 |
This forum page has been archived. Please do not make any further edits unless they are for maintenance purposes. |
|---|
Forums: Index > User rights requests > Adminship request - Gears of duty
Hello everyone, I am not much of a public speaker so please excuse the rather short text. As you can see, I am making an adminship request and I will explain my reasons to the best of my abilities. If you think I clearly should not be admin, please tell why so I can improve upon myself. I have been an active contributor here for roughly a year and decided it's time. I would also like to thank the good admins here, for teaching me many important things about proper editing, which will also come in handy if I become an administrator.
Reasons of adminship request[]
- I am actively overseeing the wiki activity, watching for potentially bad edits. Any tools that can help me fight malicious contributions will be of great help.
- I am always happy to help new contributors out, and having adminship may help me help them.
- I am not only doing this for adminship, but also to receive feedback from the community so I can improve. This is also a good way to see how the community trusts me.
Contributions[]
| There should have been a list of this user's edit counts here, but the edit counts feature is no longer available. |
Other notable contributions are as follows:
- Been a helpful contributor on the Fo3/NV creature project.
- Have made good use of the rollback feature against poor edits.
- Have reported a good amount of malicious contributors.
Games[]
- Fallout 1 (completed four times)
- Fallout 2 (completed twice)
- Fallout 3 (completed 11 times)
- Fallout: New Vegas (completed five times)
- Fallout Tactics (Not completed)
Votes[]
| ||||
To be honest, I've never really seen that many of your edits, but I have done a quick look and most edits are revert edits so Im gunna have to be neutral on this. Saxony4 13:48, July 23, 2011 (UTC)
- Samuel L. Whackson Talk Poll 14:29, July 23, 2011 (UTC)- Go for it ToestheUnwholy 15:08, July 23, 2011 (UTC)
- i think you have done enough around here to become an admin. The Nemisisx 15:11, July 23, 2011 (UTC)
- --Xa3 15:13, July 23, 2011 (UTC)
- Cone was here 15:18, July 23, 2011 (UTC)
- You seem responsible and nice. I've seen some of the edits you've made and I can tell you care about putting time into contributing to the vault. You've also reverted quite a few edits anons have made stupid edits, so you do keep up with keeping the vault clean. Fingers crossed. Living Lifeless 9
- --Kris
- Of course. You have a reasonable amount of edits and would be a good addition to the team of admins. -- Yakov 16:34, July 23, 2011 (UTC)
- I just haven't seen you very active around here. BILLYOCEAN 21:29, July 23, 2011 (UTC)
- I'll write my reasons tomorrow, I'm too tired at the moment. And it's nothing personal. -- 21:48, July 23, 2011 (UTC)
- Right. I have noticed few contributions from you and I don't just mean your edits (though lacking somewhat), as I've seen little to no community presence from you. It might not seem important, but if you're going to be given some authority you need to have shown you need it or can use it effectively. You've given no convincing argument as to why you want these powers, to "help" against malicious users alone isn't a good enough reason in my book as it is something anyone can say and you definitely don't need admin powers to help new users as I was doing this extensively before I became an admin. You've also provided no proof regarding the "help" you've given. Your contributions are also a little strange to note, as many users revert bad edits and I haven't noticed this from you in particular. Also your contributions to the FO3/FNV creature projects don't seem to have been anything outstanding as I wouldn't say 150 edits makes you a top contributor to the cause, though they are appreciated I feel it is somewhat misleading to note. Also as Scarface points out I've seen you actively avoid conflict many times and I don't feel this is a good quality in an admin. I recall one event in the last couple of weeks where you arrived out of the blue to a chat discussion and attempted to "diffuse" the situation by telling everyone to stop as it is all opinion based (or something to that effect) to which I simply said "Gears, no" and you left with no quarrel. Conflict is part of the job description, the reality is that arguments and conflict will happen, and I see your unwillingness to participate as highly problematic. -- 18:31, July 25, 2011 (UTC)
- To add to this, a quote from you I just found: I never like discussions, just makes my blood pressure go sky-high. -- 18:57, July 25, 2011 (UTC)
- To add to this, a quote from you I just found: I never like discussions, just makes my blood pressure go sky-high. --
- Right. I have noticed few contributions from you and I don't just mean your edits (though lacking somewhat), as I've seen little to no community presence from you. It might not seem important, but if you're going to be given some authority you need to have shown you need it or can use it effectively. You've given no convincing argument as to why you want these powers, to "help" against malicious users alone isn't a good enough reason in my book as it is something anyone can say and you definitely don't need admin powers to help new users as I was doing this extensively before I became an admin. You've also provided no proof regarding the "help" you've given. Your contributions are also a little strange to note, as many users revert bad edits and I haven't noticed this from you in particular. Also your contributions to the FO3/FNV creature projects don't seem to have been anything outstanding as I wouldn't say 150 edits makes you a top contributor to the cause, though they are appreciated I feel it is somewhat misleading to note. Also as Scarface points out I've seen you actively avoid conflict many times and I don't feel this is a good quality in an admin. I recall one event in the last couple of weeks where you arrived out of the blue to a chat discussion and attempted to "diffuse" the situation by telling everyone to stop as it is all opinion based (or something to that effect) to which I simply said "Gears, no" and you left with no quarrel. Conflict is part of the job description, the reality is that arguments and conflict will happen, and I see your unwillingness to participate as highly problematic. --
- EB683
- To begin with I thought that I would vote yes. But I've investigated a bit, and noticed the same as Xa3, and that is the edit count. I recently noted that You've been here in over a year, and I've been here for 6 months (approx.) and still I am ahead in both article and blog/forum and such edits. This is what tipped it to neutral. Another thing I've noted with you is the, lets say unwillingness, to confrontation and debate, and more often than not you discourage from debating at all. In my opinion an admin should be able to handle conflict, and, "take the bull by the horns", so to speak, and I don't believe that you are such a person. No offense. Hugs Scar: "Say 'ello to my little friend!" 14:23, July 24, 2011 (UTC)
- Kastera (talk) 19:25, July 24, 2011 (UTC)
- It's not that I feel you'd be bad for it, I just don't know that I've seen your prescence enough for an admin. Valoopy
- veryblackraven 07:23, July 25, 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry, nothing personal but like some other I don't know you, and the portrait of Cartman! and Xa3 on you is not in your favor, especially the last sentence of Cartman!. I think the work you do on the Wiki doesn't require to become admin. Itachou [~talk~] 00:54, July 26, 2011 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but I've only occasionally seen your comments on blogs. You have obviously done good work, but I haven't really seen you in my two months here, and I have been active everyday. At the same time, however, I don't have a bad word to say about you and it seems no-one else does either, so I'll have to remain neutral. 13:25, July 27, 2011 (UTC).
- --RAM 19:20, July 28, 2011 (UTC)
- I'm afraid not (yet). You have 2000 edits, but in a year that's not so many. And 40% blog comments, that's also not in your favor when it comes to counting article edits. You need to do a bit more of that and show you're contributing. And you need to build confidence and avoid phrases like Cartman mentioned. For example let's hear your voice a bit more on the forum pages. People may not agree with you but don't let that get you down. Step by step you'll become more sure of yourself. Those things will help to progress here. You still have some way to go. Jspoel 21:07, July 28, 2011 (UTC)
- I would like to see a lot more in terms of knowledge with the wiki (i.e. wiki markup, templates etc.), so as to be able to support and answer questions that will come your way as a admin. 19:50, July 29, 2011 (UTC)
Comments[]
@Xa3 Reasons? I need them to improve. gears of duty
- It's nothing personal, but I don't know you. I've been around since February, and this is literally the first time I've heard of you. Another user pointed out that "most" of your edits are reverting other edits, but that I don't mind, and see as a good thing.(if you look at my edits they are similar.) But I looked at your profile, and you've been here for a year, and have only made 900 some edits in articles, and I started editing in may and I'm past 1,500. the reason I voted yes on Cartman's admin request, was he was always out there helping people, and contributing, and I actually thought he was an admin when I started. Xa3talkContributions00:03, July 24, 2011 (UTC)
- I can't agree with the second statement (about the number of edits), but I agree with the first one. And still having almost as many blog comments as article edits is not an advantage, IMHO. veryblackraven 07:26, July 25, 2011 (UTC)
- The aim I was going for with that comment, was that someone who reverts alot of edits, is generally quick at catching vandals and what not, and it could also be seen as they know the quality of stuff to properly be on the vault, and can filter out bad edits, not just vandalism. --Xa3 01:00, July 26, 2011 (UTC)
- The aim I was going for with that comment, was that someone who reverts alot of edits, is generally quick at catching vandals and what not, and it could also be seen as they know the quality of stuff to properly be on the vault, and can filter out bad edits, not just vandalism. --Xa3
- I can't agree with the second statement (about the number of edits), but I agree with the first one. And still having almost as many blog comments as article edits is not an advantage, IMHO. veryblackraven 07:26, July 25, 2011 (UTC)
Result[]
Due to the mixed feedback, I'll have to decline this request. I'm sure if you continue to improve based on the feedback given, you'll have better chances in case you choose to make another request :) -- Porter21 (talk) 20:30, August 2, 2011 (UTC)