Wikiquote:Requests for bureaucratship/GreenMeansGo

The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new topic on this or other appropriate talk page. No further edits should be made to this text.

The result was: Successful application. There is a clear consensus in support of this proposed grant of rights. BD2412 T 22:04, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GreenMeansGo (talk · contributions) edit

I appreciate all of the work from all our users and existing admins and crats. We're all volunteers, we all volunteer to the greatest extent of our available time, and many of us are active across multiple projects. But we seem to have issues closing things in a timely manner as a community. This includes RfAs. As seldom as they need closed, there are recent examples like this RfA that went on for five months before it was closed.

As far as I am aware, I have been among our most active admins since getting the bit, and I'm usually around on a daily basis in one form or another. I think it may be beneficial for our project to have another active crat. If I'm not the person for the job, and anyone else would like to volunteer, then I would happily withdraw this self-nom and support any other active admin instead. I would like to recruit more admins, and would love the opportunity for myself or anyone else to close many more RfAs as successful, because I think it benefits the value that we give to the public in building what we all build together. Thank you for your time and consideration. GMG ^talk 17:35, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vote ends: 07 December 2019

Support per this discussion, which makes it patently clear that this guy is the only one running tings around here, pace his ever-present-in-spirit colleagues. ——SerialNumber54129 17:56, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per (self) nom and Serial Number 54129 --DannyS712 (talk) 20:29, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Serial #54129. GMG is quite active, and in my opinion the most active (sorry to offend anyone) admin since getting the mop, and this seems appropriate. GMG has demonstrated time and again on various projects that he can be trusted with advanced permissions. I have no concerns that he will use these rights appropriately. I am concerned, though, of the lack of commentary on this request; this reflects on the activity of the current admin force. ~riley (talk) 02:04, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support--Savonhelmi (talk) 11:04, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Spinoziano (talk) 10:07, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion edit

@BD2412, UDScott: The voting period of 14 days has been met (by five months) and there appears to be consensus to promote. Care to close? ~riley (talk) 21:30, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Y Done BD2412 T 22:04, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new topic on this or other appropriate talk page. No further edits should be made to this text.