Wikia

Yallow - (Contribs, Talk)Edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the nomination of a user for adminship. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

This nomination was ended as of the 4^th of December 2009, due to a year long ban incurred by Yallow, which was lifted 4 days later because it was unjustified.

Candidate, please outline your reasons for becoming an adminEdit

I care what happens on this wiki
The people who run this place have gotten to know me, and who think I deserve this
I'm trusted by the community (I'm a rollbacker)
I am a bureaucrat on one wiki and hope to adopt two others
I am active and have a lot of edits and a lot of good ones
I'll provide variety (meaning I'm not from guildwiki)
I'm on irc a lot
I have my own opinions and am not a wannabe yesman
I have a lot of ideas. AFK gives me credit for the IRC and Mendel gives me credit for Good UnAnswers.

I'm going to have to say
That I am ready to be sysop today
Correct me if I am wrong
I won't hit you with a gong
But please vote on my RfA

Further questions for candidateEdit

Q: You have had disputes with members of the administration in the past, how will you resolve these disputes going forward? c 23:29, November 16, 2009 (UTC)

A: Disputes are disputes, they happen among the best of people. Sometimes disputes are indeed worth disputing, but many times they are not. Difference of opinion as far as admins is good for wikis if the dispute impacts the wiki significantly. If I wanted to resolve any of my disputes with admins, I would probably attempt to stop the drama before it catches quickly.

Q: Some users have addressed the concern that there are too many administrators, what is your opinion on the matter? Random Time 23:29, November 16, 2009 (UTC)

A:It's the candidate we vote on, not the number of admins. My opinion is that if anyone who feels qualified enough (really qualified, no joking around) should nominate themselves. If the people of UnAnswers feel ready to promote this person then they should be promoted, regardless of how many admins there are. It doesn't matter if everyone on this wiki is promoted to sysop as long as the people here feel them able; it merely means we have a lot of users who are concerned, active, and can contribute to UnAnswers in a positive fashion.

Community discussionEdit

Points in favorEdit

Previous administrative experience (albeit on a much smaller scale) Random Time
Active, is here often Random Time

Points againstEdit

Arguably not trusted by the Community A F K When Needed

Certainly not by the Admin team as a whole A F K When Needed

What use does Yallow have of Admin tools? A F K When Needed
Could potentially abuse Admin tools when she feels like the victim (often) A F K When Needed
Regularly tries to stir things A F K When Needed

(See IRC and her talk page) A F K When Needed

Neutral pointsEdit

May sometimes be seen as a "wildcard" can cause trouble due to differing opinion, previous track record indicates that in drama situations this can escalate. Random Time

SupportEdit

Umm, all contributions I recall seeing from Yallow were of high quality and what I've seen of her personality, I like. I haven't seen any of the drama 'cause I'm not really into the... mmm... extended social intercourse on most websites. I'm just a newb (or at best, novice) when it comes to administering wikis, but from what I've seen of people with power on the internet, I think Yallow has a good personality for it. Because this is all opinion™, none of you can contradict so there! :) Khono 06:48, November 29, 2009 (UTC)

You missed a lot while ou were away. --Yowuza yadderhouse | meh 12:43, November 29, 2009 (UTC)

Deserves it. But we don't need more admins. -- Dancing Penguin (Talk!) (Contribs) (Edits)

DP, it's the candidate we vote on, not the number of admins. If you feel I deserve it (or anyone deserves it) vote for them. Yallow 00:47, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

Opinion shift - Well, from what I have seen, Yallow seems trustworthy. Dancing Penguin (Talk!) (Contribs) (Edits) 17:15, November 29, 2009 (UTC)

OpposeEdit

Whilst I have my concerns, especially due to the previous drama, which - to my mind was not handled successfully by any of the parties involved. I do wish to support Yallow. She has been a good, well-reasoned and active contributor to UnAnswers in the past, and hopefully, now most of the tension has been eased off, she can do a good job as an administrator. However, one thing to consider is the number of admins, and the risk of letting someone with this history into the sysop group, as this right cannot be removed without wikia assistance. Random Time 23:29, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

...what? We're talking about her being an Administrator.

A F K When Needed 22:28, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

Opinion shift - due to the level of drama, I'm afraid I'm going to oppose this. Whilst in due time, I still hold the opinion that Yallow will make an excellent admin, I'm afraid that yes, the drama was too severe, and not properly dealt with. Random Time 22:33, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

Restating I have no problems with the candidate, but the interaction with the current administrator team shows that there will be disagreements, these, I believe - will escalate if the RFA is successful Random Time 21:58, November 19, 2009 (UTC)

2. This page and it's accompanying discussion page illustrate very important points about Yallow.

1) I raised points on the Talk Page. These put Yallow in a negative light, and the logic behind them is solid. These have gone ignored by Yallow.

2) Yallow has on this very page come up with a blatant lie about what I "give her credit for".

[ defamatory content removed, --◄mendel► 03:58, November 19, 2009 (UTC)]

Thus, due to her behaviour while her RfA has been open I whole-heartedly oppose this.

A F K When Needed 22:44, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

I state from my own knowledge that your comments have not gone ignored; however, they are biased, lack factual evidence, and are apt to conjure up emotions (actually, most RfAs put quite a strain on the candidates if they're in the slightest controversial), so, even if I didn't think Yallow was disconnected last night whilst composing her response, I would expect her to take a day or three. --◄mendel► 03:00, November 19, 2009 (UTC)

FYI, you did give her some IRC-related credit; in fact, "credit" was your exact choice of words. --◄mendel► 03:09, November 19, 2009 (UTC)

Sigh. You're really not a man who takes his own advice often. So... we're keeping responses on the discussion page? Um, k.

I thanked her ("gave her credit for" / "credited her with") the IRC channel being handled as soon as it was, stating I wouldn't have done it otherwise for around a week.

To merely state "AFK credits me with IRC" is heavily out of context, deliberately being misleading.

I don't for a second believe that you cannot see that.

A F K When Needed 22:27, November 19, 2009 (UTC)

I don't see our current Bureaucrat to be willing and able to work with Yallow; in other words, she doesn't fit the existing team. I attach no blame to this; I see this as an unfortunate clash of personalities. --◄mendel► 03:05, November 19, 2009 (UTC)

NeutralEdit

Per RT. --Yowuza yadderhouse | meh 18:37, November 17, 2009 (UTC)