D&D Wiki:Requests for Adminship/Valentine the Rogue
Valentine the Rogue
- Valentine the Rogue's Nomination.
Voice your opinion (4/4/1) 50% Approval; Ended 7:00 (PM), 19 April 2009 (MDT)
I am nominating Valentine the Rogue for adminship mostly for a single reason. This reason being that, when most people first meet him, whether on the tavern, or on a pages talk page, they believe he's already and admin, and they request that he help them in one way or another that only an admin can help them. This has lent him much fustration over the many times, as he has wanted to help those around him, but was unable. Now then, I've spoken with Valentine many times in the tavern, and I must simply state that any intents he has on this website are justified and fair, but he cannot actualize them without the rights specificied via adminship. So, I think he deserves to be given the rights to be an admin. So, I hand this request over to Valentine for him to fill it out. → Rith (talk) 00:00, 12 April 2009 (MDT)
- Candidates Prelude
- 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'd like to help the wiki by formatting pages, deleting pages as needed, organizing some of the pages, and being able to help new users better. I'd like to organize some of the sections to have only one page for preloads. Being able to protect some pages would help. I also spend a lot of time patrolling the recent changes page, anyway, and I try to be everywhere I'm needed.
- I think that being an admin will just allow me to do the things I normally would, just with less hindrance. Whenever I go through a page I correct obvious errors I see, and I also try to MOI admins right now when I see someone wants a page deleted or protected. The difference would be that I would just do those things directly instead.
- 2. Of your articles or contributions to D&D Wiki, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
- A: I have several things I'm proud of on DandWiki. First of all, my Chocobo Project. I've put a lot of work into it, and it has a large number of articles. The Character Listing Template I made to share my characters on my user page is another thing I'm proud of. Finally, the Create New Campaign Setting and Create Alternative New Campaign Setting pages are something I works hard on, and something I plan on adding to in the future to have more variant formats, more pages and utilities, and more detail.
- 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 don't think I've ever had a serious edit conflict. i can't recall anything beyond accidentally making a minor edit or two while someone was making some changes of their own on the same page. Usually I memorize what changes I made and where, save their page, and then see if my changes are still needed. I don't edit pages made by other users enough to really conflict with major edits, because I don't think I should edit other user's pages without a good reason or their consent.
Discussion
Support I Support Valentine becoming an Admin, he has been extraordinarily helpful. He maintains a good calm while talking to others. He is respectful and knowledgeable. I think he would make a fine addition to the admin team.Summerscythe 10:51, 13 April 2009 (MDT)
Support I Support Valentine because he has been very polite, informative, helpful, and has given very useful advice and tips not only about DnD and the like but also with using the Wiki. .Newbie
Support I Support Valentine! I'm not sure how many more admins we need....but Val would make a good addition to the team. He's knowledgeable, easy to talk to, and always around. --Lumi 22:03, 13 April 2009 (MDT)Lumi
Support Valentine has been nothing but helpful to me, and while some of his edits and additions to the Wikipage are strange, he does his best to make them worthy of the game. Avlindrel_Fallentree 6:40 April 17th, 2009 (CST)
Oppose I don't know Valentine. Also, of the edits I have seen, I do not feel that his D&D Wiki-syntax is quite admin-quality yet. --Green Dragon 13:49, 15 April 2009 (MDT)
Oppose - After more studying, I think that it is still far too early for Val to become an admin. Actually all the good advice that was given to me during my RfA applies here as well. Hooper talk contribs email 06:20, 17 April 2009 (MDT)
OpposeFor the same reasons Green Dragon does. --Ganre 06:26, 17 April 2009 (MDT)
Oppose - I must concur with both Green Dragon and Ganre, as well I think we are a bit top heavy with admins at the moment so another may not be needed. -- Sepsis 06:32, 17 April 2009 (MDT)
Neutral
Neutral I am yet undecided, I shall take my decision based on the discussion.--Lord Dhazriel 14:24, 13 April 2009 (MDT)
Neutral I am also undecided. The tavern talk leading up to this nomination makes me weary of it, but Val's general contributions seem positive. Hooper talk contribs email 16:32, 13 April 2009 (MDT)
- I'd like to adress your concern for the Tavern history that preceded this nomination. I requested I be nominated by someone else because I was disinclined to do so myself. I did not want to nominate myself for personal reasons, a preference derived from a history in applying for other positions. While I requested my adminship nomination, thereby effectively nominating myself, I simply prefer that another's name appear as the nominator. I am not trying to imply that Rithaniel is a scapegoat or a puppet, nor would I ever use him as such; it is merely my disinterest in nominating myself overtly and obviously that provoked my course of action.
- On a tangentially related note, I think the word you were looking for was "wary" as opposed to "weary". I certainly hope you aren't tired of my nomination. -Valentine the Rogue 16:42, 13 April 2009 (MDT)