Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Bureaucrat/Pi zero

— bureaucratship
I would like to nominate Pi zero, our great reviewer and administrator, to a promotion to bureaucratship. I can see the following things peculiar in the candidate and invaluably useful for making fair, sensible use of the new proposed position.

I expect the nominee to leave a note to the I-accept-this-nomination effect shortly. Thanks, Gryllida 13:11, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Being familiar with the policies and atmosphere after months (probably over a year) of consistent review work. Pi zero is familiar with the key policies as closely as a glove fits one's hand, and shapes them to the right direction.
 * Devotion to the project (we all _know_ it!).
 * Willingness to do a research and look into things and issues that are brought up. Look for reasons behind every actions.
 * Familiar with the software behind the wiki, including (most notably) templates and gadgets, how they work, and how to fix them properly without breaking things.
 * Ability to make sensible judgements of what to do and what not to do. I would point it out that pi zero clearly follows the "never assume" rule but remains warmly courteous at all times.
 * Open-minded, courteous spirit with a knowledge when to drop a topic or discussion if needed.
 * Openless to collaboration and detailed explanation for any topics that is useful to talk about: pi zero likes to tell a thing in a neutral, informative way, if there is a need to make something more clear.
 * Balanced, calm reaction to events, discussions, issues, and concerns.
 * It can never be stressed well enough: ability to think about why something happened, and make a new guideline or policy to shape the atmosphere to improve efficiency of work of everyone at Wikinews. This includes the development and collaboration on the WN:PeP policy, just as an example.


 * I accept this nomination. --Pi zero (talk) 13:17, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Questions and comments

 * I don't really feel active enough to legitimately vote in this. However I did want to mention that I think Pi Zero is an excellent candidate for crat. Bawolff ☺☻ 15:44, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * It surprised me to see your last 50 edits cover about a year. But, they're spread enough through that period to indicate you're probably aware of what is going on, if not able to get more involved.
 * Translation: I think you're perfectly entitled to vote. Is there anyone else taking part in this discussion does not know Bawolff? --Brian McNeil / talk 20:40, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Like bawolff, I don't want to explicitly support because I haven't been here for a while, but based on Pi zero's work before I went away, I support this nomination. Kayau (talk &middot; contribs) 07:42, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Like bawolff and kayau, I don't want to explicitly support because I am not exactly here, but based on Pi zero's contributions, I support this nomination. Wikiwide (talk) 02:25, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
 * From what I know of Wikinews procedure, the vote of MZMcBride certainly doesn't count, and probably not KhabarNegar, due to lack of record of contribution to the project. (Though I'm not aware of any such obstacle to Computron, who now has several published articles.)  --Pi zero (talk) 23:51, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Votes
Been really supportive to me as I am new here and as far as what MZMcBride is saying, I read the first four lines and got bored, you've just proved you are a "dick".--Computron (talk) 23:27, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Excellent candidate. --LauraHale (talk) 13:15, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * is obvious, for obvious reasons. —Tom Morris (talk) 13:16, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * . Thankfully, 'crat does not have a significant additional workload here on enWN. --Brian McNeil / talk 14:39, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * An excellent and obvious choice. Hawkeye7 (talk) 18:21, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Brilliant candidate -- CalF (talk) 16:21, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * , essentially per, above. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 20:58, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Pi zero will make a very good bureaucrat.--Cspurrier (talk) 21:52, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * As a fellow 'crat, albeit, a not very active one due to his worklife, I believe Pizero is an excellent canadiate. --Patrick M (TUFKAAP) (talk) 13:30, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Good candidate! --House1630 (talk) 10:43, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, of course!! --Bddpaux (talk) 20:32, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Pi zero put a lot of time and constructive comments into my first (and only so far) Wikinews publication. DavidMCEddy (talk) 04:40, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
 * obviously. He's our most valuable asset here.--William S. Saturn (talk) 22:28, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * --RockerballAustralia c 09:22, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Hope for a better site in future.KhabarNegar (talk) 11:51, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
 * : I believe I'm entitled to a vote here. I've recently been in a heated discussion with Pi zero regarding EdwardsBot and its role in global message delivery. I've found myself annoyed with his comments, but when someone suggested that I oppose his request for bureaucratship in retaliation, I said that that would be a dick move. Why am I here opposing, particularly given that it's almost certain that I'll be out-voted? I came across Proposals for closing projects/Closure of English Wikinews, where it seems that I'm not the only one who finds this user's behavior unacceptable. However, more than those worrying concerns (that only date back two or three months, Pi zero seems to have almost no understanding of how to use rollback. In multiple instances, he has now mis-used this administrative tool. I can't see how he could be trusted to use more advanced tools. Will this vote stop the nomination from succeeding? Probably not. But it should be on the record nonetheless, given the toxicity and hostility of this place. It can hopefully be used as further evidence against the "leadership" of Mr. Pi zero and Mr. McNeil when they're ousted one day. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:20, 26 January 2013 (UTC)