SmashWiki:Requests for adminship/RAN1

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.

Reason: User withdrew following request. RAN1 02:54, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

RAN1 (talk • contribs • edit count • RFA page)

Candidate, please summarize why you are running for adminship below.

Well, to be honest, I never thought of writing this so soon. In fact, I'd say that in a way, it's kind of rushed. But in either case, I'd like to speak out my thoughts.

I joined SmashWiki just a couple of months ago in late September this year. In that short time, I've made many contributions to the wiki, with my edit count totaling about 650 (though, to be perfectly honest, I've only contributed 300 edits to the Mainspace). My contributions really stand out in many ways. For example, I started out a project in the updating of SmashWiki's ever-so-long trophy list, and made major improvements to the images and adding descriptions to previously unlisted characters. Now, the list looks slightly more polished than it looked before I made my account here. Later, I helped out with Toomai's moveset project by helping out with some data of my own, as well as worked with template coding, and took part in many discussions among the editors here.

I'm perhaps one of the most active users here. I've been watching the wiki for a long time every day, reverting vandalism using rollback and aiding users when necessary. I've reported several vandals to the admins so far, as well as tagged nonsense pages for deletion. I believe that I've helped this wiki out a lot so far.

With that little summary of my time here aside, I'd like to request adminship here at SmashWiki. I believe it would help me become more productive here, since I'd be able to do more housekeeping for the wiki. I consider the policies and guidelines of SmashWiki very important, and have shown through my contributions and the help I've given that I completely understand them. These additions to the wiki probably are the most important thing I've done for the wiki and I think that they stand out a lot here. So now, I suppose that the last thing to say is, what's your opinion? RAN1 04:17, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

You know, I obviously didn't think too much about this idea; I rushed it too fast, so…withdrawn, by the reasons given below. RAN1 02:54, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

Support

1. ...

Oppose

1. Firstly, I'm not sure we need any more Administrators at the moment - there's almost always an Admin checking Recent Changes or at least lurking on IRC to deal with any issues that may come up, and whenever you see that a vandal's popped up or a page needs deleting, one of us is always around to help. Secondly, I'm not sure that you'd be a great Admin - we don't have very much on which to base an opinion of your ability to manage on-wiki user disputes, but the disputes I've seen you have with other users on IRC tend not to go so well... I'm not saying you'd be a bad Admin, just that I haven't seen anything to really convince me that you'd be a great one. Work on the "Massive SmashWiki To-do List", add stuff to policy discussions, get Admin-like things done, and maybe re-apply in a couple of months. PenguinofDeath 16:32, December 9, 2009 (UTC)
2. Oppose on the grounds that we already have plenty of active admins. You may be a great applicant with a snazzy résumé, but IMO we're not hiring. Sorry. Miles (talk) 21:15, December 9, 2009 (UTC)
3. User fails to grasp simple concepts and handles poorly in debates even when not provoked. I would not trust RAN to do anything more than ban/del vandals/vandalism, and I see no reason to appoint someone to just be a janitor. Shadowcrest 21:47, December 9, 2009 (UTC)
4. Per everybody else.Smoreking^(T) _(c) 22:56, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Like PoD said, we probably do not need many more admins. However, I do like the amount of work you have done. I haven't really seen many of these disputes talked about but contribution wise, you have been very good. ☆The Solar Dragon ^(talk)☆ 21:16, December 9, 2009 (UTC)
2. ...

Comments

• ...

---