Commons:Checkusers/Requests/Mike.lifeguard

 Support = 31;  Oppose = 1;  Neutral = 0 - Per consensus here I will now make the request at meta. abf /talk to me/ 13:30, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to all for their comments.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 17:12, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Note: Access turned on by Thogo at 13:57 (UTC) 10 November 2008: [1]

---

Mike.lifeguard for checkuser

By way of background - while Commons has a few CUs, few are active on a daily basis in the sense of watching admin board, logs & the like. Real life will become quite predictable for me for a short while - I am pretty certain I will be highly inactive for December & January (if it goes on beyond that I will drop the rights anyway). As such I feel some responsibility to ensure Commons is "protected" as well as possible.

I've known Mike & watched his work for a fair while now. Firstly on en wb where he is now CU & 'crat. It is just possible that I had some influence in encouraging him to widen his interest (!) & so I was very pleased to see him active on Meta dealing with cross wiki issues generally & the blacklist in particular. He now has admin & oversight rights there (just relinquished as unnecessary - which says much about Mike's views on rights). I suggested to him that he would be a useful addition to the admin team here. I believe he is highly effective & active here and on cross wiki issues.

He is one of a small handful of Wikimedians who I trust completely. That does not make him perfect, however it does make him a person who is responsible for what he does - very important to me. I would ask the community to consider Mike's work seriously & I hope you are able to support this nomination. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 08:45, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Position of trust gained by Mike -

• • Wikibooks RfA
  • Wikibooks RfCU
  • Wikibooks RfB
  • Commons RfA
  • Meta RfA
  • Meta RfO - now relinquished I notice.

• Acceptance - If the community trusts me to do so, I'll be happy to serve in this role.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 13:17, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Votes

Support

1.  Strong support with complete trust & thanks for helping. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 08:45, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
2.  Support yep Mike is good with this + a crosswiki CU will be helpful. --Kanonkas_(talk) 13:29, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
3.  Support I can't think of any reason not to support. Lycaon (talk) 13:30, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
4.  Support Good one, thanks for volunteering Mike Finn Rindahl (talk) 13:31, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
5.  Support I trust mike with this position and believe it would benefit the project. MBisanz ^talk 13:48, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
6.  Support EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:15, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
7.  Heel veel steun Sterkebaktalk 15:48, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
8.  Knows where his towel is ++Lar: t/c 16:12, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
9.  Support, --birdy geimfyglið _(:> )=| 17:39, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
10.  Support --MichaelMaggs (talk) 20:01, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
11.  Support per Kanonkas (talk · contribs) and Herbythyme (talk · contribs). Cirt (talk) 22:21, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
12.  Support Helpful in my experience. How do you turn this on (talk) 23:12, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
13.  Support --Foroa (talk) 06:38, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
14.  Support certainement —YourEyesOnly (talk) 14:57, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
15.  Support All interactions have been positive, appropriate, and collegial. Durova (talk) 18:24, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
16.  Support - I don't know that we need more CheckUsers, but if we do then Mike.Lifeguard is a great choice who is well-trusted across multiple projects. J.smith (talk) 08:50, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
17.  Support to equalise ME's oppose abf /talk to me/ 13:00, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
18. OK --Yikrazuul (talk) 20:15, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
19. support —DerHexer (Talk) 19:31, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
20.  Dəstək per long time working together . always helpful , always in touch , always informative , always patient to teach, always patient to ask lots of stupid question . --Mardetanha ^talk 19:51, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
21.  Support – Mike has demonstrated his trustworthiness in a number of Wikimedia communities. I don't see a reason to deny him this. - Rjd0060 (talk) 20:09, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
22.  Support I don't know how you are on non-commoners voting, but I'll vouch for mike as an existing CU elsewhere who is active and shares data to minimise vandalism. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 22:50, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
23.  Dəstək Very trustworthy. --Kimsə (talk) 04:45, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
24.  Support, of course. Pruneau^talk 22:46, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
25.  Support, absolutely! Mike has a long record of hard work for the benefit of the Wikimedia projects and the community. --SB_Johnny ^talk 11:12, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
26. Absolutely  Support OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 16:47, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
27.  Support Strong support. I have seen Mike in action as an editor, as well as a CU, and agree that he would be an excellent addition to the Commons CU ranks, together with the vastly overworked Herby. -- Avi (talk) 22:12, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
28.  Support Trusted user, why not. Herr Kriss (talk) 01:02, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
29.  Support He is Ok! Jacopo Werther (talk) 20:01, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
30.  Support —αἰτίας •discussion• 01:40, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
31.  Support He's a very good user. He has checkuser access on another wiki. He's trusted on multiple wikis Techman224^Talk 16:43, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

1.  Strong oppose See how he has tried to provoke me http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mutter_Erde#Civility Mutter Erde (talk) 13:51, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I can't see how Mike provoked you at all, he just gave you a warning. --Kanonkas_(talk) 13:57, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Please look again Mutter Erde (talk) 14:14, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

He simply told you to stop such comments, I fail to see how he provoked you when you more or less were uncivil, to people like me. --Kanonkas_(talk) 14:22, 27 October 2008 (UTC)