Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/CheckUser and Oversight/2012 CUOS appointments/OS/DeltaQuad

DeltaQuad

CheckUser candidate pages: DeltaQuad • DoRD • Ponyo • Salvio giuliano

Oversight candidate pages: DeltaQuad • Foxj • Mentifisto• Mlpearc • NuclearWarfare • Ponyo • Salvio giuliano • Snowolf • Someguy1221 • Tiptoety • Worm That Turned

Comment on the candidate below or email (arbcom-en-clists.wikimedia.org) • Community consultation period open until 23:59, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

DeltaQuad (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)

Nomination statement (250 words max.)

Hello everyone. I am DeltaQuad, and i've been an administrator for just over a year now. I am applying for both the CheckUser and Oversight tools. I have been active in SPI for about two years now, and know the list of the Functionaries names almost off by heart. I am a UTRS (Unblock Ticket Request System) Developer, which was intended to bring block appeals from the mailing list (where I handled over 500 requests in about a 6 month period) to a ticket formatted system. I am also an ACC tool administrator, and have been for over half a year now. I also have info-en (f), permissions, and photosubmission queues on OTRS. I have also closed several RfCs including a few major ones, and at the time i'm writing this, I am still assisting in closing the Pending Changes RFC. I am applying for the tool to assist the community, in a way consistent with the policy they lay out, in connecting accounts and preventing abuse, but also in suppressing inappropriate non-public information and other related things from view. I am requesting the tools because of the frequent backlogs for CheckUser, both on and offwiki, and also help with fast suppression both through OTRS and private requests primarily through IRC.

Standard questions for all candidates

Please describe any relevant on-Wiki experience you have for this role.
My only "experience" is requesting oversight for what I knew fell in to the oversight guidelines, and none have been turned down, that I can remember to this day. Otherwise, beyond revdel for administrators, I have no experience onwiki clicking the one extra check box. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 18:04, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please outline, without breaching your personal privacy, what off-Wiki experience or technical expertise you have for this role.
I have tested both oversight functions (revdel oversight, and true oversight) offwiki. More importantly, I have interacted with people on OTRS regarding sensitive nature tickets, and this is the best experience to help an oversighter handle requests where users can be very agitated, upset, angry, Et cetera. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ)
Do you hold advanced permissions (checkuser, oversight, bureaucrat, steward) on this or other WMF projects? If so, please list them. Also, do you have OTRS permissions? If so, to which queues?
[email protected], for testing purposes. I have info-en (f), permissions, photosubmission queues on OTRS. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ)

Questions for this candidate

Please describe your familiarity with the Wikimedia Privacy Policy, Meta Oversight Policy, ENWP Oversight policy, and ENWP Outing policy. Also, without breaching privacy, for each of these policies, give an example of a time that you have used the policy when evaluating a situation or taking action. Pine^✉ 01:19, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Meta oversight policy, in regards to what can be oversighted and the English Wikipedia Oversight policy overlap quite a bit, and the only difference on what can be oversighted is one additional item for extreme vandalism on the enwiki policy. The outing policy works in conjunction with the oversight policy, because the same items that would be considered outing, are subject to oversight. Now the Privacy Policy is the blanket that covers all other policies, and would be considered the policy of last resort. It governs what can and can't be released, governing what is oversighted and what is not. Now with all those connections drawn, with keeping privacy in mind, I have dealt with the outing policy directly, and had to read through it's wording specifically. With that, any sensitive information was requested for oversight. These policies match over each other, so with most requests you will hit most, if not all of those four policies. I have a good knowledge of the policies listed and can easily say which ones revisions would fall under. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 18:37, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Comments may also be submitted to the Arbitration Committee privately by emailing arbcom-en-clists.wikimedia.org. Please note that the candidate will be provided the opportunity to respond to a paraphrased version of any emailed comments; the sender's name will not be provided.

Support See CU section. Nobody Ent 03:12, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I know of no issues that would preclude DeltaQuad's appointment and he has been helpful in the few interactions I have had with him. MBisanz ^talk 03:00, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I began working with him recently at SPI, but noticed him some time prior to this, and have always found him to be trustworthy and adequately cautious in his actions, generally insightful and always helpful. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 03:05, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
DQ is highly available on IRC where CU and OS requests are frequently received. His professionalism and technical abilities make him a natural for both roles. —DoRD (talk) 13:20, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I know DeltaQuad very well through my interactions with him on SPI, UTRS, IRC, ACC and heaven knows how many more abbreviations! I fully and strongly support DeltaQuad's request for the CheckUser and Oversight tools, one more person to add to my mental black book. The Helpful One 21:52, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support. See my comment at the CU request. Sven Manguard Wha? 23:41, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I support DQ and if he only qualifies for one flag, this is my first choice. My76Strat (talk) 01:49, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Extremely experienced. --Ankit Maity ^Talk _Contribs 15:58, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Has proven himself a level headed competent admin, would expect the same as an OS. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:17, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Solid work all around and an excellent choice for the oversight team. Daniel Case (talk) 03:30, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support per CU comment. Experienced and trustworthy. Mato (talk) 10:34, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support per CU comment.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 17:37, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support also per CU comment.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 17:57, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent work done on SPI, easily to be trusted with this. Darkness Shines (talk) 04:03, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above.--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:57, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support EeBee (talk) 01:03, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
DeltaQuad is a reliable, active and easy to reach user, and I'm sure he will be a fine oversighter. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 05:12, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Best choice after having a quick look at his work on WP:SPI. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^Talk ^Email 12:51, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Trusted candidate. Has the required experience for both CheckUser and Oversight permissions. TheGeneralUser (talk) 13:26, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]