Project:Requests for checkusership/M7

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful permissions request. Please do not modify it.

M7 (checkuser)

M7 (talk · contribs)

I would like to nominate User:M7 for checkuser status on Simple English Wikipedia. He is already a Wikimedia Steward and has all the requirements for checkuser access. - Huji ^reply 14:29, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Candidate's acceptance:

Thank you for the nomination, I accept and I also agree to abide to the WMF privacy policy. --M7 15:21, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

You now have checkUser access. Please subscribe to checkUser-l, the private mailing list for checkUsers. If you use IRC, you can contact Dmcdevit or Jdforrester for access to the private freenode channel #wikimedia-checkuser. Thanks. —Pathoschild 18:14:44, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Support

1. Blockinblox - talk 14:34, 18 September 2007 (UTC) I've always said M7 should be our checkuser if we ever had one. Blockinblox - talk 14:34, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
2. - Huji ^reply 14:40, 18 September 2007 (UTC) As the nominator.
3. - Cometstyles 15:26, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
4. -- Creol(talk) 15:37, 18 September 2007 (UTC) The obvious choice for the job.
5. Archer7 - talk 16:50, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
6. of course --vector ^_^ (talk) 16:54, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
7. Indeed. Phaedriel - 18:22, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
8. · Tygrrr^·talk· 18:36, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
9. --Werdan7^{T @} 19:09, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
10. --§ Snake311 _{(T + C)} 21:31, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
11. --Eptalon 21:59, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
12. Checkuser already in effect - but should you ever become inactive, I'd prefer you to give up your rights if you don't use them. Regards, and good luck! Majorly (talk) 00:16, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
13. --Yegoyan 01:11, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
14. Oysterguitarist 13:49, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
15. - Gwib^-(talk)- 16:22, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
16. - Jordan - talk 17:10, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
17. - no question of support from me, known & trusted --Herbythyme 10:49, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
18. I do not have very many changes on this project. But I am already a checkuser on the English Wikipedia, on Meta, and on Commons. I have worked with M7 and he is a good person. He is someone I trust. He is a hard worker. If he says he will give this work good effort, I believe him. I do not think he needs to be involved every day. People can reach him on IRC if there is something bad and important happening. For these reasons I think he is a good choice for checkuser here. It is hard for smaller wikis like this one to get the 25 support votes that are needed. So there may be some other concerned editors coming in to voice support for these candidates. I hope that is all right with all of you. I hope you choose to count my support. But I will not be mad if you decide not to count my support. ++Lar: t/c 13:43, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
19. —WODUP 19:15, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
20. FrancoGG ^{( talk )} 21:21, 20 September 2007 (UTC) Although a more active user on this project might be better, I'm sure M7 will do great as a checkuser. FrancoGG ^{( talk )} 21:21, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
21. Thanks for accepting nomination. --Cethegus 21:27, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
22. Maxim 22:52, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
23. Support. --Kyoko 00:27, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
24. ...Aurora... 10:06, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
25. Count me in - Alison ^❤ 04:36, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
26. Support Fully, on grounds he is WMF Steward, which means I can trust him. -- Spiderpig0001 Does whatever a spiderpig does! 21:36, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
27. One of the person that I trust more on wikipedia. --User:Filnik/Firma 12:55, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Despite his steward status, I want someone who is involved in the project daily or close to daily at the very least. -  BrownE34  talk  contribs  14:03, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
2. Usually, I don't vote when I don't know about someone... in this very case, the goal is to reach 25 people involved unless the vote is not valid. It's the only reason why I Oppose this candidate whom I'm too lazy to know more about him. ONaNcle 13:52, 20 September 2007 (UTC) The 25 people mark goal has been reached today ; therefore my vote is not needed any more. ONaNcle 12:35, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Comments

Is M7 active enough here for this? -  BrownE34  talk  contribs  15:29, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

It's true, I've been here the lesser part of two months and I've only just seen his name. Never once have I crossed it on the recent changes page (however, he might just be editing at a time when I'm asleep).

Gwib^-(talk)- 15:32, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, actually, when he accepts the nomination, he is accepting the responsibility. The need for two CUs is because each can check the requests made by the other one, so it wouldn't be a problem if one of them would check less regularly. Nevertheless, I think it is a good idea to nominate a third person. - Huji ^reply 16:13, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I share the concern that M7 is not very active here. My top two choices for CU would actually be Archer and Creol. I would perhaps be happy to have M7 and Creol for now and have Archer run in a few months once he's 18 (assuming, of course, that he would want the added responsibility). · Tygrrr^·talk· 16:30, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

That would be a wise idea, Tygrrr. By the way, maybe M7 would become more active here due to the new responsibility. - Huji ^reply 16:32, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Wow, nice to hear that you have the trust in me! I believe that although M7 is not that active as an editor, he would be able to perfom CheckUsers as quick as anyone else here if we send an email. If we're (for some reason) desperate for new CheckUsers when I'm eligible, I'd be happy to take it on, but I see no problem having M7 as a permanent CheckUser and can't think of why you'd need me. Archer7 - talk 17:01, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

This is in fact a great idea, and I strongly endorse it. Three CUs this trusted and knowledgeable ensure we won't have to worry about this for at least a couple of years. Phaedriel - 18:22, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

The above adminship 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.