Guild Wars Wiki:Requests for adminship/Wynthyst

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

Wynthyst

This request is for the reconfirmation of Wynthyst (talk • contribs • logs • block log).

Based upon the requests for reconfirmation found here due to the length of time Wynthyst has been a sysop.

Created by Misery 09:58, 12 July 2009 (UTC).

Status

Successful. 21:10, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Candidate statement

(to be filled in)

Support

1. Strong Support I know she does her job and does it well. I support her staying as an admin. - Tesla 10:00, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
2. Support. She does a good job. I support her remaining as an admin. - 24.107.61.94 10:03, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
3. Support. Her presence as a sysop is valuable to the wiki. ~Shard 10:04, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
4. Support. Wynn does a awesome Job on here. Not only has she persoanly helped me out several times but she had spent her time to updated pictures on the wiki to make them better. Who ever is trying to do this is wrong- Kelli 10:05, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
5. Support. She does a great job and it would be a shame to lose her. 71.231.213.231 10:08, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
6. Support. I feel that Wyn does her job responsibly and she does it well. Her presence as a sysop is indeed valuable to the wiki, it would be extremely disappointing to see her go. ~Ryuu[ Talk|Contributions ] 10:22, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
7. Über support. This wiki wouldn't be the same without her. I just hope the things Auron reminded us won't happen again... - J.P.Talk 12:19, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
8. Support. DrogoBoffin 12:20, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
9. Support. Wyn has done so much for the wiki. It would be a great detriment to the wiki and to players if we were to lose her as a sysop. After having given my initial response on this issue some deeper thought over the last couple days, my support for Wyn stands, and I feel like I should clarify my position. Everyone has bad days. Everyone has days where their emotions run away with them. That's because they're human. When comparing that to what Wyn does on a daily basis for the wiki, I don't see how there can be any questioning of Wyn's competence as a sysop. As Erasculio pointed out already, I often see Wyn doing cleanup of orphaned images and mis-named pages or screenshots, taking care of vandals, etc. Despite having shown a bit of rash behaviour from time to time (I really don't think Jon's ban of 1 minute actually counts here.), overall, Wyn is a knowledgeable, even-handed and valuable asset to the Wiki as a sysop. I hope that clarifies my position a little more, despite the teal deer. Elysea 18:43, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
10. Support. Agree with WT and PoA.|Cyan LightLive!| 12:55, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
11. Support I actually think having Auron ban Noxify was a good decision; it brings in another sysop who can then add their discretion to a situation. --JonTheMon 13:18, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
12. Support. Reasons as above. (eta) I want to provide rebuttal on a couple of the opposing votes: Those voters looking at Wyn's block log noticed a few very short term blocks for "minor change" and "show preview" violations and pointed that out as evidence of erratic behavior. Those were not the actions of erratic behavior, but a very effective way of calling attention to messages that were already placed on the user's talk page regarding those same actions. Sometimes it takes a bit more than a quick message to get the point across, a short (this is bathroom break length of time here, people) break from editing can provide some perspective. It may be just the times that she and I are on, but Wyn is the most active sysop we have, and I'd hate to lose that because of a few indiscretions during a stressful time. I, for one, can absolutely say that I still trust her to use the sysop tools, and further believe that this RfA will be very useful to Wyn, as it provides feedback that she can use in the future (might have been nice to provide that without the RfA). --Freedom Bound 14:38, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
13. Support. Wyn is a great admin. I don't think a couple of minor situations should get in the way of the amazing amount of good she has done for this wiki as a sysop. -- Wandering Traveler 14:41, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
14. Support. I think Wynthyst is one of the most active sysops in the wiki, not to mention one of the few users willing to do annoying tasks that may not require admin power but are greatly eased by having them (such as tagging suggestions on Linsey's talk page and then moving them later; people respect her decisions more due to her being a sysop, and I think she's the only sysop who is constantly on the lookout for that kind of thing). The frustration she has been showing recently is something we are all allowed once in a while, and it has not caused any problem that would offset the benefit she gives to the wiki. Besides, once the feedback space is ready, I think one source of frustration will be lessened anyway. Erasculio 15:27, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
15. Support. Given Wynthyst's work here, she is considered a valuable contributor. This isn't a "fan club" point. I am confident in that regard that few can argue against that she contributes well. I believe she is too valuable an asset to be lost to the community that placed faith in her. While I do believe she should reflect on her actions a bit, I do realize that she has a quality that can sometimes get lost in all the wiki-lawyering -- she's human. She follows spirit of the policy well. I don't agree with the threats made against some users, and any and all conflicts should be resolved by another sysop. However, her work with the Feedback namespace is also another reason I want to keep her. A-Net has been wonder when the Feedback system will get done, and taking away a member who can edit it will slow it down a bit. All in all, the pros outweigh the cons, but should user conflict get involved again (conflict, not just simple argument) then I look at that evidence and make an unbiased decision again. --Antioch 17:46, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
16. Support I fully support Wyn as a sysop, I believe this reconfirmation was premature and unnecessary. --Lemming 20:40, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
17. Support I support Wyn as a sysop, and as such feel this reconfirmation is unnecessary. Dominator Matrix 21:32, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
18. Support wait ...what? --Cursed Angel 22:01, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
19. Support Despite any differences I have with Wyn, I am against this reconfirmation and I personally feel it was premature and unnecessary. -- Salome 22:09, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
20. To be frank, Halowhoever not withstanding, Wyn hasn't had any slip ups that I've seen. Wyn is definitely one of the softer sysops (if not the softest) here, and acts as an important foil to equally important yet significantly harsher sysops, like Auron. She understands spirit of the rule, unlike the newer sysops (the imbeciles they are) and is just with her bans, whether they lean on the soft or firm side of acceptable; the key is that they are acceptable. Wynthyst is a sysop that this wiki cannot afford to lose. In regards to the opposing arguments, her emotions, while often leading her to make ultimatums, are ultimatums she never actually follows through on [1]. Furthermore, her emotions don't actually affect the durations of bans or whether or not she bans someone. She's not fond of a few users as anyone may be, but she never bans them. She always asks another sysop if he or she could and if that would be fair in IRC [2]. That sounds like responsible sysopping to me. —ǥrɩɳsɧƴɖɩđđɭɘş 02:22, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
21. Support Wyn's hawt, also, as per reasons above with the other supports. -- Lacky 03:43, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
22. Support Wyn does a lot of work for the wiki helping people out and getting projects going, and I don't believe she is one to abuse power. purple llama 06:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
23. Support I don't see any compelling reason for reconfirmation. --Zora 11:09, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
24. Support I think this process is retarded. I think she is a fine admin. I'm assuming (yes I know...ass, you, me, etc.) I can vote. -Drakora 11:37, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
25. Support While I can kind of see the points that some of the people opposing are making regarding the Noxify situation, not only did she not act alone, but I'm very confident that she's acknowledged her mistake and will likely not let it happen again in the future. If there were cases upon cases where she was letting her emotions get in the way of her sysophood, then I'd likely have a different vote, but this isn't the case, and I'm confident in her ability to continue work as a sysop. That said, her general attitude/mood on the wiki should have no bearing on whether people think she's fit/unfit to continue being a sysop; rather, they should take into consideration her entire collection of actions as a sysop, in which case, I have no reason to vote anything other than Support. --★KOKUOU★ 11:56, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
26. Support: Do I really need to explain why?-- anguard 15:20, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
27. I recognise the issue. Wyn tends to act irrational when emotional. I've been a victim of this myself.

    But, none of the opposers seems to look beyond that, at the complete picture. Yes, it's a negative, but there are a large number of positives with Wyn's sysophood. And the total vote needs to look at the net balance. The failure of the opposers to consider or understand this gives me no reason to think the full picture points to anything other than Wyn staying as a sysop. Backsword

28. Support:I hate her, but she does her job well as a sysop. She just needs to take a break from the wiki to cooldown; the stress from dealing with idiots is getting to her. Pika Fan 17:50, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
29. Support: This crap with people finding every loophole to be an asshat because there isn't a "specific policy" against it is the behavior I expect from an 8-year old. Why do people need common sense explained to them? Of course she gets annoyed, it's her job to deal with it. Unlike other sysops who just hold power and do nothing to help anyone, Wyn is actually out there dealing with things. That's a lot more than most of the people here, and definitely more than sysops who openly oppose their own roles. Ghosst • Talk • 18:28, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
30. Support: I think Wyn has had some near-misses of letting her emotions overrule her better judgment, but I do not believe she has stepped over the line. I specifically protest Auron's example about Nox for the simple reason that going to another sysop when you're too emotionally involved in the situation is exactly what you're supposed to do, and Wyn would have been just as free to make the same request if she was a non-sysop. I also think it's important to keep in mind that when she does get mad at people on the wiki, it's generally for disrupting the wiki, not out of some personal grudge. While being angry in performing administrative action (whether blocks or warnings) is not ideal in any case, being angry at someone for causing disruption is not the same as just not liking someone. Looking at the Halogod35 example, whether or not you think her tone was appropriate, can anyone really tell me with a straight face that rickrolls on talk pages aren't disruptive?
    My point is this: Wyn is not a perfect sysop, but her slip-ups have been marginal and she's done a lot of good with the sysop tools. I would prefer she remain as a sysop while working to become a better one. - Tanetris 20:06, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
31. Definite Support. 28,000+ good contributions > a few slip-ups. No need to elaborate.--Rein 21:02, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
32. Support these damn RFCs need to be on the nag strip - I didn't see this one until Bax's filled up RC. Er, yes - support. Wyn is a mighty contributor and an omniscient administrator. I admire people who brook no crapulence. --snograt 22:48, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
33. Support I think Wyn is doing a great job as a sysop, but Tanetris and others really said it all. - anja 06:37, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
34. Duh. Ale_Jrb (talk) 09:06, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
35. Wynn is waaay too valuable for this wiki. i can't imagine GWW without her. ~ Kurd 21:33, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose. The issue with Noxify concerns me greatly. She let her feelings and emotions get in the way of her ability to be a fair and unbiased sysop - unfortunately, I was stupid enough to go along with it, and I did the banning instead, causing Nox to start his recent Anti-Auron campaign. Instead of sticking up for me in that case, Wyn was content to sit on the sidelines until I asked her directly to make it known it was on her request the ban was placed to begin with. That, combined with other things that have happened in the past (vili-like ragequits etc), I feel she is no longer suitable as a sysop on this wiki. When she can prove that she has a handle on her emotions, I might even vote neutral - but her past history, her attitude, and her sysop-actions-based-on-whatever-mood-she-might-be-in-today make me oppose. -Auron 12:26, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
2. Oppose. I'm with Auron. Mini Me 14:16, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
3. Oppose. It's important to note here that if Wyn does lose her sysop status, she will not lose her user status. She can continue to help people with userpages, images, categories, guild pages, discuss feedback (though I think she left that discussion, iirc), and generally help people as she already does; and I think many people have these things in mind when supporting her. I'm not contesting her usefulness or dedication to any of those things, but they're entirely irrelevant in regards to sysop status - they should not be grounds for support or opposition for reconfirmation.
   To expand on what I said on the reconfirmation request, my opposition is based on the way her emotions and mood swings affect her judgement. We expect our admins to be able to be as unbiased as possible, let reason and rationality guide their actions, and not let the pressure or flack from other users affect their actions; I see a lot of the opposite from Wyn (both on-wiki and off), and I don't think we can just ignore and wave aside the bad stuff as an 'off day', particularly when they occur so often. I don't trust Wyn's discretion, and I'm not comfortable to see her continue as a sysop. -- Brains12 \ talk 19:02, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
4. Oppose. I'm really cool and all of you care about my opinion -FireFox 21:11, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
5. Oppose. Blocked Jon Lopun just cause she got a heart attack. Lol 67.233.83.141
6. Oppose. ^ -- Halogod35 23:19, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
7. Oppose. We won't be losing her as a user, either way. King Neoterikos 01:30, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
8. Oppose. Abuses her sysop powers and mistreats other users. Loves to Sync 15:14, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
9. Oppose. While Brains and Auron have covered all the items I would have said, I would like to confirm the opinions they express and state that I observe the same emotion based actions. I will agree that she is very helpful to users learning wiki basics, rules and regulations, but she is not best as a person in a position of enforcement. There is one example that I found abusive...where she banned Jon Lupin briefly because he had the forethought to archive the same page she did. Use of power in that manner is totally innapropriate.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 16:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
10. Oppose. --adrin 16:28, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
11. Oppose. For reasons listed by above users. --mira castillo 15:46, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
12. Oppose. In my dealings with Wynthyst (virtually nonexistant as a registered user but frequently as an IP), I have noticed an alarming trend in which her mood and personal relationships strongly affect her statements and actions toward other users, particularly in her official status as sysop. Various instances include concerns with the late Uchiha Lena, Noxify, and the already-mentioned Halogod35. These are the same type of misjudgments that I once made often on GuildWiki. Hopefully, once Wynthyst has spent some time as a regular user (as I did), she will remember how to use the sysop tools properly once more. Felix Omni 21:31, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
13. Oppose. I don't think it's a secret by any means that I simply have a strong personal dislike for Wynthyst and would very much enjoy any opportunity to knock her down a few pegs. But such opinions mean jack-all on a valid, reality-based RfA. Whether or not I think Wynthyst is a pretty cool girl should have no bearing whatsoever when the "votes" are taken into consideration. I'm merely expressing this to counteract the overabundance of touchy-feely in the Support section. (Protip to fanclub: Wyn doesn't really appreciate being placed on a pedesal.)
    So, on to real arguments. If there were some position of office where a user could delete spam, mess with MediaWiki, protect pages, etc., but could not ban, then I would nominate Wyn for such a position. Alas, sysop tools are bundled, and finesse with the banhammer and the "discretion delete" button is more important as the whole rest of the lot combined.
    Wyn is a hard worker, and I don't think there is any other user on this wiki who can demonstrate such passion and devotion for the work, sysop or not. In the Wiki Personalities lexicon, Wyn fits pretty clearly as a Gnome in this regard - a tireless, devoted worker who is willing to deal with all the crap day in and day out that other sysops can't be bothered with...whether it's maintaining guild pages, deleting orphaned images, or moving and deleting misplaced userspace stuff. I don't have any problem with that side of Wyn at all.
    But there's more to Wyn than just the kindly maintenance drone who helps you design your userpage. ; )
    I've become increasingly unhappy with the way Wyn handles conflict, especially between users (although there have been some, imo, questionable/arbitrary "content" decisions as well, re: "overzealous suggestion tagging"). It is, on one level, understandable to become personally involved when you are personally involved, if you know what I mean. The "Tesla Stalker" incident comes to mind. Who wouldn't use whatever powers they have at their disposal to protect one's friends from what seems like an honest threat? I'm sure there are those who would consider anything of the sort inexcusable hypocrisy and corruption, but really...sysops are, believe it or not, human beings. This is exactly why the Good Sysop Guide(tm) advises against getting involved in conflicts where one's personal bias could affect judgment. If you want to debate the should have, would have all day long about whether Wyn should have gotten involved in the first place (not her actions thereafter), feel free. I'm willing to overlook one-offs like that.
    The problem arises, though, when they stop being one-offs. Here's the way I see it, and feel free to discard this as pure vitriolic opinion, simply me telling someone else how to live their life: the pattern I see more and more lately is that Wyn injects herself into conflicts in such a way that she becomes "personally involved" without really being personally involved...having no good reason to get so worked up/defensive/righteous. Yes! She sometimes does a pretty damn good job of it! (Lena's gone, isn't he?) But it's that sort of "if you mess with the wiki, you're messing with me" attitude that really worries me. I used to have such a complex myself, and look at me today. I feel that it sometimes clouds Wyn's better judgment in places where a neutral POV and/or objective attitude would be much more productive. How many more fights do we need to have over the structure of the Feedback namespace? This is a small wiki about an "old" video game. You can feel personally vested in the project, but at a certain point I think you just have to draw the line between "caring" and "taking things too personally".
    To put it most simply, Wyn is often the "White Knight" for GWW itself, willing to "lay down her life", as it were, to vanquish the forces of trolldom. But she is also a valuable Gnome whose 25,000+ contributions (not counting deletions!) have gone no small way towards helping the wiki run smoothly. I wish there were two Wynthysts. I wish that sysop tools or personalities could be divided at will. But that is just not the case. They are whole packages and you can't have the one half without the other.
    So the paradox of Wyn goes unresolved...and for now, at least, I think that darker side needs to take a rest. Vili 点 08:33, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
14. Oppose. Many of the votes seem to be treating this as a "do we keep Wyn as a sysop or do we ban her" type of thing - and, were that the case, my vote would be under support with most of the rest of them. However, that's not the point of this discussion - the point is whether Wyn should keep her sysop powers or lose them and remain a normal user. I don't think Wyn should keep them because, quite frankly, she seems to be an emotional carebear now that I've paid attention to her contributions. All - or at least most of - the good things Wyn can do can be done without sysop powers. -- Armond Warblade{{Bacon}} 05:12, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
15. Oppose. While she may seem like a good sysop. I have had a few things be removed because of her and deaming it unsatisfactory. When in fact it was what I had seen in game done by the gms, etc. I don't think she would be a great sysop and deam her as a user until she can learn more. Ariyen 16:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Neutral. I have noticed a shift in Wyn's behaviour, sometimes it does seem un-Sysop like (or just stuff that shouldn't have happened), yet I'm not sold on the idea of her not being a Sysop. ~~000.00.00.00~~ 14:31, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
2. Neutral. As i think of it, these events that have happened lately, turn my vote to neutral. - J.P.Talk 15:14, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
3. Neutral. The links provided on the RFA page plus the overzealous blocking of newbies not using minor edit/show previous makes me vote neutral, but on its own this is not enough for an oppose. --Xeeron 20:17, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
4. Neutral. Like Xeeron, I have some small causes for concern, but they are not enough for me to oppose. I would prefer that Wyn simply take the reservations that some wiki users are expressing here, improve herself in those areas, and that we could simply move on from there in a constructive manner. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 00:41, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
5. Neutral, per Aiiane. I do think think this request was premature- as far as on wiki, I'm not seeing a record of anyone reprimanding (or even discussing tbh) any issues Wyn may have had either with her temper or threats. People *do* make mistakes, and if nobody tells them that they're making a mistake then it's a lot harder to learn not to make that mistake again. Like Aiiane said, let this be the notice to Wyn that there may be a problem, and if we encounter the problem again in the future I'll consider opposing. – Emmett 01:15, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
6. Neutral. On the one hand, I do think that Wyn occasionally allows stress to have an undue influence on her behavior. On the other, I think that, on the whole, she has performed her duties as a sysop admirably. While I think the former is a cause of some concern, I remain unconvinced that Wyn is incapable of continuing to perform above-par as a Sysop, particularly if, as Aiiane suggests, Wyn were able to take these criticisms and apply them in a constructive fashion. *Defiant Elements* +talk 03:52, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
7. Neutral Per the above. ~ PheNaxKian 11:19, 13 July 2009
8. Neutral. It's all too easy to remember the negative aspects of a user's sysophood and too easy to forget, or at least put aside, the more positive moments. Most of the time, Wyn is one of the most active users on the wiki and is always ready to help new users and punishing the bad ones - most of the time in an objective and fair manner. However the aftermath of a particular bureaucrat election, as well the incidents linked above are cause for concern. Like others above had stated, if there's no improvement soon I'll oppose. There's always more people to fill the role. -- Indochine talk 13:17, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
9. Neutral. — Jon Lupen 15:40, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
10. Neutral I echo the sentiments of many of the above. I'd hate to see her go as a sysop, mostly because she is a good sysop and a great user. However, I do hope, if this RFA does pass, that this should serve as a wake-up call. --Riddle 16:53, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
11. Neutral Wyn seems to get frustrated easily. Which isn't surprising because it seems more than half the participants on this wiki seem to participate with a paper bag on their head and their fingers in their ears going 'lalala' (probably me included ;). If there is any fault here it is that the first thing which is done to resolve and air issues is this 'vote'. I completely agree with Aiiane's statement above. --Aspectacle 23:58, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
12. Neutral Simply put, I will not put my vote under support. King Neoterikos 04:05, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Request for Reconfirmation

1. I too feel that she can be a little emotional. While I do not think that this affects her use of the sysop tools, I think that she could be less emotional about things and perhaps just let some discussions go to avoid further drama. I feel that she is doing a great job as a sysop and is deserving of the tools, but she needs to cool down before her emotions lead her actions. Drogo Boffin 17:58, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
2. Gotta agree with Drogo :/ - J.P.Talk 18:36, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
3. Like last time, too emotional, doesn't know when to take a break and is too aggressive. I hoped you would've learned something, but alas. - Mini Me talk 19:28, 26 December 2009
4. Control your emotion or it will control you ~Celestia 02:30, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
5. Shes a good sysop but i think she should only maintain her sysop power if she learns to control her emotions --Nick123 21:39, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
6. Given that in the current discussions both sides seem to understand, but disagree with each other, and given that I feel an Arbcom is the wrong instrument for this dispute, a reconfirmation is, imho, the cleanest and fasted way to solve this. --Xeeron 15:12, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
7. Same reasons as always. She's unstable, over-emotional, and over-involved. She seems borderline incapable of making rational, unbiased decisions especially when she takes personal stake in a page/user/issue. EDIT: Lately it has gotten even worse. When questioned about her abilities as a sysop, she has lashed out at other users and she has become much more hostile and less active. Only more reasons she shouldn't retain her sysop tools. Karate Jesus 03:04, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
8. KJ summed it up quite well. 3rd try to write this, and I haven't been able to get my thoughts together. ---Chaos- (moo) -- 10:00, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
9. Comments like this [3] prove to me that does not deserve to be a sysop as it shows she has a lack of understanding as to how a wiki operates. Loves to Sync 19:04, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
10. I was really trying to meet this user in the middle, but given her lashing out at me and at Auron over the last couple days... —Tanaric 16:58, 15 February 2010 (UTC)