Forum:Administrator Request (2) - SigmaDelta54

This forum page has been archived. Please do not make any further edits unless they are for maintenance purposes.

Forums: Index > Wiki proposals and applications > Administrator Request (2) - SigmaDelta54

Hi everyone. My name is Danny, and I am requesting your permission to be an administrator of Nukapedia.

Foreword

It's been a full two months since I made my last request. I realised that it was simply too early, along with a series of misunderstandings. And what I did to combat the tide was wrong and only fanned the flames. But now I'm here before you all, seeking the administrator position once more.

About

I've been editing here for roughly 5 months, improving upon pages in a variety of ways. I have been joining the chat more often as I find it to be a relaxing way to communicate with fellow users in an amicable atmosphere. There are quite a few times where there are no admins on for a while when vandals, trolls, and bad content can thrive. I have, and will continue to be active here, spending a lot of time monitoring the recent changes and editing. I've added a ton of delete templates, see users "edit-warring", and watch vandals repeatedly vandalise pages or user pages to no end. I will fill these "gaps" where the aforementioned things can happen by utilising the administrator tools to resolve conflicts, delete pages that do not fit our content criteria, and ban vandals/trolls if necessary.

Contributions/Qualifications

• Has made 2700+ main namespace edits.
• Served as a full-fledged moderator for roughly 3 months.
• Reported countless vandals & trolls to our admins.
• Created quite a few pages, not counting the dozens of redirect ones to improve navigation.
• Leader of the weapon condition project (almost finished)
• Worked on the FO3 locations project, as well as a bunch of others.
• Active editor, have been on here everyday since December (except for my 1.5 day hiatus while I was in Mexico :P)
• Patrols the recent changes pageand checks edits to make sure they are in line with our policies and guidelines.
• Capitalised page names and within-article content in accordance to the guidelines.
• Image categorisation

-You may notice I have a relatively large number of talk page edits. I do enjoy talking with fellow users, and helping less-experienced users in becoming more effective editors, and communicating with editors to resolve a disagreement, respond to a query, or present one.

There should have been a list of this user's edit counts here, but the edit counts feature is no longer available.

Conclusion

Please vote objectively. Criticism is welcome and wanted, regardless of vote!

-SigmaDelta54^(Talk) 00:52, March 20, 2012 (UTC)

The vote

Poll finished on 12:52 am March 27, 2012 (UTC).

• A consensus must be reached by voting before any action is taken.
• You can vote by placing one of the following lines in the appropriate section:
  • Use # {{yes}} ~~~~ if you support the proposal.
  • Use # {{no}} ~~~~ if you are against the proposal.
  • Use # {{neutral}} ~~~~ if you wish to abstain.
• Please do not edit other user's votes.

• Don't get me wrong, you are an outstanding editor, but your interactions with some of the people here have raised my concerns. I will gladly change my vote if I feel it is right. -- Bacon-Man ^{Talk to me goose!} 01:00, March 20, 2012 (UTC)
  • In light of Leon's and Guardian's comments, I hereby change my vote :3 -- Bacon-Man ^{Talk to me goose!} 00:31, March 21, 2012 (UTC)
• Admins need to be able to act civil no matter who they are talking to. -- ☢Valoopy☣ 01:12, March 20, 2012 (UTC)
• BILLYOCEAN ^{Wanna talk?} 01:43, March 20, 2012 (UTC)
• To be an admin is to act as one. You are going the right direction, but now is not the time. Pony of the East 03:02, March 20, 2012 (UTC)
• MysteryStranger: Trust in the power of Infinity! 10:53, March 20, 2012 (UTC)
• This is my final decision, promise :P I looked at the negatives too much when I first voted but realised your positives outweigh them. I still think this is too rushed but I'm still sure you'll make a good admin. But just remember don't rush into other people arguments/conversations on talk pages, it can be annoying. The Australian Kiwi 16:57, March 22, 2012 (UTC)
• Happened upon some Wi-Fi and I saw that you finally put up your second request! I think you have grown a lot during the days proceeding your previous request, and while you do have certain aspects that still need improving, I believe you have earned the right to join the Administrative ranks. You're still what I would consider an uncut diamond, but so were the rest of us before being inducted and we honed ourselves by becoming used to our new responsibilities. Also, for a little criticism, try and become a little more decisive. I see you changing opinions quite a bit. ;) Anyways, I'm going to finish up here and then I'm off to the beach. Is it unhealthy that I checked up on here during my vacation? ^Skål!
• If that (^^) were true, then many admins like Leon and Ryan shouldn't be admins, right? I think that people are coming to expect too much, and the approach we need is to understand, as so many of us have tried to say, it is not a rank, but rather it gives the user a few more buttons. Sure there are responsibilities that come with it, but this is not an autocratic hierachy, and people need to start recognising this. What is the point of grabbing power: there is no power, only tools. Besides, someone needs to fill in for me over the next few months... Φύλαξ ^{[~μίλησε μου~]} 23:24, March 20, 2012 (UTC)
• -- 02:11, March 21, 2012 (UTC)
• Believe me, I wouldn't say yes if I didn't mean it. I think you've earned it. Promise me one thing though, if you do make it, don't but in into other's conversations, whether it being on talk pages, or whatever. I'll think you'll do fine though-- 07:26, March 21, 2012 (UTC)
• The lone wanderer's bad-ass grandma 22:41, March 21, 2012 (UTC)
• CharlesLeCheck
• Person of Refinement 17:43, March 23, 2012 (UTC)
• Eeeeeeenope.-- 17:58, March 23, 2012 (UTC)
• I don't see any compelling arguments against him. He's done a good job so far. he has a bit of growing to do, but I think with the help of the community he will get there. Agent c 23:04, March 23, 2012 (UTC)
• 23:33, March 23, 2012 (UTC)
• The Gunny

Comments

I'm going to have to think before voting sig. You didn't take the no well last time.... and this concerns me. I think you've grown a lot, but I'm not sure if you've learned how to deal with rejection well enough yet. For now, consider this me voting "present", and we'll see how it goes. Agent c 00:56, March 20, 2012 (UTC)

Of course, take your time. There are 7 full days ;) -SigmaDelta54^(Talk) 00:57, March 20, 2012 (UTC)

Right now I'm too short of time to vote, but I will say the only thing left that you need to avoid doing is getting involved in other people's conversations. Although sometimes this is helpful and called for, other times it can feel intrusive because even though people are aware that others can see their conversation, it's sometimes unpleasant to have others trying to get involved. This hasn't happened a lot to me, but it's a jist I've been getting. So just try to judge them better :) Φύλαξ ^{[~μίλησε μου~]} 20:07, March 20, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that, Ci. I wish to address a point. This is not a "power-grab" simply because there is no power to be grabbed. From our policies and guidelines:

“Please note that the additional power is not a reward for good contributions nor a promotion to have more authority than other users. Simply put, a special rights user is a user who is being trusted with access to certain technical features to aid in article or community maintenance.”

Thanks. -SigmaDelta54^(Talk) 23:33, March 20, 2012 (UTC)

I've noticed that you haven't made any mention of why you would like Admin powers or what you would do with them. I'd be interested in hearing those points. The Gunny 23:41, March 20, 2012 (UTC)

Oh, sure, let me add that in. -SigmaDelta54^(Talk) 23:48, March 20, 2012 (UTC)

Just to go back to what Ci said, I do agree that although you mean well, sometimes it can seem disruptive when you enter another argument. Especially when said argument has been resolved. I know you mean well but sometimes it's best to just let the two people work it out themselves. Other than that, you're doing good. 03:09, March 21, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Yessie, and Ryan! -SigmaDelta54^(Talk) 18:29, March 21, 2012 (UTC)

Well been a long time lurker here and got a feeling of folk here, though never really got into the politics round here. Seen quite a punchfights going about mostly between the higher up folks, and that makes me ponder if we choosing the right people, or at least at the right time. I reckon ya good and all, sure as hell dedicated. But to every coin there's two sides ya know, and your other side is that ya just too eager. Other folk here already mentioned that and I looked up, talked to folks back in chat for another view and etc. Ya seem to jump up and down and show up everywhere there's a commotion, kinda like those folk at parties who wanna get their face into every pic. I remember like it was yesterday bout this time I came bout while lurking 'round: http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:ToCxHawK#Achievement_Boosting. Even when the admins are already done their piece ya show up! I noticed too your a lil bit too on the fence ya know. Ya change opinions bout everything least 3 times over! I mean no offence, but come on mate! Never changing minds is hardheaded, but changing too much is people-pleasing! A leader has gotta stand tall and do what he know it's right, even if that'll make a few frowns. Ya can't please everyfolk and sure as hell can't lead right trying to!

I talked around a bit too. Folks in chat told me ya had when ya could try again down to tha day, and from what I heard here it seems ya made it again right away. I'll cross my heart and tell the truth here but that's a tad scary. Ya being everywhere, acting like ya already have the job and getting the last word from admins, being so eager to have the job that ya made marks in the calendar... Makes me sure as heck a bit uneasy that ya will just choke folks. And the site don't need no more showdowns here, I'll tell ya that, it's getting darn weird. All in all, ya seem like a nice enough fella but but ya gotta calm down and stop being so fixed in this, or else folks won't thrust ya have what it takes. Not many folks seem too eager of voting for ya, and that tells a lot.

Ya asked for critique and I think ya needed it, so I hope ya don't take this the wrong way. I don't dislike ya personally, and I admit ya gotta half of what it takes, being passionate and dedicated. Just not the other half, least not yet. When ya do, I'll be the first in line ;) CharlesLeCheck 23:33, March 21, 2012 (UTC)

Is it wrong that I only noticed halfway through that I was reading this in a southern accent in my head? XD Φύλαξ ^{[~μίλησε μου~]} 22:23, March 22, 2012 (UTC)

Just a comment on Sig's "issues" with other editors. On the comments I've seen occasionally maybe a little garnish may have helped; but I haven't seen anything recent (and by that I mean since the last request) that would come across as "rude" or "disrespectful". And even the ones I thought might come across a little blunt, his comments don't seem to be any less respectful than others. In still weighing this up, but for those who have objected to his communication style can I ask for a few examples to help guide my decision? Agent c 23:17, March 22, 2012 (UTC)

My only thing is at some point it starts to feel like there are more police than people to be policed - especially when the cop in question has been gunning for the role for quite some time now. I'm not saying Sigma has an itchy trigger finger, but I am saying that Admins should think of their roles as community builders first, law enforcers last. ---Person of Refinement 17:42, March 23, 2012 (UTC)

In response to that, I would point out that Sigma was one of the earliest volunteers in the new User network. Agent c 23:17, March 23, 2012 (UTC)

Hear hear. ---Person of Refinement 05:43, March 24, 2012 (UTC)

Also, he's started a few projects here and there, of which he's been the project leader. 05:48, March 24, 2012 (UTC)

Result

Counting the votes, the yes, no and neutrals equal eachother exactly out. So considering that it's a tough call, and in general a no vote counts slightly heavier. However, the no votes are for the main part made by people who spend most time in chat and have had a less clear view on your editing behaviour in the past few months (like tagging files, checking recent changes and correcting edits). And the extra tools you apply for will be primarily used here. Besides that, a few of the no voters didn't add a reason for their vote. When you look at the yes-votes, they were made by people who I believe have a better view on what you've done here editingwise, mostly admins, and they argumented their vote. And though there are still some small shortcomings which people mentioned on your request, they are being outweighed by your work, fast progress, dedication and will to improve. The last few rough edges will be smoothened soon enough, I have faith in that. And you've held yourself up remarkably well this time, I know it has been stressfull week for you. All in all, me and Kingclyde have decided to tip the balance in your favor. So congratulations! You are now an admin. Jspoel 20:15, March 27, 2012 (UTC)

Whoops

Let it be known that I intended to change my vote after further interaction with Sigma but a last minute emergency required my attention on the final night. -- 02:56, March 29, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Cart. I think this statement itself is good enough for me :) -SigmaDelta54^(Talk) 18:35, March 29, 2012 (UTC)