Guild Wars Wiki:Requests for adminship/Calor/Archive 1

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

Calor

This request is for the sysophood of User:Calor (talk • contribs).
Created by Coran Ironclaw 03:37, 26 January 2008 (UTC).

Status

Failed 10:34, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Candidate statement

Well, I've been on the wiki since about July of 2007. That's six months. Now I only have, *goes to count*, about 2200 contributions. Not a whole load. But it's quality, not quantity that counts. Sure, initially, I made loads of errors (Poke can tell you), but in the past few months I've gone from knowing nothing to being proficient in editing and tweaking wiki code. I feel I can grow accustomed to sysop tools quickly, also. Let my actions and my opinions that I've stated on pages throughout the wiki speak for themselves. Calor (t) 03:37, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Support

1. Support. Calor has proven, in my opinion, to be both mature and level-minded enough to be more of a leader here. He has 2200+ contribs in about 7 months (more than 10 edits a day) which shows that he's here nearly every day. I very rarely, if ever, see him get involved in flame wars, also. Plus, he comes with an added sense of humor. --MP47 (Talk) (Contr.) 03:46, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
2. Support. As I said, I nominated User:Calor, because he contributes a lot to the wiki and I think he is prepared for the tools. -- Coran Ironclaw 03:55, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
3. Support. Intelligent, responsible, plus a sense of humor. He's active on the wiki, and would make a good admin. Lord Belar 04:58, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
4. Weak support. Before this RfA was created, I was absolutely sure I was going to Support. However, after seeing Dir's comment, I can't help but feel that I may need to rethink some reasoning. While Calor may be great to counter vandalism and be helpful to users, I can't be sure he'll be the same with trolls or Raptorses. I disagree about the last parts of Dirigble's comment, about possibly misusing the tools, but I am doubtful as to whether he can discipline appropriately. But that is doubt, not certainty. The only way to be sure is to put Calor in a position where he actually has the authority to discipline. -- Brains12 • Talk • 22:59, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
5. Hard one, this. I'd agree that Calor have shown immaturity too often to be good rolemodel, but I don't see that as an sysops job. So I'm voting support, as I disagree with Dir's assesment that he would misuse the tools, which is what matters. Backsword 12:13, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
6. Support I like Calor's edits and comments I think that Calor would be perfect for it. Calor is a good contributer when it comes to wiki and in my opinion Calor should get it.--Shadowphoenix 01:28, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
7. Support. This user is level headed, friendly (if a little smart-alick ^_^), and learns from their mistakes. I believe that it is infinitely harder to admit to errors, and it shows maturity and growth. I agree with Brains12, in that Adminship is like a test or review of all the skills we have earned here, and I think Calor is quite ready to flesh out even more. --People of Antioch talk 02:34, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose - I'd rather our admins have enough good sense to not make comments such as this, this or this about a troll. I'm also surprised by how few of his contributions are in the GWW talk namespace, particularly when compared with their number in the user talk namespace. I don't see how this user would benefit from the admin tools in his wiki activities, and I don't think I have nearly the necessary level of trust in his good judgement to be confident that he won't misuse them.--Dirigible 04:53, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
2. Oppose. This person doesn't have admin thinking from the posts I've seen them make. Some of his comments like the one on Izzy's page in support of Readem and thinking Readem isn't a major troll to Izzy are puzzling at best.--riceball 18:16, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
3. Weak Oppose. I'll take the other side of the argument to Brains. I agree that Calor is good with vandals - I've worked beside him reverting and it seems he's around the wiki quite a bit. But the wiki needs is someone who is able to firmly and fairly break up trolls and flames more than someone can patrol for vandals. Calor's allocated scores into a flame war where an admin has already attempted to diffuse the tense situation. I want to see that he will responsibly deal with those sorts of situations before he gets the job not after - I haven't seen much to support Calor's ability in this yet. --Aspectacle 23:41, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
4. Oppose - partly per Dirigible, partly because the user is unnecessarily and (more importantly) non-constructively rude. -Auron 07:57, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
5. Oppose Reasons stated above. I also don't feel convinced sysop tools would help you in your "wiki-working" - anja 19:26, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
6. Weak Oppose. I don't think I want an admin who openly admits he messed up a few times, in the same way someone wouldn't want a president who openly admits he smoked crack as a kid. Calor is a cool guy but not the kind I want as an admin. Vandalism can be fixed by anyone, bud.- Vanguard 16:43, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
7. Ladiela ~ SCobra 22:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
8. Oppose In my eyes he hasn't shown anything admin worthy behavior, [1]. -- scourge 22:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Neutral. many arguments in favor, many in opposition. sums up neutral for me. - Y0_ich_halt 19:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
2. Neutral. Per Dir, Brains and Y0 ;) poke | talk 19:11, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
3. Neutral but tending towards oppose. Not entirely convinced that he won't misuse admin tools yet not entirely convinced that he might either. -- ab.er.rant 11:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
4. — ク Eloc 貢 20:04, 30 January 2008 (UTC)