Stewards/elections 2009/votes
< Stewards | elections 2009
![]() |
The 2009 steward elections are finished. No further votes will be accepted. |
←2009 elections | Stewards (2009 elections > statements only) |
Index: See Stewards/elections 2009 (Purge the cache of this page?) |
translate: translation help, statement, template, headings
Questions → Stewards/elections 2009/Questions
Yes
Support Jagwar 14:04, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Computer wh 15:58, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Luan 00:16, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Udufruduhu 00:28, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Ginosal 00:31, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Raafael D 02:40, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Mwaldeck msg 04:10, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Will he break the wiki? Most likely not. ErikTheBikeMan 04:25, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Definitely yes. I'd go with a staatement of values and intent anyday, over statements of experience. Apologies if I've got anything wrong on following this voting process though ~ I'm new, with one of the two articles I've submitted so far already under review for deletion~:o)SkankarbabaUneligible voter. Confirmed by AccountEligibility Béria Lima Msg 11:42, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Sir James 05:40, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
--Sh1019 08:07, 1 February 2009 (UTC)Uneligible voter. Confirmed by AccountEligibility Béria Lima Msg 11:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)--Caspiax --Caspiax 09:57, 1 February 2009 (UTC)Uneligible voter: The user don't have an account on Meta with userpage linked to his/her homewiki. —Dferg (meta-w:es:) 17:55, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Fruggo 10:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support--Konsnos 10:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support EUDOXIO 10:52, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support NoychoH 13:40, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support — Albert Krantz¿? 16:09, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
SupportGlobalphilosophy 16:35, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Yes. Definitely. CJS102793 18:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Nrainer 23:17, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Uneligible voter. This account isn't registered on Meta. --Lucas Nunes 16:22, 4 February 2009 (UTC)Support --Jouris2009.2.2 (UTC)
Support ----Zeljko 09:00, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Wouterhagens 16:00, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support--Psiblastaeban 16:54, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- Uneligible voter: The user don't have an account on Meta with userpage linked to his/her homewiki. Alex Pereira falaê 17:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
--201.9.61.98 18:06, 2 February 2009 (UTC)uneligible voter. It's just an IP.- 天使 BlackBeast Do you need something? 20:19, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support pro carioca! -- Linksfuss 21:44, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Arcudaki 14:03, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Lighterside 16:00, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Alex Esp 23:34, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support - Amgine/meta wikt wnews blog wmf-blog goog news 02:49, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Ozymandias 09:03, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Booksworm 19:55, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Support yes -- A2 supersonique 22:43, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Multilingual. ☺Coppertwig(talk) 17:47, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Not eligible to vote, follow all instructions at Stewards/elections_2009/Guidelines#Voters please. --Nick1915 - all you want 11:04, 9 February 2009 (UTC)Support --Snake311 20:02, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Uneligible voter, it's just an IP. --Nice poa 21:54, 9 February 2009 (UTC)Support I voted for you. Now, where's that bribe you promised me? PM me and I'll give you the account number. Heh, these suckers are gonna be taken for a spin. --85.164.165.51 16:59, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Muro de Aguas 17:20, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Uneligible voter --Nice poa 00:53, 11 February 2009 (UTC)Support Matema 09:35, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Albmont 11:31, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Kabri 18:33, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Lohen11 15:37, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --4wajzkd02 09:33, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Alborz Fallah 18:36, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Has all the right language and other skills Carsrac 23:11, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Christian Hartmann 15:04, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
No
Oppose — Aitias // discussion 00:00, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Thogo (talk) 00:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Imho the user has not enough experience, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 00:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No. Razorflame 00:07, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
No. Horacewai2 00:08, 1 February 2009 (UTC)Uneligible voter. Confirmed by AccountEligibility Béria Lima Msg 11:55, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No. Puntori 00:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No. Micha L. Rieser 00:21, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No.--Seha 00:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Kanonkas 00:30, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No. Not enough experience for stewardship, what you describe is totally different from what stewardship is. Romaine 00:30, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Az1568 (talk) 00:35, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No/いいえ. --Taichi - (あ!) 00:39, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose per Romaine Herr Kriss 00:42, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose sorry, but No per Romaine Marcus Cyron 00:57, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Seems not to understand what being a steward is, or what would make one qualified to do the job. — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 01:15, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No. Seems to not understand what stewardship is. — neuro(talk) 13:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --FollowTheMedia 01:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose I like the attitude, and the thoughtful question answers, but I think you need more experience with adminship and general wiki operations across multiple wikis. Perhaps next year? ++Lar: t/c 02:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Tomatejc 02:57, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Not at the level I expect of stewards. Prodego talk 04:38, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Avjoska 06:32, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Achates 07:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No --Shipmaster 07:33, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No --Producer 08:44, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Merdis 09:15, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Uneligible voter: The user don't have an account on Meta with userpage linked to his/her homewiki. —Dferg (meta-w:es:) 17:56, 1 February 2009 (UTC)Not anymore. Tomasz W. Kozłowski 15:10, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Oppose No --Dr. Gert Blazejewski 09:22, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Adrian 1111 09:28, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No, involved recently in too many unnecessary conflicts in Portuguese Wikipedia. RafaAzevedo 09:39, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[1]
Oppose Whilst it'd be good to have non-en stewards, this chap lacks experience. Computerjoe 09:56, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Brownout(msg) 09:58, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No --Church of emacs 10:07, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Béria Lima Msg 10:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC) I agree whit Romaine. "Not enough experience for stewardship"
Oppose Per Romaine. Jon Harald Søby 10:27, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --AFBorchert 10:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC) per birdy and Lar
Oppose Njaelkies Lea 11:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Vyk 11:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose I'm sorry. I believe in your good purpose, but not enough experience for stewardship. Smihael 11:28, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Calandrella 13:46, 1 February 2009 (UTC) I agree with Smihael.
Oppose —Dferg (meta-w:es:) 14:08, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Stewards should have the experience and trust that comes with being an admin on their home project. John Vandenberg 14:14, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --MF-W 14:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Not this year. -- Nahum 14:28, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Stewards should be able to describe what stewardship is and should be an admin on their home wiki. Per Romaine and per Jauvdb. ѕwirlвoy ₪ 14:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Filipe RibeiroMsg 14:32, 1 February 2009 (UTC) Not now.
OpposeObelix 14:55, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
--91.43.224.39 15:48, 1 February 2009 (UTC)Please login to vote. BenceMy Talk 14:10, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No. Jdrewitt 15:58, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Not really. --Ciphers 17:47, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose À cause du manque d'expérience avec les outils d'admin. / Lack of experience with admins' tools. --Edhral 18:51, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Lack of experience and bad understanding of the steward duties — NickK 19:05, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose ack NickK --RoswithaC 19:17, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No. Alefbe 19:57, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose –Ejs-80 20:48, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose NonvocalScream 20:50, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No. Wants to remove "absentee" admins for no good reason. Rspeer 21:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Ilyaroz 00:30, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --PietJay 07:47, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose ~ putnik 07:54, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Stewardship is not only checkuser. Leujohn 08:59, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Uwe Gille 09:30, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose no experience--Nick1915 - all you want 11:15, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Too few user rights => not much experience. --FiliP × 12:05, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose GlassCobra 14:54, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose
Contra. QuartierLatin1968 20:15, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose I don't see expierence. Should be an admin.- 天使 BlackBeast Do you need something? 20:30, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Stepri2003 20:38, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose--Davecrosby uk 00:09, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Mailer Diablo 03:46, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Tcrow777 04:57, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Stef48 08:15, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Tarantelle 10:42, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose no experience to this. Alex Pereira falaê 12:12, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Not enough experience or understanding of the role. Maedin\talk 13:00, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose I am not sure you fully understand the role of stewards. Anonymous101 17:51, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Fred Xavier 19:07, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Tiptoety talk 20:50, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 21:34, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Apparently doesn't know what the position is about.--Cerejota 04:55, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Doesn't seem like enough experience. ...Aurora... 11:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Don't have experience. --Lucas Nunes 16:21, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Nones. --Tesi1700 17:43, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Not enough experience. --Tchoř 02:45, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose sorry but need more experience --Gdgourou 10:18, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No Modernist 03:52, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose GoEThe 10:05, 6 February 2009 (UTC) Tends to resolve disputes by attacking the opponent rather than the question and when proposing policy shoves opposition under the carpet by pushing for a vote instead of trying to build consensus.
Oppose Urielpunk 14:36, 6 February 2009 (UTC)?
- Meekohi 22:42, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No. TFBCT1 17:02, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Nadzieja 18:32, 8 February 2009 (UTC) The user had a discussion with me in pt.wikipedia (initialized by he), and was agressive and impertinent with me and another user that was in his right: making comments in the discussion page of the pt.wiki article "Sockpuppet". The user don't have enough maturity to be a Steward. I agree with the user GoEThe: The user resolve disputes by attacking the opponent. 'Cause this my vote is no!
Oppose IMatthew 20:53, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Nice poa 21:13, 8 February 2009 (UTC) I'm sorry, but he 'argues' too much with everybody for everything and uses to offend and to mock his opponents!
Oppose No -- per unaddressed concerns from other editors. Message From Xenu 10:21, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose at first you'll need to be experienced as sysop anywhere - IMHO - sorry --Rax 22:17, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose not even a sysop on any project, and does not seem to understand well the stewards' role. O. Morand 00:03, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Not enough exp. --Sampi 02:17, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Lack of admin experience, misunderstanding of steward role. Nbarth 01:27, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Mikhailov Kusserow (talk) 06:46, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose--Drboisclair 22:47, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose--Thesupermat 09:15, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose-- Harrywad 23:29, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Nearby, but needs still experience --Höyhens 02:48, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Tosão 20:07, 14 February 2009 (UTC) No,no,no![2]
Oppose If you resign from proposed adminship why should we trust you stewardship? Masti 21:12, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Techman224Talk 02:14, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[3]
Oppose -- it's not necessary for him to add footnotes to opposing comments, and his doing so clearly demonstrates that he should not be a steward. KrakatoaKatie 20:15, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral
Neutral Efbé
10:16, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- I know nothing about the experience of candidate. Unfortunately, I can not understand Portuguese, and I'm out of estimation.LexArt 14:37, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, you are not eligible to vote this year, you must have had 600 edits on any project by November 1, and either an SUL account or a link to that account on your userpage. You must also have 50 edits since August 1 and not be blocked here. ST47 19:25, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- I am ambivalent. Rangond 06:57, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, you are not eligible to vote this year, you must have had 600 edits on any project by November 1, and either an SUL account or a link to that account on your userpage. You must also have 50 edits since August 1 and not be blocked here. ST47 19:27, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral Kushal one 11:34, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral Bence
My Talk 14:12, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral Punx 09:18, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- WITSPUTZ 17:17, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, you are not eligible to vote this year, you must have had 600 edits on any project by November 1, and either an SUL account or a link to that account on your userpage. You must also have 50 edits since August 1 and not be blocked here. ST47 00:47, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral DanielRute 22:52, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral Mizunoryu 大熊猫❤小熊猫 13:20, 11 February 2009 (UTC) Nothing against the user. He's indeed a great editor on Wiki-pt. But he's a bit nervous and he does not like being questioned and contradicted. He must change that. But in general, he doesn't like canvassing and elitism, and that's great! Especially in Wiki-pt where our adminship is focused in elitism and friendship. Being an administrator there is nothing, really.
- --Mayer Bruno 21:15, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Additional Info
Meet some people from Lusophone Wikipedia that are not only voting against me (what is perfectly democratical), but blaming me... - Al Lemos 14:33, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- ↑ This fellow has so many enemies in the lusophone Wikipedia that was nicknamed "rabid dog" by a veteran editor.
- ↑ Candidate for sysop. In the voting under way, an editor (Pediboi) said about him: "without saving articles a large number of times in quick succession, a thing that he usually do, he don't will obtain the minimum number of 2000 editions in the mainspace; I smell a scam here."
- ↑ It's old news. The world has changed since January 2007...
translate: translation help, statement, template, headings
Questions → Stewards/elections 2009/Questions
Yes
Support —DerHexer (Talk) 00:01, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Computer wh 15:58, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Changed to neutral.Support Yes. Razorflame 00:08, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support André Teixeira Lima 00:09, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support NuclearWarfare 00:10, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Horacewai2 00:10, 1 February 2009 (UTC)Uneligible voter. Confirmed by AccountEligibility Béria Lima Msg 11:51, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support I'm happy here. Majorly talk 00:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Puntori 00:12, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Luan 00:17, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Mr.Z-man 00:18, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support — vvv 00:17, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support yes. Micha L. Rieser 00:22, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Epinheiro 00:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC), of course!
Support --Seha 00:27, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Udufruduhu 00:29, 1 February 2009 (UTC)not eligible to vote--Pediboi 14:03, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Cbrown1023 talk 00:31, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Az1568 (talk) 00:35, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Chick Bowen 00:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Yes/Sí/はい. --Taichi - (あ!) 00:41, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Vini 175 01:01, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support — neuro(talk) 01:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --FollowTheMedia 01:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Ivan Štambuk 01:25, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Shizhao 01:51, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support bibliomaniac15 03:15, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Luisfege 03:17, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support--1j1z2 03:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support More workers are needed. --Millosh 03:58, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support, of course. Mwaldeck msg 04:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support GlassCobra 05:15, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Sir James 05:41, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Avjoska 06:33, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Rubin16 08:07, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Sebleouf 08:40, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Octahedron80 09:20, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Otourly 09:25, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
--Item 09:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)not eligible to vote--Pediboi 13:16, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support RafaAzevedo 09:38, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support yeaaaaaaaaaaaaa --.snoopy. ✉ 09:44, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --StSasha 09:58, 1 February 2009 (UTC) ДА.
Support --Wing 10:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support sounds fine --Church of emacs 10:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Efbé
10:18, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Samyn97 10:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)Uneligible voter. Confirmed by AccountEligibility Béria Lima Msg 11:54, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Béria Lima Msg 10:27, 1 February 2009 (UTC) Complete support.
Support →Na·gy 11:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Vyk 11:12, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support The Helpful One 11:39, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Stealth500
Support EUDOXIO 11:41, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support axpdeHello! 12:30, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Ahonc 13:59, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support -- Nahum 14:31, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Stifle 14:32, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Obelix 14:57, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Garfieldairlines 15:38, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Furado 16:00, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support iAlex 16:59, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Good luck! That Thing There 17:16, 1 February 2009 (UTC)I'm sorry, it appears you're ineligible to vote. — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 17:17, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support SOAD KoRn 17:58, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Saloca 20:45, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Takkyuu 21:40, 1 February 2009 (UTC)not elligible to vote--Pediboi 12:31, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --buecherwuermlein 06:36, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Good. Rangond 07:08, 2 February 2009 (UTC)- Sorry, you are not eligible to vote this year, you must have had 600 edits on any project by November 1, and either an SUL account or a link to that account on your userpage. You must also have 50 edits since August 1 and not be blocked here. ST47 19:27, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support No objection.--Wikipedian (Activist) 08:01, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Oui --P@d@w@ne 08:51, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Looks about right. --FiliP × 12:06, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support
Complete support. Filipe RibeiroMsg 12:24, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Rui kuhnert 14:32, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Not eligible to vote, follow all instructions at Stewards/elections_2009/Guidelines#Voters please. The Helpful One 14:36, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Jón 17:13, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Leefeni,de Karik 20:00, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support, Bjoertvedtneed to be logged in to vote.--Pediboi 12:12, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support-- Bjoertvedt 17:45, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support
Pro. QuartierLatin1968 20:16, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Zeljko 20:46, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support 天使 BlackBeast Do you need something? 20:53, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support ~ Seb35 22:07, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support everything looks good HBR 23:40, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Davecrosby uk 00:12, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Thogo (talk) 01:13, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this candidate! - 03:49, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support -gildemax 09:18, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Tarantelle 10:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support--Lighterside 16:02, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Reynaldo 18:22, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Fred Xavier 19:12, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Knows his way around the Wikimedia Projects. Experience and knowledge is key in a situation like this. Support. Marlith T/C 19:26, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Davidandrade 20:38, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support EBY3221 20:49, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 21:38, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support sure --Nick1915 - all you want 01:48, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Hermógenes Teixeira Pinto Filho 18:28, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Support--ZERBERUS 05:55, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Gdgourou 10:17, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Oui Adailton 13:32, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Changed from Neutral to Support based on answers and a closer inspection of the ptwiki issues cited by opposers and questions. John Vandenberg 16:55, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Has some good cross-wiki experience and is trusted. — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:15, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Thewiikione 03:51, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Tumnus 09:14, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Xenus 14:57, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Baiji --> (Opinión) 16:00, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Burmeister 22:46, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
I think that you will do good job. -- A2 supersonique 22:50, 6 February 2009 (UTC)Unegibile voter --Nice poa 01:09, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Dobau 23:21, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Proofreader77 03:19, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Snake311 20:05, 7 February 2009 (UTC)Not eligible to vote, follow all instructions at Stewards/elections_2009/Guidelines#Voters please. --Nick1915 - all you want 11:03, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --TNolte 02:18, 8 February 2009 (UTC) (sorry for IP, my 'Unified Login' was wrong)
Support fr33kman t - c 03:52, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Daniel73480 11:01, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Support [[User:Mateus RM|Mateus RM]] <sup>[[User talk:Mateus RM|talk]]</sup> 16:15, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Nice poa 20:45, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Support IMatthew 20:56, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Rizalninoynapoleon 12:05, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Garavello 19:08, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Support ok --Rax 22:48, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Support No problem O. Morand 00:05, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Kleiner 14:12, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
yes. Gustavo Roriz 20:48, 10 February 2009 (UTC)Uneligible voter. Alex Pereira falaê 23:22, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --João Carvalho 23:31, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Nevinho 00:34, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Nbarth 02:21, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Storkk 03:42, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Support MOOOOOPS 04:41, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Mikhailov Kusserow (talk) 06:27, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Support -- lucasbfr talk 09:42, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --4wajzkd02 09:35, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Support--Alborz Fallah 18:39, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Support--Thesupermat 09:16, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- --Mayer Bruno 21:30, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Raafael D 01:37, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Gonçalo Veiga 22:23, 14 February 2009 (UTC) Good luck!
Support Christian Hartmann 15:03, 17 February 2009 (UTC).
Support Talk2lurch 21:30, 17 February 2009 (UTC) Go on!
Support Some people say you are already busy with other tasks and conclude that you shouldn't become a Steward. I disagree with them: first, it is you who knows if you can work more or not; second, you are allowed to become a steward, and if it happens, to resign from some other tasks (and you are also allowed to postpone such resignation until you become a steward). Besides, it is great to have a steward from your time zone and with your language skills. Huji 12:32, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Fabexplosive The archive man 07:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Support André Koehne 19:31, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Mardetanha talk 21:31, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Meno25 23:45, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
No
Oppose — Aitias // discussion 00:00, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Pediboi 01:02, 1 February 2009 (UTC) Improper behavior as pt.wikipedia CheckUser as explained here
- Explained in answer to your question. Alex Pereira falaê 14:15, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry but No. Jobcolector. How much more? SysOP, Crat, CU - 9 different jobs until here. This is enough. Marcus Cyron 01:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- ptwiki issues. Prodego talk 05:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose I agree with Marcus Cyron. Jobcolector. - Al Lemos 11:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Me, too, NoychoH 13:44, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --MF-W 14:27, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose I agree with Marcus Cyron. Enbéká 15:43, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No. --RoswithaC 19:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose NonvocalScream 20:50, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Njaelkies Lea 21:30, 1 February 2009 (UTC) The Portuguese issues worry me.
Oppose No. --Nrainer 23:17, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose — MrDolomite • Talk 15:07, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No. --Andrsvoss 15:32, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No. Agree with Marcus Cyron, too many titles to do. Vinhtantran 03:51, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Hargau 05:23, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Stef48 08:16, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Maedin\talk 13:06, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Avi 14:27, 3 February 2009 (UTC)Moved to neutral upon receipt of satisfactory explanation -- Avi 17:26, 3 February 2009 (UTC)- Avi, because the summary used by any verification, it's possible to compare user with IPs by logs. Many checkusers have a archive (I have, actual checkusers have, former have) of their verifications, because the tool have a limited time of verification. So, when we have a CU, if applicable, we compare with our archive (obvius, nobody discloses that). I hope have answered your question. Alex Pereira falaê 16:02, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- I will take this to e-mail to preserve the privacy of anyone who may be involved. -- Avi 16:20, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Evidence of canvassing, borderline misuse of checkuser tools per the questions above. AndrewRT 22:37, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose - Amgine/meta wikt wnews blog wmf-blog goog news 02:51, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose I am concerned about the answer to Q6. Kingturtle 17:55, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Ozymandias 09:04, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Meekohi 22:44, 6 February 2009 (UTC)Uneligible to vote. --Lucas Nunes 01:24, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose DorisAntony 21:00, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Too much access--132.205.110.197 20:33, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
OpposeMizunoryu 大熊猫❤小熊猫 15:49, 11 February 2009 (UTC) - Too much "jobs". Take it easy!
Oppose--Drboisclair 22:50, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose per Marcus Cyron --Wikikids 02:57, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
sorry, you must to be logged to vote. --Nice poa 08:25, 12 February 2009 (UTC)Oppose per --User: Valid 02:19, 12 February 2009
Oppose per Marcus Cyron. I think it's almost impossible to hold all of these positions! --OrsolyaVirág 18:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose per Marcus Cyron. Khoikhoi 23:41, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral
Neutral perhaps all OK, but someone mentioned ptwiki issues and I think you have enough roles ... --Smihael 11:31, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Waiting on answers to questions related to ptwiki. John Vandenberg 14:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)Comment - What happneed in pt.wiki? In end of 2008 one of the CheckUsers resign, and only Alex and other user done the CheckUsers, in the same time, pt.wiki have a lot of sock puppets and dispurtives accounts in this time (PédiBoi is one of them), and we have a time whit 5, 6 CheckUsers at the same time. It's complete normal that Alex, whit so lot of work, have put in analissis the wrong CheckUser (He apologise after that). Béria Lima Msg 12:47, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral Waiting for answers on questions 4-8, will vote opposed if questions are not answered by the last day. Leujohn 09:43, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral Punx 09:21, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral I am satisfied with the explanation. Thank you, Alex, and good luck. -- Avi 16:53, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral ...Aurora... 11:17, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral Not sure how to vote on this one. Both sides have good arguments. Razorflame 04:02, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral --Sampi 20:47, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral Too pt centric Carsrac 23:18, 12 February 2009 (UTC)View vote page
translate: translation help, statement, template, headings
Questions → Stewards/elections 2009/Questions
Yes
Support because otherwise it's impossible to indent the line below properly, and that makes my vote-checking bots not work. ST47 19:32, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Zeljko 23:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
No
Oppose No. You have not mentioned anything relevant to stewardship in your summary. Gak 08:51, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No, If you are not willing to sign what you write. Fenrisulfir 01:05, 3. February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose — Aitias // discussion 00:00, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Imho the user has not enough experience, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 00:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Abdullah Harun Jewel 01:05, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, you are not eligible to vote this year, you must have had 600 edits on any project by November 1, and either an SUL account or a link to that account on your userpage. You must also have 50 edits since August 1 and not be blocked here. ST47 01:12, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, I don't believe you have enough experience. Have you thought about en:Administratorship though? With a little work, that might be better. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by NuclearWarfare (talk) diff, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 00:15, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Puntori 00:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Mr.Z-man 00:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Thogo (talk) 00:21, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose no. Micha L. Rieser 00:22, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose I think you should be familiar with your home project first before running for Steward. miranda 00:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No Udufruduhu 00:30, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Inexperience, haven't really explained what you'd do with the Steward bit and you were blocked back in October on en-wiki, can't support sorry. Matt (Talk) 00:31, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Az1568 (talk) 00:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No. Not a word about the stewardship. This user seems to think it is all about en-Wikipedia what we are talking about, but stewards shouldn't do anything (or ver very little) on en-Wikipedia. We are talking here not about the Wikipedia-project, but about the Wikimedia-project, a small difference in words, a very big difference in practice. Romaine 00:39, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No/いいえ. --Taichi - (あ!) 00:43, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry, but No - what do you want? Marcus Cyron 01:04, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Kanonkas 01:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Not enough experience. — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 01:16, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose per some of the issues mentioned above. macy 01:18, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose, inexperienced. — neuro(talk) 01:20, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --FollowTheMedia 01:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Ivan Štambuk 01:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Tomatejc 02:58, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose bibliomaniac15 03:22, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose--1j1z2 03:27, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Revolus Echo der Stille 03:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No. Prodego talk 04:39, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose—『Skjackey tse』 04:51, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Sir James 05:43, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Avjoska 06:34, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Achates 07:18, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Shipmaster 07:38, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Matema 08:18, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry. Sebleouf 08:40, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Vd437 08:41, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Brownout(msg) 09:59, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Against monolingual stewardship. Man77
"..."(de)
10:05, 1 February 2009 (UTC)Oppose --Church of emacs 10:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Efbé
10:21, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Doesn't show understanding of what stewardship is. Jon Harald Søby 10:29, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --AFBorchert 11:08, 1 February 2009 (UTC) apparently no experience and no knowledge of foreign languages
Oppose Vyk 11:14, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --KRLS 11:22, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose are you joking? --Smihael 11:33, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose only using a username when necessary - stewards use a username more than when necessary'. The Helpful One 11:46, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Against monolingual stewardship (especially english speaker). VIGNERON * discut. 11:53, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Béria Lima Msg 11:58, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose In my view, stewards on EN Wikipedia should speak English as their first language. Also this user cannot be praised (if that if the right word) for the edits he has made via an IP account as we cannot tell for sure whether this user made those edits. Also user has not had enough experience. Manadude2 12:02, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Florian Adler 12:21, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose sorry axpdeHello! 12:32, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose —Dferg (meta-w:es:) 14:10, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --MF-W 14:27, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Stewardship has little or nothing to do with enwiki. Stifle 14:33, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose John Vandenberg 14:42, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Obelix 14:59, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Obelix 14:59, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Enbéká 15:46, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Jdrewitt 16:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Japiot 18:08, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose À cause du manque d'expérience avec les outils d'admin. / Lack of experience with admins' tools. --Edhral 19:07, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Seems to be very little active (less than 50 edits in 3 monts) even in his home wiki — NickK 19:10, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Obviously not nearly enough experience. Majorly talk 19:56, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Saloca 20:47, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose –Ejs-80 20:50, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose NonvocalScream 20:51, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No. Razorflame 21:22, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Njaelkies Lea 21:33, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No, a strong one. --Nrainer 23:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Needs language skills. --Shizhao 01:15, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry.You aren't expert enough.Try next years.Good luck. --Rangond 06:26, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, you are not eligible to vote this year, you must have had 600 edits on any project by November 1, and either an SUL account or a link to that account on your userpage. You must also have 50 edits since August 1 and not be blocked here. ST47 19:27, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose ~ putnik 08:00, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Uwe Gille 09:32, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose This is obvious. User doesn't even remotely have the prerequisites to become a steward. --FiliP × 12:07, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Filipe RibeiroMsg 12:27, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose GlassCobra 14:59, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose — MrDolomite • Talk 15:06, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose
Contra. QuartierLatin1968 20:17, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- Mmmmm.... WT...? I don't think so.- 天使 BlackBeast Do you need something? 20:48, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- Against monolingual stewardship (especially english speaker) Enst38 23:07, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Against monolingual stewardship (especially english speaker), too HBR 23:46, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Davecrosby uk 00:24, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Mailer Diablo 03:50, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Stef48 08:17, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Alex Pereira falaê 12:13, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Don't think he has enough experience.--Lighterside 16:04, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Tiptoety talk 20:50, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry, but IPs cannot become stewards. --ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 21:38, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose - Amgine/meta wikt wnews blog wmf-blog goog news 02:53, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Not very active, and monolingual Gonzolito 11:15, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Experience? ...Aurora... 11:19, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Very Strong Oppose Only using account when nessaccary? I'm doubt if this user even knows what accounts are for, let alone stewardship. Leujohn (talk) 13:05, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- The candidate later made a statement on my talk page:
- "When I wrote the statement "only using a username when necessary, or to participate in discussions", I was referring to the past, and it is written in the past tense. For what it is worth, the only reason I segment my contributions is because I am only willing to contribute to WP under the condition of anonymity, something that would be extremely unlikely if I did not segment them. Fortunately Wikipedia has a very good privacy policy, but that is only half of the equation. And yes I know that IP editing is far less anonymous than using a registered username. However, most of my 5 to 10 thousand edits are as an IP user, so I see no reason to change now. You know, I make so many edits, that when I put in a website, and have to solve the captcha, not only is the first word often something that my browser recognizes, I have seen both words before sometimes (in that same order). Apteva (talk) 23:28, 4 February 2009 (UTC)"
- Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Leujohn"
- which proves that this candidate is stubborn and will not change whatsoever. I have completly lost faith to the candidate to even be an admin. I beg that you read carefully over this message before casting your vote. Leujohn (talk) 10:37, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- I really do not like to comment on votes, or answer questions asked here - there is a questions section for that, but I would suggest carefully reading especially the section above that is highlighted (not by me) - "I see no reason" - bear in mind that I make many changes, and follow the principle "change what needs to be changed, keep what needs to be kept, and have the wisdom to know the difference", which is a paraphrase of the en:Serenity Prayer. Tenacious would be a better word to use than stubborn, but clearly only when there is a good reason. Otherwise it is equally clearly better to just move on. Apteva 16:47, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Ozymandias 09:05, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose -- (cypsy) 09:56, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose a joke ? --Gdgourou 10:19, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry, do not think you are qualified. --Captain-tucker 02:58, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Not qualified. -download | sign! 05:57, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Not eligible to vote, follow all instructions at Stewards/elections_2009/Guidelines#Voters please. --Nick1915 - all you want 11:05, 9 February 2009 (UTC)Oppose --Snake311 20:06, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose speaks only english. Kafka1 21:52, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Seems to be too inexperienced. --Tauwasser 02:43, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, you are not eligible to vote this year, you must be logged in, have had 600 edits on any project by November 1, and either an SUL account or a link to that account on your userpage. You must also have 50 edits since August 1 and not be blocked here. ST47 02:47, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Tom 02:51, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Strongest possible This user does not seem to understand what is required from a normal contributor let alone someone with extra responsibilites such as a steward. fr33kman t - c 03:19, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Juliancolton 03:57, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Daniel73480 11:02, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose IMatthew 20:57, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose - Not nearly enough experience crosswiki PseudoOne 03:51, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Liangent 10:32, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --DorisAntony 11:54, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose ts --Rax 22:52, 9 February 2009 (UTC) btw
Oppose Contributing mostly anonymously is not serious enough to become a steward. It is impossible for me to check what you have done or not on Wikipedia. O. Morand 00:08, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No way. I still oppose your use of 2 accounts and a dynamic IP range to contribute (on the same range of subjects). -- lucasbfr talk 23:56, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Inexperience, misunderstanding of steward role. Nbarth 01:29, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Mikhailov Kusserow (talk) 07:01, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No experience, no relevant contributions, misunderstanding of steward role, unwilling to sign, etc. Mkruijff 15:13, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose--Drboisclair 22:55, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --4wajzkd02 09:39, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose--Thesupermat 09:18, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose English only. Maedin\talk 19:40, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- --Mayer Bruno 21:30, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose-- Harrywad 23:32, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose seems fair, but lack of language skills imminent --Höyhens 02:50, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose he is definitely not stewardship material--Sampi 04:43, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose [[User:Christian Hartmann|Christian]]<sup>[[User talk:Christian Hartmann|msg]]</sup> 16:34, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose You haven't said what you are going to do mainly with the steward tools. Techman224Talk 01:03, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
OpposeNatanaeel83 20:51, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Masti 21:21, 18 February 2009 (UTC) you don't want to edit under your nick you have a problem
Neutral
Neutral GOOD LUCK! Although it seems you have little chance this time NoychoH 13:43, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral Punx 09:24, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral I'm not sure that you are ok for become a steward this year. -- A2 supersonique 22:55, 6 February 2009 (UTC)View vote page
translate: translation help, statement, template, headings
Questions → Stewards/elections 2009/Questions
Yes
- OK, why not. Marcus Cyron 01:05, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --FollowTheMedia 01:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --Gereon K. 01:39, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --Sir James 05:44, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --Vd437 09:14, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support because of ru-2 — Iguacu • !? • ru 09:48, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --StSasha 09:59, 1 February 2009 (UTC) Да
- --Church of emacs 10:21, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --AFBorchert 11:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC) as he would become the first steward who speaks Estonian
- --MannMaus 11:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --Александр Сигачёв 12:17, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --Ahonc 14:07, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --tiuks 14:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support - ru-2 will be useful. LexArt 14:25, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, you are not eligible to vote this year, you must have had 600 edits on any project by November 1, and either an SUL account or a link to that account on your userpage. You must also have 50 edits since August 1 and not be blocked here. ST47 19:25, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support, it looks okay. — Albert Krantz¿? 15:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC).
- Good. Rangond 07:11, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, you are not eligible to vote this year, you must have had 600 edits on any project by November 1, and either an SUL account or a link to that account on your userpage. You must also have 50 edits since August 1 and not be blocked here. ST47 19:27, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Andres 09:49, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Dr Oldekop 11:15, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, you are not eligible to vote this year, you must have had 600 edits on any project by November 1, and either an SUL account or a link to that account on your userpage. You must also have 50 edits since August 1 and not be blocked here. ST47 00:58, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Szalakóta 14:30, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Wouterhagens 16:05, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Roquai 21:05, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --WikedKentaur 06:24, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support - Punx 09:25, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support – Epp 00:49, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Support – Szater 17:18, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Support – Stellar Grifon 18:44, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Zeljko 23:15, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- Weak
Support -- Bence
My Talk 17:35, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Dj Capricorn 12:07, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Support -- Eug 11:56, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Multilingual. ☺Coppertwig(talk) 18:01, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Support good cross-wiki activity. I don't think you'll succeed this time round however! fr33kman t - c 03:43, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Support--Daniel73480 11:03, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Support--Jusjih 22:41, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Support -- Lelandrb 22:28, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- ok --Rax 22:55, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Respects the conditions and seems serious. O. Morand 00:11, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Support: Is experienced in many languages. -- Maseltov 12:12, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Support A steward who knows Russian and Estonian and who seems to be trustworthy must be a net benefit, even if they only do a little. As far as I know, Avjoska being elected wouldn't squeeze out a (perhaps) more worthy candidate. Maedin\talk 20:00, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Höyhens 02:58, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Good and useful knowledge of languages. --Nurtsio 09:24, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
No
OpposeNo. Why apply to be steward if you are only planning to do the work when other stewards are off? Gak 12:38, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- — Aitias // discussion 00:00, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --Thogo (talk) 00:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Imho the user has not enough experience, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 00:07, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Puntori 00:14, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- no. Micha L. Rieser 00:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- No Udufruduhu 00:33, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- No. We already have to much little active stewards. We want much active stewards. Romaine 00:44, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose, inexperienced. — neuro(talk) 01:20, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Inexperience + the statement about (in)activity concerns me. Matt (Talk) 01:50, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose. Prodego talk 05:02, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 05:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Achates 07:20, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Stewards need to be active, there no value to the community to support someone who has already express an intent of being inactive Gnangarra 08:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --Brownout(msg) 10:00, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Fruggo 10:21, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Efbé
10:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose, per statement. Jon Harald Søby 10:29, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Njaelkies Lea 11:09, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Vyk 11:15, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose per I do not expect to be a very active steward - we need more active stewards. The Helpful One 11:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- only active stewards, please axpdeHello! 12:34, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- —Dferg (meta-w:es:) 14:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --MF-W 14:27, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --Kanonkas 14:32, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose due to intent of inactivity. --Nahum 14:37, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Filipe RibeiroMsg 14:52, 1 February 2009 (UTC) "I do not expect to be a very active steward, I apply for this status because that might occasionally dilute the other stewards' workload somehow" sounds me like a "I want a term-buffer"
- Obelix 15:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --RoswithaC 19:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- NonvocalScream 21:04, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --Jan eissfeldt 22:47, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- No/いいえ. --Taichi - (あ!) 03:33, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- Uwe Gille 09:34, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- we need active ones --FiliP × 12:09, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- GlassCobra 15:00, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose — MrDolomite • Talk 15:08, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Contra. QuartierLatin1968 20:18, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- --Davecrosby uk 00:25, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Mailer Diablo 03:50, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Stef48 08:17, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Hoping to assist by aiming to simply reduce other stewards' work load is not enough commitment.--Trevor Marron 10:46, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Alex Pereira falaê 12:22, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Not committed enough --Lighterside 16:05, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- --ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 21:39, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose - Amgine/meta wikt wnews blog wmf-blog goog news 02:55, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose Inactive steward ?? Gonzolito 11:17, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose due to not responding to queries about activity level for next year. John Vandenberg 17:06, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- Meekohi 22:45, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, you are not eligible to vote this year, you must have had 600 edits on any project by November 1, and either an SUL account or a link to that account on your userpage. You must also have 50 edits since August 1 and not be blocked here. ST47 00:44, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Don't need inactive steward Darkxsun 01:50, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Not eligible to vote, follow all instructions at Stewards/elections_2009/Guidelines#Voters please. --Nick1915 - all you want 11:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)Oppose --Snake311 20:07, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Only casual activity is not enough to be a steward imho. --Tauwasser 02:45, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, you are not eligible to vote this year, you must be logged in, have had 600 edits on any project by November 1, and either an SUL account or a link to that account on your userpage. You must also have 50 edits since August 1 and not be blocked here. ST47 02:47, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- IMatthew 20:59, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose - Sorry, if you want to be a steward you should be an 'active' steward. --Captain-tucker 14:53, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- Intention of inactivity. Nbarth 01:30, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose--Drboisclair 22:57, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --4wajzkd02 09:40, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose--Thesupermat 09:19, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose-- Harrywad 23:33, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose -- Masti 21:25, 18 February 2009 (UTC) sorry, we do not need inactive stewards
Oppose --Techman224Talk 02:19, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral
- Intend to be inactive? ...Aurora... 11:21, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- Intend to be inactive? I would say that there would be no reason to give you steward rights if you're not going to use it, but the rest sounds good, so I'll plop myself here. Leujohn (talk) 13:10, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- nothing against him but i don't understood his motivation --Gdgourou 10:21, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- --Mayer Bruno 21:30, 13 February 2009 (UTC)View vote page
translate: translation help, statement, template, headings
Questions → Stewards/elections 2009/Questions
Yes
Yes Alex F. 10:58, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support — Aitias // discussion 00:01, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support —DerHexer (Talk) 00:02, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 00:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Sceptre 00:05, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Yes. Razorflame 00:08, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Already ID'd to the foundation, so this is just a matter of expanding his workload. NuclearWarfare 00:14, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --林勇智 01:04, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Udufruduhu 00:22, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Sure, second and final candidate that I will support. —CyclonenimT@lk? 00:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support yes. Micha L. Rieser 00:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Have known Avi for a long time and he is definitely fit for the job. -- Ynhockey 00:28, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Matt (Talk) 00:35, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Az1568 (talk) 00:43, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support don't see a cause against. Marcus Cyron 01:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Ivan Štambuk 01:17, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Nishkid64 (talk) 01:20, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support — neuro(talk) 01:21, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support shirulashem 01:28, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Shizhao 01:52, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Revolus Echo der Stille 03:52, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support More workers are needed. --Millosh 04:02, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support MBisanz talk 04:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Based on support of several very active stewards, and a general trust of the user. Prodego talk 04:40, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Avjoska 06:35, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Hermann Luyken 07:30, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Gnangarra 07:58, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support "I am present on Meta, and although eligible, have never submitted an RfA on Meta out of respect for the understanding that the tools are meant to be used" I'm agree with that. Otourly 09:27, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --DR 09:27, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Computerjoe 09:57, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Wing 10:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Church of emacs 10:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Efbé
10:25, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Hatukanezumi 10:28, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Seems to be trusted. Tomasz W. Kozłowski 10:38, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Yes. Alefbe 10:58, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support →Na·gy 11:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Njaelkies Lea 11:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Rudget (talk) 11:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Tinucherian 11:43, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support The Helpful One 11:51, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support sounds acceptable ;-) axpdeHello! 12:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Davemustaine 13:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Ahonc 14:15, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Not eligible to vote. Tomasz W. Kozłowski 16:37, 1 February 2009 (UTC)Support --Steve94 15:20, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Yes. Stifle 14:31, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Obelix 15:04, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Certainly trustworthy. Rje 15:48, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support-- Bence
My Talk 16:08, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Yes. bastique demandez! 17:12, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support. Trusted user. ☺Coppertwig(talk) 20:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support NonvocalScream 20:51, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support I trust Avi. Steve Crossin Talk 20:57, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Nemo 21:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support TheNeon 21:37, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Rspeer 21:41, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Someoneinmyheadbutit'snotme 22:42, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support after thorough review of his contributions. The Relativity of The Truth 22:58, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Philippe 23:37, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support FayssalF 02:53, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Definitely trustworthy. Orderinchaos 03:45, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Looks good. faithless (speak) 05:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- Ryan Postlethwaite 09:56, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Jaranda | wat's sup 14:24, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Szalakóta 14:32, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support JoshuaZ 16:57, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Avruch 17:42, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support
Kushal one 18:22, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support
Pro. QuartierLatin1968 20:20, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Nave.notnilc 22:41, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Avi's a good guy (except for those darn smileys), and knows where his towel is. I've worked with him as an admin and CU on en:wp, and like his approach. He has two strikes against him if you read the opposes, experience on other wikis, and language. Language is hard to fix, but in general the other wiki experience can be fixed. My generic advice for it is: Come over to Commons, there's lots of work to do there, and you'll find people from all around the world, many who don't speak English as their first language... you'll demonstrate that you can (or can't) work in a multicultural environment, and that you can get the support of your colleagues. Now then... Avi HAS come over to Commons, he's got a lot of edits... and what's more, he's been a sysop for a year. Commons:Administrators/Requests_and_votes/Avraham_(2nd_attempt). I think he will have to work hard at the job to overcome the barriers of experience and language, but if he does (and I know he will) he'll be a fine steward. Avi, if you don't pass this year, help out more, help the small wiki team, get global rollback, get more active still at Commons, and try again. ++Lar: t/c 22:55, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Davecrosby uk 00:27, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Egmontaz 01:14, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Per Lar.--chaser - t 05:11, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Stef48 08:17, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support - Punx 09:26, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Lighterside 16:06, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support after a private talk. Thanks, Avi. Alex Pereira falaê 17:42, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --.snoopy. ✉ 19:53, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support good and reasonable Wikipedian. Carlossuarez46 20:42, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 21:41, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support You undersold your second language indeed! - Mailer Diablo 23:16, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support I recognize him from his excellent track record on en. A fine choice for steward -- Samir 01:54, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Support — Rlevse • Talk • 02:26, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Telaviv1 15:07, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Support OK. --Goodmorningworld 15:41, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Kingturtle 17:57, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Language evidence has changed my vote. RyanGerbil10 18:35, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Jon513 22:10, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Avi is "solid as a rock" and absolutely trustworthy. -- (cypsy) 09:59, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support ok for me --Gdgourou 10:22, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Yes we need people to deal with cross-wiki vandalism. Leujohn (talk) 10:50, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Filipe RibeiroMsg 13:39, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support - good work on en, active on Commons. Warofdreams 15:14, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Yes ...Modernist 03:56, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Xenus 15:03, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Support I'm okay with the candidate. Iss246 15:47, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Rosiestep 17:06, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Roberta F. 18:34, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Support - Eug 11:57, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Glad to bring up the century for Avi. I've said elsewhere why I trust Avraham. Lar's statement deals well with the main reasons for oppose, and confirms my judgement. NSH001 14:13, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Snake311 20:08, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Support fr33kman t - c 00:38, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Support -- --Zeljko 10:51, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Support--Ziko 12:38, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Support — Coren (talk) / (en-wiki) 15:36, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Hardenacke 17:26, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Support IMatthew 21:00, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Support--Jusjih 22:43, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Malinaccier (talk) 00:05, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Support as experienced sysop and cu on en:wp he'll get "experience to speak of in steward areas" (s.b.) quickly --Rax 22:59, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Support no problem, serious motivations. O. Morand 00:13, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Martina Nolte 12:08, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Support per Lar. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 00:48, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Nbarth 02:55, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Mikhailov Kusserow (talk) 03:07, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Support -- lucasbfr talk 13:55, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Support -- Drboisclair 23:02, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --4wajzkd02 09:43, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Support rootology (T) 04:31, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Support--Thesupermat 09:20, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- --Mayer Bruno 21:30, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Elijah/אליהו (Eliyahu)/إلياس (Ilyas) (Me!) 16:04, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Betacrucis 09:18, 16 February 2009 (UTC)Support
- As much as I truly appreciate your support, I believe you are not eligible to vote in this year's elections, so I am afraid I have to indent your vote. Trust me, I'm as sorry as you are, but rules are rules.
-- Avi 15:48, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
- As much as I truly appreciate your support, I believe you are not eligible to vote in this year's elections, so I am afraid I have to indent your vote. Trust me, I'm as sorry as you are, but rules are rules.
Support As long as stewards has full access to enwiki it's good to have stewards knowing this area well and can follow up in case of misuses. Plus for he language skills. nsaa 16:51, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Support. Good experience, good attitude. Jayjg 22:27, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Nothing but positive experiences and observations of this user. IronDuke 04:16, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Sampi 04:50, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Support. Does a great job in all his admin, CU, and Oversight positions. Have full confidence that he'll make a fantastic Steward.--Brewcrewer 05:17, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Inspires confidence. -- Tundrabuggy 05:45, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Cerejota 12:47, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Great checkuser on en.wiki, I'm confident they'd make a great steward on meta. This flag once was red 15:26, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Support—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Christian Hartmann (talk) 11:37, February 17, 2009
Support -- Scrupulous, fair, nice to vote for him while signing off from the project. If not in much else, at least in voting for Avi, one can be useful to wiki. Nishidani 20:34, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Jpgordon 23:59, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Support DVD R W 01:05, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Support ~Franchement, il n'y en a pas beaucoup des comme lui... Ceedjee 20:00, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Yossiea 15:58, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Die4Dixie 22:03, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Marlith T/C 00:33, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Support . He is an exceptional and caring admin on Wiki! IZAK 03:52, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Support For sure! Tiptoety talk 05:50, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Support. Helpful user, and I trust him. He helped me once. W Tanoto 07:23, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Fabexplosive The archive man 07:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Fritzpoll 09:44, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Support without hesitation. Jakew 10:15, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --MPerel 10:54, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Good luck! Dorgan 11:15, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Speaking as someone who is heavily involved in cross-wiki work, I still don't think there is a problem per se with an excellent contributor who concentrates on en.wikipedia. Dovi 14:16, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Support I know Avi as a very able and responsible contributor to en.wiki Any Wikimedia project will gain by his contributions! Gidonb 15:04, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Yoavd 16:22, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Mardetanha talk 21:37, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
No
Oppose No experience to speak of in steward areas - seems primarily based on English Wikipedia. Majorly talk 00:09, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Puntori 00:15, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --FollowTheMedia 01:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Per Majorly. An excellent en:wiki sysop, but stewards need broader experience. Durova 02:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Andre (talk) 03:41, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
OpposeAgree with Majorly. Giggy 04:05, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Sir James 05:46, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Latitude 08:27, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Limited language skills. feydey 11:43, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No per FeydeyCarn 12:48, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose candidate is spamming by mail.Carn 08:22, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Per Majorly, Durova et Feydey. -- Nahum 14:18, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --MF-W 14:27, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry, but 16 useful edits to non-English projects does not show an aptitude for steward work, nor exposure to the dynamics of small wiki projects. John Vandenberg 15:05, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Definitely a trusted user (on the English Wikipedia) but as pointed out above, no cross-wiki work. - Rjd0060 15:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Contra — Albert Krantz¿? 15:32, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Per Rjd0060 --Herby talk thyme 16:02, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Don't seem to be interwiki active --Nux (talk) 16:28, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
OpposeInsufficient interwiki activity. Jehochman 17:52, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose I'm sorry, you simply don't have any cross-wiki experience. — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:01, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Tim Q. Wells 18:29, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose--RoswithaC 19:25, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose --Jan eissfeldt 23:02, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Uwe Gille 09:36, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No cross-wiki experience. Tombomp 10:06, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose — MrDolomite • Talk 15:10, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose - Agree, Bjoertvedt
Looking for proficiency in two languages or more. - Mailer Diablo 03:52, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Hargau 05:24, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
as Mike says. Alex Pereira falaê 12:15, 3 February 2009 (UTC)change my vote. Alex Pereira falaê 17:42, 3 February 2009 (UTC)Upon further inspection, I take back my opposition. Marlith T/C 00:32, 20 February 2009 (UTC)Oppose While excellent in EnWiki, more experience in international areas and other languages is necessary for the job. Marlith T/C 19:28, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose - Amgine/meta wikt wnews blog wmf-blog goog news 02:56, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Per Majorly. ...Aurora... 11:25, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- No. 148.225.101.3 18:07, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Tesi1700 18:09, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose After 6 days of thinking, I've decided that I have to oppose this. Experience is just an issue for me. —Anonymous DissidentTalk 08:26, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Meekohi 22:46, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, you are not eligible to vote this year, you must have had 600 edits on any project by November 1, and either an SUL account or a link to that account on your userpage. You must also have 50 edits since August 1 and not be blocked here. ST47 00:44, 8 February 2009 (UTC)(|1000 4 20 24 46 106 119 121 1000)
Oppose --Anthony Ivanoff 17:16, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose A meta-steward should have more crosswiki experience and language skills. EdBever 18:46, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No, per Majorly and John Vandenberg. His meta involvement seems to be limited into voting concerning about English Wikipedia rather than steward-related cross-wiki issues. --Aphaia 18:47, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose per Majorly Bogorm 15:58, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- Note User is indefinitely blocked in project where user has the edits for sufferage, for what it is worth. -- Avi 00:07, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Experience only in English projects. Sp5uhe 10:53, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose. Not a lot of cross-wiki experience. OhanaUnitedTalk page 14:41, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose. More cross-wiki experience is required--132.205.110.197 20:37, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Sorry but I think there are other candidates that are more focused on multiple wikis and languages. -- lucasbfr talk 09:43, 11 February 2009 (UTC)switching vote per my misunderstanding of the election process. -- lucasbfr talk 13:55, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose per Majorly--Wikikids 03:17, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose-- Harrywad 23:34, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose because candidate is using edit summaries for campaigning. /Pieter Kuiper 23:05, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- comment but only on his own user page, nothing much wrong with that (except maybe a bit OTT) NSH001 08:49, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose en:wiki only expierence :( Masti 21:31, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral
Neutral Vyk 11:17, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral --Smihael 11:35, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral Don't know him Patio 14:34, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral I trust Avi but I don't think this is the role for him. WJBscribe (talk) 00:42, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral If it's only going to be CU requests, then no. Otherwise, not a bad candidate. --FiliP × 12:11, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
I trust this user greatly, but Stewards need to be multilingual. RyanGerbil10 18:54, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Changing vote per new evidence. RyanGerbil10 18:34, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral - Agree with WJBscribe. Juliancolton 00:14, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
NeutralNatanaeel83 20:48, 18 February 2009 (UTC)View vote page
translate: translation help, statement, template, headings
Questions → Stewards/elections 2009/Questions
Yes
Support --Thogo (talk) 00:15, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support yes. Micha L. Rieser 00:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Pataki Márta 00:51, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Yes. Marcus Cyron 01:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Ivan Štambuk 01:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support bibliomaniac15 03:17, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --KeFe 03:34, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support We need more brave persons in stewards team. --Millosh 04:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support -- Peti610 05:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Sir James 05:50, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Avjoska 06:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Achates 07:21, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Misibacsi 07:44, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Sóhivatal 08:01, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Marci1994 08:07, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Sebleouf 08:42, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Hunyadym 09:38, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Zimmy 09:41, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support - Pilgab 10:07, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Wing 10:09, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Efbé
10:30, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Istvánka 10:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support →Na·gy 11:08, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --RedMosQ 11:30, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Xxxx00 11:34, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --MannMaus 11:39, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Bennó 11:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Beroesz 11:55, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --VC-s 12:02, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Teemeah 12:05, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support ----Korovioff 13:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Hkoala 14:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Por supuesto! Ya necesitábamos alguien de Hungría. ;) --El Mexicano 14:22, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Ahonc 14:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Stifle 14:34, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support -- Nahum 14:53, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support We need a Hungarian speaker steward: to investigate a case, it is essential to do it in the original language. I trust him to do a good a job. Karmela 14:56, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Burumbátor 15:01, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Obelix 15:08, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Cassandro 15:38, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Enbéká 15:39, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Csanády 15:51, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Rje 15:56, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Dani (vita) 16:12, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Alensha 16:54, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support iAlex 17:01, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support – Glanthor ※ 20:17, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Nemo 21:28, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support TheNeon 21:38, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Jan eissfeldt 22:58, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Sí/Yes/はい. --Taichi - (あ!) 03:37, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support faithless (speak) 05:13, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Saltinbas 05:56, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --P@d@w@ne 08:58, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support — Winston 09:19, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support 문제없음--Kwj2772 09:36, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Uwe Gille 09:37, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
SupportSeems suitable. --FiliP × 12:15, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Data Destroyer 12:47, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Lily15 13:14, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support -- Mami 14:11, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Szalakóta 14:37, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support GlassCobra 15:02, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support — MrDolomite • Talk 15:13, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Wouterhagens 16:10, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support. LaraLove (User:Jennavecia on my home wiki.) 19:44, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support - Support, Bjoertvedt
Support Al Lemos 20:26, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support
Pro. QuartierLatin1968 20:30, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support ~ Seb35 22:23, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Davecrosby uk 00:28, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this candidate! - 03:55, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Stef48 08:18, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support--Alexander Leischner 09:07, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Susulyka 09:16, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support - Punx 09:28, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Tuohirulla 11:58, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support I like his answers to the questions, too. Maedin\talk 13:20, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Lighterside 16:07, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support--Szilas 18:45, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 21:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Support He is determined, diligent and experienced enough to become a great steward! 200% YES!!! --OrsolyaVirág 09:35, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Opa 13:43, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Pakos 14:17, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Kingturtle 17:59, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Daderth 20:03, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Mdavid89 20:50, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Support ~ Boro 21:57, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Kriszta67--Kriszta67 22:48, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Caiaffa 03:32, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Ben1979 09:23, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support ok for me --Gdgourou 10:23, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support OsvátA 12:20, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Filipe RibeiroMsg 13:43, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Funatic 14:33, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Buda 14:43, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Diaby 15:09, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Church of emacs 16:08, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support John Vandenberg 17:10, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support – Szalax 20:52, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support — told Stewe 21:09, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Attis 22:47, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Eintragung ins Nichts 14:51, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Rosiestep 17:08, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Roberta F. 18:22, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Mdönci 18:30, 6 February 2009 (UTC) Code page problem, his eligible. See his contributions on HuWiki. Dorgan 15:58, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Kralizec! 01:16, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Hunadam 16:02, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Support -- --Zeljko 10:56, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Daniel73480 11:04, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Support IMatthew 21:00, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Jusjih 22:44, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --CsGábor 22:51, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Cinik 20:25, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --DorisAntony 21:07, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Support ok --Rax 23:01, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Support OK Somebody working for Ferenc Liszt Music Academy cannot be a bad guy. Seems to have the required qualities to apply. O. Morand 00:15, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Ok
Support - User:Kossuthzs. 07:46, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Antissimo 18:36, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Orange.man 18:44, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Support OK - Rendben van;) Hajrá! --Madura Máté
talkstreet 19:24, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Support--Bapti 19:57, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Nbarth 02:06, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Storkk 03:46, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Mikhailov Kusserow (talk) 07:23, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Support: Why not. -- Maseltov 12:14, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Diligent 19:34, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Drboisclair 23:04, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --4wajzkd02 09:44, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Support--Thesupermat 09:21, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Support----Texaner 12:58, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Einstein2 18:16, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- --Mayer Bruno 23:06, 13 February 2009 (UTC
Support -- Harrywad 23:36, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Support - Burrows 09:35, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Andrzej19 17:17, 15 February 2009 (UTC) Let him try.
Support Christian talk 23:31, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Fabexplosive The archive man 07:45, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Support -- Hidaspal 22:13, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Support --Mardetanha talk 21:32, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Support -- Avi 23:40, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
No
- — Aitias // discussion 00:01, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, doesn't seem experienced enough. Majorly talk 00:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Puntori 00:16, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- No. I miss the words about you being present on Wikimedia/the projects and what you are intented to do. You are based on some projects, which is very nice, but that isn't so much what stewards do. Romaine 00:54, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose — neuro(talk) 01:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --FollowTheMedia 01:25, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Mr.Z-man 02:09, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --Revolus Echo der Stille 03:55, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Prodego talk 04:41, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Not enough experience. - Lolsimon 10:38, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Vyk 11:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --MF-W 14:27, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- 100% No.--Gothika 15:00, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, I don't think you have enough experience. — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:10, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- NonvocalScream 20:54, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- per Majorly, lack of experience--Nick1915 - all you want 11:35, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- Hargau 05:26, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- per Majorly. Sorry. Alex Pereira falaê 12:16, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- per Majorly. Definitely does not have the experience necessary to be a steward at this time. Maybe try again in the future? Cheers, Razorflame 20:34, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No. Tesi1700 18:47, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose - Amgine/meta wikt wnews blog wmf-blog goog news 21:15, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose. Sorry but I think you lack experience in the field. -- lucasbfr talk 09:44, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose per Majorly. --Wikikids 02:53, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
- what about cross-wiki?JALK 10:46, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Lack of concern about canvassing. --Apteva 03:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- He did answer to you prior your vote. - Xbspiro 10:58, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- For what it is worth, his answer to both of our questions did not meet with my satisfaction. Just answering a question with a question is not ever likely to be satisfactory, and calling canvassing flattering was not what I was expecting. Apteva 13:36, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- He did answer to you prior your vote. - Xbspiro 10:58, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose per experience concerns. Khoikhoi 23:41, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral
Neutral No information on what user intends to do as steward. Gak 12:51, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- Udufruduhu 00:37, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- ...Aurora... 11:27, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral --Tauwasser 02:52, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral Leujohn (talk)
Neutral I have trust in this user and someone who speaks fluent Hungarian would erase the language barrier between HuWiki and stewards. However I don't see why he needs to be a steward to encourage other users (see his answer at q2). Also, I have concerns about the propaganda on HuWiki which goes in favour of him. If my questions remain unanswered, then this neutral vote will turn into opposal. - Xbspiro 11:47, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
- Hahó, Xbspiro. I can't speak on behalf of anyone else but as I see the candidate is well-known and respected in the wiki segments which I frequent. Is that an answer? I don't see a point in the main argument on this page against Dorgan, and I hope that you will not oppose him either. --Korovioff 20:13, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
- It is barely an argument with only one side speaking, however Dorgan promised me via e-mail that he will answer soon. So, I am waiting. I do not want to affect his answer with further comments. However I have to make it clear that all I wanted was to point out the weak points in his statements and comment on the banner of Huwiki of steward elections. I have offered him a chance to correct them, so I assume that a fast response from the candidate of the highest eligible rank would be gentle. Such a delay (one week in the case of my original questions) is not what I expect. - Xbspiro 13:48, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- I have had a talk with the candidate via MSN recently: my vote will remain neutral. He will soon post his answers here. - Xbspiro 23:59, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- It is barely an argument with only one side speaking, however Dorgan promised me via e-mail that he will answer soon. So, I am waiting. I do not want to affect his answer with further comments. However I have to make it clear that all I wanted was to point out the weak points in his statements and comment on the banner of Huwiki of steward elections. I have offered him a chance to correct them, so I assume that a fast response from the candidate of the highest eligible rank would be gentle. Such a delay (one week in the case of my original questions) is not what I expect. - Xbspiro 13:48, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- Hahó, Xbspiro. I can't speak on behalf of anyone else but as I see the candidate is well-known and respected in the wiki segments which I frequent. Is that an answer? I don't see a point in the main argument on this page against Dorgan, and I hope that you will not oppose him either. --Korovioff 20:13, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Neutral — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Masti (talk) - Xbspiro 11:13, 19 February 2009 (UTC)View vote page
translate: translation help, statement, template, headings
Questions → Stewards/elections 2009/Questions
Yes
ja WOBE3333 11:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC)Not eligible to vote. Tomasz W. Kozłowski 16:44, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Lolsimon 00:12, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Experienced global rollbackers should be fine in this role. Majorly talk 00:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- —DerHexer (Talk) 00:17, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- NuclearWarfare 00:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Mr.Z-man 00:21, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --Kanonkas 00:29, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- yes. Micha L. Rieser 00:31, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Cbrown1023 talk 00:31, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Az1568 (talk) 00:37, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Udufruduhu 00:39, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Herr Kriss 00:40, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Sí/Yes/はい. --Taichi - (あ!) 00:47, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Yes. Knows where he should use the stewardship for. Romaine 00:56, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Kalan ? 01:01, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Yes. Marcus Cyron 01:12, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --Ivan Štambuk 01:12, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Erwin does excellent work with spam and vandalism, is consistently level-headed, and takes a collaborative approach, which I particularly like. — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 01:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Nishkid64 (talk) 01:22, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support — neuro(talk) 01:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --FollowTheMedia 01:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --Shizhao 01:55, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- bibliomaniac15 03:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --Revolus Echo der Stille 03:56, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- More workers are needed. --Millosh 04:07, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Wutsje 04:35, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --Sir James 05:51, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Avjoska 06:37, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Eddylandzaat 07:41, 1 February 2009 (UTC)Uneligible voter: The user don't have an account on Meta with userpage linked to his/her homewiki. —Dferg (meta-w:es:) 17:45, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Support Gnangarra 08:05, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Redlinux 08:22, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Sebleouf 08:42, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Vd437 08:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --Euku 08:59, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Kameraad Pjotr 09:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Dr. Gert Blazejewski 09:25, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- ken123 09:54, 1 February 2009 (UTC) ;-)
- --StSasha 10:01, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- yeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaa --.snoopy. ✉ 10:05, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- --Wing 10:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC)