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

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

Rainith

This request is for the reconfirmation of User:Rainith (talk • contribs).
Created per request of Rainith. — Gares 21:26, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Result

Successful. 00:35, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Candidate statement

This is a voluntary reconfirmation request of my sysop status, in advance of the reconfirmation timeline that is still being established. The grandfathered sysops helped this wiki bridge the gap of needing someone in that position in its early stages. Now that this wiki community has RFA’d its own sysops, I voluntarily place myself up for reconfirmation. The preceding was stolen wholesale from other people.

My apologies to everyone for taking so long to get this in here. I would like to continue to be an admin/sysop here and stand on my record (what little of it there is here, plus what is a GuildWiki). I thank Gares, Karlos and Skuld (who voted before I got this up here) for their confidence in me. Karlos is right in that I need to be more active here, but as is stated on my user page, that is unlikely to happen for another month or so. However the days of me being able to run change crusades like a bot from work are over as I only have a small amount of free time to check the wiki from there now. I am determined to have finished up the other issues that are keeping me from the wiki and the game in my free time by the time GW:EN comes out though so I should be back by the end of August to being a more active contributor.

If you feel that because of my general level of inactivity recently that I should not continue to hold this position please vote against me, I generally take nothing personally.  :)

--Rainith 19:38, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Support

1. Support. Level-headed, keeps me in check. ;) — Gares 21:26, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
2. Support. Needs to be a bit more active these days... But a very calm person, and very simple and user-oriented in his view of what should happen on the wiki. --Karlos 22:52, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
3. — Skuld 08:17, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
4. nice guy, no problems. -- (gem / talk) 21:32, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
5. Support. I don' feel that low activity for a month or so justifies removing his sysop rights. In the past he has been a good admin. --Lemming64 00:50, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
6. Support. Pretty responsive, especially for being semi-away from wiki. Single-handedly (okay, not quite, but still) resolved the grandfathered sysops issue, which makes me happy, and seems a generally polite and helpful fellow. - Tanetris 06:37, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
7. Support. A very polite, calm, and user friendly person who may not have significant quantity of contribs but Rainith is sysop material and a low activity on a wiki for a month should not be a justification for his sysop status removal.--Bane of Worlds 22:04, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
8. Support. Sysops are appointed for life and no amount of inactivity should be reason for de-sysop. That being said, whether this were a new RFA or a reconfirmation, I believe Rainith has the ability to put the sysop tools to good use. - BeX 10:36, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
9. Support. I don't think sysops are appointed for life but I do understand periodical "interferences" from real-life :P No problems here. -- ab.er.rant 09:39, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
10. Support. --Dirigible 18:37, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

1. ...

Neutral

1. Unjustifiable support. I believe Rainith is one of the best sysops we have, but I do not believe he has demonstrated that on this wiki. I cannot support a candidate based upon off-site activity. —Tanaric 23:07, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
2. Echoing Tanaric, I would vote in Support if I had a larger number of recent contributions to base such a vote off of. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 21:23, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Request for Reconfirmation

1. "I am for the most part inactive on Guild Wars Wiki and in the game Guild Wars. I do still lurk here multiple times a week (down from multiple times a day in the past), and do what clean-up I can see is needed when I'm here." <-- Is this what we want in a SySop. DrogoBoffin 00:15, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
2. The fact that he has not made use of sysop tools in the last year makes me wonder if he needs to have access to sysop tools anymore. Also, in the same lapse of time he has taken part on zero wiki-related discussion.--Fighterdoken 18:52, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
3. per above Loves to Sync 21:06, 13 July 2009 (UTC)