Wikipedia:Requests for checkusership/Vector

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

Vector (checkuser)

Result: 13 support/0 oppose - 25 votes were required for the permission to be given.

Vector (talk · contribs)

I would like to nominate myself for a CheckUser, I'm also a sysop and a bureaucrat here but I think that I could help more with CU flag. Thanks --vector ^_^ (talk) 18:46, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support

Support, if they are SySop & B/Cat, then they can be trusted as CHU. Spiderpig0001 Does whatever a spiderpig does! 05:50, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support, per Spiderpig0001 ONaNcle 05:43, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
-- Creol(talk) 18:32, 24 September 2007 (UTC), 4 is better than 3.[reply]
--Eptalon 18:38, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
--Yegoyan 19:16, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
--M7 19:38, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
--Werdan7^{T @} 20:51, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I've candidated him as CU also on it.wiki some times ago. I renew my support. --Filnik^\b[Rr]ock\b 12:55, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
..We can never have enough checkusers and .snoopy. being a checkuser might be quite useful..--Comet styles 11:56, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
--WODUP 05:04, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's always a good thing to have more checkusers, and Vector is certainly suited to the job. Good luck! ( ar ky ) 20:50, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
--Maxim 00:49, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No problems here. JetLover 22:53, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Comments

Question Same thing Majorly asked. Do you think you have sufficient knowledge of IP addresses, proxies etc to be able to fulfil this role well?--Werdan7^{T @} 18:50, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm currently studying computer science at Padua's university (en:University of Padua) and I spend about 5-6 hours in internet, yes I have a sufficient knowledge of IP address and proxies. --vector ^_^ (talk) 18:27, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question 2: It seems the three candidates above are all going to get the CU permission. Why do you think we need a fourth one as well? - Huji ^reply 18:56, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

4 is better than 3....right? --vector ^_^ (talk) 18:27, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps 3 is enough for now. It is going to get three weeks since this voting is open, and unlike the last three requests for CU permission, this one hasn't got more than a half of needed votes. I'm going to close this, on October 13th (when it gets three weeks full), as an unsuccessful attempt. I appreciate a future effort, when we really need another CU. - Huji ^reply 12:16, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hope that the others 2 'rat have the same Huji's idea! --vector ^_^ (talk) 18:21, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You mean, me and Archer7? Personally I think it is reasonable to impose a time limit for CU votes, since we have one for other votes on this page — rather than have it continue indefinitely, but I don't know if there are any precedents over at meta on this question. I also think Huji's intention to close on the 13th sounds like a generous and fair amount of time to try and round up the required consensus for a 4th CU. Blockinblox - talk 18:53, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blockinblox, as far as I've noticed (and once told by a steward) the regular duration is one to two weeks on most wikis. That's why I thought a three week period is fair enough. - Huji ^reply 19:21, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem for me, you can close now, if you wont :-) --vector ^_^ (talk) 05:40, 12 October 2007 (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.