SmashWiki:Requests for adminship/Serpent King (2): Difference between revisions

#'''Support'''. While previously I was unsure whether you really deserved it, since then I believe you've really shown off what you were talking about. That, and you're one of the most active and helpful users I've seen. While Miles has brought up some decent points in my opinion, you still would be a good fit in my book. [[User:F0rZ3r0F0r|F0rZ3r0F0r]] ([[User talk:F0rZ3r0F0r|talk]]) 14:08, 8 November 2015 (EST)

#'''Support''' I definitely think you would be a good admin, although you definitely should work on your snippiness when exasperated (though this is a good example of the pot calling the kettle black), since, having dealt with that in an admin, it's definitely discouraging to a new user. <small>---Preceding unsigned comment added by [[Special:MyPage|<font color="brown">a turkey</font>]]! Or maybe [[User:DatNuttyKid|DatNuttyKid]].</small>  16:59, 10 November 2015 (EST)

#'''Support''' Alright, I took another review of Serpent King, fully read his responses here and on the qualifications page, and I'm gonna now be putting my support behind him. I've found his answers to be satisfactory enough to show he knows what he is doing despite his lackluster RfA intro that gave other impressions, and reinforce my prior thoughts that he has a good head with solid judgment and reasoning skills. The main hangup people claim to have with him are his suppose dispute skills, but outside the smashpotatoes incident, I'm not seeing it, and it's a one-time incident Serpent King has sufficiently shown was likely a one-time thing. Miles' linked examples in particular don't stand out as bothersome outside the aforementioned. As I stated in my oppose, I don't see how he was doing anything remotely close to "heavy-handed berating" in the INoMed convo. On the Drilly Drilly page, I don't see any problem with this supposed "snappiness", as minor as it was, especially when the user he was trying to help been a problem user for a while who brushed off Serpent King's help. For the Toon Link argument, I find it again to be a problem user being needlessly difficult and pushing Serpent King's patience after he mostly handled it well; if anything he should have been more forceful from the getgo. For the Departure convo, I find Serpent King being "snippy" here fully justifiable, when it's the same problem user once again making such a ridiculous post that no one could take seriously. On the contrary, I've found that Serpent King is pretty damn good at serious disputes, particularly on the infamous [http://www.ssbwiki.com/Talk:Marth_%28SSB4%29#.22Subjectivity.22 Marth argument], this [http://www.ssbwiki.com/Talk:Super_Smash_Bros._4#Unfitting_Name.3F Smash 4 name argument], and his involvement with Miles' recent RfB, where I found he provided the most insightful posts besides myself. As such, I can trust giving Serpent King the adminship tools and am confident in his ability to lead on the wiki. <span style="font-family:Edwardian Script ITC; font-size:12pt">[[User:Omega Tyrant|<span style="color:forestgreen">Omega</span>]] [[User talk:Omega Tyrant|<span style="color:forestgreen">Tyrant</span>]]</span> [[Image: TyranitarMS.png ]] 19:28, 16 November 2015 (EST)

#<s>'''Slight oppose''': So I just spent the past few hours looking through your contribution history. First thing I'll say is that outside of the Smashpotatoes incident, the linked discussions Miles brought up do not have any real bearing against your capabilities (especially the INoMed thing, I don't see how you were "heavily-handed berating" there at all or doing anything wrong). Overall you appear to be a great user with a solid head, but while I don't find you poor at user conflict and discussion, I don't find anything that shows you especially excel at it. I was somewhat leaning towards your support, but your proposal here is extremely lacking and shows a lack of understanding of what a wiki really requires in an admin. I have no doubt you can handle vandals well, but like I repeat over and over, that's a basic job anyone with basic competency can do. Besides that, I just don't have a strong grasp on your overall judgment. And with that, I'll have to lean to oppose, as I won't support the promotion of someone on an overall "why not?" basis. Like I said in the Disaster Flare RfA, I'm open to being convinced otherwise if you want to try and have anything to show me that could change my mind, I think you have the potential but I want to be 100% certain you do before supporting an RfA of yours. <span style="font-family:Edwardian Script ITC; font-size:12pt">[[User:Omega Tyrant|<span style="color:forestgreen">Omega</span>]] [[User talk:Omega Tyrant|<span style="color:forestgreen">Tyrant</span>]]</span> [[Image: TyranitarMS.png ]] 11:03, 14 November 2015 (EST)</s>

#::Pretty much this is the [[User:Shadowcrest/Qualifications|criteria]] I'm expecting of you. If you can sufficiently answer the questions given there, I'll reconsider. <span style="font-family:Edwardian Script ITC; font-size:12pt">[[User:Omega Tyrant|<span style="color:forestgreen">Omega</span>]] [[User talk:Omega Tyrant|<span style="color:forestgreen">Tyrant</span>]]</span> [[Image: TyranitarMS.png ]] 03:53, 15 November 2015 (EST)

#'''Neutral'''. Sigh. I don't know what to say about this. Everything what I said in your previous RFA, except you inherit one core problem in your effectiveness on your dispute skills, although I've seen you made some improvements. However, I trusted some users with decent to great dispute skills. I don't know about yours. Should I trust you as an admin? Hmm maybe. I'm not sure. I'll wait until more people vote and then I will decide deeply. [[User:Luigi540|Luigi540]] ([[User talk:Luigi540|talk]]) 11:35, 8 November 2015 (EST)

 

<noinclude>[[Category:Active RfAs]]</noinclude>