Requests for Adminship/Xenophon
From D&D Wiki
- Xenophon's Nomination. Done!
Voice your opinion (4/1/0) (80% Approval - Neutral is not counted) Ended 10:00 (MST), 13 December 2006 (MST)
- 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: One frustration I've run into has been not being able to correct any of the protected pages. I would really like to clean up any issues and possibly I would like to help out Dmilewski with the SRD. I will still continue on with my spelling and grammar checks regardless of any adminship. I also want to keep vigilance on copyright issues as we're dealing with multiple licenses here and reference material that might not be as open as some think. I'll always continue my constructive criticism as well as maintaining good stewardship and work to find new ways to evangelize the wiki and bring more people in. I want this place to grow.
- 2. Of your articles or contributions to D&D Wiki, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
- A: My contributions outside of spell checking are few. However, I feel pleased in spearheading the Standards and Formatting page as without standards wikis can become nothing but a gibbering mouther. I've been trying to allocate more time to doing this and adding in de facto standards people have been using, putting them into general practice by letting new people know how things are done around here.
- 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: There was a bit of back-and-forth on the Intercessor class. Looking back I feel that there was possibly some tension brought on by myself. I feel I could have been a bit more gentle and constructive. I didn't stress over it too much, because like Calidore has said... We're here for fun. I feel since then my temperament has cooled considerably and have laid out my personal framework for deal with all users.
- General comments
- Support - Xenophon has shown as willingness to help in many cases, and I am sure he will continue to do this. He does not have to many edits (a lot less than 1000), however no edits that reflect bad judgment in any way. I also feel that while Xenophon has been here he has learned the Wiki style enough to change many items into correctly formatted items. Good work Xenophon, and you have my vote. --Green Dragon 19:58, 6 December 2006 (MST)
- Support - Xeno has my vote. --Calidore Chase 02:45, 7 December 2006 (MST)
- Support - I also vote for Xenophon. The reasons are apparent from his responses above; he strives for professionalism and to construct this community is a healthy and vibrant way. I approve, and have often myself benefited from his attention to my pages! --EldritchNumen 23:39, 10 December 2006 (MST)
- Support - Aye. He posts and edits like someone who is quite responsible. I vote aye as I believe that you will grow into this position. That, and the SRD (a two week project that's gone on for nine months and ain't stoppin') is getting to be more than I can really handle. The SRD really needs some new eyes going over it. (I think Shadow Dragon has a good point, though. I feel like a hypocrite for saying so. I was only on the wiki a few weeks before I became an admin. For me, it's not just making edits, but getting to "know" the folks making the edits, both in how they work and how they disagree.)--Dmilewski 13:33, 11 December 2006 (MST)
- Oppose - I think an Admin on any Wiki should have more than 1000 edits before becoming admin. Less than 1000 edits is not enough to completely grasp the formatting to a wiki. This is not a personal attack against you, and I am sorry if you take it that way. --Shadow Dragon 23:40, 10 December 2006 (MST)
- I thank you for bringing up this argument. I do believe that the idea of admin having no less than 1000 edits is good as a loose guidance. However, I think it's up to the wiki community to determine if some one is qualified rather than a list of hard fast rules. Just because some one has made 1000+ edits doesn't mean those are worthwhile edits. I know I've made mistakes the first time I make an edit and go back again and change something. I could go over all the scenarios but I'm sure we can imagine them all. The issue of not being up on the formatting is a case by case basis as well. Some may not pick up on the syntax right away while there may be people with previous mediawiki and xhtml/css experience, such as myself, and others who are able to "talk" wiki by submerging themselves right away, such as Calidore. --Xenophon 02:09, 12 December 2006 (MST)