GuildWiki:Requests for adminship/M.mendel


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the nomination of a user for adminship. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

=== M.mendel (talk &bull; contribs &bull; edit count &bull; RFA page) ===

M.mendel was promoted on 11-02-08.

I think that he has shown many qualities that a good admin should have. He has shown a great interest in bettering this wiki and putting it back "on top". I think that having mendel as an admin could only turn out great! -- Shadowphoenix  18:23, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

I am flattered to be nominated here, after a mere 2 3 months on the wiki, and my share of raising controversial issues.

However, this RfA catches me unprepared; maybe it comes too early. Today I am still in shock over seeing the wiki through the default skin, and was thinking of announcing that I would refuse to edit any pages that have ads in the page body (banners top and bottom I don't mind, as long as they don't come with a fake header - as the bottom ad currently does -, and a sidebar ad would be ok even if the sidebar has to expand slightly to 300px) because I don't want my work presented that way.

Besides that, I probably could support myself only with reservations: a mere 2 months on the wiki, holding minority opinions on certain issues (how much that'd affect my adminning is anyone's guess), likely to use "undelete" more often than "delete".

I hope you can understand that, on the whole, I wouldn't mind if the RfA was shelved for another month.

A month has come and gone, I'm still here. So I guess that's good. Yes, I would like to be an admin. It helps with "power editing": editing Mediawiki namespace, being able to move more than 2 pages at a time, being able to delete my typos and false starts myself is going to be directly helpful.

There remains the issue about banning. As you all know, I am the voice of moderation here, believing that in the long run, mediation and pushing for a compromise are going to be more effective than wielding the banstick. I've been discussing this for as long as I've been a registered user on this wiki, and I'm likely to keep raising these issues whenever they come up, whether I'm promoted or not. Is there compromise in sight? Maybe.

--◄mendel► 06:07, 30 July 2008 (UTC), amended 06:26, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I am practicially administrating GuildWiki. Two of the more obviously "admin-y" tasks were applying to Wikia to have the shared help enabled, and the new preprocessor turned on. But I do pretty much everything else that is expected of an admin, except that for the things that require admin powers, I have to get people who have them to do them. This happens several times each week now, and I believe I've requested more admin actions in the last months (page deletions, edits to protected pages, and more) than some present admins have performed on their own. ''You could say that, de facto, I am the only admin forced to work under the "four eyes" rule. ;-)'' --◄mendel► 10:43, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Please discuss the candidate's qualifications on the talkpage, and consolidate the summaries below:

Supporting arguments

 * Diplomacy/personable
 * Knowledgeable in technical stuff
 * A mover-shaker
 * Takes much effort to explain himself
 * Objective in dealing with counter-arguments
 * Bold for the betterment of the wiki, voice for the under-represented

Opposing arguments

 * Use of abrasive examples to make his case
 * Potential of butting heads with some other admins on a too-frequent basis?
 * Does not seem to match the admin criteria Mendel self-proposed?
 * Blows things out of proportion, making issues out of non-issues
 * Taking AGF too far?

Neutral/Double-edged arguments



 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.