D&D Wiki:Requests for Adminship/Quincy

Quincy

Voice your opinion Done!

---

(6/2/1) 75% Approval; Ended 12:00, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Quincy has been an active and prolific contributor to this site for about a year. He clearly cares about the site and its well-being, as can be seen in his votes in previous RfA's, and I feel he would fulfill the role of an admin well. — Geodude (talk | contribs | email)‎‎ . . 11:22, 6 November 2018 (MST)

Candidates Prelude

Hi, it's me, Quincy! Before we start I'd like to give my special thanks to Geodude671 for nominating me and suggesting that I run for admin in the first place. I hadn't even considered becoming an administrator before, but now that the question's come up, well it's a great honor for me to be here! Quincy (talk) 16:29, 6 November 2018 (MST)

Thank you all for your support! Thank you, thank you, thank you! Quincy (talk) 15:15, 13 November 2018 (MST)

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve D&D Wiki in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with? Please read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list on Wikipedia before answering.

A: I'll do my best wherever I can! First of all, I'll keep an eye on the list of recent changes to the wiki. As a user, I have often been the first one to respond to spammers and users inappropriately using D&D Wiki as a place for unwarranted commercial solicitation. As an admin? I would use my powers to speedily delete offending pages and deal with the perpetrators as the situation demands. If there's cleanup or regular patrolling that needs doing, then great, I can help with that too! On a more personal level, I'm committed to being the "face" of the wiki, conducting myself in good faith and enforcing our wiki's behavioral policies. I have a vested interest as a user in keeping the wiki a fun place, so I'll always be there to help users who need a page protected from vandalism or bad faith edits. Spirit and intent matters to me a great deal.

2. Of your articles or contributions to D&D Wiki, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?

A: Of the articles I've contributed? Definitely the rule system I made for simulating nuclear warfare in 5e, just because of how metal it is, and because I feel like I did a good job providing passably realistic statistics for something that's normally beyond the scope of any game. Out of my contributions overall, I'm very happy with the work I've been doing recently on templates for things like 21st-30th level 5e classes and prestige classes. I've learned a lot through experimenting with those templates, and even if they're just for fun simply seeing proof that they work is such a wonderful feeling! I also like those occasions where I can be a mentor of sorts for newer users. When I'm able to teach someone how to format a table, or correctly use an overlooked rule that exists in the SRD, or just plain explain concepts of design or wiki policy, it makes my heart swell with pride!

3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?

A: I'm still a bit salty over one of my older (now deleted) pages, Glass Sword. I created an item which I thought provided a fair drawback for its benefit, but Blobby383b rightfully pointed out that it was badly designed, not to mention poorly thought out. Although I tried to remain polite, I did argue with him about it. However, I eventually realized he really did have a valid point and I had the page itself deleted. If there's one user that caused me stress it was Xslasher112, even though he didn't do anything to me, really. He had issues with other users editing his pages. I steered him to have a conversation with the users in question because I thought it would be better if he talked it out with them rather than lose his temper and get banned for edit warring. He did just that, but he found talking with those users very frustrating. Eventually he lashed out at an administrator and got banned. After the whole debacle I couldn't help but feel like there was more I could've done to help defuse the situation. I'm not a perfect man; My experiences have taught me that I can definitely stand to be more vocal, and take action more quickly when someone's out of line. On the other hand I'm still going to be as courteous and respectful as I've always been because hey, if it ain't broke then don't fix it, am I right? If there's a peaceful solution to a user's grievances, rather one that ends with somebody getting banned, then so much the better! Quincy (talk) 16:29, 6 November 2018 (MST)

---

Discussion

• Green Dragon, I'm writing here to prevent Quincy's RfA from becoming as cluttered as mine. You quote from the RfA procedures, but I'm not sure why? Could you please explain what I am supposed to gather from your quote? Was it directed at me or Quincy? All it seemed to do is support that RfA is not a ballot, like I said, and that it's up to you to come to consensus. If I came off as passive-aggressive, I apologize. I only meant to convey that I am unsure how serious my concern is, and that I respect your judgement on the matter.--GamerAim (talk) 06:23, 8 November 2018 (MST)

I just wanted to make it clear that the RfA is not about my opinion, or my feelings for a particular user, but rather about reaching concensus. --Green Dragon (talk) 09:13, 8 November 2018 (MST)

Support

• Per above. — Geodude (talk | contribs | email)‎‎ . . 11:22, 6 November 2018 (MST)

• Quincy has always been a mediating force for new users, with a good grasp of policy. He has communicated well with all sorts of users and in multiple situations. Quincy also understands D&D well, and is very constructive. --Green Dragon (talk) 01:34, 7 November 2018 (MST)

• I have taken a look at your work and found that you are integral to this community and as such I say you more than deserve this. I know I am still quite new here but I hope that you sore at this new Herculean task in front of you. Many have have tried to do what you do but form what I can see you have what it takes to help and outshine everyone else in this role but for now good luck and may the winds of magic never turn against you!--Erlek Thunder weaver (talk | contribs | email) 13:19, 7 November 2018 (MST)

• I agree with the above. As someone relatively new to the wiki, I greatly appreciate Quincy's role and actions. I wish him the best of luck! -- Senex (talk) 13:54, 7 November 2018 (MST)

• I am supporting this RfA solely based on contributions. I am skeptical because my own interactions with Quincy have been extremely limited. What contributions I have seen were not bad, and after researching Q's contributions, I see a lot of good ones. Quincy gives correct answers when someone asks about 5e. Quincy has created items Glowstaff (5e Equipment) that aren't crazy unbalanced or unplayable. Quincy has created monsters Greater Balor (5e Creature) and when a valid point was made they accepted the idea well (or great), Quincy hit the ground running helping place templates on articles needing corrections and beyond these exmaples Quincy continues to grow and understand D&D. I also appreciate that Quincy is a user that has faced adversity on the wiki and maintained themselves and is open about the experience. Humility and/or humbleness go a long way. I hope to know more about Quincy in the future and even work with them, as I do all users on the wiki. Kudos and good luck on the nomination Q ~ BigShotFancyMan (talk) 11:02, 9 November 2018 (MST)

Thank you very much for your support BSFM! Quincy (talk) 14:51, 9 November 2018 (MST)

• I look forward to your continued contributions and you fresh spirit. You have my sword... —ConcealedLight (talk) 12:18, 10 November 2018 (MST)

Oppose

• Though polite, creative, and clearly has good skills; I am not convinced Quincy is currently in a position to make net constructive contributions as an admin. Best luck. --SgtLion (talk) 14:31, 7 November 2018 (MST)

Thanks for coming, SgtLion! Dare'st I ask why? If there's anything I can do to better myself I'm all ears. Quincy (talk) 15:10, 7 November 2018 (MST)

• I don't know much about Quincy, except that I've seen him around the Wiki for awhile now and haven't met anyone with complaints about him or his edits. From what I gather, he works quietly and knows his stuff, is polite and good at conflict resolution, and is active in Wiki politics but remains an uncontroversial figure. In those ways, Quincy reminds me of me when I became an admin, and my lack of first-hand knowledge of him should not be used as a negative with regards to his character.

However, we've promoted 5 admins (and had 2 step down) in 2018 alone. Quincy would be the 6th. His would also be the 11th RfA this year (13 if you count the informal RfAs of Guy and Jwguy stepping down). I feel like this is a lot of power being transferred in a short span of time, though I don't necessarily distrust Quincy with it; I doubt that he'd abuse the ability to delete and restore pages, which is the crux of what adminship entails.

So, because this isn't a vote, GD is free to decide how much weight my concern is worth. I otherwise have no qualms about Quincy in particular and I hope I've made that clear <3 --GamerAim (talk) 15:20, 7 November 2018 (MST)

Thanks for commenting, GamerAim! No offense was taken and no harm was done, so don't worry! Quincy (talk) 15:31, 7 November 2018 (MST)

"The numbers of people supporting, opposing, or expressing another opinion on a candidacy are a significant factor in determining consensus, as such few RfAs succeed with less than 75% support, but a request for adminship is not a ballot; only consensus (as determined by a bureaucrat) must be achieved: the reasons and evidence given during the RfA may sway others, and participants communication with the candidate may change ones position during the decision period." --Green Dragon (talk) 23:35, 7 November 2018 (MST)

Neutral

• I would vote for, but have stuck to just lurking for the last couple of years so don't feel as though I should have a say really.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   15:19, 12 November 2018 (MST)