Commons:Oversighters/Requests/Tiptoety

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Successful; granted by Shanel. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:26, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tiptoety

Vote

Links for Tiptoety: Tiptoety (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth)

NOTE: OV and CU requests run for two weeks here rather than just one. So this will close no earlier than 23:54, 26 April 2010 (UTC).

Hi everyone. I have served as both a administrator and CheckUser here on Commons for a little bit now. In both of those roles, I have ran across a number of instances that require suppression. I think Lar and other oversighters can attest to the fact that I have sent a number of requests to the mailing list (something I helped to create). Having access to oversight will also help me in the investigation of sockpuppetry cases. I am already identified with the foundation, and have read the privacy policy. Seeing as we currently only have three oversighers, only two of which are active I would like to offer my services to commons once more. Tiptoety talk 23:54, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

  1.  Support sure. -- User:Docu at 00:02, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2.  ok I've worked with Tiptoety and I think he can handle this job. Note: I would like to see an Oversighter who is in an Asian or Australian timezone sometime soon. ++Lar: t/c 05:45, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3.  Support Trustworthy user. Pruneautalk 08:28, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  4.  Support. I'm certain Tiptoety would make a good OV. — Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 10:31, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  5.  Support --Jarekt (talk) 15:26, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  6.  Support, sensible and reasoned candidate. -- Cirt (talk) 18:10, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  7.  Support Agree that it is helpful for at least some people on a wiki to have both CU and OS, and Commons would benefit from Tiptoety having both tools. Thanks for volunteering to do more work :-) FloNight♥♥♥ 20:48, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  8.  Support --Nillerdk (talk) 06:18, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  9.  Support –Tryphon☂ 06:43, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  10.  Support - SatuSuro (talk) 12:24, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  11.  Support Diego Grez (previously MisterWiki) let's talk 15:49, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  12. �Support: No objections from me. I don't really know how often oversighters are needed at Commons, but I can't see the harm in adding another one. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:15, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  13. �Support-KTo288 (talk) 18:30, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  14. �Support Why not? -FASTILY (TALK) 18:48, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  15. �Support --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:36, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  16. �Support, of course. A project the size of Commons should have more than three oversighters. Blurpeace 04:03, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  17. �Support --Herby talk thyme 08:01, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  18. �Okay Pmlineditor discuss 08:20, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  19. �Support Responsible and trustworthy enough. --Bsadowski1 08:37, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  20. �Support Certainly. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 04:51, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  21.  Support —Dferg {meta} 13:14, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  22.  Support I'm happy to support someone with the necessary knowledge for this job. --The Evil IP address (talk) 14:58, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  23.  Support Having worked with Tip as a CU and OS on EnWiki, I am comfortable trusting him with OS here on Commons. As an aside, if there is no active Commons OS around, a steward can be pinged too, but it is preferable to have local OSers perform local hidings. -- Avi (talk) 03:42, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  24.  Support should be fine. From doing oversight at en.wiki for a brief period, I feel that it never hurts to have a few extra folks with this tool. Casliber (talk) 13:18, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  25.  Support —Dark talk 22:57, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  26.  Support Highly competent and trustworthy. Ottava Rima (talk) 01:00, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  27.  Support without hesitation  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:10, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  28.  Support --Túrelio (talk) 16:27, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  29.  Support I know him as a reliable user. --High Contrast (talk) 20:14, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  30.  Support Yep  Chzz  ►  02:14, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  31.  Support No concerns. MBisanz talk 02:46, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Which two do you think are active? From my perspective, we all 3 are active. ++Lar: t/c 05:44, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Lar. While I think you probably have a far better idea of the level of activity amongst the oversighters than I do, I was just going off contributions, and it would appear that Rama is not super active. But, I guess, like I said I can not see what is going on behind the scenes. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 08:03, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • If anything, it should be the other way around. Inherently, both CheckUsers and Oversighters are trusted competent members of the community. The only difference between the two is that one (CU) requires slightly more technical skills. I am of the opinion the OS should be granted to all CUs as they often work hand and hand. And seeing seeing as both are positions of trust, and both require identification it seems a bit silly to waste the communities times with multiple requests. Just my two cents though. ;-) Cheers, Tiptoety talk 09:09, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • What you just described is what Docu said, isn't it? Did you really mean it the other way around, or did you misread Docu's question (or maybe I did and I'm not making any sense right now)? –Tryphon☂ 09:27, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree with his answer, I think what he is trying to say is that there could be OS that aren't also CU. -- User:Docu at 09:31, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think it may require a policy change to grant this to existing OV/CU, but going forward we could bundle the stuff together and say that we are always having the election for both roles when a candidate steps forward, or something. But I agree with the gist of this thinking. ++Lar: t/c 12:37, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that does indeed sound like a good idea. -- Cirt (talk) 23:46, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • We could probably have additional users we this special delete option without them all needing to be CU. It seems more needed here than at other wikis. -- User:Docu at 09:50, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: Might indeed something to consider. If you ask me, I'd completely trust the current Checkusers to properly use the Oversight bit. --The Evil IP address (talk) 17:56, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question: Currently, (child) nude/porn and that sort of images are (again) a hot topic after the Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger said he reported Commons to the FBI. What is your opinion about this and how would you react to an oversight request of an image of that sort where the question if someone is over 18 isn't obvious after looking at the image and there's no proof for the model of being under-age. (Let me know if you don't understand what I mean; I just happened to wonder what you would do in such a case). --The Evil IP address (talk) 17:56, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • First off, I would say that in situations such as this one consulting the other oversighters on the mailing list would be my first course of action. From there, we would need to decide if the file really warrants suppression or just regular deletion. I will add that such a decision needs to be made with great care given the implications of suppressing a file that someone uploaded with the summary of "child porn." That said, suppression is reversible and I think we should be better safe then sorry. Obviously, if the situation is clear cut or there is a request from a foundation employee suppression should be used without hesitation. Hope this answers your questions. Tiptoety talk 23:17, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Oversighters/Requests/Tiptoety&oldid=38261103"