Commons:Checkusers/Requests/Arnomane

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

As User:Ausir pointed out that there is need for more than one checkuser and asked me if I would volunteer [1] additionally to my request for becoming a bureaucrat I decided doing so after carefully reading meta:CheckUser. Of course I hope that I will not need this tool and hope that we can keep the numbers of serious sock puppet problems in Commons low by other means -in a general atmosphere of collaboration. However as there was quite some time ago an incident with evil sock puppets of a user coming from de.wikipedia (luckily up to now this would have been the only case out of my limited perspective where Checkuser would have been adequate) I decided to candidate. However please carfully decide on your own upon my request. Arnomane 19:14, 27 March 2006 (UTC) [reply ]

• Support -- skINMATE 19:28, 27 March 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support. Arnomane is a trustworthy contributor. User:dbenbenn 19:30, 27 March 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Ausir 19:33, 27 March 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support as for dbenbenn. pfctdayelise (translate?) 03:59, 28 March 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support --EugeneZelenko 06:01, 28 March 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Oppose -- There is no need for a Checkuser appointee. Commons has been able to live happily until now without one. There is no reason why this should change. Teofilo 10:08, 28 March 2006 (UTC) [reply ]

  Comment I saw one case recently when CheckUser could help (there are several users who uploaded copyvios from http://www.airliners.net and claimed authorship). --EugeneZelenko 15:11, 28 March 2006 (UTC) [reply ]

  Comment Arnomane disobeys the rules and therefore I have reservations against his candidacy. See : this section at the village pump. Teofilo 11:38, 17 April 2006 (UTC) [reply ]

• Support Essjay ^{Talk • Contact} 09:55, 29 March 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support (hope there won't be any other request ... 3 CheckUser should do for the moment). Please take notice that, according to CheckUser_Policy#Access, we are talking here about a 70/80 % consensus with 25-30 editors approval. So that the 7 days shouldn't/couldn't apply. villy ♦✎ 18:56, 29 March 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support ABach 19:07, 29 March 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support--Jusjih 10:43, 30 March 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Sanbec ✉ 22:40, 1 April 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support — Arnomane is an excellent user whom I would gladly entrust with CheckUser privileges. —UED77 19:25, 3 April 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support - I agree with UED77. Thryduulf
• Support - --Lmbuga 07:38, 4 April 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Kjetil r 23:22, 8 April 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support --HardDisk 09:58, 9 April 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support --Prevert ^(talk) 09:13, 12 April 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Wholeheartedly Support Cary "Bastique" Bass ^parler _voir 15:19, 13 April 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support --Xelo2004 12:23, 15 April 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support--Lmbuga 09:36, 17 April 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• pro --Crux 15:09, 17 April 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support -- Denniss 01:46, 18 April 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support -- James F. (talk) 22:29, 19 April 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support -- ed g2s • talk 22:32, 19 April 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• SupportAnna 22:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Pietras1988 15:53, 20 April 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support - Amgine 16:00, 20 April 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support A.J. 20:21, 20 April 2006 (UTC) [reply ]
• Strong Support, If I have it, on arabic wiki ;-D, then he should have it. --89.48.206.36 11:53, 21 April 2006 (UTC) [reply ]

-89.48.206.36 is User:Tarawneh; that is I. So some times we need check user . My vote up counts :-D. --Tarawneh 12:01, 21 April 2006 (UTC) [reply ]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Checkusers/Requests/Arnomane&oldid=33086274"