Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for checkusership/Kennedy

Add links
From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship, request for bureaucratship or request for checkusership that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.

Kennedy

[change source]
Kennedy (talk · contribs)

End date: February 5, 2009

Nomination from Razorflame: Hi there all. I would like to present Kennedy to the community for Checkuser. He is 18 and will be willing to confirm his identity with the WMF if this were to succeed. He has been an experienced editor here on this site for several months now and I believe that he has shown people that he could be trusted with the CU tools. He has agreed to follow the privacy policy and I fully trust him to do so. Thank you! Razorflame 18:44, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate's acceptance: I accept. Thanks Razor Kennedy (talk) 18:57, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support

[change source]
  1. Support as nominator. Razorflame 18:44, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  2. This sounds like a good idea. I was a bit concerned with the recent retirement thing, but nobody's perfect and it's obvious K only has the best for this project in mind. Majorly talk 18:59, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support - I trust you completly. Yotcmdr =talk to the commander= 18:59, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support - Agree with Majorly. Juliancolton (talk) 19:00, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support I was definately dismayed when it looked like we might lose you as an admin. I have found you to be very level headed and trustworthy. And CU is all (and only) about trust. So I don't believe you would use the tool in a way that would be against policy etc. -Djsasso (talk) 19:00, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support no one better for the job.-- Chris†ianMan16 t c r 19:53, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  7. --vector ^_^ (talk) 19:53, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support I have faith he meets the only important criteria, namely sticking to the privacy code. Nothing else matters Soup Dish (talk) 19:56, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support I trust Kennedy with the duties and responsibilities of checkuser. Furthermore we need more checkusers who don't have all available user rights. Gives more "power" spread over different people, which is a good thing in my opinion. PeterSymonds (talk) 20:04, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support Yes. Shapiros10 21:41, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support. Out of interest, what exactly happens if all three RfCUsr's go through? We don't need *five* checkusers... MC8 (talk) 22:03, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  12. I definitely trust you to use the CU tools. Good luck, Malinaccier (talk) (review) 23:19, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support Yes, of course. - Æåm Fætsøn /ˈaɪæm ˈfætsən/ 10:08, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support - Per everyone above. --§ Snake311 (I'm Not Okay!) 11:40, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Definitely. — RyanCross (talk) 17:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support Per everyone.SimonKSK 01:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support – no issues here. :) TheAE talk 01:43, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

[change source]
  1. Not as active as I'd like a CU to be. I'm thinking about Creol's replacement only. It has nothing to do with trust. Synergy 20:25, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Understood. I have been very active previously, and I intend to be just as active in the future. Kennedy (talk) 23:01, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Barely an admin for 3 months is not what I like in a CU to be plus no actual experience as a CU anywhere and thirdly per Synergy, not as active. We have a problem on enwiki with so many grawp socks and no CU ever around because all the wrong people have CU. I don't really want that to happen here ...--Cometstyles 21:58, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually, it is closer to four months. We all have to start somewhere, don't we? How can I have CU experience if you oppose me for not having experience. Thirdly, your solution to better finding sockpuppets is to promote less CU's? Could you clarify please? Kennedy (talk) 23:00, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree, Pathy it's a bit silly to oppose over not having CU anywhere, how is he supposed to get it if he's opposed for not having it? Majorly talk 23:04, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I think he's saying that three months as an admin is too short without checkuser experience elsewhere. PeterSymonds (talk) 23:08, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Per PeterSymonds, I wasn't clear on this. You have no Cu experience anywhere plus you are barely an admin for 4 months which is a no-no for me, but if you had CU experience on any other wiki, even if its not wikimedia, then I would have supported ...--Cometstyles 03:45, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Thats my point. How can I have experience, especially if you vote against me, for not having aforesaid experience? How will I ever have experience of CU if I don't get the CU tool? Kennedy (talk) 13:05, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, there are other wikis perhaps, but he is also opposing you because of time as an admin. I disagree with that, but that's his opinion. Majorly talk 13:07, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[change source]
That's correct, per what I said at the other RfCU. :p PeterSymonds (talk) 19:57, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What I'd like to see from a CU candidate would be some technical experience. I mean, as in how to find a proxy of different kind, XFF, etc. Anything you might want to sum up? Thanks, --Kanonkas(talk) 03:29, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely a must, as you should be aware of how blocking a range can block thousands of good editors or how certain ISP's make use of their ips like Verizon or AOL etc ..--Cometstyles 03:48, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkusership/Kennedy&oldid=8895564"