Guild Wars Wiki:Requests for adminship/Burning Freebies

Note: This RFA has been resolved. Please do not add further support/oppose opinions.

User:Burning Freebies[edit]

This request is for the sysophood of User:Burning Freebies (talk • contribs).
Created by Burning Freebies 07:25, 1 September 2008 (UTC).

Status[edit]

Failed 05:09, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Candidate statement[edit]

Hello everyone. My name is Burning Freebies. I started work on the wiki about half a year ago. I am based on this wiki and have found no other intrest in other wikis. Ever since i have joined, i have become found of improving my userpage and starting off wanted pages, especially on GW2 wiki where i have made some pages about Arena Net staff.

So why me as a sysop? Why someone who you could consider a "wikinoob"?

A leader or someone in authority needs several characteristics to show that they can be trusted to rule. Some of these are:

Knowledge of the wiki
Someone who has done much good work in the past and wishes to carry it on with bigger projects which require higher authority
Activeness
Knowledge of the rules, terms and conditions of the wiki.
Someone who votes for the right leaders in elections for bureaucrats
Someone who has a calm head
Someone who will user their new authority to its full extent to provide for the community and improve the wiki.
Someone who has a basic knowledge of graphic design of the wiki.

Now you need to ask your self whether you agree with my requirements, and whether you think i have them. Its not whether i believe i do, its what you think. You must choose to elect me as your leader.

Another question to ask is-"What do you intend to acomplish in such a role"

I have many projects that i am planning to do, such as

Start more wanted pages
Work on GW2 wiki by moving significant pages over to the new wiki
Improve current pages
Help people creating userpages
Improve NPA violation rules and to use my power to control people involved in such crossfires
Removing comments from pages that people do not wish to have
Updating the front page of the wiki
Learn more about graphic design to allow me to work more effeciently on the wiki

I believe i am fit for such a job. However, if you all disagree with me my thoughts are useless. You know the right desicision to make. I know i have upset people, and i am not planning any cruel revenge on them, as this would cause my expulsion from the wiki. If i have upset you, think about the desicion you make before choosing. Remember, no can be the right choice sometimes, but its all up to you.

Feel free to ask questions on the talk page regarding my projects etc. I hope you make the right choice. --Burning Freebies 07:25, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Support[edit]

...

Oppose[edit]

Oppose. I feel that Burning Freebies needs to become much more impartial in his interactions with other users, and focus on what is good for the wiki over all. Participation in discussions and mainspace contributions would be a good place to start. See my additional comments here-- Wyn 07:37, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Most of the goals listed are general user responsibilities, not the duty of a sysop. Things like "Removing comments from pages that people do not wish to have" make me doubt his knowledge of policy and the wiki way; users can remove unwanted comments/attacks from their own talk pages, but that's about it. Sysops, for the most part, don't remove comments - even if they're in violation of policy, comments are usually left untouched (even though the user may be banned for them). -Auron 07:54, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Strong Oppose. Perhaps an even more basic question than, "Can I trust user X with the Sysop tools?" would be, "Does user X understand what it means to be a Sysop?" After reading Burning Frisbee's candidate statement and perusing his contributions, I'm not so sure that the answer to the latter question is "yes," and I'm certain that the answer to the former is "no." Burning Frisbee has demonstrated neither the level-headedness/rationality/impartiality/etc. nor the knowledge of policy that I would expect from a Sysop. *Defiant Elements* +talk 07:56, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose. Agreed with Defiant. --People of Antioch 08:00, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Strong Oppose. Apart from completely not understanding what "...if you all disagree with me my thoughts are useless..." means, I have to agree with DE above. You need to understand what a sysop actually does before you'd ever have a chance of becoming one. Being a sysop doesn't give you "power" in the way you think it does. Kokuou 08:21, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose - from the candidate statement written by Burning Freebies, I think it is clear that he has no real understanding of the role of a sysop on a wiki - neither the general guidelines that govern what it means to be one, nor the specific policies and guidelines that we adhere to on GWW. The mentions of 'authority' and 'power' trouble me, as it seems that these are the reasons for the RFA, rather than the betterment of the wiki. In addition, the majority of the intended activities do not require sysop privileges, and those that do are not in line with our policies or guiding ideals. Until Burning Freebies realises what it means to be a sysop, I think it unlikely that an RFA will pass. Ale_Jrb (talk) 09:05, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose - as the others above me have said, I don't think this user really understands the sysop role. Furthermore, I think he needs to develop a few more skills in handling interactions with others, judging by how he has acted on events-related pages.Cassie 09:23, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose. As with Seru, nothing new to add for me here. --Xeeron 09:51, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose. Agreed with Wyn on the talk page. poke | talk 11:01, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Strong Oppose. Far too often has he both instigated or been involved with wiki drama and each time it becomes a flamefest. I'm sorry but their is no way I can support this individual in this RFA now and he would have to completely change for me to support him in the future. -- Salome 11:33, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose. I strongly agree with the comments on the talk page. -- Indochine talk 11:51, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose on a personality basis. I wouldn't support him for sysop on PvX, so I won't here. -- Armond Warblade 11:53, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose More or less agree with the above comments, Defiant Elements and Wyn in particular. --Kakarot 13:04, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose User did not demonstrate an understanding of policies, does not seem to possess a generally calm behavior, and have not participated in discussions outside of content and projects. -- ab.er.rant 14:11, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose. I havent seen much of Burning Freebies, but what I have seen was, in general, unconstructive to a degree. I don't think he is ready to take on the position of a sysop for quite a while. -- Wandering Traveler 14:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose. power, leadership and authority! --Cursed Angel 14:26, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose. Everyone else, namely DE and Wyn, summed up how I feel. Calor 14:35, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose Agreed with Salome. Dominator Matrix 14:38, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose. Intelligence is usually a requirement for sysops. Lord Belar 21:17, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose.Salome and Wyn summed up my thoughts BlackBlood - talk 17:31, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose. Enough has probably already been said...anyway, I don't trust this user to be a sysop. -- Inspired to ____ 03:47, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose You need to get around more on the wiki. (Terra Xin 11:17, 6 September 2008 (UTC))
Doesn't look very well when you get blocked 2 days after making your RFA. — ク Eloc 貢 18:34, 6 September 2008 (UTC)