Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for checkusership/Archer7

Add links
From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archer7

[change source]

I think that I can now be trusted with CheckUser information, and if I'm not online, I'm just an email away.

Support

[change source]
  1. Strong Support. Archer7 has been active, knowledgable, and diligent in dealing with sustained vandal attacks, especially when they're targeting Wikipedians (rather than the Wiki in general), such as Hailey last month and Reri/Billz this month. Clearly Simple would gain by Archer7 having this tool to help him deal with these particularly vicious vandals. Simple is getting increasingly active, and we should have the ability to police things ourselves, rather than having to rely on stewards that are mostly active on other Wikis. Freshstart 00:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support. Very good worker, seems to be a good admin, worthy of trust. --Cromwellt|talk 04:38, 14 May 2006 (UTC) I'm changing this to strong support. Excellent contributor and admin, who won't abuse his rights or let others abuse theirs either. Certainly worthy of additional trust. --Cromwellt|talk|contris 02:41, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support. Great admin that we can certainly trust with checkuser. -- Psy guy 04:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support Trustworthy editor. DaGizza 05:17, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support Naconkantari 21:32, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Oppose. He has been very immature during the recent dispute in my honest opinion. -- Billz 15:50, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Support -- I have checked his edits and do not believe that he has been immature. Sorry for my previous accusations. Billz 12:38, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support. Can be trusted with an extra tool. -- King of Hearts 21:47, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support GangstaEB talk contribs 17:39, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support per comment 1. Picaroon9288 03:48, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support. Being admin is doing the right thing. This also involves standing up for users rights, even against a peer. Archer7 therefore has my support. -- Eptalon 10:15, 27 May 2006 (UTC)Neutral:Vote changed till role in edit conflict is fully clarified. -- Eptalon 11:35, 29 May 2006 (UTC)Strong supportThe way this edit conflict was handled only makes my full support for Archer7 stronger -- Eptalon 23:07, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Strong Support. Trusted admin indefinately. Jordanhatch 19:26, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support googl t 18:09, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Strong Support. Archer7 consistently shows dedication to the project. - Tangotango 16:11, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

[change source]

Oppose

[change source]
  1. Oppose. -- aflm (talk) 17:48, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose There aren't enough problems on the Simple Wikipedia to require any admin to have the checkuser bit. For the very rare occasions when a checkuser might be required, a request could be made of one of the English Wikipedia admins with checkuser capability. BlankVerse 11:44, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkusership/Archer7&oldid=10092676"