Wikipedia:Requests for checkusership/Barras 2

Support

1. Absolutely. I appreciate the support Barras has given at WP:RFCU (I'm the one who made the AN thread about the backlog). He's shown that he can be trusted with the tools in the past on this wiki and is clearly a trusted member of the global community through his stewardship. My only worry is us finding 25 people to participate in this! CountryANDWestern (talk) 18:46, 11 May 2026 (UTC)
2. Yes, please! Ternera (talk) 19:02, 11 May 2026 (UTC)
3. Hell yes!!! Barras has experience in using CU before and is very active at the minute. Our current CU team is not very active, some for temporary reasons and some for more long-term reasons - Peter indicated he would step down from the role, Fr33kman is currently unable to login, and Eptalon and Vermont have not been as involved with CU work lately. Combined with Djsasso no longer being a CU there is certainly a case for a new checkuser and right now Barras is the perfect candidate. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 19:23, 11 May 2026 (UTC)
4. Support per both CountryANDWestern and Ferien. ShadowBallX (talk) 20:13, 11 May 2026 (UTC)
5. Incredibly easy Support, thanks for volunteering, Barras. We definitely need more folks on the checkuser side and honestly probably oversighters too, given the problem Ferien described. I hope we get the necessary 25 votes. Garsh (talk) 21:14, 11 May 2026 (UTC)
6. Support per ShadowBallX Yeatglazer (talk) —Comment without a date added on 23:20, 11 May 2026 (UTC)
7. Support PieWriter (talk) 12:05, 12 May 2026 (UTC)
8. Why not?--BRP ^ever 15:18, 12 May 2026 (UTC)
9. Support --NDG (talk) 21:09, 12 May 2026 (UTC)
10. Support --Icodense (talk) 22:09, 12 May 2026 (UTC)
11. Support Trusted user through and through. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 15:16, 14 May 2026 (UTC)
12. support Trusted user. --Der-Wir-Ing (talk) 18:01, 15 May 2026 (UTC)
13. Support normally I'm very difficult when it comes to expanding the CU/OS team, but with the state the team is in now, with a good few CUs experiencing a good amount of limited activity and the removal of a once very active CU/OS, I can't (at least not in good faith) place the same requirements as I would normally - especially with Barras' recent re-election as a stew.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 21:48, 16 May 2026 (UTC)
14. Support An asset to the community. 🤘🤘 DFRD (talk) 20:08, 17 May 2026 (UTC)
15. I think that more CUs are needed for a community the size of simple wiki EasternShah (talk) 17:53, 18 May 2026 (UTC)
16. Support - Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 18:02, 18 May 2026 (UTC)
17. Support - they're not already?!?!? Ravensfire (talk) 17:13, 19 May 2026 (UTC)
18. Support --Auntof6 (talk) 22:28, 20 May 2026 (UTC)
19. Support -Annh07 (talk) 11:04, 21 May 2026 (UTC)
20. Support- user is extremely experiencedCyberwolf (talk) 17:08, 21 May 2026 (UTC)
21. Support Jolly1253 (talk) 07:13, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
22. Support- Barras had this right before, and he gave it up during a period where he was less active here. I really see no reason to not grant the right again. -Eptalon (talk) 07:54, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
23. Support — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 22:01, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
24. Support - Peterdownunder (talk) 12:19, 24 May 2026 (UTC)
25. Strong support. Sorry for being late, my available time has been a bit streched lately. --M7 (talk) 19:51, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

Oppose

Strong oppose This wiki has enough checkusers. I don't want to see any passengers. SG5536B 11:44, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Note that this account was made just 8 minutes before making this !vote. CountryANDWestern (talk) 12:20, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

•  Bureaucrat note: This vote is struck as their account was created after the request had started. This account has also since been globally locked. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 13:29, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Oppose Same as SG5536B. 椿 (🎀talk) 05:35, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

• User is Globally Locked PieWriter (talk) 10:27, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• I am a bit worried that the 25 votes requirement may not be met, since we have only a few active contributors. PieWriter (talk) 07:26, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

  There are several people who didn't voice their opinion yet and are regularly active. Just from looking at the recent changes during the last days, we'd be more than enough people to gain 25 votes. Maybe some people simply don't care much about such request or don't want to support this request and thus don't comment at all. Maybe because no one wants to be the first oppose. Anyway, the request doesn't need to be closed this evening. It can be open for longer as it happened in the past with CU/OS request. We will see what happens within the next days. -Barras talk 07:34, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

  Agreed, we should keep voting open a bit longer or as Barras said, we don't have a lot of users active/the one's that are active may not care to contribute to voting in things like these. Given the current state of activity from our users, should we consider lowering the threshold? TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 00:00, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

  The threshold is set via global policy; we can’t amend it locally. CountryANDWestern (talk) 00:07, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

  How long should we keep this open? Do we usually leave it open until the minimum number of votes has been reached? PieWriter (talk) 09:10, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

  2 weeks is usually good for this, these never get closed within 7 days and that is okay. We can go beyond two weeks as well, though if we get over a month then it's worth closing at that point. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 11:40, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

  The last RFCU was open for about six weeks. That usually isn't a big issue. There are currently 9 (support) votes missing. Technically, the project has enough people to comment here, as written above. I'm not sure if it would be useful or appropriate to ping active users directly to voice their opinion or if that would be seen as canvassing. Even oppose votes would be good actually, as that would at least show that people noticed this request. Maybe a post at WP:ST and WP:AN would be good. However, I won't do that myself as I'm obvious biased here. I think neutrally pointing to the request and asking people to comment wouldn't be a problem, in fact it's pretty much what happens for steward elections and also U4C elections with central notice banners. Same with pinging active users. If that is ok, it should be done by someone who is not me. ;-) -Barras talk 12:56, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

  How about for such request we post a message on the site banner, like what they do in Wikiversity etc? PieWriter (talk) 10:27, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

  Site banner is perhaps excessive imo. We usually do a neutrally worded simple talk post, AN post, watchlist notice, Discord / IRC post (although I think the Discord server now really doesn't like mentioning RfAs etc even neutrally as it can be viewed as canvassing, and IRC is very dead at the moment, so we are kind of missing both of these) and this is sufficient, I think when you get to CentralNotice you'll end up appealing to many more people beyond active editors to the point it's probably unreasonable. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 13:47, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

  Oh PieWriter (talk) 10:25, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

  Can't believe sock puppets are appearing with legitimate looking signatures trying to make this fail. PieWriter (talk) 10:27, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

  Impersonators/LTA I've globally locked in the past. They just try to be disruptive. Nothing we really need to care about. -Barras talk 12:10, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

  Socks are weird some put so much effort in they might as well contribute constructively Cyberwolf (talk) 17:12, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

  For the record, the last request for checkusership was actually for BRPever and closed after 10 days. How long these requests take can vary quite a bit. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 13:34, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

  The requirement seems to have been now met PieWriter (talk) 09:34, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

  Yep. Just needs a 'crat to close this request. Thanks to all voters here! -Barras talk 09:42, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

  Perhaps a post on Simple Talk that there is a request for CU permissions open and asking for comments? Ravensfire (talk) 17:15, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

  I left a neutral comment on Simple Talk asking for more community feedback. I think that should be sufficient. Garsh (talk) 23:47, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.