Wikipedia:Bot Approvals Group/nominations/The Earwig
- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for Bot Approvals Group membership. Please do not modify it.
BAG Nomination: The Earwig edit
- The Earwig (talk · contribs)
The Earwig has been an editor since July 2008 and an admin since October 2009. In that time he has run a series of useful bots and contributed to the functioning of the bot approvals process. I believe he has the skill required to review bots and the competence to judge community consensus. Further, I believe he has shown himself to be trustworthy and available, two important talents in a BAG member. Therefore, I am nominating him for BAG membership to assist in the reviewing of bots. MBisanz talk 06:11, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion edit
Votes edit
- Support MBisanz talk 06:11, 2 February 2010 (UTC)\[reply]
- Support this is overdue. Tim1357 (talk) 04:05, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Absolutely. Great bot operator. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 05:10, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, we need more bugs Josh Parris 05:55, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Of course, his comments have always been helpful, and have always achieved a positive end. There's no harm that could happen here, Earwig is a fully trusted user who is competent for the job. (X! · talk) · @850 · 19:23, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Seems to have a proper understanding of bots and BRfA. Great choice for BAG - Kingpin13 (talk) 20:22, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Support sensible and relates to others well. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:53, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Sure. Blurpeace 08:55, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Clueful and certainly qualified. fetchcomms☛ 00:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Support as I see only positive results from this. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 16:07, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Support –Juliancolton | Talk 01:50, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Closed as successful -- Pakaran 03:29, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above BAG membership discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.