Commons:Checkusers/Requests/Bastique

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 Support = 26;  Oppose = 5;  Neutral= 0 = 83,870967742% will make the request at meta. abf /talk to me/ 09:37, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bastique

Vote

Bastique is a well known user, I do not feel a need to speak in his behalf. He already has access to the data as a steward, yet it would be more appropriate for him to have it locally within the project. That would really help us on ar.wiki, as we are working real hard to switch to commons for our image needs. Such a switch is a long waited heaven for trolls. As it would makes things harder for admins and checkusers to follow both sides. With users having the rights locally things might be a bit smoother. I know we already have 5 other CUs here, but I do feel that adding Bastique to the local list will make work on both sides much easier , and faster. I do hope that both Bastique and you would accept his nomination. --Tarawneh 01:14, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I accept. And I am honored by this nomination. Cary Bass demandez 16:45, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

  •  Support as nominator --Tarawneh 19:51, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose - we don't need more checkusers. He's already bureaucrat and steward, here are more than enough good and trustworthy Users, not only ten of them must have all the Positions. Without any given good cause why we need one more Checkuser, we shouldn't elect one more. It's a position only very few users should have use of. Marcus Cyron 19:52, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
We actually do need a checkuser that is trusted both within commons community and other wikis, I can only think in Cary, Lar, Bryan, and hmmmmm ... Any way this is not directed to commons, but to the needs of other wikis . When someone contacks cary and finds out that he has to make a few other posts on other pages cause Cary can access the data but needs the flag then we have something wrong with the procedures we are following --Tarawneh 22:03, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That don't convinced me. At de:WP we have three CU's and that is really enough. Two of them are only from time to time present. Three for the second biggest Project and here are 5. And the CU at Commons only has to do with Commons. What is on other projects can not be important here, as long we see them as different an independent. Marcus Cyron 09:14, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
yes Herby, Although I do not feel that it should not be, this is not directed to commons. Commons serve other wikis and we should keep the needs of such wikis in mind. Stewards are the trusted user for such positions, still they would need the local flags. --Tarawneh 22:03, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Per Marcus. Current checkusers take the role well, and I personally think Cary is too busy for this (of course, I think Cary is great, and one of the best Wikimedians EVER... but I believe in keeping roles like this to a minimum.) Thanks, Majorly (talk) 22:53, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is not about giving Cary extra rights, he already has access to CU data. This is about better serving other wiki needs through users trusted by these wikis. Cary should make the time if needed, as he already accepted the nomination. --Tarawneh 20:18, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Then we might as well make every user with checkuser right a checkuser here... really that is not a good argument. Cary is a busy person - he is a bureaucrat but makes very few actions compared to the other bureaucrats. He should make time for things he has already. Also, people like Lar and Herbythyme have checkuser in a ton of places so would be sufficient. Majorly (talk) 22:56, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lar already have an account on ar.wiki, I do trust him. Some times I even idealize him, but he needs to have more contacts with ar.wiki . I posted him a note when he created his account there telling him about the community sensitivity towards the outsiders, specially when it comes to Checkuser rights. CUs consequences back there are way much more serious than any other wiki . Some admins on the wikipedia-ar IRC channel kick inactive users cause they fear that such users might be bots gathering users IPs. Personally I had to drop my CU tag back there when I thought things might get ugly. Not that Lar is not trusted but he is still to be known among the community. Cary on the other hand is well known there. He works with a lot of the Arab wikipedians, and a lot knew him ( at least by name ) at the time of his steward elections. Regarding Yann, well, I can say that Lar is better known than Yann there. Again, this is not about commons, although I don't find it hard to see it as so. This is about making life much easier for other wikis. Plus we are not voting here to give Cary something new; he has access to the data. We are voting here to make him better serve other communities. --Tarawneh 20:18, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Tarawneh, remember when you said, "I do not feel a need to speak in his behalf" :) →Rocket°°° 20:34, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a little lost as to how having explicit CU here (as opposed to using it here as a steward when needed) helps address issues of CU usage at ar:wp . Could you elaborate? Or are you driving at something else? Apologies. ++Lar: t/c 22:52, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Yes DarkFalls, we did have a chat . --Tarawneh 03:28, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
We believe you, but candidates should always make a statement here for traceability. Sorry Lar, I know that this is your line :) →Rocket°°° 07:15, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Woah, stay mellow there! Dodge's Lar inevitable attack giggy (:O) 09:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Tarawneh, I trust you and your rationale is fine. But per Rocket000, traceability is important. Also due to courtesy, I understand it is an estabilished custom 1) most votes come after the public acceptance and 2) the first supportive vote may come from the nominator himself. :) --Aphaia 08:27, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
LOL. Of course Bastique must post his public approval :D . The YES I posted was for: Yes I talked with Bastique not for Yes he accepted. I should have been more careful with my initial replay. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Or am I missing something else here? --Tarawneh 10:11, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So I should use my crat tools more often :) Bastique demandez 16:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Very much so, yes... as long as you're following established process (or working to get it changed while you follow it anyway). I think we're keeping up but more hands make light work. Just remember it's not a race. ++Lar: t/c 19:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note the difference between accounts. User:Cary Bass is solely for office level actions. I reject other requests because I, personally, am not a duly elected Checkuser. Bastique demandez 16:49, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I was confused there for a sec and then realized you normally sign as Cary Bass... →Rocket°°° 17:52, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Crystal clear. As I already thought. --Tarawneh 19:51, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Absolutely agree that Cary needs to accept this before we go. I strongly suggest we withdraw this whole thing, and start over, starting with a nom that lays out the case clearly, doesn't include any confusing statements like "I hope both Bastique and you would accept the nomination" (who is you? Another CU potential candidate he was talking to? Us, the voters?) and has an acceptance BEFORE it's transcluded. I really appreciate T's enthusiasm though. I'll reserve comments on the nomination itself for after it's accepted. ++Lar: t/c 14:59, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lar, I really can't figure out where we hit the road fork here. Things are much more simple, aren't they? --Tarawneh 19:51, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This nom is messy, that's all I'm saying, because it was put up before Cary accepted. That usually causes (small and relatively unimportant) messes. ++Lar: t/c 19:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment The taking on of additional duties when 'crat work has been needed here for sometime concerns me? Your 'crat activity is minimal at best. (trust is definitely NOT the issue here) Thanks --Herby talk thyme 17:06, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
On my own RFB, there were comments to the effect that the current bureaucrats are doing a fine job... I tend to agree at this time. As it happens, Cary does do occasional bureaucrat work, but normally Eugene and Lar are faster. Majorly (talk) 18:34, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I do agree more Burea work is needed. What concerns me at this point is that a local flag would make things way much more faster for other wikis when contacting Cary. --Tarawneh 19:51, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I just really need to get a better explanation of this as it's been advanced and I still am not completely following it. ++Lar: t/c 19:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Checkusers/Requests/Bastique&oldid=33086307"