Guild Wars Wiki:Requests for adminship/Eloc Jcg/Archive

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

Eloc Jcg

This request is for the sysophood of User:Eloc Jcg (talk • contribs).
Created by —ǥrɩɳsɧƿoɲ 04:38, 14 December 2007 (UTC).
Despite the fact that he'll be nothing more than a janitor, Eloc is truly suited for menial tasks not unlike a beast of burden and the seeming enjoyment he gets out of such nonsense would be greatly augmented with administrator powers. Of course, since the janitorial position on this place is the administrative position, Eloc should be the greatest admin known to GWW.

Status

Failed. 16:57, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Candidate statement

Well, rather than be rambling on about things that most likely not help my chances here, I'll just use statistics the Sysops from around the Wiki and how I compare to them.

Contributions: Well, as many of you guys know I've been contruting here for a long time (since the Official release of GWW). Here I'll compare myself in the aspects of Sysops contributions as I feel that contributions do make the difference sometimes.

~ stands for approximately

All contributions are rounded up to the nearest thousand

Ab.er.rant — ~19,000

Aiiane — ~3,000

Anja Astor — ~14,000

BeXoR — ~14,000

Dirigible — ~5,000

Gares Redstorm — ~1,000

Gordon Ecker — ~12,000

Lemming64 — ~7,000

LordBiro — ~3,000

MisterPepe — ~3,000

Poke — ~5,000

Rainith — ~1,000

Tanaric — ~2,000

Xasxas256 — ~500

Xeeron — ~2,000

Eloc — ~7,000

Now then, I place at about ~7,000 edits. That would place me in 5th/6th place out of the current 15 Sysops, which isn't too bad in my opinion.

Most linked to pages: As most linked to pages is concerned, I have the 51st most linked page, which is 3rd out of users, with Aberrant being at 46th place and Anja at 47th place. For my usertalk, I am at 65 with only Aberrant ahead of me at 50. All in all, I am the 3rd most seen user on talk pages.

Userpage views: This part I suppose is more of a popularity contest I suppose, but does show how many people have viewed your page.

Ab.er.rant — 13,447

Aiiane — 2,944

Anja Astor — 8,754

BeXoR — 9,276

Dirigible — 8,854

Gares Redstorm — 6,610

Gordon Ecker — 6,373

Lemming64 — 5,890

LordBiro — 10,431

MisterPepe — 9,466

Poke — 10,202

Rainith — 6,830

Tanaric — 8,696

Xasxas256 — 3,153

Xeeron — 8,507

Eloc — 11,831

With me having 11,831 at the time of me writing this, that means that people have only been to Aberrants page more than mine. I find that Sysops are well known by the community, and since they are Sysops, that are generally the first people they turn too when they have a problem. By me having the 2nd more page views in comparisn to all of the Sysops here on GWW, that means that I am already well known by the majority of the users.

Usertalk page views:Even more important than the thing above, the talk page symbolizes pretty much all of GWW as it's the best way to communicate with a particular person.

Ab.er.rant — 3,191

Aiiane — 10,993

Anja Astor — 20,566

BeXoR — 28,179

Dirigible — 19,658

Gares Redstorm — 11,383

Gordon Ecker — 11,271

Lemming64 — 11,329

LordBiro — 22,100

MisterPepe — 19,534

Poke — 17,636

Rainith — 12,210

Tanaric — 17,365

Xasxas256 — 2,612

Xeeron — 13,109

Eloc — 22,289

Pretty much in the same sense of the thing above this, User talk page views also show mainly how well you're known and how much people talk to you. Yet again, I have the 2nd most views for talk page. Also, there are some users who like to go to my talk page quite frequently for chatting with me about like anything. For example, Y0 ich halt has my talk page on his toolbox on the left.

Other facts: Here are some other facts that might convince you to vote for me if I already maybe haven't.

I started using Wiki's nearly over a year ago when I created my account on Guildwiki. This means I have a fairly large amount of experience in wiki editing (Maybe not as much a Poke though), which is very useful for a Sysops. It's definitely enough to be able to do daily Sysop dutys though.

I've been playing GuildWars for 27 months now. I know that your experience at the game doesn't really count for much, but it can be used to help out user in need at HELP:GAME. Also, if GWW is to document the game, experiece definitely helps there.

I run a guild of 100 members and a 10 guild alliance. The Guild name is Devils Whisper. Now, me being the founder of the guild and gettig it to 100 members isn't an easy task, especially when I kick all inactive members at 1 week. This shows that I can be a good leader as I don't see a whole lot of people who can start up a guild and get it to 100 members. But I've not only done this once. I've done this to 2 other guilds besides Devils Whisper. One I founded and the other one I was co-leader in which the guild was in the [any] alliance. After a week of me leaving that guild that was in the [any] alliance, it disbanded and broke apart, that shows that I pretty much kept the entire guild together.

Decent relations with some members of GWW ingame. I've met quite of few members of GWW ingame, some meetings were arranged, others were ourely coincidental. For example, I met Dirigible in The Sunspear Great Hall and then pwned him in a 1v1 fight :P. I also have some users in my guild which have a pretty good standing in the community, and other which don't have quite a good standing due to inactiveness. Some users I have in my guild are Y0 ich halt, Fall, Priestess Donut, Terrence Konaii, & User:Prophet Ascension. Thos are only to name a few. I also used to have Brains12 and, can you believe it, Raptors in my Guild for a while. Overall, this shows that I can be a good leader.

Landmarks. As some of you may know, I've been working on the Landmark pages here on GWW. So far I've gotten all of the pages made and am currenly just going through and getting images, maps and verifying data on them.

Vandals. I find myself to be on GWW at odd times. At those odd times when like no one is onine, I find that's when vandals go and don't get banned for a while. It has happened a couple times. By me being a Sysop, that would get rid of those times and help to reduce the vandal count GWW has been experiencing.

Anyways, I'm starting to run out of things to say. I know that some users will probably be against me no matter what I say, but I suppose that's their choice and I respect their opinion. I'd also like to thank Mgrinshpon for nominating me. — ク Eloc 貢 06:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Support

1. Eloc's number of contributions does show something. He is dedicated to the wiki, he is VERY familiar with the wiki and its goings ons (and many of the rules and adminship duties - the above is him trying to please an always critical crowd) and he spends A LOT of time here making edits all over the place. It should be clear to anyone that if he were given these powers, given the large amount of time he spends here he would probably sweep all the other admin under the table as far as deleting pages and performing other edits in the realm of admin. It would be a great decision. Maybe if you are still so critical put him on a trial basis - prove me and Eloc wrong. If you think he lacks understanding of the sysop do the honourable thing and ask him what he thinks his role will be, or what he plans to do. Don't assume. 122.104.227.103 16:59, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
2. Reading through the "oppose" section of this, I am once again disgusted by the apparent lack of anything resembling a spine among the vast majority of GWW contributors. Read grinch's original nominating statement, it explains it all. Lord Belar 02:53, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
3. i think eloc is a great leader and some of the best leaders were block in wiki term like MLK he was arrested many times and that is sort of like a block and he was a insprtion to many. HE may break rules but rules were meant to be broken.and i know eloc can handle one more leadership experiences. whats the harm any way.--話す priestess donut 寄付17:17, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
4. i think that u need an admin that is active alot, and under times that only a few others are. He's here to help the wiki and while not everyone can be perfect he's still a nice person, and even if he takes alot of bashing for nothing from everyone under me i guess its easier to write against than for someone. If u let him try it out for a week u should see that nothing of what he've done is negative. --Cursed Angel 18:20, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Strongly oppose. This user has repeatedly demonstrated a complete lack of any leadership ability whatsoever. I believe his repeated bureaucrat runs, and now this sysop run, are self-serving in their entirety -- I believe he does them merely to draw attention to himself. Finally, as this user was blocked for a GWW:NPA violation only a week ago, I feel that he is not capable or appropriate to be a policy enforcer. —Tanaric 08:05, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
2. Oppose Reading the above, I believe it would be fair to say that this user still has a fair number of misconceptions regarding the admin role. -- ab.er.rant 08:26, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
3. Oppose. - anja 08:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
4. Oppose. Just... no. --NieA7 08:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
5. As Aberrant points out, most of that is irrelevant. And just as Tanaric, I find a user who occasionally loses it to be unsuited for such responsibilities. Backsword 09:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
6. Oppose. As Aberrant said, this user lacks the understanding of what makes up a good admin. Or in other words said: "Someone's number of contributions does not mean a damn." poke | talk 11:05, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
7. Oppose. Facts about contibutions and linked pages have no relevance to admin and "janitorial" abilities. Whille Eloc isn't a bad person, I do not feel he can be trusted with the abilities of blocking and deletion. -- br12 • (talk) • 15:06, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
8. Oppose. For the same reason I voted against in the bureaucrat election. While he has put a lot of effort into this place for the past few months, I feel he doesn't show the maturity needed for any type of admin position. Also, his repeated runs for bureaucrat and now this run for SysOp make it seem like he's desperate to be in a position of "power". --Doll 16:30, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
9. Oppose. As Ab.er.rant said. Furthermore, Eloc has repeatedly shown outbursts of temper when provoked, which I can't imagine being a good combination with admin tools, and he's occasionally demonstrated a poor understanding of the policies he would be enforcing. - Tanetris 16:47, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
10. Oppose. Pretty much everything has been said already--Gummy Joe 16:49, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
11. Oppose. Eloc is, to me, a hugely active user that is great at just that... being a user - he a massive contributor, helps answer questions about the game and wiki that other people aren't going to, and he does so at a much faster rate than just about anyone else! However, the statistical listings above show, to me, a significant lack of knowledge about what a sysop role, on a reasonably active wiki, actually entails. The number of contributions, while it shouldn't be non-existent, is not important, and the number of views that a user page and user talk page has had? That simply could have nothing less to do with the position than it does. Eloc is also quick to anger, and occasionally shows a lack of empathy that I find astounding, and simply doesn't go with the role at all. A great user, to be sure, but someone I do not think should have administration tools. Ale_Jrb (talk) 16:54, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
12. Doesn't have enough contributions. — Skuld 17:12, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
13. Oppose Even if we cannot doubt the great apport this user makes to the wiki, i feel he is not yet qualified for an adminship position. I find he more often than not tries to impose his point of view over the rest of the userbase, and even if a previous concensus was reached against something, he tries to circumnavegate it so he can keep going on.--Fighterdoken 20:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
14. Oppose Tanaric said it best. — kyrasantae 08:45, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
15. Oppose -- scourge 08:46, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
16. He opposed at DE's thingie, nuff said. Dark Morphon 14:30, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
17. Oppose From a general sense Eloc might be alright for this position, however his outbursts mean that I have to oppose. --Lemming 17:00, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
18. Oppose per Skuld. --Santax (talk · contribs) 17:05, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
19. Oppose I'm sorry Eloc, I just have to echo what the others are saying: great editor, not yet ready for Adminship --Snograt 19:16, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
20. Oppose --Aspectacle 23:19, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
21. Oppose --Longasc 21:48, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
22. Oppose Yup, pretty much everything has been said. 0xLunarEffect 13:30, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
23. Oppose Quality over quantity Isk8 21:08, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
24. Oppose I have high standards for sysops. Eloc falls far short of them. —♥Jedi♥Rogue♥ 21:16, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Neutral. After reading the Candidiate Statement, while having a number of contributions can be considered a good thing, but having User, UserTalk Page views and most linked to pages, those are irrelevant. With this candidate having been repremanded for a NPA violation in the past week, it makes you wonder. BUT.... How many times has he been blocked in the past year? Twice, and both were for one day at most. That's not too bad a track record, considering how long he's been here. - Raknor - Talk 19:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
2. ...