Votes

•  Support - You got my total confidence and you'll be a nice asset for commons - Silver Spoon (talk) 18:48, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support - trusted user - Taketa (talk) 19:17, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support - most trusted user - MoiraMoira (talk) 19:36, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support - trusted nlwiki admin Olivier Bommel (talk) 19:48, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support - per MoiraMoira (talk · contribs). ;) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 22:53, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support Why not? -FASTILY ^(TALK) 01:10, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support Absolutely. --ZooFari 02:43, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support. Geagea (talk) 03:47, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support No problems here. Jafeluv (talk) 06:52, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support - Of course! Kthoelen (talk) 07:20, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support More Dutch (speaking) admins ;-) Multichill (talk) 08:42, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 10:42, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support Quiet and skilled. -- Blackcat (talk) 14:24, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support - Will make an excellent admin. --Captain-tucker (talk) 16:05, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support Yes please. Trijnstel (talk) 18:37, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support - join the Dutch invasion :-P - Jcb (talk) 19:19, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support Sure mickit 20:11, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support --Dferg (talk) 20:52, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support --Mbdortmund (talk) 22:43, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support Clueful user. ←fetchcomms 01:45, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:44, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support What's with all the good candidates falling from the woodwork this week? Courcelles (talk) 16:21, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Some of them didn't fall, they were recruited, something we could all do more of when a reasonable, intelligent, adult crosses our path.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:48, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

•  Support matanya • talk 19:24, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support Definitely. odder (talk) 19:44, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support Yes, good addition to our ranks.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:48, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support - Tinucherian (talk) 05:28, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support One of the wisest and most reliable admins I have the pleasure of knowing. Mathonius (talk) 03:59, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Support --Skeezix1000 (talk) 11:47, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Aye - TBloemink (talk) 15:35, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
•  Oppose fairly low edit count. ¼ in the last 30 days. --  Docu  at 18:57, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Comments

• Can you explain why you didn't review this picture? Multichill (talk) 10:16, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Yes, of course. Images from FilmiTadka are licensed cc-by-sa-3.0, except for screenshots, wallpapers and promotional posters (see ). The procedure of license reviewing is meant for sites where multiple licenses are used, among which unfree ones ("License reviewing is a necessary process for files from Flickr, Picasa, Panoramio, and other external websites that provide images under different licenses. People who upload their material to these web albums choose a license, some which are free and suitable for Commons, and some not free that should not be uploaded to Commons."). I informed the user that requested the license review for many images from this site, and asked him or her to remove the {{LicenseReview}} here. Because this user didn't respond and didn't withdraw the requests, did do some other edits though, and becaues there was quite a backlog this morning, I decided to turn down the requests. Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 11:15, 11 April 2011 (UTC)