The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new topic on this or other appropriate talk page. No further edits should be made to this text.
The result was: Checkuser status granted. --Poetlister 20:14, 16 April 2008 (UTC).
I am responding to JeffQ's plea here for more people to stand for Checkuser. I am comfortably older than any possible age limit requirement :-(. I have been an admin here for over six months  and hope that the community can have confidence in me. I have experience of being a Checkuser on a private Wiki.--Cato 20:07, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Support. Cato has been an extensive and responsible contributor and admin, and I know of no reason to object to his nomination for this position, if he is willing to take it on. This position can involve far more responsibility than mere adminship, and though JeffQ deserves whatever break he wishes to take from the task, I would hope he would also stick around. I can fully sympathize with his desire to retire though, as I myself have declined invitations for the position, and probably always will. Even with the responsibilities I already have, I often fall behind on many basic editing tasks I would like to take care of. ~ Kalki 22:22, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Support. Cato has been a reliable administrator. I feel confident that he can be entrusted with this position. - InvisibleSun 01:02, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Support Conscientious and meticulous.--Poetlister 20:35, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Support, I agree with what the others have written - Cato has certainly shown the necessary responsibility to assume this role as well. ~ UDScott 15:26, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Support I have always found Cato a good admin and very helpful.--Yehudi 16:18, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Support I totally support Cato for this role. I think he has contributed a lot to Wikiquote, both as admin and editor, and I expect he will handle the responsibilities of Checkuser with his usual sense of dedication and cooperation. --Ubiquity 18:28, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Support, longstanding good admin. BD2412T 23:54, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Support , outstanding contributor and responsible, capable of handling a position of trust. Modernist 02:41, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Support Since his or her promotion, Cato has shown good judgment and performance as a sysop. I haven't recalled any controversial sysop action from Cato. And as Jeff Q said, I think the current CU team have a pressured need for more hands. If we can work together in this sphere too, it will benefit both the project and the current two active CUs. --Aphaia 09:28, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Support. Once again I apologize for my glacial pace at responding, this time to my own request for CheckUser help. (I'd warned Cato in our offline discussion a while back about this, but I'm afraid I've been even slower than I'd anticipated.) Cato's tireless work here as a user and admin has been exemplary, and his interactions with users, both new and old, have demonstrated both conscientious attempts to improve the project and the willingness to admit and correct mistakes that I believe is essential to the tricky work of checkusering (checkusery?). His efforts to assume good faith in the face of editing that some of us oldtimers would block without hesitation are the kind of caution and patience that I like to see in a CU. His support of BD2412's motion to unblock Zarbon helped convince me to review Zarbon's situation and eventually reverse my earlier block. I feel confident that he will make an excellent and prudent checkuser, and I urge the community to support his nomination so that we can more readily fix the growing problems that only a CU can detect and confirm. ~ Jeff Q(talk) 13:58, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Support checkusery tool for a helpful editor. --Bradeos Graphon 16:44, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Support per the above Ripberger 21:05, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Support The project has a definite need for more CUs, and Cato's track record shows that he'd be a good candidate for the position. EVula// talk // 14:57, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Support per all previous comments.--JayJasper 17:13, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Cato and I have had our differences, he chose not to support me for steward, but I do think he works hard, has the trust of the community, and can be trusted by fellow CUs and others to execute the tasks with discretion and politeness. As pointed out, having a third CU is a good idea, as a wiki must have at least two at all times, or none. Therefore I support his candidacy. ++Lar: t/c 03:28, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
I hope Lar and I have made up since the steward election.--Cato 20:57, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Support - seems to be active, committed, cognisant of due process, and well liked. Webawaretalk 13:24, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Support - I was initially reluctant since to vote at all since I've had no direct interaction with this user, but from reviewing some contributions and logs, as well as the esteem of other users I trust, I'm confident Cato will make a good checkuser. I'm particularly impressed with the stipulation on the call for checkuser candidates that technical ability/knowledge was mentioned (as it should be), and I believe Cato meets that requirement as well. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 02:30, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Support - as BD2412 had stated earlier, and I am saying now, I fully agree about Cato as he has shown support in the past and has very admirable admin qualities. - Zarbon 23:32, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new topic on this or other appropriate talk page. No further edits should be made to this text.