Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2013-12/User:Kephir for admin

User:Kephir for admin

edit

Support

edit
  1.   Support Having gone through and looked at the user's contributions, per acceptance of the nomination of course, this seems like a superb idea. --Neskaya sprecan? 00:08, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Support Could be more diplomatic in making his/her case, but does have good points especially on technical considerations and, in my earnest opinion, the interests of the project in mind. DAVilla 09:57, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Support Good contributor. --Vahag (talk) 01:10, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Support --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:44, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   SupportΜετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:19, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      Support (Late vote) He's invaluable in module programming and deserves to have access to protected modules. --WikiTiki89 03:10, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

edit
  1.   Oppose --Dan Polansky (talk) 16:18, 31 December 2013 (UTC). The last time I checked, he was less than enthusiastic about the principle of consensus. For more, see Wiktionary:Votes/bt-2013-10/User:Buttermilch_for_bot_status#Oppose. On a minor note, edit summaries like "go ahead, Dan Polansky, relieve yourself" (relieve oneself = defecate or urinate) made in diff are characteristic of juvenile delinquents more than mature editors entrusted with admin tools. --Dan Polansky (talk) 22:38, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Abstain

edit

  Abstain He might be a bit too new, in my opinion. But I don't care either way. -- Liliana 23:15, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decision

edit