Guild Wars Wiki:Requests for adminship/Hawk Skeer

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

Hawk Skeer

This request is for the sysophood of User:Hawk Skeer (talk • contribs).
Created by Hawk Skeer 05:06, 20 January 2008 (UTC).

Status

Failed 17:46, 20 January 2008 (UTC) (Candidate withdrew below).

Candidate statement

I don't really know what to put here, since I'm not a very good self-promoter, so I'll just detail some things about myself. First, even though the policy says contributions and game knowledge don't matter much, I've looked through the other RFA's and see some of you look at that, so I'll tell you some. I've been playing for about 9 or 10 months, and know the game pretty much inside and out. During that time, I've been a member and contributor to the 2 GW wikis for a combined 7 months (5 here; 2 at Guildwiki before it changed hands). Although I've made less than 100 contributions to the main space here, I'm very active around the wiki in the guild and talk spaces. Most of you probably know me, or have seen me around either on GWW or Guildwiki. Now on to my activity. Due to the combination of being a homeschooled teen and not having a job, I have a lot of free time on my hands to do just about anything, and I frequent the wiki many times throughout the day. As for technical wiki experience, I had a copy of MediaWiki on a webserver that I played around with a lot, so I know basically how to use the tools. I don't have any experience with making bots or anything like that, but I can learn. As for policy knowledge, I've studied all the GWW policy, and been helped in past times by others whenever I happend to cross a line. To close, I like to help people, and I like to help the wiki, and I'm a pretty friendly guy.

The rest is up to you who vote to decide whether I'm good enough or not.

--Hawk Skeer 05:06, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I Withdraw from wanting to be a SysOp. Defiant has made it quite clear that I'm not qualified, and I agree with him. --Hawk Skeer 17:46, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Support

1. ...

Oppose

1. Oppose: See below. I'm also against the recreation of the ULGG page, but that's mainly for comedic reasons. MisterPepe talk 05:46, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
2. Oppose: Looking at his contributions, I cannot see what Hawk has to contribute as an Admin. He has a grand total of 6 edits to the Guild Wars Wiki: and Guild Wars Wiki talk: namespaces (two of which were to create this RfA and two of which consisted of votes on RfBs). His edits to the Main: and Talk: namespaces don't stand out, and he has only slightly more than 250 edits total, most of which are in the Guild and User namespaces, going back to September. Looking at his reasoning, I cannot shake the feeling that it all essentially amounts to: "Why not?" And based on his contributions so far, I don't see any good reason why he needs Admin tools, and, to be perfectly honest, he's done nothing to deserve them. Of course, there are not many people who "need" the Admin tools per se, but I've always ascribed to the notion that an Admin should be someone willing to go above and beyond the call of duty: they should have something more than a basic level of activity and dedication to offer. And, when measured up to that standard, Hawk doesn't seem to qualify. That said, I'd like to pose Hawk a question: given that there are (as near as I can tell) a whole host of users who are, if nothing, else more active than you, what do you think distinguishes you from the pack such that you should be promoted? *Defiant Elements* +talk 05:47, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
3. Oppose: Defiant Elements explained it very well. -- Coran Ironclaw 05:55, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
4. Oppose: I cannot see how admin tools would help you in your daily wiki life. - anja 08:16, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
5. Oppose: Sorry mate, but it isn't that easy to become a Sysop around here. — ク Eloc 貢 09:29, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
6. Oppose - Having a lot of free time, knowing the game inside out, and being experienced with MediaWiki are not strong points when there's not much to show that you've actually used those time and knowledge on the wiki. -- ab.er.rant 14:17, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Neutral

1. ...