Meta:Requests for adminship/Philippe 2

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a closed Meta-Wiki request. Please do not modify it.

Philippe

Discussion to end at or after 10:00, 16 August 2009 (UTC).

I currently have temporary adminship based upon my role on the Wikimedia Election Committee, which is set to expire on 1 September. This is the second time I've held temporary adminship on meta (the first time being last year). I am an admin on the English wikipedia and (by virtue of my role at the Foundation), an admin and bureaucrat on the strategy.wikimedia.org wiki.

I have always declared that if I were to need permanent adminship here, I would go through the process of RfA. Until lately, I didn't feel that I had a need for the tools. However, given my new role at the Foundation, and my increased participation at meta, I think I have a need for them on a permanent basis now.

I am a long standing editor with a clean block record on all wikis. My RfA on the English wikipedia passed with near unanimous support. I believe that I have demonstrated myself to be a trustworthy member of this community, and request that the community grant me the tools. If the community chooses not to, I will, of course, relinquish the tools at the end of my temporary adminship. --Philippe 10:00, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For the record; today was the election, and I ended my work with the election committee today (although other users remain active on that committee). As a result, I surrendered my temporary tools, pending the outcome of this RFA. --Philippe 02:53, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Sure. You display a consistent need for adminship on Meta, and you're trusted on other projects. No red flags. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 12:11, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Hello, Could you please say why you think you should need the tools here on Meta, you are a trustworthy user no doubt about that and I'm nog going to oppose but I don't see the need for the tools when I check you recent edits, within the last 500 edits you never placed a warning for test edits or vandalism, neither do you have deleted contribution like you should have when tagging for delete or Speedy delete. So could you please tell me why you think you need the tools? Huib talk 10:07, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Response to Huib: Undoubtably, my use of the tools is not the usual vandal fighting. In the course of the Wikimedia Strategic Planning process, we will be using the meta site (and the strategy.wiki) for large scale community wide discussions. I anticipate that the tools will be needed then. If they are not, I pledge to relinquish them. --Philippe 19:08, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support can be trusted. Cbrown1023 talk 19:24, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - No issues and it would save us some work if he does election committee stuff in future. :) (you KNOW how overworked us meta 'crats are!) ++Lar: t/c 20:08, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not just no, but hell no. :-) No more elections for me. It's time for new blood. --Philippe 20:09, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support ;) Laaknor 21:06, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Definitely. WJBscribe (talk) 21:07, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sure. :-) --Az1568 (talk) 04:51, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Trusted, friendly , hardworking so No doubts Mardetanha ^talk 07:09, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. No explanation needed I think. Kat Walsh (spill your mind?) 15:43, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, certainly. -- sj | translate | + 03:12, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support No brainer. Pmlineditor Talk 11:57, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, yep. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:30, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support sure --Jan eissfeldt 17:28, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Laaknor :) J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 22:40, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Philippe is certainly trusted. Aude 04:55, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support of course for a trustworthy and hardworking user. Nishkid64 (talk) 03:40, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Closed, promoted. Majorly talk 10:05, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]