Meta:Requests for checkuser/Vermont

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a closed Meta-Wiki request. Please do not modify it.


Not ending before 30 October 2020 19:33 (UTC)

Hello! I've been considering putting my name in for a few weeks now, and especially after Vituzzu was, sadly, removed for inactivity. We could definitely use a few more meta-specific CUs, whether it be for the typical LTA-style vandalism we see, the increased spam problem, or the various other issues that seem to arise on Meta with relative frequency.

I've been an admin on meta since June 2019, and generally have focused my editing on clerking, general administrative actions (periodically in contentious areas), and anti-vandalism/spam. Lately I haven't been as active as I'd like to be due to RL issues, though I expect that to change soon as this winter is unlikely to be particularly busy for me.

I have been a CU on the Simple English Wikipedia since May, and would be happy to extend my CU-related volunteer work here if the community supports it. There is a decent amount of overlap between my volunteering here and on simplewiki, namely with LTAs and cross-wiki problem editors, that would result in CU access here improving my workflow and efficiency, as well as allowing me to better help Meta specifically. I'm quite active on IRC, I check my email frequently, and I'm generally easy to contact. I am also, of course, happy to answer any questions. Thank you for your consideration, Vermont (talk) 19:33, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Support Support Trustworthy, proven experience with CU, relevant experience on meta, reasonable use case. Happy to endorse. (also: first post!) GeneralNotability (talk) 19:36, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support Support per above. Sgd. —Hasley 19:38, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support Support I trust in Vermont's judgement, and I think they would be a great addition to the Meta's checkuser team. Thank you for volunteering, --Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:41, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Of course. Vermont is great and active guy. Without problems here.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 20:04, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support Support When I saw Arj call in Sotiale RFCU !vote for one more CU, I thought who will I be nominating if I will and the 1st one that pops up on my mind is Vermont. So I am glad to see this, thanks for volunteering, nothing more to say as GeneralNotablity covered it well. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 20:05, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support Support - Highly active, experience as a CU elsewhere, trusted to use the access well here. And it would be nice to have another non-steward CU. – Ajraddatz (talk) 22:17, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support Support Experienced, trusted. A good addition to the team. Thank you for volunteering. Rafael (stanglavine) msg 23:17, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Well, basically what Ajr said. I guess I can have a free ride on his comment :) — regards, Revi 23:36, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support Support --Rschen7754 00:04, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support SupportTulsi Bhagat contribs | talk ] 03:08, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support Support no concerns. ミラP@Miraclepine 04:46, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 07:00, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support Support Trusted on cross-wiki. An active admin who regularly works here every month. It's already a checkuser on other wiki. He/she can help other checkusers. Good luck. --Uncitoyentalk 08:58, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support Support, sure. Trijnsteltalk 09:56, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  15. SupportMarcoAurelio (talk) 10:46, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support Support. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 11:30, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support Support I think many people have already explained Vermont's capabilities enough. --Sotiale (talk) 11:53, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support Strong supportMJLTalk 17:32, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support Support yes. —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 17:51, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support Support --Esteban16 (talk) 20:25, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support Support of course. --IWI (talk) 22:11, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Strong support Strong support Jianhui67 talkcontribs 13:14, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support Support per Urbanecm. -- CptViraj (talk) 13:49, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support SupportTeles «Talk to me ˱C L @ S˲» 04:30, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support Support per GeneralNotability / trusted user, valid need --DannyS712 (talk) 14:55, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support Support--Saroj Uprety (talk) 15:13, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support Support --mirinano (talk) 02:24, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support Support -- Несмир Кудилович (разговор) 09:34, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support Support --Infinite0694 (Talk) 18:05, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Successful. (29/0/0; 100 %). This RfCU vote passes with unanimous support, and more than the required minimum 25 votes per policy. A request will be posted at Steward requests/Permissions to request that access be granted. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 19:54, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above request page is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Comments about this page should be made in Meta:Babel or Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat.