Guild Wars Wiki:Requests for adminship/Gem

Gem
This request is for the sysophood of User:Gem (talk &bull; contribs). Created by -- (gem / talk) 07:30, 21 September 2007 (UTC).

Status
Failed. 21:18, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Candidate statement
I decided to start a new RfA for myself now that I'm more clear with my aims and with the needs of this wiki. There has been a lot of discussion about admin roles in the past two months after my resignation. The current interpretation of the role is that admins are just regular users with some additional janitorial 'possibilities' or 'duties' (word choice depends on user). The main reason for my resignation during the last reconfirmation was that I knew that admins were looked up to in the same way as they are looked up to in GuildWiki, and thanks to the feedback from some users who I respect I realised that I wasn't the best user to be in such a position. This situation has now changed due to the change in opinnions and attitudes towards admins and I now find myself fitting for the role. I know my way around the wiki, I know the policies and I have the ability, time and willingness to work with the admin tools according to policies.

All in all I'm very happy with the last two months. I took the time to see the wiki from the regular users viewpoint, I took the time to get back to contributing just like a regular user, I took the time to think about me and my actions in the wiki, and, most importantly, I took the time to take really good care of Kalomeli. Thanks for all that to those users who could view me and my actions critically last time and could get me to understand better. -- (gem / talk) 07:33, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) Definitely knows his way around the wiki. -- ab.er. rant  [[Image:User Ab.er.rant Sig.png|sig]] 07:50, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Support for all the reasons from the old confirmation, and generally gets the job done. Glad you've decided to put up the new RFA, Gem. - Tanetris 08:06, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Support. It's Gem. It's an RfA. 'Nuff said. -- Snog  rat [[Image:User Snograt signature.png]] 08:50, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Support. From what I've seen Gem has always displayed maturity and makes strong contributions.--Drekmonger 09:49, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Support. I feel that Gem should never have left in the first place. -- Lemming [[Image:User Lemming64 sigicon.png]] 12:09, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Support. I agree with Lemming, above. Erasculio 12:19, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Support.  - [[Image:User HeWhoIsPale sig.PNG]] HeWhoIsPale 12:21, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Support. - elviondale  (tahlk) 14:34, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Support. Also agree with lemming :)--[[Image:User Gummy Joe Sig Icon.PNG]]Gummy Joe 15:44, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) Support -  anja  [[Image:User Anja Astor sig icon.png|talk]] 15:45, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) Support - Seen him in a bunch of discussions on this wiki, and the other, and hasn't made a bad contribution.  Calor  - talk 19:11, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) Support -- [[Image:User Corrran sig.png|CoRrRan]] (CoRrRan / talk) 12:24, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 13) Support Tedium 20:13, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 14) Support I think I'll start contributing too, so no reason to oppose this anymore. :) --Kalomeli [[Image:User Kalomeli sig.png]] (talk) 22:21, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 15) Support --Bane of Worlds 23:01, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 16) Support. even if I fear deletion-thievery ;) poke | talk 17:57, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 17) Support. Was always a great admin on GuildWiki, as long as I've known him; aside from adjustments to fit GWW's style of arbitration, I don't see how you could go wrong. --[[image:User_Jioruji_Derako_logo.png]] Ĵĩôřũĵĩ Đēŗāķō.>  .cнаt^

Oppose

 * 1) At least until further notice, I oppose. I've seen nothing of Gem in his two month or so hiatus, so I can't know if he's improved or if he's just hoping the standards for sysopship have dropped. If I see evidence of significant improvement, my vote will change. - Auron  08:51, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Nothing changed. --Karlos 08:57, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) ^ &mdash; Skuld 14:03, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Ditto. &mdash;Tanaric 15:45, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Misfate 02:58, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) --- Raptors / RAAA! 00:03, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) SUPERIOR OPPOSE Gem is inflexible and comes off as smooth as sandpaper. He is oftentimes confrontational and making him a sysop will provide no tangible improvement to the wiki. While he may be a good contributor in terms of raw information, he is most certainly not qualified to be a sysop on any level. —ǥrɩɳsɧ  ƿoɲ  19:39, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) nevar. Tab 21:20, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Weak oppose - Gem cares very much about this wiki and I believe he has calmed down a little since his 'hiatus', but unfortunately this is not enough evidence that he is suitable for the role of sysop and I would like to wait until he has contributed some more before supporting his promotion. LordBiro 17:23, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) He is secretly planning a deletion spree!! 86.83.15.245 16:24, 26 September 2007 (UTC) no IP account votes
 * 11) I think he is doing a great job but not admin-worthy. - Hyrule 02:10, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) Is this a joke?Sailors 14:47, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Neutral

 * 1) Neutral. Don't know enough about what he has been doing. Backsword 08:34, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Neutral. On the one side, I haven't seen him here a long time. But on the other hand, he is already an experienced Sysyop.-- §   Eloc   §  13:48, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Misfate 03:32, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Neutral. I can't make up my mind in regards to this RfA. [[Image:User Aiiane-a.gif|Go to Aiiane's Talk page]] (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 09:59, 22 September 2007 (UTC)