GuildWiki:Requests for adminship/Warwick (6)


 * 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.

=== Warwick (talk &bull; contribs &bull; edit count &bull; RFA page) ===

'''RfA failed. Reason: It's just not worth it. Rejected.'''


 * God, I have had way too damn many nominations. Lots of people probably thought I'd given up on the whole rfa front, but the ironic thing is its a tiny little thing that made me think about rfaing again - The fact I couldn't edit Entropy's page to vote in her poll. :P. The rationale of my nomination is this: I'm better than I was before, and I don't do much trolling anymore. I think I'm quite a lot more mature, wiki-wise than I was before. I doubt I'd abuse admin powers, because it'd be a fairly stupid thing to do. Surefire way to get kicked out of them, much? I also feel that I know what's involved in adminship. Sure, I seem to be relatively inactive, but I'm nearly always in IRC idling, on my gwiki msn, ingame, and I refresh RC every time I check, and I'm almost always there for a chat on my talkpage. If there's any vandalism going on, I revert it. I don't normally tag things for deletion/banning anymore, because I know that Viper will get round to it regardless. Adminship would probably increase my activity by quite a lot. I've pissed a lot of people off, and several people probably don't think that I deserve a chance, but I think I do. Plus, now if I'm a terrible admin, Entropy/Auron/Jedi can just demote me outright, without waiting for Wikia to respond. I've never been a believer in "If you screw up it can be fixed", its just that that's a bonus of the fact.
 * I feel, as I always have, that I could use admin tools well. As well as that, it'd probably increase my activity by quite a lot. I can't really think of many reasons why I should, to be truthful, though I can think of quite a few as to why its okay. Gwiki doesn't need more admins, but Entropy herself said "You can never have too many admins".. At least, I think it was Entropy. :P. Thats about it all. Oh, and I see quite a few things that could do with deleting that other people (Mainly Viper tbh) don't get to deleting for about 20-40 mins or so. But I'm not really certain if that's an actual reason.
 * I need more clarification on my rationale for why I deserve to be, and why I should be. I feel I can help this wiki quite a lot more than I can now with admin tools, but so can anyone else. I feel that I generally have quite a lot more of an idea than some of the other people who could be nominated about wikicoding, templates, and I've been here for quite a long time. Lots of people know me, and I feel that my word would probably be listened to. I also help the newbie users, but thats also something that quite a few people do (though I have a bit more patience than some people, Mr Delete Instantly :p). I feel that I could also benefit my "Wacky Schemes" as an admin more so. I could still do that as a regular user, admittedly. As I've already stated, my activity would only increase with adminship, since I'd be able to do the things I can't now, that I have to wait for other people to do. The only thing that currently is actually standing against me is my "Rocky History", which is impossible to get rid of anyway. My supporting qualities actually outweigh my negatives by quite a lot. I know the general code of conduct for admins, and what is involved in Adminship, which Gem stated previously, if I remember correctly, was a requirement for admins. If I wasn't suited to adminship before, which I probably wasn't, I feel that I am now more so than ever.
 * Okay, more on the way of why I should be a sysop. When you're asking why should I be a sysop, why don't you ask why anyone should be a sysop? Why was Viper sysopp'd? Why were his reasons better than mine? They weren't as well explained, imo. Why was Cress sysopp'd? He had 3 supports and 5 opposes. Why was Shadowcrest sysopp'd? Most other people havn't provided much in the way of a rationale for why they would be good with admin powers. Mostly it's just "I feel that I could use Admin powers well" etc. Whilst apparently we don't need Admins now, I could still help the wiki as a syosp as much as Viper, Shadowcrest, and Cress have been, to name a few. Why do I deserve adminship? Because I've remained a loyal contributor here for the last year dispite everything that wikia has thrown at us? Oh, wait, everyone else has done that. I've been stating my reasons as "Why don't I deserve adminship", because of the fact that just about everyone else had based it on that. So why do I deserve adminship? Because I've eaten everything thrust onto my plate, because I've remained a loyal contributor, because I've grown up specially for guildwiki. But mainly? Because I'd make a good one. Think what you want, but I'll still believe that I'd make a good admin.
 * Oh, and I accept the nomination. &mdash;[[Image:MaySig.png]] Warw/Wick 15:31, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

''Please summarize the candidate's qualifications below. Elaboration on a post, counter-arguments, etc. should be directed to the talkpage.''

Supporting qualities

 * Longevity / Experience of various forms
 * Helps and supports other users
 * Fair knowledge of wikicode and templates
 * Knows the general code of conduct for adminship, and what is involved in being an Admin
 * Can be a "Mover and Shaker"
 * Almost constantly patrolling Recent Changes for vandals
 * Friendly to the newer people, has patience with people whilst they're testing out
 * (list supporting qualities here)

Opposing qualities

 * Rocky history (Tendency to make quick decisions without community discussion leading to brash actions that are widely opposed by the community.)
 * General lack of confidence from some members of the community, partly due to rocky history mentioned above, and partly due to the ongoing discussion on the talkpage
 * (list opposing qualities here)

Neutral/Double-edged qualities

 * A tendency to (tag) delete first and ask questions never
 * (list neutral qualities here)


 * 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.