Guild Wars Wiki talk:Requests for adminship/Emmett/Archive 1

Reasons to Support?

I'm leaning to neutral at the moment.

There's a strong enough track record on GWW and GWiki to get a sense of your abilities and sensibilities. I don't see any reasons to oppose your RfA. Unfortunately, I don't see any specific reason to support it either. Your acceptance note does not give us a sense of what you would offer GWW. Are there gaps in the current admin coverage? Are you adding to the wikifu of the team? How would you weigh in on recent policy decisions? Have you helped defuse recent controversies? Are you able to help new users contribute? Are you able to provide solutions to situations that pop up? What would you be able to do as sysop that you aren't able to do as contributor?

I personally don't think sysops need to be strong in each of these areas; I do think they should be strong in several or at least very strong in one.   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 00:58, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Actually, if you look at just the actual number of sysops, it's pretty low. Of the people here, from the actives only Kakarot, Poke, Salome and Wyn are active (by which I mean contribute) on a ~daily basis, and Auron seems like he should be in the actives rather than semi-active. (Aiiane and Indochine are usually on IRC, though.) However, they keep up just fine with maintenance, so there's nothing I personally have to add there, other than just an average helping hand.

However, as Pling so nicely put it, this nomination/request isn't really for what I have to offer the wiki as a janitor. That's not to say that I wouldn't ban vandals and delete pages when I can- I understand that that's a part of the job. What I think I can bring to the admin team is "wikifu". Pling's thoughts reflect my own, so I won't just rephrase his entire comment here, but that's the general idea. I don't necessarily think that the team needs me, since as far as I can tell the current admins are just as/more competent than me, but I definitely feel that my addition would only improve the sysop team.

I have commented on recent policy decisions. 1, 2, 3 (not technically a policy, but it's the same idea), 4- mostly all just "+1" comments, but that's because I agreed with the proposals. If you want other examples of places where I feel I have successfully demonstratred my ability to "make judgements, form and express arguments, and to reason and justify", I feel that my comments on RfAs have been the best- JP/Jope12, Wyn's, WT's, Vili's are my favorites. I'm able and willing to help new users, too- my name is even on Guild Wars Wiki:Helpers! :P – Emmett 05:23, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. This is helpful.   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 07:35, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

It may be a mix of cynicism and being too busy to pay attention to the wiki, but has there been recently any kind of incident in which a discretionary sysop would actually have helped? Erasculio 00:18, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, Misery has recently used the discretion log, DE perma'd Super Igor about a month ago and Mafaraxas was blocked for a 3rd time for sig issues then too to name a couple. – Emmett 01:41, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I meant more in the way Brains said: "I guess the main thing I nominated Emmett for was what he could contribute to the discretionary side of sysopping in particular - the blocking, the conflict resolving, the discussion". Has there recently been any situation in which a sysop actually acted to resolve a conflict or to help in a discussion, or in which a sysop could actually have helped in any of those things? Erasculio 22:12, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Nicholas the Traveler fan fiction? -- FreedomBound 23:00, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Would it be the time to close this? - J.P.Talk 14:11, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Pretty sure we haven't forgotten. Misery 14:14, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) The bureaucrats can close it when they wish, it's only approximately a week in the policy, it hasn't been much longer than that at this point. I'm sure they're aware of it. -- FreedomBound 14:16, 16 October 2009 (UTC)