Revision as of 14:39, 8 July 2016 edit Hobit (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 16,428 edits →Oppose: note CU thoughts. ← Previous edit		Revision as of 15:28, 8 July 2016 edit undo SanAnMan (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 13,412 edits →Oppose: oppose Next edit →
Line 363: #'''Oppose'''. If the candidate is really interested in adminship, I'd suggest they come back in about six months after a bit more community scrutiny. I can't entrust the mop to someone whose character hasn't yet been adequately revealed through action. [[User:BusterD\|BusterD]] ([[User talk:BusterD\|talk]]) 13:18, 7 July 2016 (UTC) #'''Oppose'''. I'm troubled by the CU incident. [[User:BethNaught\|BethNaught]] ([[User talk:BethNaught\|talk]]) 10:40, 8 July 2016 (UTC) #'''Oppose''' [[WP:NOTQUITEYET]]. 9 or 10 months of experience just isn't enough in my book to qualify as an administrator yet. - [[User:SanAnMan\|SanAnMan]] ([[User talk:SanAnMan\|talk]]) 15:28, 8 July 2016 (UTC) =====Neutral=====

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/BU Rob13: Difference between revisions