From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Symbol support vote.svg Support = 26; Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose = 5; Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral= 0 = 83,870967742% will make the request at meta. abf /talk to me/ 09:37, 24 February 2008 (UTC)



Bastique is a well known user, I do not feel a need to speak in his behalf. He already has access to the data as a steward, yet it would be more appropriate for him to have it locally within the project. That would really help us on, as we are working real hard to switch to commons for our image needs. Such a switch is a long waited heaven for trolls. As it would makes things harder for admins and checkusers to follow both sides. With users having the rights locally things might be a bit smoother. I know we already have 5 other CUs here, but I do feel that adding Bastique to the local list will make work on both sides much easier , and faster. I do hope that both Bastique and you would accept his nomination. --Tarawneh 01:14, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I accept. And I am honored by this nomination. Cary Bass demandez 16:45, 10 February 2008 (UTC)


  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as nominator --Tarawneh 19:51, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - we don't need more checkusers. He's already bureaucrat and steward, here are more than enough good and trustworthy Users, not only ten of them must have all the Positions. Without any given good cause why we need one more Checkuser, we shouldn't elect one more. It's a position only very few users should have use of. Marcus Cyron 19:52, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
We actually do need a checkuser that is trusted both within commons community and other wikis, I can only think in Cary, Lar, Bryan, and hmmmmm ... Any way this is not directed to commons, but to the needs of other wikis . When someone contacks cary and finds out that he has to make a few other posts on other pages cause Cary can access the data but needs the flag then we have something wrong with the procedures we are following --Tarawneh 22:03, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
That don't convinced me. At de:WP we have three CU's and that is really enough. Two of them are only from time to time present. Three for the second biggest Project and here are 5. And the CU at Commons only has to do with Commons. What is on other projects can not be important here, as long we see them as different an independent. Marcus Cyron 09:14, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support we really need more 'crates&Cu's&Oversighters%Admins. Carry is something like 'Commons-Jimbo' and I belive he cant abuse the rights even if he is not as active. Bon courage! abf /talk to me/ 20:01, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
    • However there is no point granting anyone rights if they are not sufficiently active to use them for the benefit of the community (this is not a matter of trust at all) --Herby talk thyme 20:07, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
yes Herby, Although I do not feel that it should not be, this is not directed to commons. Commons serve other wikis and we should keep the needs of such wikis in mind. Stewards are the trusted user for such positions, still they would need the local flags. --Tarawneh 22:03, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Marcus. Current checkusers take the role well, and I personally think Cary is too busy for this (of course, I think Cary is great, and one of the best Wikimedians EVER... but I believe in keeping roles like this to a minimum.) Thanks, Majorly (talk) 22:53, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
This is not about giving Cary extra rights, he already has access to CU data. This is about better serving other wiki needs through users trusted by these wikis. Cary should make the time if needed, as he already accepted the nomination. --Tarawneh 20:18, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Then we might as well make every user with checkuser right a checkuser here... really that is not a good argument. Cary is a busy person - he is a bureaucrat but makes very few actions compared to the other bureaucrats. He should make time for things he has already. Also, people like Lar and Herbythyme have checkuser in a ton of places so would be sufficient. Majorly (talk) 22:56, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Anthøny 23:49, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - more the timing than the candidate. Need more 'cratness, also agree with Majorly (:O) giggy (:O)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - on checkuser-l I found some cross-wiki vandalism include Commmons. Having a steward as a local CU on multilingual / hub-type service project like Commons may be an idea we would like to spread more. --Aphaia 11:31, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Although we already have two such user in Lar & Yann? --Herby talk thyme 12:23, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Lar already have an account on, I do trust him. Some times I even idealize him, but he needs to have more contacts with . I posted him a note when he created his account there telling him about the community sensitivity towards the outsiders, specially when it comes to Checkuser rights. CUs consequences back there are way much more serious than any other wiki . Some admins on the wikipedia-ar IRC channel kick inactive users cause they fear that such users might be bots gathering users IPs. Personally I had to drop my CU tag back there when I thought things might get ugly. Not that Lar is not trusted but he is still to be known among the community. Cary on the other hand is well known there. He works with a lot of the Arab wikipedians, and a lot knew him ( at least by name ) at the time of his steward elections. Regarding Yann, well, I can say that Lar is better known than Yann there. Again, this is not about commons, although I don't find it hard to see it as so. This is about making life much easier for other wikis. Plus we are not voting here to give Cary something new; he has access to the data. We are voting here to make him better serve other communities. --Tarawneh 20:18, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Tarawneh, remember when you said, "I do not feel a need to speak in his behalf" :) →Rocket°°° 20:34, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm a little lost as to how having explicit CU here (as opposed to using it here as a steward when needed) helps address issues of CU usage at ar:wp . Could you elaborate? Or are you driving at something else? Apologies. ++Lar: t/c 22:52, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's really hard to oppose a candidate like this, who I trust, it's just I can't really see this bringing that much benefit to Commons. And per Majorly, we should keep these rights to a minimum. →Rocket°°° 20:34, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Trusted user with an Excellent Relationship with many Communities. Tarawneh comments make good sense to me about why giving Bastique CU access here will be good for Commons and some other Communities. FloNight♥♥♥ 20:43, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Текущие чекъюзеры недобросовестно выполняют свои обязанности и я не уверен, что Бастик будет их добросовестно выполнять.--Ahonc (talk) 13:14, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
    Вы могли написать этому в Английском, пожалуйста? --Boricuæddie 23:35, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
    Oppose. Current checkusers fulfil teh duties not conscientiously, and I'm not sure that Bastique will do it conscientiously.--Ahonc (talk) 08:27, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
    Small corrections :-) Should be Вы могли бы написать это по-английски, пожалуйста? --EugeneZelenko 15:27, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Mønobi 22:43, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 16:24, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cary has my full trust and respect. --Meno25 09:31, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Grandpa will make a Great Checkuser and with his foundation + Steward experience, He ain't no Newbie :) !!...--Cometstyles 14:39, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I think it would be a little arrogant of me to try and judge whether Cary is too busy to take this on. That must I think be a matter for him to decide. If Cary says he is willing to commit to being a local checkuser on Commons, he is both trustworthy and sufficiently competent to fulfil that role. WjBscribe 18:39, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. I don't see a problem with having a few extra checkusers, if they're very trustworthy, and I'm sure Bastique is. Cowardly Lion 21:26, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support : Oxam Hartog 22:44, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel (talk) 10:59, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Agree --Prevert(talk) 11:23, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Loco085 msg 17:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC) A really good person. :-)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Raymond Disc. 17:43, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nick 17:05, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I trust Cary implicitly here and his experience and track record speak for themselves - Alison 22:21, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Bien sûr. Cary has my full trust. Arria Belli | parlami 20:22, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support RedCoat 21:07, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportDark (talk) 06:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OhanaUnitedTalk page 05:32, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Patstuart (talk) 16:43, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Szczepan talk 20:52, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Gnangarra 23:32, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. I fully trust Cary to be a checkuser. --Deskana 00:09, 23 February 2008 (UTC)


  • You really should get Bastique to accept the nomination before transcluding this. —Dark (talk) 02:10, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Yes DarkFalls, we did have a chat . --Tarawneh 03:28, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
We believe you, but candidates should always make a statement here for traceability. Sorry Lar, I know that this is your line :)Rocket°°° 07:15, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Woah, stay mellow there! Dodge's Lar inevitable attack giggy (:O) 09:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Tarawneh, I trust you and your rationale is fine. But per Rocket000, traceability is important. Also due to courtesy, I understand it is an estabilished custom 1) most votes come after the public acceptance and 2) the first supportive vote may come from the nominator himself. :) --Aphaia 08:27, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
LOL. Of course Bastique must post his public approval :D . The YES I posted was for: Yes I talked with Bastique not for Yes he accepted. I should have been more careful with my initial replay. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Or am I missing something else here? --Tarawneh 10:11, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment and it is a comment - no more, no less. There is a greater need for active 'crats than CUs --Herby talk thyme 10:53, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
So I should use my crat tools more often :) Bastique demandez 16:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Very much so, yes... as long as you're following established process (or working to get it changed while you follow it anyway). I think we're keeping up but more hands make light work. Just remember it's not a race. ++Lar: t/c 19:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Strange, when did the vote take place?, I found the log , not the vote? Or just a temporary forgotten flag? --Tarawneh 11:34, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
    • I spotted it the other day & came to the conclusion that it was a forgotten flag (does happen with stewards). There was a cross wiki check Cary did. Equally - as it was Cary - it didn't bother me much although I meant to mention it to him :) --Herby talk thyme 12:44, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Note the difference between accounts. User:Cary Bass is solely for office level actions. I reject other requests because I, personally, am not a duly elected Checkuser. Bastique demandez 16:49, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I was confused there for a sec and then realized you normally sign as Cary Bass... →Rocket°°° 17:52, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Crystal clear. As I already thought. --Tarawneh 19:51, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Absolutely agree that Cary needs to accept this before we go. I strongly suggest we withdraw this whole thing, and start over, starting with a nom that lays out the case clearly, doesn't include any confusing statements like "I hope both Bastique and you would accept the nomination" (who is you? Another CU potential candidate he was talking to? Us, the voters?) and has an acceptance BEFORE it's transcluded. I really appreciate T's enthusiasm though. I'll reserve comments on the nomination itself for after it's accepted. ++Lar: t/c 14:59, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Lar, I really can't figure out where we hit the road fork here. Things are much more simple, aren't they? --Tarawneh 19:51, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
This nom is messy, that's all I'm saying, because it was put up before Cary accepted. That usually causes (small and relatively unimportant) messes. ++Lar: t/c 19:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The taking on of additional duties when 'crat work has been needed here for sometime concerns me? Your 'crat activity is minimal at best. (trust is definitely NOT the issue here) Thanks --Herby talk thyme 17:06, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
On my own RFB, there were comments to the effect that the current bureaucrats are doing a fine job... I tend to agree at this time. As it happens, Cary does do occasional bureaucrat work, but normally Eugene and Lar are faster. Majorly (talk) 18:34, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
I do agree more Burea work is needed. What concerns me at this point is that a local flag would make things way much more faster for other wikis when contacting Cary. --Tarawneh 19:51, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
I just really need to get a better explanation of this as it's been advanced and I still am not completely following it. ++Lar: t/c 19:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)