Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/CheckUser and Oversight/2023 CUOS appointments/CU

DatGuy

 * Nomination statement
 * Hello, I'm DatGuy, and I'm applying for the CheckUser team. After my RfA last year, I was going over the administrative backlogs when SPI caught my eye in a way I didn't expect. After reading up on the patrolling administrator instructions, I've gone about handling the cases that are available to me, and helped with emptying the backlog entirely (despite the quick resurgence) earlier as well as contributing some improvements to GeneralNotability's spihelper script. I feel fairly confident in my ability to discern whether two accounts are related through public evidence, or also rather importantly whether they're unrelated. I am also experienced in the AbuseFilter extension and its use to track sockpuppeteers. The CheckUser tool would allow me to reduce the other backlogs, both on-wiki and in various queues, and I believe that especially with the upcoming IP masking changes more CheckUsers will be needed to mitigate bad actors.

Standard questions for all candidates (DatGuy)

 * 1) Please describe any relevant on-Wiki experience you have for this role.
 * As mentioned in my nomination statement, following my RfA I took an interest to SPI. Starting slowly as a patrolling administrator, I began picking up the ins and outs of SPI, including behavioural ways to conclude whether accounts are sockpuppets, meatpuppets, or totally unrelated, proper proxy detection and handling (with help from MarioGom), and more. I contributed to the case backlog hitting zero (despite the quick rebound) and made a few improvements to GeneralNotability's spihelper script.
 * 1) Please outline, without breaching your personal privacy, what off-Wiki experience or technical expertise you have for this role.
 * Keeping it intentionally vague, I go about my workday with a need to look into things deeper than surface level while ensuring I avoid confirmation bias about any preconceived notions, which I believe translates well into SPI. I am also regularly in and around sensitive information.
 * 1) Do you hold advanced permissions (checkuser, oversight, bureaucrat, steward) on this or other WMF projects? If so, please list them. Also, do you have VRT permissions? If so, to which queues?
 * I do not hold any advanced permissions on any WMF project. I previously had access to the VRT info- and permissions- queues, but they were removed in October 2020 for inactivity.

Questions for this candidate (DatGuy)

 * Editors may ask a maximum of two questions per candidate.


 * The following question intends to test your understanding of the CU policy and the way CU checks are handled on the English Wikipedia. If you were a CheckUser, would it be permissible for you to run a CU check on me right now, based solely on the fact that I am asking you this very question at this venue? 78.28.44.127 (talk) 23:03, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
 * No. CU is used to counter disruptive behaviour (encompassing sockpuppetry, vandalism, UPE, etc.), and asking a question here is no reason to believe you are engaging in it. DatGuyTalkContribs 09:35, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Clarifying my earlier response, this is based on the (possibly overly optimistic) belief you are genuinely an unregistered user who's interested in the CUOS appointments. If I were more cynical, I may believe you are trying to either evade scrutiny (WP:SCRUTINY), intentionally deceive by editing while logged out (WP:LOUTSOCK), or possibly attempting to impact internal discussions that would affect your other account (WP:PROJSOCK and its footnote), and hence run a check on you in spirit of WP:BADSOCK. DatGuyTalkContribs 12:20, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I've blocked the above IP for obvious project socking. We do not have to play "guess the master" for such clear disruption of our processes. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:47, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Comments (DatGuy)

 * Comments may also be submitted to the Arbitration Committee privately by emailing . 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.


 * As a CU who spends a lot of time at SPI, I've seen DatGuy contributing there and can't think of any problems I've seen. Having CU will make them more effective at combating sockpuppetry so I support their being given the bit.  RoySmith (talk) 15:28, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Relaying here my comments from the functionary consultation - DatGuy seems competent, and sensible enough to learn the things he does not yet know. He is an occasional (or more?) patrolling admin at SPI and I've never had an issue with his actions. Happy to see him join the CU team. firefly  ( t · c ) 15:36, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Congratulations on your forthcoming appointment DatGuy.To expand on my reasoning: They say also rather importantly whether they're unrelated: this is absolutely fundamental, and—in light of it being something that should be nailed above the door to the CU-wiki but probably isn't!—they should be tooled up right now merely on that. It is so easy to go looking for things which make people look like socks that, were one of a gung-ho mindset, that one forgets to look for reasons they might not be.  SN54129  16:39, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I wholeheartedly endorse DatGuy's request — they're a calm and collected administrator, who is quick to stop, ask for help and listen when unsure. They will make a good addition to the CU corp — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 17:51, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm familiar with DatGuy's work at SPI and I'm satisfied that he has the judgment and technical knowledge required for the role. Moreover, he's clearly the most qualified of all the candidates. Spicy (talk) 18:48, 19 September 2023 (UTC)