, see here) - Ahmad87 checked by (RT) 18:55, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

Cryngo has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support Cryngo 09:50, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Cryngo checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Vladimir Solovjev has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support--Vladimir Solovjev 09:54, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Vladimir Solovjev checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

Pjoef has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support Yes, it's a good idea. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:58, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Pjoef checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support --Akkifokkusu 10:00, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Akkifokkusu checked by (RT) 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support--Bdell555 10:01, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Bdell555 checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support Nobbipunktcom 10:03, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Nobbipunktcom checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support Archandha 11:10, 8 January 2010 (MET)

   Sorry, you are ineligible for voting. John Vandenberg 16:06, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also here) - Archandha checked by (RT) 19:35, 15 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support BabelStone 10:13, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - BabelStone checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

6.  Support Looks like it is opt in (for larger wikis) or opt out (for smaller wikis). As such, I can't see a reason to oppose - if your local wiki doesn't like it, just opt out of it. --Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 10:34, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Philosopher checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

Michail has contributed to wikis which will be affected

--Michail 10:49, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Michail checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support Gz260 10:55, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Gz260 checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support Lemiffe 10:57, 8 January 2010 (UTC) Go for it!

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Lemiffe checked by (RT) 18:55, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support TraxPlayer 11:57, 8 January 2010 (MET)

    Eligible Meets eligibility criteria; no unified login, but link provided - TraxPlayer checked by (RT) 22:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC).

SVL may have contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support --SVL 11:00, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - SVL checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

Boivie has contributed to wikis which will be affected

--Boivie 11:03, 8 January 2010 (UTC) It's a good proposal.

1.  Eligible - Boivie checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  SupportYeah, I'm OK with this.--Mktsay123 11:04, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Mktsay123 checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support MichaelSchoenitzer 11:24, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - MichaelSchoenitzer checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

4. Seems sensible, if you only have two or three admins on a project you can't expect them to be online 24/7, especially if the vandals are english speakers who don't necessarily operate in the same timezone. WereSpielChequers 11:32, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - WereSpielChequers checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

   And what happens if there are only one or two admins, who only check the project on a daily basis, or even less - many only dedicate a few hours each weekend. global sysops will do all the work because it "needs" doing, except during the time those admins are around. The result is that the local admins will not be able to shape their project, and without the sense of responsibility to tend to the garden, they will walk away from the project leaving it to the global sysops who probably dont understand the language. Or, they will opt out. John Vandenberg 12:34, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

   That would be a sound argument if global sysops did more than anti-vandalism. I hardly think blocking rampaging vandals, which is likely to be 99.9% of the work (even nonsense pages are tagged for local evaluation today rather than given to the stewards to handle), will annoy the local community. NW (Talk) 12:41, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

   blocking rampaging vandals does not need global sysops with all of the rights of local admins and global blocking.

   The proposal currently says they will be doing "non-controversial maintenance", which is the vast majority of a local sysops duties on a small wiki. John Vandenberg 12:58, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

   A few anti-vandal experiences that I have seen while doing SWMT work. These all require tools in addition to the block button: An editor on the Greek Wikipedia who uses multiple IPs and a script to vandalize on page over and over again. Temporary semi-protection is often used to stop this. Multiple IPs go on a mass vandal page creation, creating pages with solely obscenties. Is there really any reason to for those pages to stick around? Page-move vandalism still occurs on small projects. I would go on, but I probably shouldn't. In any case, these are not isolated incidents. These happen every week, and stewards are not always there to stop it. NW (Talk) 17:09, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

5.  Support. Not a bad idea, I think. — Qweedsa 11:49, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Qweedsa checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support maxkramer 11:57, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

   Sorry, you are ineligible for voting. John Vandenberg 16:06, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also here) - Maxkramer checked by (RT) 19:35, 15 February 2010 (UTC).

6. --Conti 12:00, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Conti checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

MacCambridge has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support MacCambridge 12:04, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - MacCambridge checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support --Clpo13 12:07, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Clpo13 checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

Lukas9950 has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Lukas9950 12:23, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Lukas9950 checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support--Spartanbu 13:27, 8 January 2010 (MET) Good idea!

    Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Spartanbu checked by (RT) 02:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC).

NoCultureIcons has contributed to wikis which will be affected

--NoCultureIcons 12:39, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - NoCultureIcons checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support Great idea. We do need to be careful who we elect, though. Elium2 12:44, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

   Sorry, you are ineligible for voting. John Vandenberg 16:06, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also here - Elium2 checked by (RT) 19:35, 15 February 2010 (UTC).

Tim Ross has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Tim Ross (talk) 12:46, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Tim Ross checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

Hut 8.5 has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support Hut 8.5 12:49, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Hut 8.5 checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support ...and hopefully this will be the last of any dealings with this matter. LessHeard vanU 12:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - LessHeard vanU checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support --Carkuni 12:59, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Carkuni checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support Good idea -- DieterEg 13:01, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

   Sorry, you are ineligible for voting. John Vandenberg 16:06, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also here) - DieterEg checked by (RT) 19:32, 16 February 2010 (UTC).

Olaf2 has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support--Olaf2 13:06, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Olaf2 checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support sounds like a flexible tool to me. Pauli133 13:11, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Pauli133 checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

Usien has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support--Usien 13:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Usien checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

2. Per J.delanoy's comment below. AGK 13:18, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - AGK checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support --Samyn97 13:20, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Samyn97 checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support Tinucherian 13:31, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Tinucherian checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support Dprabhu 13:37, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

   Sorry, you are ineligible for voting. John Vandenberg 16:06, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also here) - Dprabhu checked by (RT) 23:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC).

Vajotwo has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support --Vajotwo (posta) 13:41, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Vajotwo checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

   annotation finishes here

2.  Support CillanXC 13:54, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Meets eligibility criteria; no unified login, but link provided - CillanXC checked by (RT) 22:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC).

3. --Bahnmoeller 13:55, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Bahnmoeller checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support Shaktal

   Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You do not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project and at the time of voting you had not been registered for at least 3 months. --(RT) 23:48, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

4.  Support--Иван Прихно 13:57, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Иван Прихно checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support : We need men of good will to protect small projects. These small projects, viable or not, are useful to readers. Stephane8888 13:58, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Stephane8888 checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

6.  Support. Yes indeed! -- OlEnglish 14:02, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - OlEnglish checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

7.  Strong support That'll be good for smaller Wikis --231013-a 14:06, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - 231013-a checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support. Anything to slow vandals -- comindico 14:17, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

   Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 23:40, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

8.  Support --Jpfagerback 14:23, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Jpfagerback checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

9.  Support Makes sens. skagedal^... 14:27, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Skagedal checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support --Lankavatara 14:33, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

   Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 22:25, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

10. sounds reasonable to me -- pne 14:36, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Pne checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

11.  Support Certainly would help the smaller wiki's. -Djsasso 14:41, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Djsasso checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support -- Tehbing 14:53, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 22:20, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

12.  Support --Maha 15:07, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Maha checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

13.  Support -- There are concerns with this, but the benefits outweigh the disadvantages I think. en:Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 15:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Oleg Alexandrov checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support --Professor Muttonchops

    You are not eligible for voting. – Innv | d | s: 07:00, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

14.  Support --Oneiros 15:23, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Oneiros checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Lineplus 15:27, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 22:16, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

    Diyan.boyanov 15:31, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 22:11, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

15.  Support There are global vandals so why not admins and difference to stewards seems somewhat sufficient. --Usp 15:34, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Usp checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Yes, I reckon it's needed, مر. بول مساهمات النقاش ‎ 15:35, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link (with a qualifying account) is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Mr. Richard Bolla checked by (RT) 02:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC).

     Not eligible Links between wiki accounts are unproven, so cannot verify eligibility to vote - a unified account or a link from Meta user page was required for identification - Mr. Richard Bolla checked by (RT) 17:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

16.  Support Mulad 15:38, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Meets eligibility criteria; no unified login, but link provided - Mulad checked by (RT) 22:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC).

17.  Support - Colin dla 15:40, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Colindla checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

18. Good idea. --Dimitris 15:41, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Dimitris checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

19.  Support yes--Alexander Timm 15:44, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Alexander Timm checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

20.  Support We need to be as coordinated and flexible as our attackers -Drdisque 15:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Meets eligibility criteria; no unified login, but link provided - Drdisque checked by (RT) 22:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC).

21. Convinced that it has its place; also, the fact that wiki's can opt out of global access list makes it less likely that the bigger wiki's will have problem with global blocks. (I can't see enwiki be used on global access list, for example.) Penwhale 16:01, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Penwhale checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

22.  Support Jes / Yes -- Kelkaj enesperantaj projektoj bezonas tian uzulon. / Some projects in Esperanto need these special users. -- Fernando Maia Jr. 16:05, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Meets eligibility criteria; no unified login, but link provided - Fernando Maia Jr. checked by (RT) 22:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC).

23.  Support Perfect iniciative. --Rolf Obermaier 16:09, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Rolf obermaier checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

24.  Support - Taqi Haider 16:10, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Taqi Haider checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

25. ×α£đ^es 16:11, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - XalD checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

26.  Support About time that this happened. Woollymammoth 16:21, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Woollymammoth checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

27.  Support but the group should be diversified and consist of people representing different countries and ideas. Otherwise, it will be the dominance of US community Alexbouditsky 16:24, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Alexbouditsky checked by (RT) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

28.  Support 51% support, 49% no support. A bit concerned with power abuse --Rochelimit 16:28, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Rochelimit checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

29.  Support --Emericpro 16:29, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Emericpro checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Think it's definately necessary! --NorthernCounties 16:31, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 17:44, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

     SupportWe need more anti-vandals.Zoravar 16:45, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You do not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project and at the time of voting you had not been registered for at least 3 months. --(RT) 17:39, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

30.  SupportDefinitely.Lewis82 16:47, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Lewis82 checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

31.  Support At first I was going to come in an say hell-no, but then I read the proposals, and it's a perfectly reasonable thing to do (individual projects opt-in, and they have to be small). So hell-yes. Headbomb 16:49, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Headbomb checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

32.  Support Jacoplane 16:50, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Jacoplane checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

33.  Support --Feudiable 16:51, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Feudiable checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

34.  Support Danielkueh 16:55, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Danielkueh checked by (RT) 02:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC).

     Eligible Rechecked. Login account now unified - Danielkueh checked by (RT) 13:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

35.  Support Kanman 16:57, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Kanman checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support MMS2013 16:59, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). At the time of voting you had not been registered for at least 3 months. (You registered on 16 November 2009). --(RT) 17:34, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

     Support --Teufli 17:00, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 17:17, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

36.  Support even though we should always be sceptical about sysops and their behaviour I support the effort in consolidating sysop's work like blockage of vandals as way to more efficiency and therefore more ressources to support our initial project goal - creating an encyclopedia --Manuel Schneider^(bla) (+/-) 17:02, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - 80686 (Manuel Schneider) checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support - seems reasonable to me (Madapakar 17:10, 8 January 2010 (UTC))

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You do not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project and at the time of voting you had not been registered for at least 3 months. --(RT) 17:12, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

37.  Support - useful and reasonable --Jfblanc 17:15, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Jfblanc checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

38.  Support - seems to be a good idea, to support understaffed wikis --NPunkt 17:18, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - NPunkt checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

39.  Support - Ike9898 17:20, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Ike9898 checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

40.  Support --Mordan ( talk - de - de-talk ) 17:21, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Mordan checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

41.  Support. I think the ability of each project to opt in or out satisfies any concerns I would have had. --Tryptofish 17:22, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Tryptofish checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support -- Wikimedia needs as many able-bodies, responsible sysops in place as possible, and this plan seems to cover all eventualities thought of so far. I am in favor of the proposal, thanks for the opportunity to vote. -- Erredmek 17:24, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 17:07, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

42.  Support - Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m

     Eligible Meets eligibility criteria; no unified login, but link provided - R.T.Argenton checked by (RT) 22:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC).

43.  Support Ironholds 17:26, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Ironholds checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support I agree with Headbomb. --Charlie Rrose Selavy 17:27, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 17:01, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

44.  Support Galessandroni 17:31, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Galessandroni checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

45. --Density 17:40, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Density checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

46.  Support - It's very good idea! Misiek2 17:43, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Misiek2 checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support simonexxx83 17:45, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). At the time of voting you had not been registered for at least 3 months. (You registered on 24 November 2009). --(RT) 16:56, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

47.  Support Mlaffs 17:49, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Mlaffs checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support—I discuss my decision here--ArthurOgawa 17:50, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 16:50, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

48.  Support —LarryGilbert 17:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - LarryGilbert checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support would make wiki so much better! akshayrangasai 23:23, 8 January 2010 (IST)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 16:46, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

49.  Support agree Mathmo Fulldecent 18:17, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Fulldecent checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

50.  Support I have become mostly inactive, due to rampant Wikipedia abuse --Gesslein 18:26, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Gesslein checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

51.  Support One problem is: if a global-admin account is hacked, or someone can using it for vandalism (example: forgotten to logout, then someone use global-admin account to global-vandal) --Love Krittaya 18:40, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Love Krittaya checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

52.  Support Demonwhip 18:59, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Demonwhip checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support I think it is a very good idea Jan Keromnes 19:05, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 16:42, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

53.  Support Great idea. --Connel MacKenzie 19:07, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Connel MacKenzie checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Half price0 19:09, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 16:38, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

54.  Support --Epiq 19:13, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Epiq checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

55.  SupportThe Magnificent Clean-keeper 19:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - The Magnificent Clean-keeper checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

56. Annabel 19:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Annabel checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

57.  Support--Germannoiseunion 19:21, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Germannoiseunion checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support--User:Tag101 19:21, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 16:33, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

58.  Support--Bartiebert 19:27, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Bartiebert checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

59.  Support--Mike Linksvayer 19:38, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Mike Linksvayer checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support--Charles F Ross

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 16:27, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

60.  Support Let's try it out --Tschips 19:43, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Tschips checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

61.  Support —Paul Erik 19:53, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Paul Erik checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

62.  Support —Longbow4u 19:55, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Longbow4u checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Cowtung 19:59, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 16:22, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

63.  Support Sins We Can't Absolve 20:01, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Sins We Can't Absolve checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

64.  Support --BradPatrick 20:02, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - BradPatrick checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

65.  Support --Firilăcroco ^{discuție / talk} 20:06, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Firilacroco checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

66. Nothing controversial, really. --Mormegil (cs) 20:10, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Mormegil checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

67.  Support -- Pbsouthwood 20:11, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Pbsouthwood checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support --Thekaleb 20:15, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 16:18, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

     Support --Dougcard 20:15, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. (If you use a different user name on other wiki projects you should have provided a link). --(RT) 16:14, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

68. Nakor 20:21, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Nakor checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

    Weak  Support. On the one hand, there are editors like EVula who are dead impartial, a good trait for an admin on so many wikis. On the other, there are people who feign goodwill just so they can get the tool and proceed to abuse it. Plus, it's extremely powerful, which could either do good or bad, depending on whose hands it's in. I'm putting up a weak support because I'm assuming there are enough honest editors on the project to keep things under control. --Gp75motorsports 20:28, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project - at the time of voting your highest number of edits was 148 on Simple wiki. --(RT) 16:10, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

69.  Support So long as the right candidates are selected, I believe this to be a positive initiative that will support the development of smaller projects. Rje 20:30, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Rje checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

70. --habakuk 20:37, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Habakuk checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

71. --Jeroen 20:38, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Jeroen checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Absolutely a necessity, given the volume and scope that the wikimedia projects have evolved into! Soren42 20:42, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. Also, when you voted you had not been registered for 3 months. --(RT) 01:25, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

72.  Support — The Earwig @ 20:47, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - The Earwig checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

73. --Nro92 20:54, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Nro92 checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

74. --Matthiasb 20:59, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Matthiasb checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

75.  Support Bob bobato 21:00, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Bob bobato checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

76.  Support --Item 21:01, 8 January 2010 (UTC) of course :-)

     Eligible - Item checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

77. → crazytales 21:05, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Crazytales checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

78.  Support - so long as it remains the privelege of a few, and not the right of many. GeeJo

     Eligible - GeeJo checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

79. XenonX3 21:17, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - XenonX3 checked by (RT) 02:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

Hercule is a sysop on two wikis which will be affected, and crat' in another affected wiki

 Support --Hercule 21:22, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Hercule checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support --Sens8 21:30, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

   Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. (If you use a different user name on other wiki projects you should have provided a link). --(RT) 01:17, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

    Support --Todtanis 21:39, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

   Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You have not been registered for at least 3 months and do not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 23:55, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

2.  Support --AnRo0002 21:41, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - AnRo0002 checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support --TK-CP 21:44, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

   Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You have not been registered for at least 3 months and do not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 23:49, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

3.  Support Per proposal. --Millosh 21:49, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Millosh checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support --Gaumond 16:54, 8 January 2010 (UTC)(My account is active on Wikipedia FR)

   <small>IP vote, login to vote pliz --[[User:Dalibor Bosits|'''<font color="Maroon" face="Bookman Old Style" size="2">D<font color=#ffcc66>alibo<font color=#FFD70 face="Bookman Old Style" size="2">r <font color="Maroon" face="Bookman Old Style" size="2">B<font color=#ffcc66>osits<font color="silver">''']] [[User_talk:Dalibor Bosits|'''<font color="black" size="3">^©</font>''']] 22:06, 8 January 2010 (UTC)</small>

    Not eligible Rechecked. Voter was not logged in (see evidence); Gaumond did not log in to vote (see here) - 74.57.163.6, Gaumond checked by (RT) 12:49, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support Jarkeld 21:59, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Jarkeld checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support --Jnthn0898 22:04, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Jnthn0898 checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

6.  Support --Malafaya 22:08, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Malafaya checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

7.  Support --MichaelMaggs 22:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - MichaelMaggs checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support --Ondokuzmart 22:22, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

   Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 23:42, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

8.  Support HistoryStudent113 22:24, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - HistoryStudent113 checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

9.  Support --Mark Nowiasz 22:28, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Mark Nowiasz checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

10.  Support --Woodstock1 22:32, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Woodstock1 checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

11.  Support --ZX81 ^talk 22:34, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - ZX81 checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

12.  Support - I see a need, and while I see this as an imperfect solution, I have not seen a superior proposal. - Sinneed 22:36, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Sinneed checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

13.  Support --Tone 22:41, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Tone checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support -- Yaztromo 22:44, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 23:37, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

14.  Support -- Btphelps 22:50, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Btphelps checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

15.  Support -- Rotsee 22:57, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Rotsee checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

16.  Support --ST ○ 23:01, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Steschke (ST) checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

17.  Support --Church of emacs talk 23:02, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Church of emacs checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support --Kjetil1001 23:06, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 23:34, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

18. --Tinz 23:10, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Tinz checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Beccaviola 23:11, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 23:31, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

     Support --Alexanderaltman 23:15, 8 January 2010 (UTC) elegant

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 23:26, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

    {{co-firm}} --  verdanarch!  THE LOGISTICS FOR OVERIDE SEEM REASONED. Harmonic unsubverted education for all is a legacy and our future. As we grow wiser so some of us step fore and ward.

    Sorry, you are ineligible for voting. John Vandenberg 08:49, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also here) - Verdanarch checked by (RT) 19:32, 16 February 2010 (UTC).

19.  Support -- Pistnor 23:30, 8 January 2010 (UTC) seems reasonable

     Eligible - Pistnor checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

20.  Support -- CristianCantoro 23:41, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - CristianCantoro checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

21.  Support - Seems like a good idea. - NeoAC 23:50, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

     Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - NeoAC checked by (RT) 02:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC).

     Eligible Rechecked. Login account now unified - NeoAC checked by (RT) 13:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

22.  Support Hportfacts5 00:17, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Hportfacts5 checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

23.  Support Acer 00:20, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Acer checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Weblaunches

     Not eligible At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Weblaunches checked by (RT) 17:12, 10 February 2010 (UTC).

24.  Support Sure! Why not? If the doomsayers are right and a new breed of uber-wikinazi emerges as a result of this, surely our ever-watchful stewards can give them a thorough stomping. I think that people who are sufficiently interested and experienced to nominate or be naominated are unlikely to have these antisocial tendencies anyway. As in life, the bulk of the work on wiki is done by a minority of people, so more power to those that have the time and motivation. Mattopaedia ^{Have a yarn} 00:33, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Mattopaedia checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

25.  Support Blahma 00:34, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Blahma checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

26.  Support It sounds usefully. — Jagro (cs.wiki) 00:40, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Jagro checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

27.  Support --Evangelivm 00:42, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Evangelivm checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Publicly Visible 00:50, 9 January 2010 (UTC) Most of the naysayers seem to be either misunderstanding the proposal (e.g. the oft-overlooked "opt out") or misguidedly shouting about tyranny when many small wiki users are voting "yes". As far as I can tell, this proposal has almost everything to do with cross-wiki vandalism, and these cries for assistance from users helpless to stop cross-wiki vandals while the stewards are unavailable fill me with righteous rage! A global sysop group that doesn't have the power of stewards but can deal decisively with these insolent whelps is definitely a great idea.

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Publicly Visible checked by (RT) 12:49, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

    It seems many people represent the opposition as folks who predict pervasive tyrany, this doesn't really seem accurate and it doesn't really seem to be the thrust of their objections. The problem cited is that the potential is created, and that along with the increased complexity, responding to inevitable abuse of power becomes harder. The degree of abuse will probabl be quite minor based on my present understanding of this proposal, but who can say, especially when the means for gaining the privledge and for revoking it are still a bit unclear. The problem I see is that the wikis where this is needed will be by-definition under-policed. I would think it easier to deal with a vandal that anyone can check than a privledged user that is immune to most user's objections. So we create a class of users who will be given extraordinary powers over particularly unmoderated sites- this to me seems to be a possible problem. As for the pros of the proposal, I see no reason why more stewards can't be recruited nor why the requirements for obtaining this privledged status and the manner in which it may be used can't be modified if needed. It seems to me that if the steward program isn't working on certain sites then this program should be discussed directly. In short, the complexity, opportunity for arbitrary excercise of power in an environment with less oversight, and the unclear necessity of creating a new user class rather than simply getting more stewards or changing the nature of this user class's functions and appointment process as needed, makes me oppose the proposal, and it seems many share similar views. It isn't that prevasive abuse is foreseen, its that the need for this change is unclear and that the negatives, however slight, push many to not being able to see this proposal as a beneficial change given the readily available and well-tested alternatives (steward program expansion, modification) not having bee shown inadequate.--Δζ 05:28, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

28.  Support --Hormold 00:56, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Hormold checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

29.  Support--Unionhawk 01:00, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Unionhawk checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

30.  Support Saemikneu 01:04, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Saemikneu checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

31.  Support There seem to be plenty of checks and balances and though there's opportunity for mistaken actions there's very little for abuse. As the Wiki projects grow so does the number of vandals and also the motivation for interested parties to play dirty tricks: we need the tool to cope. --Simonxag 01:07, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Simonxag checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

32.  Support Hi878 01:09, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Hi878 checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Wiseguy007 01:16, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 23:22, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

     Support MikeLacey 01:22, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 23:19, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

    Weak  Support. On the one hand, there are editors like EVula who are dead impartial, a good trait for an admin on so many wikis. On the other, there are people who feign goodwill just so they can get the tool and proceed to abuse it. Plus, it's extremely powerful, which could either do good or bad, depending on whose hands it's in. I'm putting up a weak support because I'm assuming there are enough honest editors on the project to keep things under control. --Gp75motorsports 20:23, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

    Duplicate vote. Davewild 15:38, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Support Sure! Why not? If the doomsayers are right and a new breed of uber-wikinazi emerges as a result of this, surely our ever-watchful stewards can give them a thorough stomping. I think that people who are sufficiently interested and experienced to nominate or be naominated are unlikely to have these antisocial tendencies anyway. As in life, the bulk of the work on wiki is done by a minority of people, so more power to those that have the time and motivation. Mattopaedia ^{Have a yarn} 00:28, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Duplicate vote. Davewild 15:38, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Support -- VanderGomes I support this project. I believe a big project like Wikipedia is necessary to consider not only the quality but also quantity to fully achieve the results.

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 23:16, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

33.  Support -- Tawker 00:58, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Tawker checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support -- Buckeyetigre 01:38, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Buckeyetigre checked by (RT) 17:12, 10 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support --Bctrainers 02:11, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Bctrainers checked by (RT) 17:12, 10 February 2010 (UTC).

34.  Support — It can be useful. Here's hoping its used for the described purposes.—DMCer 02:17, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - DMCer checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

35.  Support, gives better fine tuning of permissions, plus there's always a place to take complaints if necessary. --Sigma 7 02:23, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Sigma 7 checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

36.  Support -- Njrwally 03:29, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Njrwally checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

37.  Support -- Jtico (talk) 02:40, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Jtico checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

38.  Support -- Lenitha 02:44, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Lenitha checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

39.  Support: small wikis are vulnerable to attackers, since too few people watch them if ever. Now, this would be a way to increase their defenses. Alexius08 02:42, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Alexius08 checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support -- Based on review of the previous comments and consideration of the effects on current and future users, I support the proposal to establish global sysops in effort to provide efficient and complete protection of wikis that opt-in. JShenk 02:49, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - JShenk checked by (RT) 02:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC).

     Not eligible Links between wiki accounts are unproven, so cannot verify eligibility to vote - a unified account or a link from Meta user page was required for identification - JShenk checked by (RT) 17:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

40.  Support -- William915 02:57, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - William915 checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

41.  Support Ottava Rima 02:59, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Ottava Rima checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

42.  Support -- Allen4names 03:10, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Allen4names checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Supraphonic 03:14, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 23:12, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

43.  Support-Not entirely sure about some things, but I'm basically in support — The preceding unsigned comment was added by NativeTexan55 (talk)

     Eligible - NativeTexan55 checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Xam123456 03:35, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 23:08, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

     Support - I think it's a good idea —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Reinaldo Christopher (talk • contribs) 2010-01-09T03:49:34 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible for voting. John Vandenberg 09:01, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also here) - Reinaldo Christopher checked by (RT) 19:32, 16 February 2010 (UTC).

44.  Support This is a great idea, since certain administrators (examples: Juliancolton, PeterSymonds) help out all they can on multiple wikis of the Wikimedia Foundation. Since I read/heard about the shortage of Stewards, the global sysop group would benefit those users. DivineAlpha 03:50, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - DivineAlpha checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Sounds like a normal delegating of responsibilities Firefight 03:50, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 23:05, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

45.  Support. →Lwalt ^♦ talk 03:52, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Lwalt checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

46.  Support. I am an admin at the English Wikipedia under this same username, but I can't help with adminstrative tasks at, say, Simple English. I would greatly enjoy the opportunity to assist in theadministrative tasks of other Foundation projects. --PMDrive1061 04:04, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - PMDrive1061 checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support --Joejoe92 04:07, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 22:55, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

47.  Support. The major benefit appears to be the small wikis hits by cross-wiki spammers/vandals—given that Stewards would be delegating this responsibility, the Stewards will also be in the position to remove it if the extra powers are misused. —Sladen 04:10, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Sladen checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

48.  Support to deal with spam. --Banana 04:33, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Meets eligibility criteria; no unified login, but link provided - Banana04131 checked by (RT) 22:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC).

49.  Support --Werdan7^{T @} 04:39, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Werdan7 checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

50.  Support, I don't anticipate objections to sysop actions, since I doubt there will be much dispute resolution--just vandalism/spam cleanup and the like. My only concern is that this will be a tedious and unrewarding job, and no one will want to do it very long. Chick Bowen 04:41, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Chick Bowen checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Danshil 04:54, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Danshil checked by (RT) 12:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

51.  Support Will enhance the fight against inter-wiki vandals... ARUNKUMAR P.R 04:58, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - ARUNKUMAR P.R checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

52.  Support --Leuqarte 05:01, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Leuqarte checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

53.  Support--Jusjih 05:04, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Jusjih checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support It is a large responsibility that will prevent far more irresponsibility. --ChrstphrChvz (talk • contribs) 05:10, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - ChrstphrChvz checked by (RT) 12:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

54.  Support Zscout370 05:42, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Zscout370 checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support while I haven't personally logged 150 edits, I've run a nonprofit community ISP & have been teaching a bunch of college students how to edit for the first time. This makes a lot of sense to me. --DrMel 06:04, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Only 4 edits, sorry. 150+ edits on a single project are required.

     Not eligible Rechecked. See also here - DrMel checked by (RT) 14:13, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

55.  Support Kira-san 06:28, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Kira-san checked by (RT) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

    Hesperian 06:32, 9 January 2010 (UTC) Changing vote; John Vandenberg's comment below convinced me this is unwise as presently worded. Hesperian 13:37, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

     Moved vote See evidence here - Hesperian checked by (RT) 13:05, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

56.  Support Lear's Fool 06:34, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Lear's Fool checked by (RT) 13:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

57.  Support Sheepunderscore 06:36, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Sheepunderscore checked by (RT) 13:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

58.  Support — Аурелиано Буэндиа 06:37, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Аурелиано Буэндиа checked by (RT) 13:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

59.  Support --Nn123645 06:45, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Nn123645 checked by (RT) 13:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support --Guugolpl0x 07:02, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 22:51, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

60. --Fg68at 07:03, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Fg68at checked by (RT) 13:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

61.  Support - I can see how this would be a useful stopgap for under-visited wikis and the "OMG 1 ADMIN WAS BAD SOMEWHERE!!11!!1" arguments don't realy resonate with me. --J.smith 07:12, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - J.smith checked by (RT) 13:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

62. —Dark ^talk 07:18, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - DarkFalls (Dark) checked by (RT) 13:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

63.  Support Barefact 07:43, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Barefact checked by (RT) 13:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

64.  SupportScooteristi 07:45, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Scooteristi checked by (RT) 13:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

65.  Support Calaka 07:53, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Calaka checked by (RT) 13:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support --Chadwickschool 08:04, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 22:46, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

66.  Support --Gaeser 08:18, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Gaeser checked by (RT) 13:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

67.  Support Local wiki project have a safety break in their right to disavow/reject one or all Global sysops. If it's happen meta-project and higher up have better to abide their decisions. --KrebMarkt 08:21, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - KrebMarkt checked by (RT) 13:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

68.  Support Sheitan 08:24, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Sheitan checked by (RT) 13:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Pheines 08:33, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here) You have not been registered for at least 3 months and do not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 00:00, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

     Support Astonvilla91 08:36, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 23:55, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

     Support Kevin j morse 08:49, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Kevin j morse checked by (RT) 19:19, 15 February 2010 (UTC).

69.  Support Absolutely necessary for small wikis. --FocalPoint 08:53, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - FocalPoint checked by (RT) 13:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Pyrdacor-Cyberdragon 09:02, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. Does not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Pyrdacor-Cyberdragon checked by (RT) 13:58, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Catgunhome 01:11, 9 January 2010 (PST)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You have not been registered for at least 3 months and do not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 23:50, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

     Support NeoCreator 12:16, 9 January 2010 (UTC +3)

     Not eligible Rechecked. Does not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - NeoCreator checked by (RT) 14:05, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Good to see Wikipedia taking action towards increasing reliability of its contents. Subh83 09:25, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You have not been registered for at least 3 months and do not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 23:45, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

     Support Good idea User:ulrichteich7 10:33, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. Does not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Ulrichteich7 checked by (RT) 14:11, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

70.  Support Wild mine 09:40, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Wild mine checked by (RT) 13:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

71.  Support — JamesR ≈talk≈ 09:53, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - JamesR checked by (RT) 13:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

72.  Support Biathlon 10:09, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Biathlon checked by (RT) 13:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

73.  Support --Vantey 10:11, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Vantey checked by (RT) 13:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

74.  Support --Ratzer 10:13, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Ratzer checked by (RT) 13:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

75.  Support Niesy74 10:29, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Niesy74 checked by (RT) 13:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

76.  Support --Joe-Tomato 10:32, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Joe-Tomato checked by (RT) 14:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support --TimppaKoo 11:02, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. If you have edits on another account, you have not indentified it. --(RT) 23:07, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

     Support Cody escadron delta 10:41, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here) You have not been registered for at least 3 months - your first registration was on 8 November 2009. --(RT) 23:01, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Willscrlt has contributed to wikis that will be affected

 Support because…

1. • (a) It is possible for someone who doesn't speak the language on many wikis to detect vandalism and other blatant forms of abuse. Can conflict of interest, weasel words, and other forms of subtle vandalism, be detected? Probably not. But I regularly visit and do contribute to sites in languages I don't speak. Languages in a non-Latin alphabet or that are markedly different from English would not be a place I could help much, but that's the smaller portion of the total number of wikis. (I am not a local sysop and would not want to be a globabl one; I'm just sharing my experiences as a frequent cross-wiki visitor and contributor).
   • (b) The "powers" being given to the global sysops are essentially the same as they would have if they were local sysops. No biggie there. They are just assisting the local ones. Maybe the name for the role should be changed to "Global Assistant Sysops" to make that point more clear?
   • (c) For the people who don't see how this "helps Wikipedia", you're living in a monoculture with blinders on. "Wikipedia" is a vast multilanguage project with several related sites. While English encyclopedia articles may be your interest, someone in Laos may be much more interested in the Laotian Wikinews site. If the person goes there, and the site is all fouled up due to obvious vandalism or other serious maintenance problems, that person will have a very poor view of "Wikipedia". If that person is a journalist, blogger, or otherwise well-connected, his or her low opinion of "Wikipedia" will spread. Negative feelings for non-profit organizations keeps donations down, makes major contributors nervous, and harms the overall project. "Wikipedia" is a complex organism, and damaging even small parts of it (i.e., smaller projects in uncommon languages) harms the larger, more visible parts, too.
   • For those reasons, the reasons already voiced above, and more that I can't think of, I support this proposal (and would strongly support it with the name change to "Global Assistant Sysops"). —Willscrlt ( “Talk” • “w:en” • “c” ) 10:46, 9 January 2010 (UTC) (edit conflict)

    Eligible Rechecked - Willscrlt checked by (RT) 14:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

2. --Mbdortmund 11:12, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Mbdortmund checked by (RT) 14:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

3. Shraktu 11:20, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Shraktu checked by (RT) 14:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support --Mohanjith 11:15, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

   Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 22:53, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

4. Greudin throws a shoe towards spammers, vandals Greudin 11:24, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Greudin checked by (RT) 14:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support --Goldzahn 11:25, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Goldzahn checked by (RT) 14:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

   Didicher

    Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page needed to verify eligibility to vote - Didicher checked by (RT) 14:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

    Not eligible Links between wiki accounts are unproven, so cannot verify eligibility to vote - a unified account or a link from Meta user page was required for identification - Didicher checked by (RT) 17:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support --Insinbad 11:24, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked. Does not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Insinbad checked by (RT) 15:25, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

6.  Support ----Roquefeuil 11:38, 9 January 2010 (UTC), judicious / judicieux, allows to block obvious vandalisms, with limited resources (not to too much time or complexity demanding)

    Eligible Rechecked - Roquefeuil checked by (RT) 14:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support MirekDve 11:38, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting not registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - MirekDve checked by (RT) 15:38, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

7. Yes. Seems helpful on balance. Ucucha 11:47, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Ucucha checked by (RT) 14:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

8.  Support Needed. Surprising this does not already exist. / edg ☺ ☭ 11:53, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Edgarde (edg) checked by (RT) 14:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

9.  Support Michalwadas 12:00, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Michalwadas checked by (RT) 14:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

10.  Support, but having looked through the oppose section - provided that they're elected by means of really stiff criteria, in order to prevent possible misunderstandings.--Microcell 12:02, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Microcell checked by (RT) 14:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support --Sparkiegeek 12:07, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. Does not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Sparkiegeek checked by (RT) 15:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

11. OK Stef48 12:14, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Stef48 checked by (RT) 14:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support make sense to me

     Not eligible Rechecked. Unsigned vote by Alatryste (see evidence). At time of voting not registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Alatryste (unsigned) checked by (RT) 15:17, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

12. --ThierryNicollin 12:26, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - ThierryNicollin checked by (RT) 14:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

13. --Rutja76 12:40, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Rutja76 checked by (RT) 14:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

14.  Support Cysioland - Talk with me 12:44, 9 January 2010 (UTC) - Why not? It can be useful.

     Eligible Rechecked - Cysioland checked by (RT) 14:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

15. Btd 12:48, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Btd checked by (RT) 14:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

16. Kallerna 12:52, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Kallerna checked by (RT) 14:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

17.  Support Automatic seeing is good, but this sounds much better! Keep that idea up! (User: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Andy_E (German))

     Eligible Rechecked - Andy E checked by (RT) 14:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

18.  Support--Capucine8 13:00, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Capucine8 checked by (RT) 14:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

    Be bold, as they say. --Innerfish 13:10, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    User not eligible to vote. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 02:04, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. Does not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also here) - Innerfish checked by (RT) 15:52, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

19.  Support I am clearly supporting this decision, which is a very good idea in order to make the most little wikis more dynamic. Indeed, I think that is a great piece of new for the whole community, which will by this way certainly win a great dynamism.

    Je pense que nous avons là une excellente idée pour accroître le dynamisme et la pertinence des projets wikis les plus modestes, et que cette mesure aidera peut-être à crédibiliser Wikipédia. En effet, les actes de vandalisme sont réellement un problème dans les plus petits wikis, donc cette nouvelle catégorie d'administrateurs comble bien un "manque" dans le mille-feuille administratif wikipédien. Artemis Fowl 13:14, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Artemis Fowl checked by (RT) 17:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

20. Wammes Waggel 13:15, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Wammes Waggel checked by (RT) 17:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

21.  Support strongly. Having tried to help out with cross wiki vandalism, it is very hard to help with small projects that have few sysops. The stewards have too many other things to do to deal with all of this as well. Additionally the set of projects where global sysops will have rights is reasonable and allows opting out. - Taxman 13:16, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Taxman checked by (RT) 17:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Penso che possa essere utile per combattere i vandalismi. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by A.gavardi (talk)

    Oldest account (on it.wiki) was created 12:31, 06 December 2009. Erik Warmelink 14:04, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked - at time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - A.gavardi checked by (RT) 17:12, 10 February 2010 (UTC).

22.  Support Mystori33 -- I think its a great idea.

     Eligible Rechecked - Mystori33 checked by (RT) 17:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

23.  Support Plani 13:57, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Plani checked by (RT) 17:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

24.  Support --FritzG 14:08, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - FritzG checked by (RT) 17:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

25. -jkb- 14:12, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - -jkb- checked by (RT) 17:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

26.  Support--ZERBERUS 14:14, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - ZERBERUS checked by (RT) 17:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

27. Carlitoslemon 14:16, 9 January 2010 (UTC) Yo creo que esto si es una buena idea

     Eligible Rechecked - Carlitoslemon checked by (RT) 17:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

28.  Support --S.Didam 14:20, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - S.Didam checked by (RT) 17:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

29.  Support Kyro 14:21, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Kyro checked by (RT) 17:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

30.  Support --Tpa2067 14:23, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Tpa2067 checked by (RT) 17:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

31.  Support Esp since any wiki can opt out. We have way too many inactive admins on small wikis and admin backlogs are big on those wikis. --Daniel Mayer (mav) 14:22, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Mav (Daniel Mayer) checked by (RT) 17:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support As a general rule, I think more flexibility in dealing with emergencies or chronic understaffing is a good thing. PauAmma 14:42, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 22:46, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

32.  Support --Ken-Z! Talk 14:49, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Mopza (Ken-Z!) checked by (RT) 17:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

33. DarkoNeko 14:59, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Darkoneko checked by (RT) 17:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support --Drwhapcaplet 15:02, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Drwhapcaplet checked by (RT) 17:12, 10 February 2010 (UTC).

34.  Support; this is a sound subset of the Stewards' rights which can be safely given to a larger group of editors for the good of all. — Coren ^{(talk) / (en-wiki)} 15:12, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Since you justify this based on the subset of rights being "sound", perhaps you would be kind enough to explain which steward rights are not being given to this group...? And then explain why you think global block is appropriate. John Vandenberg 10:28, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

    Well, the inability to use Special:Userrights is the primary difference (and a big one it is!). As for global block, that's an important tool for fighting cross-wiki vandals. — Coren ^{(talk) / (en-wiki)} 18:50, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Coren checked by (RT) 17:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

35.  Support Fernbom2 15:25, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Fernbom2 checked by (RT) 17:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

36.  Support --Orci 15:36, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Orci checked by (RT) 17:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

37.  Support Стаканчик 15:44, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Стаканчик checked by (RT) 17:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

38.  Support Untitledmind72 15:53, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Untitledmind72 checked by (RT) 17:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC).

39.  Support. We have people we can trust with this responsibility, and we have persistent vandals who jump from wiki to wiki across projects and languages, and need to be stopped by someone able to do so in this manner. BD2412 T 16:12, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - BD2412 checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

40.  Support JackOL31 16:17, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - JackOL31 checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Sueli.f.lima 16:27, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Sueli.f.lima checked by (RT) 16:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

41.  Support That's a very good idea! FalconL 16:32, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - FalconL checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

42.  Support Banning notorious vandals from all wiki projects at the same time and helping the admins of small wiki projects to maintain their wiki does make sense in my opinion --Sylvain2803 16:43, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Sylvain2803 checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

43.  Support Dewet 16:45, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Dewet checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

44.  Support Qui1che 16:48, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Qui1che checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support darklordoftime 16:52, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. Username is Dark Lord Of Time (see evidence) who did not have a minimum of 150 edits (see here and also here) - Dark Lord Of Time (darklordoftime) checked by (RT) 18:55, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

45.  Support, vandalism is evil. If an experienced sysop knows the language of project, its support is important. --Jackie 17:03, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Jackie checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

46.  Support, no reason not to. Timmeh 17:06, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Timmeh checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Evox777 17:10, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. Did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (at the time of voting Evox777 only had 91 edits on en wiki, although has more than 150 edits now, see here and also here) - Evox777 checked by (RT) 18:55, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

47.  Support, Geoff ^{Who, me?} 17:24, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Glane23 (Geoff) checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

48.  Support --Mghamburg 17:25, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Mghamburg checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

49. Роман1989 17:27, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Роман1989 checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

50.  Support --Trixt 17:28, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Trixt checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

51. This is a good idea. Earle Martin 17:38, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Earle Martin checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Rafael Rodrigues Troiani 17:42, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Rafael Rodrigues Troiani checked by (RT) 21:01, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

52.  Support I agree, --Réginald (To reply) 17:46, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Meneerke bloem (Réginald) checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

53.  Support Chrisvomberg 17:47, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Chrisvomberg checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

54.  Support --Srborlongan 17:59, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Srborlongan checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

55.  Support--Héctor Guido Calvo 18:27, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Héctor Guido Calvo checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

56.  Support Isidore 18:30, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Isidore checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support as long as those chosen do not abuse their power Railpunk 18:32, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Railpunk checked by (RT) 21:01, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

57. Halut 18:35, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Halut checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support User195 18:47, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - User195 checked by (RT) 21:01, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

58.  Support Pic-Sou 18:49, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Pic-Sou checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

59.  Support Promking 18: 45 Jan 9

     Eligible Rechecked - Promking checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

60.  Support Hégésippe | ±Θ± 18:56, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Hégésippe Cormier checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

61.  Support Rastrojo _(D•ES) 18:58, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Rastrojo checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

62. Yes, Oui, Ja, Si ! Ce nouveau statut pourrait être très utile ! Nougatdugardemanger 19:05, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked and reinstated - registered on fr wikipedia for more than 3 months (since 17 May 2009); also at time of voting exceed 3 months on fr wiktionary (since 4 October 2009) with more than 1330 edits (see here) - Nougatdugardemanger checked by (RT) 21:01, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

63.  Support Secret 19:14, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Secret checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

64.  Support --Explodicle 19:28, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Explodicle checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support asia234

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project - you had slightly less, 147 edits on zh wiki, at the time of voting. --(RT) 23:00, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

     Support --Plasmie 19:43, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 21:55, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

65.  Support There is way too much vandalism. --Brandon5485 19:49, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Brandon5485 checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

66.  Support Blue Elf 19:50, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Blue Elf checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Mramz88 19:55, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 21:50, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

67.  Support --Duschgeldrache2 20:21, 9 January 2010 (UTC) There are so many small Wikis. It would help to manage them.

     Eligible Rechecked - Duschgeldrache2 checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

68.  Support --Gestumblindi 20:24, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Gestumblindi checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support --Gaumond 15:28, 9 January 2010 (UTC) (My account is active on Wikipédia (fr))(My vote was strike #666 for IP reason, if your'e going to strike it again please tell me more about the reason)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project - your fr wiki account only has 135 edits by 31 January. --(RT) 21:45, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

69. Дзей Ковуй 17:20, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Dzej (Дзей Ковуй) checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

    --Sfcongeredwards 18:55, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 21:37, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

70.  Support Johnnyjoe23 20:33, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Johnnyjoe23 checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

71.  Support Jón 20:34, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Jón checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Gohe007 20:39, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    At the time of voting, you did not have 3 months registration (See here and also here). --(RT) 21:32, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

72.  Support Happy‑melon 20:48, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Happy-melon checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

73.  Support Shadowrouge99 20:53, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Shadowrouge99 checked by (RT) 11:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support BernAdrian 22:04, 9 January 2010

    User is not eligible to vote. --Bsadowski1 01:05, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also here) - BernAdrian checked by (RT) 23:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC).

74.  Support --Cirdan 21:06, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Cirdan checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

75.  Support --Devin Murphy 21:07, 9 January 2010 (UTC) Looks good as far as I can see.

     Eligible Rechecked - Nived 90 (Devin Murphy) checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

76.  Support --Alvestrand 21:14, 9 January 2010 (UTC) Makes creating new wikis a less dangerous activity for the community.

     Eligible Rechecked - Alvestrand checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

77.  Support --Egmontaz♤ ^talk 21:18, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Egmontaz checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

78.  Support --IvanStepaniuk 21:24, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - IvanStepaniuk checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

79.  Support --Dthomsen8 21:31, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Dthomsen8 checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

80.  Support --Aqwis 21:32, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Aqwis checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

81.  Support -- Inhumandecency 21:57, 9 January 2010 (UTC) Many of the concerns raised by opponents of the proposal seem reasonable, but I consider them less serious than the problem of vandals running wild because no one on a smaller project is available to shut them down. Hopefully we can count on responsible behavior from global sysops and those with the ability to discipline them.

     Eligible Rechecked - Inhumandecency checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

82.  Support Sembra una buona idea, vediamo cose ne esce.--Topolgnussy 22:03, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Topolgnussy checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

83.  Support -- Anne-theater but there must be the posibilty to opt out! 23:13, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Anne-theater checked by (RT) 00:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

     Eligible Rechecked. Login account now unified - Anne-theater checked by (RT) 14:31, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

84.  Support Si les administrateurs ont ressenti le besoin d'un tel aménagement, faisons leur confiance. Si jamais, les droits de blocage global amenaient une censure excessive, il serait toujours temps de faire marche arière. BTH 22:21, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - BTH checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

85.  Support Camaron · Christopher · talk 22:59, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Camaron checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

86.  Support Good idea to help small wikis. But the preventions of abuse should be controlled very strictly by Stewards. Eventually a regular re-election should take place. But support in general. --PsychoKim 23:26, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - PsychoKim checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

87.  Support AlexKazakhov 23:34, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - AlexKazakhov checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

88.  Support I share the initiative VivaU--VivaU 23:49, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - VivaU checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

89. --Jabala 23:53, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Jabala checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

90.  Support -- JB82 23:55, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - JB82 checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

91.  Support Rather strong vote "yes" for now, hope it lasts! ;-) CielProfond 23:59, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - CielProfond checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

92.  Support Under the assumption that such sysops will be chosen from a small list of trusted, multi-lingual users. —Josiah Rowe 00:00, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Josiah Rowe checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

93.  Support --Grebenkov 00:04, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Grebenkov checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

94.  Support -- Vik-Thor 00:30, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Vik-Thor checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

95. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 00:42, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - La Pianista checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

96.  Support --The High Fin Sperm Whale 00:58, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - The High Fin Sperm Whale checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

97.  Support -- Eric.LEWIN 01:06, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Eric.LEWIN checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

98.  Support --Cephas 01:13, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Cephas checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

99. Szwedzki 01:20, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Szwedzki checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

100.  Support The main is opportunity to switch ths option on and off. If smaller wikies agree - it will just help. --Antioctopus 01:33, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Antioctopus checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

101.  Support --Denverjeffrey 01:41, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Denverjeffrey checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

102. Collect 01:47, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Collect checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

103.  Support --Gobonobo 02:09, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Gobonobo checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support This sounds like a great way to assist with the propogation of Wikipedia. Scottperry 02:24, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Scottperry checked by (RT) 00:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

      Not eligible Links between wiki accounts are unproven, so cannot verify eligibility to vote - a unified account or a link from Meta user page was required for identification - Scottperry checked by (RT) 17:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

104.  Support -- Jeffmister 02:53, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Jeffmister checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

105.  Support These people may be crucial in stopping mulitilingual vandals. OCNative 03:07, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - OCNative checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

     Vandalism is annoying. McLerristarr 04:39, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     [2] Seb az86556 10:05, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also here) - McLerristarr checked by (RT) 23:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC).

106.  Support SifaV6 04:48, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - SifaV6 checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

107.  Support -- @lestaty ^discuţie 05:27, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Sir Lestaty de Lioncourt (@lestaty) checked by (RT) 12:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

108.  Support I support this completely. Modify 05:34, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - no unified login, but link provided - Modify checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

109.  Support Clorox 05:41, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Clorox checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

110.  Support CastAStone/^{/₵₳$↑₳₴₮ʘ№€} 05:43, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - CastAStone checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

111.  Support. ReverendWayne 05:59, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - ReverendWayne checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

112.  Support. Vandalism is a huge problem on Wikimedia projects. Firsfron 06:10, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Firsfron checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

113.  Support. --Rocksanddirt 06:12, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Rocksanddirt checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

114. M0llusk 06:20, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - M0llusk checked by (RT) 00:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

      Eligible Rechecked. Login account now unified - M0llusk checked by (RT) 14:31, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

115.  Support. It's a good selection. --Ch.Andrew 06:37, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Ch.Andrew checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

116.  Support Yves.morel 06:41, 10 January 2010 (UTC) 06:41, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Yves.morel checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

117.  Support Everyking 06:45, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - no unified login, but link provided - Everyking checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

118.  Support Have oberserved a lot of spam abuse and copyright violation on wikis without active administrators. --Martin H. 07:15, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Martin H. checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

119. Chaddy 07:28, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Chaddy checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

120.  Support Kostmo 07:57, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Kostmo checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

121.  Support ---- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) 08:37, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - AlexandrDmitri checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

122. I see this will help many projects (especially small projects) to keep in good condition for growth (and possibly some eduation of policies and guidelines).--Altt311 09:05, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Altt311 checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

     Please explain what you mean by "some eduation of policies and guidelines". Are you voicing your support for interference into smaller projects? Seb az86556 10:09, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

123.  Support I think it is a good idea. --Amit6 09:27, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Amit6 checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

124.  Support --Malcolmxl5 09:36, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Malcolmxl5 checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support Spin7ion 09:59, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting had not been registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Spin7ion checked by (RT) 21:01, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

125.  Support J-C Bubbendorf 10:06, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - J-C Bubbendorf checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

126.  Support - Yes. Yottie 10:15, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Yottie checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

127.  Support --Reader781 10:18, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Reader781 checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

128. --Archenzo 10:20, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Archenzo checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

129.  Support Michael Meinel 10:25, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Michael Meinel checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

130.  Support Onix GCI 10:36, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Onix GCI checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

131.  Support --Lohachata 10:57, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Lohachata checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

132.  Support -- Freedom Wizard 11:05, 10 January 2010 (UTC) sounds useful

      Eligible Rechecked - Freedom Wizard checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

133.  Support --Giac83 11:20, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Giac83 checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

134.  Support Need this feature for smaller wikis until they have enough contributors to elect enough sysops. --Teemeah 11:22, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Teemeah checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

135.  Support Thomas Vedelsbøl 11:36, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Thomas Vedelsbøl checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

136.  Support--Bencmq 11:40, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Bencmq checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

137.  Support Bennó 11:41, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Bennó checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

138.  Support ·Add§hore· ^Talk/_Cont 11:48, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Addshore checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

139.  Support Sounds like a good plan, why didn't we think of it before?--AnthonyBurgess 11:55, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - AnthonyBurgess checked by (RT) 00:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

      Eligible Rechecked. Login account now unified - AnthonyBurgess checked by (RT) 14:31, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

140. The RedBurn 12:00, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - The RedBurn checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

141.  Support --Einstein2 12:45, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Einstein2 checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

142.  Support Icairns 12:48, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Icairns checked by (RT) 13:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

143.  Support On ne peut plus logique... --Tadeo59370 12:55, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Tadeo59370 checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

144. --He3nry 12:56, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - He3nry checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

145.  Support I am leery of having too many stewards given their immense power. This proposal will reduce the demand for more stewards, which I see as a good thing. UncleDouggie 13:21, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - UncleDouggie checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

146.  Support - I believe that this is necessary to protect smaller wikis until they establish their own local culture.--Danaman5 13:24, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Danaman5 checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support 15versts 13:25, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not enough edits (29 on en.wiki), too young an account (22:59, 15 November 2009) Erik Warmelink 14:00, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Not eligible Rechecked. Agreed, see here and also here - 15versts checked by (RT) 21:01, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

147.  Support Grzegorz.Janoszka 13:26, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Grzegorz.Janoszka checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

148.  Support Jérôme 13:29, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Jborme (Jérôme) checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

149. --Hei ber 13:34, 10 January 2010 (UTC) "non-controversial maintenance"(Argumente auf Deutsch: de:Benutzer_Diskussion:DerHexer#Global_Admin?)

      Eligible Rechecked - Hei ber checked by (RT) 21:01, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

     Could you explain how you think a locally blocked user can do "non-controversial maintenance"? Erik Warmelink 13:51, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

150.  Support - Hopefully the process will be made as transparent and accountable as possible. It's iffy to give global powers when you don't have a full-fledged system to police that. Ariedartin 13:42, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Ariedartin checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

151. --voyager 13:50, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Voyager checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

152. --MOTOI Kenkichi 13:54, 10 January 2010 (UTC).Σ|D<It's a nice design.

      Eligible Rechecked - MOTOI Kenkichi checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

153.  Support --Glenn 14:04, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Glenn checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

154. Ferbr1 14:14, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Ferbr1 checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

155.  Support Of course. -Nard the Bard 14:18, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Nard the Bard checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

156.  Support Much more sensible than the previous proposals. --ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 14:26, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - ChrisiPK checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

157. En passant 14:28, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - En passant checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support--88.54.198.242 14:39, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     ip vote, please login to vote. Davewild 15:46, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

158.  Support --WikedKentaur 14:40, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - WikedKentaur checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

159.  Support Sir Shurf 14:44, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Sir Shurf checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

160.  Support -- Mr George R. Allison 14:52, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Mr George R. Allison checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

     support--82.226.91.108 15:01, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     ip vote, please login to vote. Davewild 15:46, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Support-- AshleyMorton 15:08, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - AshleyMorton checked by (RT) 00:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

      Not eligible Links between wiki accounts are unproven, so cannot verify eligibility to vote - a unified account or a link from Meta user page was required for identification - AshleyMorton checked by (RT) 17:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

161.  Support--Ellery 15:22, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Ellery checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

162.  Support René Schwarz 15:41, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - René Schwarz checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

163.  Support--Dardorosso 15:44, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - no unified login but link provided - Dardorosso checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

164.  Support--Fondudaviation 15:48, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Fondudaviation checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

165.  Support--André Oliva 15:54, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - André Oliva checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

166.  Support-- Daniel Seibert 15:56, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Daniel Seibert checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

167.  Support Zerblatt 16:00, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - no unified login but links provided - Zerblatt checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

168.  Support --junafani 16:03, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Junafani checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

169.  Support Plyd 16:06, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Plyd checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

170.  Support -- Ssilvers 16:15, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Ssilvers checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

171. faithless (^speak) 16:21, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Faithlessthewonderboy (faithless) checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

172. --Zombi 16:27, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Zombi checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

173.  Support Scienceman123 talk 16:30, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Scienceman123 checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

174.  Support -- Matthias Schalk 16:42, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Matthias Schalk checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

175.  Support -- Guaca 16:48, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Guaca checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

176.  Support It is a very important for small proyects --Wilfredor 17:01, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Wilfredor checked by (RT) 14:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

177.  Support --Cyrus Grisham 17:05, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Cyrus Grisham checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

178.  Support --Sdornan 17:16, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Sdornan checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

179.  Support --trm^ger 17:32, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Theredmonkey (trm) checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

180.  Support -- NastalgicCam 17:33, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - NastalgicCam checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

181.  Support -- Djlayton4 17:40, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Djlayton4 checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

182.  Support Jezebel'sPonyo^shhh 17:42, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Ponyo checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support This is a good idea--Talismania 17:47, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not enough edits (51 on it.wiki) Erik Warmelink 18:52, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Not eligible Rechecked. Agreed, at time of voting not enough edits - see also here - Talismania checked by (RT) 14:13, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

183.  Support Fangfufu 17:54, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Fangfufu checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

184.  Support Mvc 18:13, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Mvc checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

185.  Support Lymantria 18:22, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Lymantria checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

186.  Support AleXXw 18:31, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - AleXXw checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support Clemwang 18:36, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Clemwang checked by (RT) 00:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

      Not eligible Links between wiki accounts are unproven, so cannot verify eligibility to vote - a unified account or a link from Meta user page was required for identification - Clemwang checked by (RT) 17:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support 68.83.216.91 18:38, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     Please login to vote. Erik Warmelink 18:52, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

187.  Support many little projects needs global sysops. --Fabexplosive The archive man 18:39, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Fabexplosive checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

188.  Support Alterboy 18:41, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Alterboy checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

189.  Support Good idea. Helpful assistance for smaller wikis. --High Contrast 18:45, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - High Contrast checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

190.  Support Ideally, all Wikis would be self-policing, but that's simply not realistic. This proposal keeps smaller Wikis from being handicapped by a lack of native admins.Fyre2387 19:03, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Fyre2387 checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

191.  Support --Jodo 19:04, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Jodo checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

192.  Support, with reservations. The Global sysops will need to work with the local sysop(s), who should have the technical and social authority to overrule whatever is done locally by the global sysop (who should only intervene if it is such blatant vandalism that overruling it is illogical). Also, global blocks should only last for a short time before going before locals and stewards to decide on possible extention. (If there are NO local admins, then Robsters makes an interesting point.) Chamberlian 19:17, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Chamberlian checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

193.  Support Dspradau 19:22, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Dspradau checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

194.  Support -- Scray 19:24, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Scray checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

195.  Support --ScottyWZ 19:28, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - ScottyWZ checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

196.  Support Icestorm815 • Talk 19:44, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Icestorm815 checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

197.  Support -- TheLastNinja 20:00, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - TheLastNinja checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

198.  Support Recognizance 20:04, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Recognizance checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

199.  Support. LairepoNite 20:06, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - LairepoNite checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

200.  Support Longliveemomusic 20:10, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Longliveemomusic checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

201.  Support Stobs 20:13, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Stobs checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

202.  Support Matthias Becker 20:19, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Matthias Becker checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

203.  Support Dutchdean 20:23, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Dutchdean checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

204.  Support Mifter 20:50, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Mifter checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

205.  Support Béria Lima ^Msg 21:24, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Beria (Béria Lima) checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

206.  Support here's to progress Murraytheb 21:35, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Murraytheb checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

207.  Support — the Man in Question (in question) 21:49, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - The Man in Question checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

208.  Support Long overdue for dealing with some of the more persistent Wikimedia's Most Wanted. —Jéské Couriano ^{(v^_^v)} 21:53, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Jéské Couriano checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

209.  Support --Seraphie 22:06, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Seraphie checked by (RT) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support With the safeguards included, this sounds like a very good idea. --Blackfyr 22:21, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     [3] Seb az86556 00:24, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Not eligible Rechecked. See also here - Blackfyr checked by (RT) 14:13, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

210.  Support There is a dire need here. As an admin on the English Wikipedia, I know how needed we truly are. Look at how big of an archive I have. :) And yes. Plenty of safeguards. --Woohookitty 22:38, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Woohookitty checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

211.  Support. Looks like it will give smaller WP's some added protection. Alan Liefting 22:46, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Alan Liefting checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

212. Kalan ? 22:48, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Kalan checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

     --Wechu 22:54, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

     [4] Seb az86556 00:22, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Not eligible Rechecked. See also here - Wechu checked by (RT) 14:13, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

213.  Support. It's fine because projects can opt in an out of this. It's good that small projects can get help fighting vandalism if they need it. --X-Man 23:20, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Alexey Feldgendler (X-Man) checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

214.  Support. This is a good way to share the custodial burden. However, this starts with the smaller wikis where oversight is already thin. Because of that, it might make it easier for a patient, malicious user to slowly infiltrate the community using fragmentary, poorly coordinated support from smaller wikis in order to gain general blocking rights. Thus at the very least I'd like to see strong contributions to and consensus within one of the bigger wikis (perhaps even English Wikipedia itself) as an additional criterion for the status. Decoy 23:54, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Decoy checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

215.  Support Good idea.--Jonesy 00:03, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Jonesy checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support Globalisation ! --Virus 00:25, 11 January 2010 (UTC)--Virus^ger

     [5] Seb az86556 00:32, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Not eligible Rechecked. See also here - Virus checked by (RT) 14:13, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

216.  Support Chuckiesdad 00:40, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Chuckiesdad checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

217.  Support Magog the Ogre 00:47, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Magog the Ogre checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

218.  Support It makes sense to me: a global project, a global community, global sysops, of course!--Marjorie Apel 01:06, 11 January 2010 (UTC)  Eligible Rechecked - Marjorie Apel checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

     We already have "global sysops" - they are called stewards. This proposal will create a second set, who don't have checkuser, and are not subject to a well advertised election, but still have the ability to globally block. i.e. this proposal waters down who can do global blocks. John Vandenberg 08:38, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Support My support you have ! --RSchmoldt 01:18, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - RSchmoldt checked by (RT) 00:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

      Not eligible Links between wiki accounts are unproven, so cannot verify eligibility to vote - a unified account or a link from Meta user page was required for identification - RSchmoldt checked by (RT) 17:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

219.  Support shaka 01:39, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Shaka checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

220.  Support Jed 20012 02:00, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Jed 20012 checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

221.  Support Makes good sense and frees up the limited number of stewards to do other things. fr33kman ^{t - c} 02:15, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Fr33kman checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

222.  Support — Balthazar ^(T|C) 02:21, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Balthazar checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

223.  Support Sounds good. Neil Clancy 02:28, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Neil Clancy checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

224.  Support Sensible and pragmatic without creating another layer where it's not needed. Webmink 02:36, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Webmink checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

225.  Support LSX 02:53, 11 January 2010 (UTC) Global patrolling is needed to keep sync, but I worry that there will be overlap problems from locals.

      Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - LSX checked by (RT) 00:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

      Eligible Account unified - LSX checked by (RT) 17:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

226.  Support Yup! Lets 'ave it! If this model does not work we may iterate and repair it. Svaha B9 hummingbird hovering 03:45, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - B9 hummingbird hovering checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

227. --Harald Krichel 04:04, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Seewolf (Harald Krichel) checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

228.  Support Gribeco 04:29, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Gribeco checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

229.  Support Robin Patterson 04:51, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Robin Patterson checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

230.  Support Pharos 05:08, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Pharos checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

231.  Support --Holder 05:36, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Holder checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

232.  Support sounds like a good idea, despite the reasons below. Š¡nglî§h §Þëªk£r 05:52, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Singlish speaker checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

233.  Support Mmaick 07:07, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Mmmaick (Mmaick) checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

234.  Support Not a permanent solution, but it'll have to for now Gaara the Fifth Kazekage 06:12, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Gaara the Fifth Kazekage checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

235.  Support The Thing That Should Not Be 06:24, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - The Thing That Should Not Be checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

236.  Support FrankyLeRoutier 07:00, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - FrankyLeRoutier checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

237. --Nikcro32 16:07, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Nikcro32 checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

238.  Support - yes. Ale_Jrb^talk 08:03, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Ale jrb checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

239.  Support in principle, but 1. their tenure/performance would need to be reviewed at regular intervals. 2. The high number of invalid votes (mine? - I'm not even sure about the difference between Wikpedia & Wikimedia) on this page already demonstrates that tighter controls, and more clarity in the maze of bureaucracy is required.--Kudpung

      Eligible Rechecked - Kudpung checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

240.  Support Szymon Żywicki 08:26, 11 January 2010 (UTC) If it may improve Wiki, I agree.

      Eligible Rechecked - Szymon Żywicki checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

241.  Support -- Marcika 08:48, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Marcika checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

242.  Support Sounds reasonable. Any person in place of authority has the potential to abuse power; using that as a reason to deny power from existing is absurd. We can deal with those kinds of people if they happen to show up. Until that occurs, I fully support this. -- Mike | Contrib 09:01, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Mikekearn (Mike) checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

243.  Support quality control --penubag 09:12, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Penubag checked by (RT) 16:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

244.  Support Morgan May 09:24, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Zorblek (Morgan May) checked by (RT) 00:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

      Eligible Rechecked. Login account now unified - Zorblek (Morgan May) checked by (RT) 19:18, 16 February 2010 (UTC).

245. EMU CPA 10:02, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - EMU CPA checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

246. --Roo1812 10:09, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Roo1812 checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

247. --Thesupermat 10:11, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Thesupermat checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

248.  Support Lost Boy

      Eligible Rechecked - Lost Boy checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

249.  Support Ali1 10:48, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Ali1 checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

250.  Support --Vlad 10:52, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - no unified login, but link provided - Vlad checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

251.  Support --Wagusi

      Eligible Rechecked - no unified login, but link provided - Wagusi checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

252.  Support -- Cdinesh 11:00, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Cdinesh checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

253.  Support --风之清扬 11:14, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - 风之清扬 checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

254.  Support -- Maniago 11:28, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Maniago checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

255.  Support --Sverrir Mirdsson 12:58, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Sverrir Mirdsson checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

256.  Support <flrn> 13:38, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - FLrn checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

257.  Support Alpertron 13:45, 11 January 2010 (UTC). Definitely a help for stewards.

      Eligible Rechecked - Alpertron checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

258.  Support -- I propose a WikiProject to monitor the activity of the global sysops. This WikiProject could maintain a list of RSS feeds for all global sysops on all targeted wikis. This list could be available as a configuration file for some popular RSS readers. This would make it easy for anyone to monitor the global sysops, or a few of them. We could easily reach a ratio of 3 people to monitor each global sysops. Monitoring is very convenient using an RSS reader software. Nicolas1981 13:48, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Nicolas1981 checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

259.  Support Obelix 13:54, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Obelix checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

260.  Support --Markus Schulenburg 14:16, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Markus Schulenburg checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

261.  Support Njaelkies Lea 14:23, 11 January 2010 (UTC) Sounds good to me.

      Eligible Rechecked - Njaelkies Lea checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

262.  Support --Xkoalax 15:01, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Xkoalax checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

263.  Support --DerNews 15:05, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - DerNews checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

264.  Support --Alaniaris 16:31, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Alaniaris checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

265.  Support -- Good for the smaller wikis, but only until they can take care of themselves. A good process is needed to ensure that only users with proven records get the bit; any power can be abused, but that's no reason not to have it. 1ForTheMoney 16:39, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - no unified login, but link provided - 1ForTheMoney checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

266.  Support Tim Song 16:46, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Tim Song checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

267.  Support Good Idea. Why Not? --Der Messer 17:06, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Der Messer checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

268.  Support Good Idea. --Zabia 17:20, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Zabia checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

269.  Support I think that's a good idea. --Алексей Шиянов 17:44, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Алексей Шиянов checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

270.  Support Eloquant 17:54, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Eloquant checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

271.  Support PS11 18:00, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - PS11 checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

272.  Support --Lightsup55 ( T | C ) 18:08, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Lightsup55 checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

273. Yes --David1982m 18:19, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - David1982m checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support Larrikin 18:50, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

     Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 17:14, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

274.  Support Great idea, particularly for small wikis Cruccone 19:01, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Cruccone checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

275.  Support --NSH001 19:15, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - NSH001 checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

276.  Support Ytfc23 19:35, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Ytfc23 checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

277.  Support -- Tilmandralle 19:45, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Tilmandralle checked by (RT) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

278. --Inductor 19:51, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Inductor checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

279.  Support Absolutely. --Sovereign92 19:53, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Sovereign92 checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

280.  Support --Denis Barthel 20:25, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Denis Barthel checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

281.  Support --DrGaellon 20:28, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - DrGaellon checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

282.  Support --Abutkeev 20:56, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Abutkeev checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

283.  Support Kokorik It's a very good idea!

      Eligible Rechecked - Kokorik checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

284.  Support --Marianian 21:09, 11 January 2010 (UTC) This will be very useful when carefully used.

      Eligible Rechecked - Marianian checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

285.  Support --Aineias 21:38, 11 January 2010 (UTC), idea is o.k.

      Eligible Rechecked - Aineias checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

286.  Support -- raveman 21:42, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - vote actually by Hardcoreraveman (see evidence) who is entitled to vote (see here and also here) - Hardcoreraveman (raveman) checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

287.  Support --Paperoastro 21:48, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Paperoastro checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

288.  Support Though I think the removal section needs work to ensure dedicated vandals can't put together a small group that appears mistrustful and throw a big wrench in things. Staxringold 22:01, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - no unified login, but link provided - Staxringold checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

289.  Support --Marcl1984 22:12, 11 January 2010 (UTC) jup

      Eligible Rechecked - Marcl1984 checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

290.  Support --Oxguy3 22:15, 11 January 2010 (UTC) "Oh so observant, watch as the Wikipedian catches a bad sysop within moments of the admin's bad deed." P.S. 1044 is my lucky number!!!

      Eligible Rechecked - Oxguy3 checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

291. Xaura 22:26, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Xaura checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

292.  Support Now that I understood why that is needed, I've changed my mind. I'd still prefer opt-in (instead of opt-out) though. --Pberndt 22:30, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Pberndt checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

293.  Support --Echtner 22:32, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Echtner checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

294.  Support Enigmaman 22:41, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Enigmaman checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

295.  Support DidiWeidmann 22:49, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - DidiWeidmann checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

296.  Support --BloodDoll 22:50, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - BloodDoll checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support Vladimir.mencl 22:51, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

     [6]. – Innv | d | s: 00:54, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also here) - Vladimir.mencl checked by (RT) 14:13, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

297.  Support I must confess that I am dismayed that we need another layer of bureaucracy... but given that we do, I must support its creation, given the safeguards in place. Chazz 23:03, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Chazz checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

298.  Support --Majestic6 23:27, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Majestic6 checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

299.  Support --Ks0stm ^(T•C•G) 23:30, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Ks0stm checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

300.  Support - Davecrosby uk 00:20, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Davecrosby uk checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

301.  Support - Techman224^Talk 00:50, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Techman224 checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

302.  Support, with the understanding that at the slightest issue of abuse, this privilege will be removed. - Jmabel 01:06, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - no unified login, but link provided - Jmabel checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

303.  Support — Bdb484 01:14, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Bdb484 checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

304.  Support - Chris a Liege 02:10, 12 January 2010 (CET)

     ^ Ineligible to vote? --(RT) 02:26, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

     is eligible (name spells lowercase "l") Seb az86556 02:57, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - note correct username here - Chris a liege checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

305.  Support - Vinicius Lima 01:43, 12 January 2010 (UTC) I agree, we need more admins for Wiki

      Eligible Rechecked - Vinicius Lima checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

      Support - Ede11 02:56, 12 January 2010 (UTC) ok.

     Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 05:54, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

306.  Support – Adavidb 03:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Adavidb checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

307.  Support – Infrogmation 03:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Infrogmation checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

308.  Support – ageoflo 03:23, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Ageoflo checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

309. Support - Sounds good to me. -Royalguard11(Talk·@en) 03:30, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Royalguard11 checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

310.  Support - This will also, to some extent, help bridge the culture gap between different language projects. B Fizz 03:47, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - no unified login, but link provided - B Fizz checked by (RT) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

311.  Support. Hehe. Erwin Springer 03:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Erwin Springer checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

312.  Support - Because of all the languages. Chucky 04:07, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Chuck Marean (Chucky) checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

313.  Support - Not sure what I think of the 6 months before losing their position. Is this standard for an admin positions? Seems like it should be shorter. MetricSuperstar 04:22, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - MetricSuperstar checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

314.  Support --관인생략 05:20, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - 관인생략 checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

315.  Support Randalf 06:21, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Randalf checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

316.  Support G.A.S 07:16, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - G.A.S checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

317.  Support Someone stepped on my vote! Reechard 07:18, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Reechard checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

318.  Support I hate additional heirarchies. But things are getting too unweildy, too fast. These folks will need to be purer than Ceasar's wife, tho. David in DC 07:24, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - David in DC checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

319.  Support Get it done --Rembertbiemond 07:56, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Rembertbiemond checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

320. --Yaroslav Blanter 08:14, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Yaroslav Blanter checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

321. Ar son - Yeah, we definitely need this - Alison ^❤ 09:12, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Alison checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

322.  Support --Einmaliger 09:20, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Einmaliger checked by (RT) 00:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

      Eligible Rechecked. Login account now unified - Einmaliger checked by (RT) 14:31, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

323.  Support (criteria met with ENWP account) -- Sk8er5000 09:34, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Sk8er5000 checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

324.  Support Good idea! --MarkusZi 09:44, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - MarkusZi checked by (RT) 00:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

      Eligible Rechecked. Login account now unified - MarkusZi checked by (RT) 14:31, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

325.  Support --Phrontis 10:21, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Phrontis checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

326.  Support Yes, it sounds good. -- Sherenk 10:27, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Sherenk checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

327.  Support Sounds like a good idea to help out the younger Wikipedias. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 10:57, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Thejadefalcon checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

     200.211.91.140 11:26, 12 January 2010 (UTC) Ip don't vote. Alex Pereira ^falaê 11:32, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

328.  Support --Blackjogger 11:30, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Blackjogger checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

329.  Support Alex Pereira ^falaê 11:32, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Alexanderps (Alex Pereira) checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

330. Xico CLJ 11:35, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Xico CLJ checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

331. --Uwe Gille 11:50, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Uwe Gille checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

332.  Support Good idea! --JCAILLAT 11:53, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - JCAILLAT checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

333.  Support -- Flexman 12:02, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - no unified login, but link to Flexmaen on de wiki provided - Flexman checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

334.  Support Seems like a reasonable idea, with modification below --SteveMcCluskey 13:24, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - SteveMcCluskey checked by (RT) 00:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

      Eligible Rechecked. Login account now unified - SteveMcCluskey checked by (RT) 14:31, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

335.  Support makes perfect sense. Garkeith 13:28, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Garkeith checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

336.  Support Azmi1995 13:43, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Azmi1995 checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

337.  Support -- RacoonyRE 13:52, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - RacoonyRE checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

338.  Support --Zorglube 13:55, 12 January 2010 (UTC)--

      Eligible Rechecked - Zorglube checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

339.  Support There are enough admins on en.wiki who speak other languages to help out on sister wikis that need it. Throwaway85 14:06, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Throwaway85 checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

340.  Support --Jorunn 14:37, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Jorunn checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

341.  Support - If they can be trusted on one, they can be trusted on all! Set Sail For The Seven Seas 14:40, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Thesevenseas checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

342.  Support This sounds like a good idea. I support. --Jesant13 14:42, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Jesant13 checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

343.  Support SoWhy 15:07, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - SoWhy checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

344.  Support It's certainly worth a try. GreenGourd 15:23, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - GreenGourd checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

345.  Support --Lcawte 15:55, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Lcawte checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

346. --Quaro75 15:56, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

      Eligible Rechecked - Quaro75 checked by (RT) 19:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

LadyofShalott has contributed to a wiki which will be affected

Sounds reasonable. LadyofShalott 15:57, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - LadyofShalott checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

DeeMusil has contributed to a wiki which will be affected

 Support This will prevent abuse globally. Good is that it does not influence the local content --DeeMusil 16:24, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - no unified login, but links provided - DeeMusil checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support Benji 16:25, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Benjism89 (Benji) checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support --Aristeas 16:59, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Aristeas checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support I think there are individuals who can handle this responsibility; I know I could. David spector 17:39, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - David spector checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

Rsocol has contributed to a wiki which will be affected

 Support Especially useful for smaller projects (like wikinews, wikisource, etc) in languages other than english. Rsocol 18:14, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Rsocol checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support Angry bee 18:20, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Angry bee checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support Aye. But watch out for abuse. Horst Emscher 18:36, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

   Sorry, you are ineligible for voting. John Vandenberg 05:18, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also here) - Horst Emscher checked by (RT) 14:13, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

Bruno Leonard has contributed to a wiki which will be affected

 Support Bruno Leonard 18:41, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Bruno Leonard checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support but weak - what we need are "multi-project sysops" where multiple projects can band together and create a "multi-project sysop" with powers that stretch across just those projects. See #Proposal to amend wording #2 below. Davidwr/talk 18:43, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Davidwr checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support seems to be the lesser evil choice. Tavatar 19:08, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Tavatar checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

4. --Karl.Kirst 19:09, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Karl.Kirst checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support Message From Xenu 19:19, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Message From Xenu checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

6. --Jarhed 19:23, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

    Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Jarhed checked by (RT) 00:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

    Eligible Rechecked. Login account now unified - Jarhed checked by (RT) 14:31, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

7.  Support --Artur Weinhold 19:30, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

    Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Artur Weinhold checked by (RT) 00:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

    Eligible Rechecked. Login account now unified - Artur Weinhold checked by (RT) 19:18, 16 February 2010 (UTC).

8.  Strong support In any wiki-related project, there's always tons of vandalism and abuse, and never enough admins, sysops, or high-privelaged users to take action upon the vandals. --TrekCaptainUSA, English Wikipedia User

    Eligible Rechecked - TrekCaptainUSA checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support This makes sence. --85.180.166.79 20:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

   Please log in to vote. John Vandenberg 05:18, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

9. Sumurai8 20:07, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Sumurai8 checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

10.  Support it seems like a good idea--Mark0528 20:17, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Mark0528 checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

11.  Support - With the projects having the power to opt-out, I see no problem with this. Hello32020 20:49, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Hello32020 checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

Una giornata uggiosa '94 has contributed to a wiki which will be affected

 Support IMHO userful --Una giornata uggiosa '94 · So, what do you want to talk about? 20:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Una giornata uggiosa '94 checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support -- /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 21:02, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - MWOAP checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support Chris-marsh-usa 21:04, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

    Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Chris-marsh-usa checked by (RT) 00:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

    Eligible Rechecked. Login account now unified - Chris-marsh-usa checked by (RT) 19:18, 16 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support Sam8 21:13, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Sam8 checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support Greyskinnedboy 21:56, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Greyskinnedboy checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

Jisis has contributed to a wiki which will be affected

 Support --Jisis 22:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Jisis checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support Tarheelcoxn 22:28, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Tarheelcoxn checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support Cactus007 22:32, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Cactus007 checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support Gentgeen 23:21, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Gentgeen checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support Miyagawa 23:27, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Miyagawa checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

6.  Support My comments are in TALK page --Tombaker321 23:33, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Tombaker321 checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

7.  Support Dusti 23:34, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Dusti checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

8.  Support PdebartPdebart 00:45, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - no unified login, but links provided - Pdebart checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

Stepro has contributed to a wiki which will be affected

--Stepro 01:03, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Stepro checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support RadManCF 01:08, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - RadManCF checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support Robinbanerji 01:11, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

   [7]. – Innv | d | s: 03:57, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also here) - Robinbanerji checked by (RT) 15:03, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support The hunter1986 01:14, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - The hunter1986 checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

Joaquín Martínez Rosado has contributed to a wiki which will be affected

YES. --Joaquín Martínez Rosado 01:37, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Joaquín Martínez Rosado checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

2. I agree Raktop 01:40, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Raktop checked by (RT) 21:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support More hands for maintenance is a good thing. Smokizzy (talk) 01:43, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Smokizzy checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support December21st2012Freak 01:59, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - December21st2012Freak checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support DoubleAW 02:02, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - DoubleAW checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

Nihonjoe has contributed to a wiki which will be affected

 Support I think this will be a useful safety net. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 02:57, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Nihonjoe checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

MER-C has contributed to a wiki which will be affected

Sure. MER-C 03:25, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - MER-C checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support --Edwod2001 03:31, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

   [8]. – Innv | d | s: 03:46, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked and reinstated. At the time of voting had been registered for 3 months, and had about 1663 edits on es.wikipedia (see here) - Edwod2001 checked by (RT) 19:11, 15 February 2010 (UTC).

Torin has contributed to a wiki which will be affected

 Support --Torin 04:12, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Torin checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support Jptwo 04:39, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Jptwo checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support Sbb 05:48, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Sbb checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

Tilman Berger has contributed to a wiki which will be affected

 Support --Tilman Berger 05:55, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Tilman Berger checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support Marc Gabriel Schmid

   Voted added by IP user. -Barras ^talk 15:56, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked. Voted whilst not logged in (see evidence); no vote by Marc Gabriel Schmid recorded (see here) - 89.206.81.112, Marc Gabriel Schmid checked by (RT) 16:29, 13 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support Xionbox 08:16, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Xionbox checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support JonathanWinarske 09:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - JonathanWinarske checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

Werdna has contributed to a wiki which will be affected

 Support Werdna 09:15, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Werdna checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

Volkov has contributed to a wiki which will be affected

 Support This might be very helpful for small-sized wiki-projects. --Volkov 09:39, 13 January 2010 (UTC), sysop @ ru-wiki

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Volkov checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

Saschaporsche has contributed to a wiki which will be affected

 Support --Saschaporsche 10:01, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Saschaporsche checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

Jan Friberg is a sysop on a wiki which will be affected

 Support --Jan Friberg 10:18, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Jan Friberg checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support Foux 10:19, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Foux checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support --Root66 10:59, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Root66 checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support — I have delayed voting to see what the other side says – having read their reasons I can see no compelling reasons not to support this. Saga City 11:15, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Saga City checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support 11:30, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

   The preceding unsigned vote is by Pymouss --(RT) 05:20, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Pymouss checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

Ftkurt has contributed to a wiki which will be affected

 Support--.ftkurt..⍌. 12:02, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Ftkurt checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support - I think this is an excellent idea. It is frustrating to see vandalisers not being blocked for a while because of a backlog. This would help do this quicker before more pages have been vandalised. Neutralle 12:29, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

   Sorry, you are ineligible for voting. John Vandenberg 05:18, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also here)) - Neutralle checked by (RT) 15:03, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support ChrisHodgesUK 12:51, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - ChrisHodgesUK checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

Sk Rapid Wien has contributed to a wiki which will be affected

 Support --Sk Rapid Wien 13:57, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Sk Rapid Wien checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support Lionel Elie Mamane 14:01, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Lionel Elie Mamane checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support Khoyobegenn 14:05, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Khoyobegenn checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support --Cho M.cher 14:20, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Cho M.cher checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support More policemen might not imply a more peaceful world, but perhaps thats one of the better things we can do :) --Anoopkn 14:39, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Anoopkn checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

6.  Support Given the significant proportion of interwiki vandalism, such a measure should have been implemented sooner. Yet, better later than never… Alexander Doria 14:41, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Alexander Doria checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

George Chernilevsky has contributed to a wiki which will be affected

 Support --George Chernilevsky 14:45, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - George Chernilevsky checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

Notnd has contributed to a wiki which will be affected

 Support --Notnd 14:53, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Notnd checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

2. --Mayer Bruno 14:58, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Mayer Bruno checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support On the provision that any misuse is treated with appropriate severity Topperfalkon 15:09, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Topperfalkon checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

Alno is a sysop on a wiki which will be affected

 Support as such global admins will help reducing trivial vandalism on small projects. -- AlNo (talk) 15:39, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Alno checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support I can only agree with the above. --Tomalak geretkal 15:47, 13 January 2010 (UTC) 15:47, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Tomalak geretkal checked by (RT) 21:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support Kirikou 16:08, 13 January 2010 (UTC).

    Eligible Rechecked - Kirikou checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support ElCharismo 16:14, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - ElCharismo checked by (RT) 16:04, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

    Not eligible Links between wiki accounts are unproven, so cannot verify eligibility to vote - a unified account or a link from Meta user page was required for identification - ElCharismo checked by (RT) 17:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support Mesphito 16:19, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Mesphito checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support Bubinator 16:32, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Bubinator checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

6.  Support --Haneburger 16:34, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Haneburger checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

7.  Support Ruhrfisch 16:50, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Ruhrfisch checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

8.  Support Inclusivedisjunction 17:23, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Inclusivedisjunction checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Lajsikonik is a sysop on a wiki which will be affected

 Support Lajsikonik 17:35, 13 January 2010 (UTC) Czamu ńy? Ńy zawadźi jak u nos globalne admińistratory bydům dować blokady lo wandalůw a roztomajtych chacharůw. I tak byda wszyjsko widźoł we logach a podźyrańu wyćepanych zajtůw.

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Lajsikonik checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support --Dirkpetsch 17:49, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Dirkpetsch checked by (RT) 16:04, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

    Eligible Rechecked. Login account now unified - Dirkpetsch checked by (RT) 14:31, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support As long as the persons given the power are tightly monitored, a lot of power to be given away but I believe it is a step in the right direction. Sirkad 18:43, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Sirkad checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support generated1183

   User is not eligible for voting. – Innv | d | s: 00:34, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked. Vote was by QASIMARA (see evidence), who did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also also here) - QASIMARA checked by (RT) 15:03, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support RJC 20:03, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - RJC checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support D-Rock 20:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - no unified login, but link provided - D-Rock checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

6.  Support --Egrian 20:41, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Egrian checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Zimin.V.G. has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support --Zimin.V.G. 20:45, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Zimin.V.G. checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Nolispanmo has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support --Nolispanmo 20:49, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Nolispanmo checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support --Johannes Götte 23:36, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Johannes Götte checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support Elkelon 20:54, 13 Janury 2010 (UTC)

    Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Elkelon checked by (RT) 16:04, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

    Eligible Rechecked. Login account now unified - Elkelon checked by (RT) 14:31, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support --Bduke 21:08, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Bduke checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

5. Bigmantonyd 21:13, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Bigmantonyd checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

DaSch has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support --DaSch 21:49, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - DaSch checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support If it helps... Yes --Amada44 22:22, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Amada44 checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support Sounds quite usefull. --Akrause91 22:35, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Akrause91 checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support If people are trustworthy and willing to help, I don't see why not. Jason L. Gohlke 23:14, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Jason L. Gohlke checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support The Arbiter 23:19, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - The Arbiter checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

6.  Support Haseo9999 00:11, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Haseo9999 checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

7.  Support Anything that helps to rid the project of trolls and vandals. David A 00:12, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

    Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - David A checked by (RT) 16:04, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

    Eligible Rechecked. Login account now unified - David A checked by (RT) 14:44, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

Pulsar may have contributed to kawiki, which will be affected, however that account is not unified

 Support Pulsar 00:20, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Pulsar checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support Seems like a good idea. Lambdoid 00:33, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Lambdoid checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support -- Don't see why not... -- Whaatt 00:42, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Whaatt checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support Ryan Postlethwaite 00:43, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

   You have already voted. John Vandenberg 02:37, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

4.  Support Joshuaingram 01:04, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Joshuaingram checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Bubamara is a sysop on a wiki which will be affected

 Support --Bubamara 01:32, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Bubamara checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support TheTechFan 01:44, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - TheTechFan checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Marek69 is a sysop on a wiki which will be affected

 Support -- Marek.69 ^talk 01:53, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Marek69 checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support--Alain Darles 02:42, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

   Sorry, you are ineligible for voting. John Vandenberg 05:18, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - is the same as Alain.Darles (link provided and see here), who is entitled to vote - Alain Darles checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support It has enough positive potential that I'd like to see it in action. Sistermonkey 02:49, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

   Sorry, you are ineligible for voting. John Vandenberg 05:18, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also here) - Sistermonkey checked by (RT) 15:27, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support Continuous improvement ist always good! -- PDCA 02:54, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - PDCA checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support PokeYourHeadOff 03:27, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - PokeYourHeadOff checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support Freshacconci 03:44, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Freshacconci checked by (RT) 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

6.  Support --Stormie 04:26, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - no unified login, but link provided - Stormie checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

7.  Support--Hammy64000 04:30, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Hammy64000 checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

8.  Support This is a good idea! David290 04:37, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - David290 checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

9.  Support Go!--Cerejota 06:26, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Cerejota checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

10.  Support - this should allow small wiki projects to have the benifits from being part of the large super-project. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:47, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Od Mishehu checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

11.  Support - as long as the given rules are followed regarding avoiding potential conflict of interest, POV pushing, abuses of power... it should be OK Mjharrison 09:19, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Mjharrison checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

12.  SupportAjcheema 10:30, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Ajcheema checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

    --Wanderer777 13:07, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible for voting. John Vandenberg 05:18, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also here) - Wanderer777 checked by (RT) 15:27, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

13.  Support Xfigpower (yak yak) 13:12, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Xfigpower checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

14.  Support Yzmo 13:20, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Rechecked - Yzmo checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Jo Shigeru has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support Jo Shigeru 14:03, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Jo Shigeru checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Castelobranco has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support (I hope there will be no conflict between local and global sysops...) CasteloBranco^msg 14:35, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Castelobranco checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support Sephia karta 15:50, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Sephia karta checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support If they are trusted in one wiki, they should be trusted in all.Nmajdan 17:09, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Nmajdan checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

4. The limitations seem strict enough that it looks like global sysops will not be able to cause any problems on any wikis on which they aren't needed. --Cyde Weys 18:20, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Cyde (Cyde Weys) checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support --Eabadal 18:55, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

    Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Eabadal checked by (RT) 16:04, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

    Eligible Rechecked. Login account now unified - Eabadal checked by (RT) 18:03, 17 February 2010 (UTC).

Amikeco is a sysop at one on a wiki which will be affected

Support Some people here commented that an active Wikipedia should have enough local admins, but even a somewhat active writing community may lack a person with required knowledge and desire to administrate. Also, when there are, say, 3 admins in a smaller wiki, there is a large probability they will all be absent during several days. Amikeco 20:47, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Amikeco checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support Hires an editor 21:04, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Hires an editor checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Seb35 has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support ~ Seb35 21:16, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Seb35 checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support Yes in principle but concerned somewhat about abuse of power. Perhaps a test of the system could be trialled on a limited basis first? Antarctic-adventurer 21:25, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Antarctic-adventurer checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Feydey has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support Seems like a good idea. feydey 21:41, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Feydey checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support Good idea. Andrewrhchen 22:46, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Andrewrhchen checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support. Yes we can. Joe9320 23:28, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Joe9320 checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support Jordan Brown 00:37, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Jordan Brown checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Jpatokal has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support Jpatokal 02:02, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Jpatokal checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 02:26, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - SuperHamster checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Magicknight94 has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support--Lê 03:09, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible Rechecked - Magicknight94 (Lê) checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support More stewards are needed, yes, but there is a higher required standard for steward selection, especially given the potential damage that a steward can cause versus that of a global sysop. Having a larger pool of people willing and able to handle obvious vandalism alone is worth implementing this proposal. I'd encourage people to reconsider opposes based on inability to understand the local language: Stewards don't understand all the local languages now, and yet manage to assist these projects in adminstrative duties. Kylu 04:20, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Kylu checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support --VS ^talk 04:33, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - VirtualSteve (VS) checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support Mark.s.shaw 05:05, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Mark.s.shaw checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support Pjr 05:11, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Vote made whilst logged in as Petri (see here) who is ineligible (see here and also here). No link provided to eligible Pjr account - Pjr (Petri) checked by (RT) 18:12, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support Mkubica 05:28, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Mkubica checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

6.  Support Lemonsawdust 05:55, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Lemonsawdust checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

7.  Support This might be what is needed to keep these smaller wiki's going. --Kraftlos 05:59, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Kraftlos checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

8.  Support Captain panda 06:40, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Captain panda checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

9.  Support --Skenmy ^talk 07:54, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Skenmy checked by (RT) 16:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

10.  Support--MaulYoda 08:21, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

     Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - MaulYoda checked by (RT) 19:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

     Eligible Rechecked. Login account now unified - MaulYoda checked by (RT) 14:44, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

11.  Support -Vcelloho 11:05, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Vcelloho checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

12.  Support Needed before. Szalakóta 12:00, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Meets eligibility criteria; no unified login, but link provided - Szalakóta checked by (RT) 22:33, 18 February 2010 (UTC).

13.  Support Paul2387 14:31, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Paul2387 checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

14.  Support Claymore 15:49, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Claymore checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

15.  Support ShinePhantom 16:03, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - ShinePhantom checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

16.  Support--Mstislavl 16:36, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Mstislavl checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

17.  Support DigitalCatalyst 16:59, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - DigitalCatalyst checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

18.  Support -- Ra'ike 17:21, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Ra'ike checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

19.  Support I should be like a giving a general key to the cleaning team. At the bigger amounts of vandalism I am seeing all time when editing or inspecting histories a joint defense is something that I have no doubt it can be beneficial. We are all only "departments" of a big company. I hope the critical companions got it. --Alexander.stohr 18:40, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Alexander.stohr checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

20.  Support I'm satisfied that the opt provisions are robust enough that there is little danger of overiding local autonomy. -- Xymmax 18:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Xymmax checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

21.  Support I believe this is a worthwhile attempt, and possible solution. Naturalnumber 19:00, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Meets eligibility criteria; no unified login, but link provided - Naturalnumber checked by (RT) 22:33, 18 February 2010 (UTC).

22.  Support Due to the fact that more and more articles and edits have to be controlled this could be a solution. --Gruhland 20:17, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Gruhland checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

23.  Support Globalknowlage needs globalsysobs. HBR 20:35, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - HBR checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

24.  Support Good idea...these issues have come up a lot Alphachimp 20:56, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Alphachimp checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

25.  Support This is an idea whose time has certainly come. Strongest possible support. Ginsengbomb 23:35, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Ginsengbomb checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

26.  Support A proposal that will greatly enhance cross-wiki collaboration. Perfect Proposal 00:28, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Perfect Proposal checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

27.  Support However, I wish to make it a requirement that any potential global sysops be an op in an wiki before nomination. SYSS Mouse 00:44, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - SYSS Mouse checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

28.  Support --Brandsen 02:03, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Brandsen checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

29.  Support Guusbosman 02:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Guusbosman checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

30.  Support Dweekly 02:13, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Dweekly checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

31.  Support Theshowmecanuck 05:38, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Theshowmecanuck checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Botsad 10:25, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

     Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Botsad checked by (RT) 19:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

     Not eligible Links between wiki accounts are unproven, so cannot verify eligibility to vote - a unified account or a link from Meta user page was required for identification - Botsad checked by (RT) 17:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

32.  Support --Yowuza 11:47, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Yowuza checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

33.  Support -- Axyjo 14:06, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Axyjo checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

34.  Support Altes 14:58, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Altes checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

35.  Support Vziel 18:44, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

     Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Vziel checked by (RT) 19:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

     Eligible Rechecked. Login account now unified - Vziel checked by (RT) 11:31, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

36.  Support SWMNPoliSciProject Positive addition to overall wiki structure and management. Stewards should strictly monitor for and control any abuse situations. Maybe eventually implement regular elections for same. 19:18, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - SWMNPoliSciProject checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

37.  Support Роман Беккер 17:47, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Роман Беккер checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

38.  Support rubin16 18:15, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Rubin16 checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

39.  Support –Saruwine 18:34, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Saruwine checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support--Samuelwn 19:38, 16 January 2010 (UTC) Great idea- Would allow users whom have shown a history of trustworthy maintenance over the site to further their influence. Viva la Wiki!

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You have not been registered for at least 3 months. --(RT) 04:46, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

40.  Support Jimcripps 20:14, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Jimcripps checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

41.  Support Tristan Liardon

     Eligible - Tristan Liardon checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

42.  Support --SPKirsch 20:36, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - SPKirsch checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

43.  Support --BRG 21:35, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - BRG checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

44.  Support -- pity I don't have the time to help right now though Agathoclea 21:58, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Agathoclea checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Zwilson14 22:08, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

    Duplicate vote (Sorry, you have already voted on 7 January) --(RT) 03:47, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

45.  Support Sebletoulousain 23:27, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Sebletoulousain checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

46.  Support -- OscarPremium 22:44, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - OscarPremium checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

47.  Support -- Gulmammad 23:55, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Gulmammad checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

48.  Support -- KevinCuddeback 02:55, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - KevinCuddeback checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

49.  Support -- MIKADO,Sakura (御門桜) 03:04, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - 御門桜 (MIKADO,Sakura) checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

50.  Support -- Arenlor 04:31, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Arenlor checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

51.  Support -- The time has come... TRosenbaum 05:47, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - TRosenbaum checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support <--Kargin Kargin 05:59, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 04:53, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

52.  Support -- Reiknir 07:20, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Reiknir checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

Piisamson has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support -- Piisamson 10:57, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Piisamson checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support It appears that the safeguards built into this proposal are sound. -- Kushal one 11:29, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Kushal one checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support --Franco56 13:00, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Franco56 checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support --UrLunkwill 13:07, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - UrLunkwill checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support --Loupeter 17:35, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Loupeter checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

6.  Support -- EOZyo 18:48, 17 January 2010 (UTC) It could help to control some other despotic wikis

    Eligible - EOZyo checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

7.  Support -- AroundTheGlobe 19:00, 17 January 2010 (UTC) We need more manpower that has "power"!

    Eligible - AroundTheGlobe checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

8.  Support It's about time we got something like this. Mendaliv 20:06, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Mendaliv checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

9.  Support -- Jan Sende 20:30, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Jan Sende checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

10.  Support -- Mglovesfun 21:03, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Mglovesfun checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

11.  Support -- CardinalDan 21:13, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - CardinalDan checked by (RT) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support -- --Awaler 22:16, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

     Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Awaler checked by (RT) 19:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

     Not eligible Links between wiki accounts are unproven, so cannot verify eligibility to vote - a unified account or a link from Meta user page was required for identification - Awaler checked by (RT) 17:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

12.  Support Andrei Romanenko 03:34, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Андрей Романенко (Andrei Romanenko) checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

13.  Support --ArnoldReinhold 04:16, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - ArnoldReinhold checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

14.  Support -- Aaronchall 04:46, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Aaronchall checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

15.  Support --Ytrottier 04:54, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Ytrottier checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

16.  Support -- Rohan nog 05:50, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Rohan nog checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

17.  Support -- FAThomssen 09:06, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - FAThomssen checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

18. --Scorpion-811 11:18, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Scorpion-811 checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

19.  Support, but the global sysops should meet strict requirements (stricter than the usual admins), since working on a foreign wiki is a great responsibility not everyone can handle. --Cvz1 12:00, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Cvz1 checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

20.  Support. However I do not believe that a large number of g. sysops will be appointed (judging by the number of global rollbackers). Ruslik 12:50, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Ruslik0 (Ruslik) checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

21. В принципе, дело полезное. Только ни в коем случае не давайте такой флаг администраторам из русской Википедии.--Agent001 13:45, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Agent001 checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

22.  Support -- Chstdu 13:55, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Chstdu checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

23.  Support -- -RF- 14:17, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - -RF- checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

24.  Support -- xaosflux ^Talk 14:51, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Xaosflux checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

25.  Support. It will help revive some projects with few contributors.Andrei Stroe 15:11, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Andrei Stroe checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

26.  Support -- AKA MBG 16:02, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - AKA MBG checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

27.  Support. Makes sense and will help small projects. Evolve75 18:13, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Evolve75 checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

28.  Support.Ryangiggs69 19.08, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Ryangiggs69 checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

29.  Support Rinfanaiel 22:06, 18 January 2010 (UTC)Δ

     Eligible - Rinfanaiel checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

30.  Support Smartse 00:53, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Smartse checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

31.  Support CmaccompH89 03:40, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - CmaccompH89 checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

32.  Support Williamborg 03:55, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Williamborg checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

33.  Support --Sum 04:26, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Sum checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

34.  Support --Hintswen 05:35, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Hintswen checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

35.  Support. If only in case of real need and not as a local sysop. As they will not have checkuser access, there will be more users on vandalism combat, but the number of users with access to private log will keep the same.Teles ^{(talk / pt-wiki talk)} 05:59, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Teles checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

36.  Support Я только ЗА. Roma pi 08:14, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Roma pi checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

37.  Support John-vogel 08:42, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - John-vogel checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

38.  Support Sounds like a great plan. Keep on wiking Wikipedia, and get rid of abusers. Borninlyoko 11:52, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Borninlyoko checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

Vinhtantran has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Support Small wikis will have benefits from this policies. Tân (talk) 11:57, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Vinhtantran (Tân) checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support As long as local sysops can override global sysops if they wish. ...Aurora... 13:43, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Aurora checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support Visible Light 14:13, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Visible Light checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support Tckma 17:23, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Tckma checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support Airplaneman ^talk 18:09, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Airplaneman checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

6.  Support --V2k 21:11, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - V2k checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support Yeah!!! --MisterWiki (talk) 22:28, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

   Duplicate vote (You already voted on 1 January) --(RT) 12:22, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

7.  Support commons and svwiki user Korall under global account name --Passion4carrots 23:20, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Passion4carrots checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

8.  Support It will be very useful --Dima io 01:39, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Dima io checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

9.  SupportCenya95 Cenya95 02:44, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Cenya95 checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

10.  Support Explanation is in my crossed-out oppose !vote below. (Thanks to those who replied to me to answer my objection.) -- Soap 03:00, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Soap checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Shashank Reddy.P Good luck Wikipedia, we are there for you...! 3:34, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 04:40, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

     Support Sreed888 03:40, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Sreed888 checked by (RT) 17:16, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

11.  Support --Seidalex 08:54, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

     Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Seidalex checked by (RT) 19:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

     Eligible Rechecked. Login account now unified - Seidalex checked by (RT) 14:31, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

12.  Support Because there's a problem: cross-wiki vandals, and this is the solution folks I respect advocate. I feel that if a project can't find enough volunteers to accept admin rights on their own, the project should be frozen. But a small set of admins with advanced vandal-fighting tools and skills wielded cross-wiki makes sense. I guess this grants this group sufficient rights without making them stewards.--Elvey 09:17, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Elvey checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

13.  Support --Steffen 10:31, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Steffen checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

14.  Support --Xqt 15:51, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Xqt checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

15.  Support -- Asr 15:52, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

     Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Asr checked by (RT) 19:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

     Eligible Rechecked. Login account now unified and link provided - Asr checked by (RT) 14:31, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

16.  Support Matvilho 17:49, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Matvilho checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

17.  Support --Masz 19:01, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Masz checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

18.  Support --Airon90 19:34, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Airon90 checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

19.  Support - seems like a good idea.--Labattblueboy 21:03, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Labattblueboy checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

20.  Support --AJH16 16:27, 20 January 2010 (EST)

     Eligible Vote by Ajh16 (see evidence) who is entitled to vote (see here) - Ajh16 (AJH16) checked by (RT) 19:18, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

21.  Support --Bettercom 21:37, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Bettercom checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

22.  Support --Parent5446 21:56, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Parent5446 checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support --HansM 22:05, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

    You are not eligible for voting (150+ edits required). – Innv | d | s: 03:57, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Rechecked. At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see also here) - HansM checked by (RT) 15:27, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

23.  Support --Enti342 03:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Enti342 checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

24.  Support — I figure if we allow editors to have the power to grant and remove sysop status on any Wiki, then a Global Sysop access level shouldn't be too much of a stretch. Master&Expert 04:38, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Master&Expert checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

25.  Support -- I support the proposal. As wikipedia keeps growing new approaches are needed to combat vandalism. Unified login will make this proposal even more important (in regard to cross-wiki vandalism). Dylansmrjones 05:23, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Dylansmrjones checked by (RT) 17:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

26.  Support -- Seems to be a logical proposal. Ecw.technoid.dweeb 16:18, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Ecw.technoid.dweeb checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

27.  Support --Warionm 18:02, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Warionm checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

28.  Support It will be help for small wikis. MaxiMaxiMax 18:22, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Maximaximax checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

29.  Support –Mucus™ 18:57, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Mucus™ checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

30.  Support- Uri afanasevshirocov™

     Eligible - Uri afanasevshirocov checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

31.  Support – GreenZmiy 19:41, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - GreenZmiy checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

32.  Support – Flyguy649 19:59, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Flyguy649 checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

33.  Support – Kijek93 22:12, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Kijek93 checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

34. Okay, might be necessary. –-Wolf-Dieter 22:26, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Wolf-Dieter checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

35.  Support - Frederic 22:49, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Meets eligibility criteria; no unified login, but link provided - Frederic checked by (RT) 22:33, 18 February 2010 (UTC).

36.  Support Siebrand 23:01, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Siebrand checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

37.  Support Edonovan 00:48, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Edonovan checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

38.  Support Talkstosocks 01:07, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Meets eligibility criteria; no unified login, but link provided - Talkstosocks checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

39.  Support I've read through the objections and agree with many of them. The problem is, I see a real problem here, and even if this isn't an ideal solution, I don't think that wishing and hoping that the problem goes away is a viable strategy. - AyaK 01:33, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - AyaK checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

40.  Support Seems reasonable. Elekhh 06:08, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Elekhh checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

41.  Support I fully agree that such a proposal would be extremely helpful.

     Eligible Unsigned vote is by Tdxiang (see evidence) who is eligible (see here and also here) - Tdxiang checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

Nahum is a Beurocrat on one wiki which may be affected

 Support If a project feels this is unnecessary or counter-productive, they can opt-out. I se no harm in this proposal and lots of potential good. -- Nahum 11:47, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Nahum checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support sounds reasonable --Klaeren 11:50, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Klaeren checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support --Mazbln 12:24, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Mazbln checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support Greenman 12:39, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Greenman checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support | I agree - it's reasonable. I care for small wikis. I hope that those global sysops who shall be elected will do their jobs HONESTLY. - Kampfgruppe 13:55, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Kampfgruppe checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

6.  Support - Shureg 14:46, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Shureg checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

7.  Support - Gracz54 15:31, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Gracz54 checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

8.  Support - Conny 16:24, 22 January 2010 (UTC).

    Eligible - Conny checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

9.  Support - Terloup2 17:38, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Terloup2 checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

10.  Support → Moipaulochon ☎ ← 17:41, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Moipaulochon checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support - Tim Ross (talk) 19:10, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

    Duplicate vote (Sorry, you have already voted on 8 January) --(RT) 03:43, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

11.  Support - Chartinael 22:51, 22 January 2010 (UTC) Just don't forget to provide for checks and balances

     Eligible - Chartinael checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

12.  Support --Ixfd64 22:52, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Ixfd64 checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

13.  Support --Bff 23:34, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Bff checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

14. --DENker 23:47, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - DENker checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

15.  Support Kbh3rd 06:12, 23 January 2010 (UTC) - Vandalism is the problem of Wikipedia.

     Eligible - Kbh3rd checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

16.  Support Local contributor 07:45, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Local contributor checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

17. Yup --Sankarip 08:36, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Sankarip checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

18.  SupportVolt4ire 15:35, 23 January 2010 (UTC) seems reasonable

     Eligible - Volt4ire checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

19.  Support This proposal is beneficial to wikipedia. --Winhunter 15:48, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Winhunter checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

20.  Support Yarl 17:50, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Yarl checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

21.  Support I think it's very reasonable. Panther991 18:42, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Panther991 checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

22.  Support No big deal...go for it. Seth Whales 20:23, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Seth Whales checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

23.  Support si ayuda a terminar con el vandalismo, adelante.

    The preceding unsigned vote is by Roquemontoya --(RT) 05:08, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Roquemontoya checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

24.  Support Into it. Improves database control.--MichaelProcton 23:02, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - MichaelProcton checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

25.  Support: This seems like an excellent idea to me. -- IRP ☎ 23:22, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - IRP checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

26.  Support --Dispe 00:06, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Dispe checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

27. --Valentim 01:50, 24 January 2010 (UTC) Positive effects clearly outweigh negative effects.

     Eligible - Valentim checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

Gadfium is a sysop on mi: which is an affected wiki

 Support -Gadfium 05:52, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Gadfium checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support Shubinator 06:10, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Shubinator checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support --Mahatee 10:10, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Mahatee checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support Simo ubuntu 13:40, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Simo ubuntu checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support EtäKärppä 15:28, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - EtäKärppä checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

6.  Support --Djuneyt tr 18:48, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Djuneyt tr checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support Useful for small Wikis. — Jagro (cs.wiki) 18:55, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

   Duplicate vote (Sorry, you have already voted on 9 January) --(RT) 03:38, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

7.  Support RuB 18:57, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - RuB checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

8.  Support for the same reasons as Kbh3rd. --Crossman33 19:52, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Crossman33 checked by (RT) 23:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

9.  Support NBS 20:21, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - NBS checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

10.  Support Chirlu 23:58, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Chirlu checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

11.  Support Finn Rindahl 00:22, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Finnrind (Finn Rindahl) checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

12.  Support Zatoichi26 01:48, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

     Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Zatoichi26 checked by (RT) 19:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

     Eligible Rechecked. Login account now unified - Zatoichi26 checked by (RT) 14:44, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

13.  Support Mrrightguy10

     Eligible - Mrrightguy10 checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

14.  Support [[SeanJA 06:46, 25 January 2010 (UTC)]]

     Eligible - SeanJA checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

15.  Support Lars Ola Eide 08:35, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Lars Ola Eide checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

16.  Support Torinir 08:58, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

     Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Torinir checked by (RT) 19:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

     Eligible Rechecked. Login account now unified - Torinir checked by (RT) 14:44, 14 February 2010 (UTC).

17.  Support This will probably make things easier. I do not share the fears of the opposers. Absolute freedom and power-less structures are overrated. At least for a serious international encyclopedic project. Michbich 10:01, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Michbich checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

    The projects included in this mostly already have a functional power structure, and the majority of them are not encyclopedic projects. They include dictionaries and transcription projects, where there is extremely little cause for dispute, and consequently very few persistant vandals who have a bone to pick. John Vandenberg 12:35, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

18.  SupportChristopher1968 12:11, 25 January 2010 (UTC), As long as it works, we have people we can trust, and we can vote to change things if it doesn't work.

     Eligible - Christopher1968 checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

19.  Support User:Etore.Santos

     Eligible - Etore.Santos checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

20. Roger360 14:38, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Roger360 checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Spartanbu 15:26, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

    Duplicate vote (Sorry, you have already voted on 8 January) --(RT) 03:31, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

21.  Support Lewenstein 19:02, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Lewenstein checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

22. WS62 19:47, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - WS62 checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

23.  Support Ronhjones 21:46, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Ronhjones checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support MarkusZi 22:48, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

    Duplicate vote (Sorry, you have already voted on 12 January) --(RT) 03:28, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

24. RonaldB 01:24, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - RonaldB checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

25.  Support --NukeOperator 09:51, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - NukeOperator checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

26.  Support Sponge 10:15, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Sponge checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

27.  Support --Creeper 12:39, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Creeper checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

28.  Support downloadmeh 16:42, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Downloadmeh checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

29.  Support J Raghu 16:52, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - J Raghu checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

30.  Support --Kmw2700 18:47, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Kmw2700 checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

31. Vernanimalcula 19:40, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Vernanimalcula checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

32.  Support --Mmaxx 20:22, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Mmaxx checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

33.  Support I can't see any rational reason to oppose. It strikes me that the oppose voters are showing a good bit of reflexive anti-authoritatian paranoia. RGTraynor 00:42, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - RGTraynor checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

34.  Support Zvika 06:21, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Zvika checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

35.  Support Zuse 08:07, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Zuse checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

36. --Stefan64 10:47, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Stefan64 checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

37.  Support -- Tofra ^Talk _{contributions} 12:00, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Tofra checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

     SupportEseki 13:54, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 04:33, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

38.  SupportFkmd 14:01, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Fkmd checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

39.  SupportIf you have this idea (that I don't really understand because I don't know the adminitration), it's because you need it (you know that better than me...) 5 desperate 15:01, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - 5 desperate checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

40.  Support --Lerdsuwa 15:03, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Lerdsuwa checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

41.  Support--Neduvelilmathew 17:05, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Neduvelilmathew checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

42.  Support--Alex S.H. Lin 18:26, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Alexsh (Alex S.H. Lin) checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support--CB 18:27, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

    Sorry, you are ineligible (see here and also here). You need a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project. --(RT) 04:25, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

43.  Support Alanmaher 20:23, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Alanmaher checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

44.  Support D82 22:07, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - D82 checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

45.  Support Dglynch 22:24, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Dglynch checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

46.  Support Dedalus 22:38, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Dedalus checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

47.  Support Kleuske 23:25, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Kleuske checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

48.  Support Kirrages 00:24, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Kirrages checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

49.  Support If it strengthens and improves pro-social functions of and within Wikimedia projects, I concur. But one cannot allow some forms of social dynamic to develop unchecked, so checks-and-balances are of course essential. Wotnow 06:03, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Wotnow checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

50.  Support --kuvaly|d|p| 12:48, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Kuvaly checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

51. Armagedon^Discussão 15:49, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Armagedon checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support This is a good idea, but it seems to be a killer group if they dont have a any limit. Goostaw 16:53, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

     Note Rechecked. No unified login (see here) - link on user page is needed to verify eligibility to vote - Goostaw checked by (RT) 19:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

     Not eligible Links between wiki accounts are unproven, so cannot verify eligibility to vote - a unified account or a link from Meta user page was required for identification - Goostaw checked by (RT) 17:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

52.  Support Nunobaton 17:09, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Nunobaton checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

53.  Support Kinhull 18:30, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Kinhull checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

54.  Support --Quartermaster 19:13, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Quartermaster checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

55.  Support Purplebackpack89 19:42, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Purplebackpack89 checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

56.  Support Phil13 20:51, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Phil13 checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

57.  Support -- gildemax 21:22, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Gildemax checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

58.  Support PBona 21:35, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Pierre Bona (PBona) checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

59.  Support -- Optimus Pryme 21:54, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Optimus Pryme checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

60.  Support UninvitedCompany 22:00, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - UninvitedCompany checked by (RT) 00:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

61.  Support --Stuttgart1950 22:35, 28 January 2010 (UTC)Stuttgart1950

     Eligible - Stuttgart1950 checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

62.  Support RandorXeus 23:24, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - RandorXeus checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

63.  Support --Xander89 23:56, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Xander89 checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

64.  Support GreyWyvern 01:39, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - GreyWyvern checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support Aldo samulo 04:23, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

    Duplicate vote (Sorry, you have already voted on 7 January) --(RT) 02:39, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

65.  Support --Dogcow 05:00, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Dogcow checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

     Support --However there must be strict critrions.Sheepunderscore 05:19, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

    Fraud/double-vote Seb az86556 04:41, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

     Not eligible Voted previously on 9 January, see here - Sheepunderscore checked by (RT) 11:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC).

66.  Support Wfplb

     Eligible - Wfplb checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

67.  Support! I often imagined stewards as desperately skipping through hundreds of small wikis deleting and blocking (which isn't their main task). Advantages outnumber drawbacks. - εΔω 09:17, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - OrbiliusMagister (εΔω) checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

68.  Support Topfive 09:59, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Topfive checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

69.  Support --Coquidragon 10:46, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Coquidragon checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

70.  Support Антон Черный 10:57, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Антон Черный checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

71. -- Perrak 12:23, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Perrak checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

72.  Support Jonathan Haas 17:13, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Jonathan Haas checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

73.  Support --GreyCat 17:54, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - GreyCat checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

74.  Support --Annamaria.dmr 19:05, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Annamaria.dmr checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

75.  Support --Pipep 19:29, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Pipep checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

76.  Support Ninetyone 20:24, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Ninetyone checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

77.  Support Comte0 20:59, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Comte0 checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

78.  Support Explained very well by Willscrlt. While some of the "no" arguments seem fair, a substantial proportion seem unfounded (e.g. failure to understand that a non-native speaker can detect obvious spam; global sysops would not be involved in content politics), others seem to assume the worst motivations on the behalf of sysops (if they are doing the thankless task of interwiki antispam, it would be very unfair to accuse them of being "little Napoleons" or "powerseekers"; I fail to see why this proposal is "anti-democratic"), others seem due to a bias against "useless" small wikis "draining" (wo)manpower from "useful" larger ones. If an editor wishes to be involved in anti-spam and anti-vandalism, it isn't for us to dictate how to do it in the most "useful" way, or accuse them of bad motives - but we should ensure that editor is equipped with the tools required to do the job efficiently and with minimum hassle. TheGrappler 23:56, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - TheGrappler checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

79.  Support I imagine problems in both situations. Problems without G-SOPs would could be bigger Mario23 00:42, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible Meets eligibility criteria; no unified login, but link provided - Mario23 checked by (RT) 22:33, 18 February 2010 (UTC).

80.  Support--Ahonc 00:46, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Ahonc checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

81.  Support Estillbham 01:55, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Estillbham checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

82.  Support --Bernardoni 02:04, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Bernardoni checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

83.  Support Richwales 03:29, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Richwales checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

84.  Support SchfiftyThree 04:41, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - SchfiftyThree checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

85.  Support --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 04:48, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - LegitimateAndEvenCompelling checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

86.  Support --Jyothis 04:59, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Jyothis checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

87.  Support Samuel Contré 06:55, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Samuel Contré checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

88.  Support Grotte 10:06, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - Grotte checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

89.  Support DoppioM 11:25, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

     Eligible - DoppioM checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

Milda is a bureaucrat an affected wiki and sysop on another affected wiki

 Support --Milda 12:55, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Milda checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

2.  Support Mabdul 15:31, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Mabdul checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

    Support Harald Krichel 19:13, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

   Fraud/double-vote Seb az86556 23:59, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Agree this is a duplicate vote (shown here) - Seewolf (Harald Krichel) checked by (RT) 16:36, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Support CathFR 19:49, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - CathFR checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

4.  Support As proposed. ~ Tommy Kronkvist 21:17, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Tommy Kronkvist checked by (RT) 01:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

5.  Support Game-M 13:23, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Game-M checked by (RT) 16:20, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

6.  Support Us441 15:19, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Us441 checked by (RT) 16:20, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

7.  Support PierreAbbat 23:38, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible See here and also here - PierreAbbat checked by (RT) 16:20, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

No

Badbread/Pakman has contributed to wikis which will be affected

 Oppose --Badbread 03:05, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Badbread checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

   --User:patsfanczar

   You are ineligible to vote as you do not have 250 edits, sorry. John Vandenberg 03:20, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

   Didn't you mean 150? --Trickstar 10:15, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked - less than 150 edits on any project - see here - Patsfanczar checked by (RT) 19:04, 9 February 2010 (UTC).

2. If a project can't find enough volunteers to accept admin rights on their own, there would have to be some question as to whether that project is viable. -- Robster2001 03:33, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Robster2001 checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

   The alternative POV is that the projects may one day be viable, but lack sufficient interest at the current time and when people who can contribute find a project full of major problems with the frustrating inability to do anything about it (and the lack of support for the too busy stewards) is going to prevent the project ever taking off. And as this oppose section illustrates, being sysop is a thankless job, people like to hate you and many editors like to just avoid it. If you force people who would prefer to be editors or lack the experience to become administrators, because no one else can handle the mess then these people have less time to contribute and may end up leaving all together when they get too annoyed with being an admin Nil Einne 03:24, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Jeblad has contributed to wikis which will be affected

I can't see the real reason behind this except introducing a new level in the hierarchy. As such I oppose the change. Jeblad 13:40, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Jeblad checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

   The idea is to give the smaller projects a new layer of protection against mass vandalism attacks. Currently, cross-wiki vandal fighters sometimes go back and forth with vandals for hours until a steward comes online. Durova 15:09, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Quistnix is a 'crat on a wiki which will be affected

Agree with Robster2001 = Quistnix 17:05, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Quistnix checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Abigor has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Only stewards should use globalblock. Huib talk 22:16, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Abigor (Huib) checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Nick1915 has contributed to wikis which will be affected

I don't oppose global sysops, but I don't like current proposal, particularly about globalblock that needs imho bigger consensus than just a stewards opinion (like a regular poll). Yes, we need help with "rollbackers" and maybe with "deleters" or local "blockers" on small wikis, but we need new stewards as well--Nick1915 - ^{all you want} 09:48, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Nick1915 checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

   Sorry, I'm not sure I understand what you're saying about global blocking and "just a steward's opinion" - can you explain?  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 16:09, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

   global sysop with access to global block has more responsibility than a rollbacker, so he should be submitted to a "bigger consensus", like the yearly "steward poll", and not treated just like a standard request. So why we couldn't keep just one role, and perhaps elect a few more stewards?--Nick1915 - ^{all you want} 22:56, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

   I think we need both, as discussed in the comments section. Also, the provisions for removal due to nonconfidence you want do exist in the proposal (in addition to stringent activity requirements).  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 02:29, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

2. Tjako 20:12, 2 January 2010 (UTC) - This proposal concentrates administrative power in the hands of too few people.Tjako 20:12, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Tjako checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Spacebirdy/geimfyglið is a 'crat on a project which will be affected

no thanks, I don't see the need for this, we actually need more active stewards (requests are open for unreasonable long time), they can handle this too and they are elected by a broader community, --birdy geimfyglið _(:> )=| 20:59, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Spacebirdy (geimfyglið) checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Pjahr has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Pjahr 07:19, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Pjahr checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

2. I completely agree with Robster and also see some truth in Jeblad's words. Masur 10:27, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Masur checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

KamStak23 has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Robster2001 is right. KamStak23 20:11, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - KamStak23 checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Maikking has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Maikking 20:15, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Maikking checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

2. Per the comments above regarding global blocking. - Rjd0060 20:17, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Rjd0060 checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Krinkle has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Agree with Huib, and Robster also has a good point. Krinkle 22:28, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Krinkle checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Klondek has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Klondek 05:51, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Klondek checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Brimz has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Brimz 13:25, 4 January 2010 (UTC) Because most people who voted for "yes" are working on the bigger wikis. The bigger wikis should not decide what to do on the smaller ones. If a smaller community needs help they can ask people from other communities to become mod on their wiki (temporarely or not)

1.  Eligible - Brimz checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

   Same as for "no". I see mainly people who works on big Wikis. Herr Kriss 18:29, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

   More to the point perhaps no one is forcing the smaller ones to do anything. They still get the choice to disallow global sysops. Opposing will prevent them having access to global sysops however and they have no choice. Nil Einne 03:09, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

LidiaFourdraine has contributed to wikis which will be affected

--LidiaFourdraine 20:57, 4 January 2010 (UTC) One should first inform about the proposal on sister wikiprojects and make it posssible to discuss it among the members long before the voting.

1.  Eligible - LidiaFourdraine checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Pieter2 has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Pieter2 15:30, 5 January 2010 (UTC) I can't see the need to create more jobs when people already are leaving.

1.  Eligible - Pieter2 checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

2. Don't we have confidence in sysops from small wiki-projects? Further, global sysop is too big power for a single person. Kubura 02:09, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

   It is less power than stewards get (by a lot). I suppose the question then becomes whether you trust the vetting process. As with other global rights, stewards are in some sense overseeing this - I think it will work just fine, as global rollbacker did.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 02:29, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

   Please confirm that you are Kubura from either enwiki/frwiki/hrwiki/itwiki. Thank you. Pmlineditor ∞ 11:11, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - no unified login, but links provided. Meets eligibility criteria (with over 4500 contributions on en wiki at the time - see here and also here) - Kubura checked by (RT) 19:25, 9 February 2010 (UTC).

3. Rafostry 18:00, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Rafostry checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Paelius has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Paelius 01:11, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Paelius checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

   Zhouf12 01:44, 7 January 2010 (UTC) I'd rather see little maintenance rather than poor maintenance.

   You are not eligible for voting (150+ edits required). vvv^t 00:17, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible Rechecked - agreed, insufficient edits - Zhouf12 checked by (RT) 19:04, 9 February 2010 (UTC).

Natkeeran is a sysop for a wiki which will be affected

--Natkeeran 01:46, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

1. Please confirm that you are Natkeeran from either tawiki. Thank you. Pmlineditor ∞ 11:27, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - no unified login, but link provided - Natkeeran checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

2. I like the idea, but this proposal has much more administrative overhead than needed accomplish this goal. Brianski 01:50, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Brianski checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Xania has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Most administrators have let power go straight to their heads and don't care for the little folk. Administrating shouldn't just be about quoting endless wiki policies and shouting down other people's opinions with a list of policies, guidelines and other wiki nonsense. Giving some of these people the power to patrol over all projects is the opposite of what is needed. Policies differ across projects and languages and given social sensitivities each Wiki should be administered by someone from that community and not an outsider.--Xania 02:07, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Xania checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

   Well since global sysops "have access strictly for maintenance and countering abuse; they have no editorial control over content or the local community", I think it should be fairly obvious they should not be quoting 'quoting endless wiki policies and shouting down other people's opinions with a list of policies, guidelines and other wiki nonsense' (in any case, I'm not an admin and not particularly trying to be one but I quote endless wiki policies when it's relevant). Also as I mentioned above, each wiki has the choice to disallow global sysops so it's up to them whether they want to be administered by an 'outsider' Nil Einne 03:09, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Prodego has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Globalblock affects all wikis, should not be given to this group. Prodego ^talk 02:11, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Prodego checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

2. I work for a small wiki (bar) and we have no considerable vandalism problem. I don't see why a global sheriff should monitor a projekt where he/she doesn't understand the language. --El bes 02:25, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - El bes checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

3. --Rockfang 02:37, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

   Vote made by IP; please log in to vote. Pmlineditor ∞ 11:41, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

   This vote was made while logged in[9] --John Vandenberg 06:16, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible Rechecked - Rockfang checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

4. This proposal concentrates administrative power in the hands of too few people.--Degen Earthfast 02:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Degen Earthfast checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

   Could you please explain what you mean? This is expanding global adminstrator access from more than just the stewards. NW (Talk) 03:26, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

5. --Heyitspeter 02:41, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible No unified login, but link provided - Heyitspeter checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

   --Tim Tebow Rocks! 02:44, 7 January 2010 (UTC) I disagree as this makes outsourcing in everything. Even Disney (Walt Disney World!! CRAZY I know!) outsourced recently to India for their customer service! This is unacceptable in Wikipedia also!

    Not eligible At time of voting did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - Tim Tebow Rocks! checked by (RT) 19:04, 9 February 2010 (UTC).

Conbo has contributed to wikis which will be affected

I'm a sysop in vi.wiki. I think if a global sysop doesn't understand Vietnamese, he can't solve the problems in vi.wiki, and I don't understand Russian or Japanese, I can't work well in these wikis. Each wiki has its own sysops and steward can work inter-wiki, I think it's enough. Conbo 02:46, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Conbo checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

   Sadly, most vandalism is English, or is unmistakable gibberish.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 19:32, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

   While it nice to know there is almost no vandalism in French or (US)American sign language, how can you distinguish, say, Ukrainian or Vietnamese from unmistable gibberish? Erik Warmelink 11:01, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

   When I said "unmistakable" I meant it.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 15:06, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

   First of all one example doesn't prove "most vandalism". Secondly, it isn't unmistakable gibberish, it's a "Stinky & Loof" level file. Thirdly, you haven't even proven this single example is vandalism, inserting "not" at position where it is grammatically correct would be less work for the alleged vandal and more work for the self appointed "vandal fighter". Erik Warmelink

   I surely am able to make a good guess as to what language a text is in. Ukrainian would for example be written in Cyrillic; Vietnamese tends to have quite a few accented characters. Both have an average word length that is well below 30 characters. So I can be quite sure that "asdfasdfasdfasdfasdfasdfasdfasdfasdfasdfasdfasdfasdfasdfasdfasdfasdfasdf" is not a valid article in either language. - Andre Engels 09:12, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Cinik has contributed to wikis which will be affected

--Cinik 02:54, 7 January 2010 (UTC) (as Conbo, Xania, Robster2001 et cetera)

1.  Eligible - Cinik checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

   --Tim Tebow Rocks! 02:44, 7 January 2010 (UTC) I disagree as this makes outsourcing in everything. Even Disney (Walt Disney World!! CRAZY I know!) outsourced recently to India for their customer service! This is unacceptable in Wikipedia also!

    Not eligible Invalid and duplicate vote - Tim Tebow Rocks! checked by (RT) 19:04, 9 February 2010 (UTC).

Jcwf is a sysop on a wiki which will be affected

-- I agree with Robster. If the native speakers are conspicuously absent there should not be a wiki. Period. Jcwf 04:00, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Jcwf checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Resident Mario has contributed to wikis which will be affected

-- No. That's what we have stewards for. What's the use of a global admin, anyway? If they want those rights they can go ahead and try and get steward. All this does is let some random admin from some random wiki randomly block random ips on a wiki of a language he doesn't even understand. That's like throwing informed decision out the window! (en.wp opinion, me). Resident Mario 04:22, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Resident Mario checked by (RT) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

   You may want to read the section about removing the tools if they're misused. Stewards would not stand by while a global sysop "randomly blocks random IPs"  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 19:32, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Shobushin has contributed to wikis which will be affected

-- No, el proyecto puede crecer en cada región sin administradores globales que pueden no entender las prioridades locales. --Shobushin 04:47, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Shobushin checked by (RT) 12:02, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

爱学习的饭桶 has contributed to wikis which will be affected

Different project has different policy. --爱学习的饭桶 04:50, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Info Voter decided to withdraw vote (see here) - 爱学习的饭桶 checked by (RT) 18:33, 9 February 2010 (UTC).

   But vandalisms or spam are not welcome everywhere :) --Vituzzu 15:31, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

   Well,neutral.--爱学习的饭桶 09:22, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

J. Patrick Fischer has contributed to wikis which will be affected

No. Projects are too different. --J. Patrick Fischer 04:54, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - J. Patrick Fischer checked by (RT) 12:02, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

   --SQ_Minion 05:03, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

    Not eligible At time of voting not registered for 3 months and did not have a minimum of 150 edits on at least one project (see here and also here) - SQ Minion checked by (RT) 22:01, 9 February 2010 (UTC).

2. coldacid 05:12, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Coldacid checked by (RT) 12:02, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

3.  Absolutely not Deathgleaner 05:24, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Deathgleaner checked by (RT) 12:02, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

4. No. Projects that do not have enough users/depth to such an extent that project specific administrators cannot be found, should not actually have global sysops attempting to 'mentor' such projects, especially as they may have relative incompetence in the particular area. Worse, taking away, say, an English sysops time for contribution to a niche small time project would take away Wikipedia's focus from fortifying its stronger and more competent projects. An issue of self destructing the core competence of administrators is at hand. Wifione 05:36, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

    Eligible - Wifione checked by (RT) 12:02, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

   They would leave the "mentoring" to the local admins, as well as non-urgent tasks. They would only take actions in cases of extreme vandalism when there is no local administrator around, similar to a steward. Tiptoety ^talk 05:40, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

   That line unfortunately assumes that local administrators would be naturally incompetent to handle vandalism. If a project has more vandals than its natural administrators can handle, then a better idea would be to advertise the particular project across our various projects and request interested editors in joining the particular project. If that particular project has depth and interest value which is enough to allow these new editors from other projects to stick on and become administrators, so be it. Users like Rich Farmbrough, you yourself, have seen such a development on the English project. Believe in the sustenance/destruction project life cycles of individual projects and let them develop on the basis of their individual strengths. ▒ Wirεłεşş ▒ Fidεłitұ ▒ Ćłâşş ▒ Θnε ▒ 05:57, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Carolina wren has contributed to wikis which will be affected

No. I support the general concept, but a few of the powers proposed for global sysops should be left in the hands of local sysops or stewards. Carolina wren 05:47, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

1.  Eligible - Carolina wren checked by (RT) 12:02, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

O has contributed to wikis which will be affected

I will never support any global sysop proposal at any time. Even though the proposal claims to promise that global sysops have no editorial control and whatnot, there will still be other issues. One major issue: if a user cannot understand the target wiki's language, the user simply cannot do anything right, including the very tasks in the proposal. In addition, this will create another class of users in the rights hierarchy, creating more complexity and resentment amongst the greater Wikimedia community. The option of individual wikis opting-out is simply not enough—a software solution is needed and must be ready for use by the time a proposal like this is brought to vote (correct me if I'm wrong). I can go into much further detail if needed, but to make a long story short: good idea in theory; bad idea in practice. --O (谈 • висчвын) 05:47, 07 January 2010 (GMT)

1.  Eligible - O checked by (RT) 12:02, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

   Then what are your thoughts on Stewards? They can, and do take admin action on smaller projects and I can assure most speak only a few languages at most.