Requests for adminship is the process by which the WoWWiki community decides who will become administrators (also known as admins or sysops), who are users with access to additional technical features that aid in maintenance. A user either submits his/her own request for adminship (a self-nomination) or is nominated by another user.
About RfA
The community grants administrator status to trusted users, so nominees should have been on WoWWiki long enough for people to determine whether they are trustworthy. Administrators are held to high standards of conduct because other editors often turn to them for help and advice.
- Nomination standards
- The only official prerequisite for adminship is to have an account, have a basic level of trust from other editors, and the ability to show the community how the user will use administrator tools.
- Decision process
- Any user may nominate another user with an account. Self-nominations are permitted. If you are unsure about nominating yourself for adminship, you may wish to speak with one of the other administrators first, so as to get an idea of what the community might think of your request. Nominations will remain posted until a bureaucrat reviews the discussion to see whether there is a consensus for promotion. The purpose of this time is for users to give their opinions, ask questions, and make comments.
- If your nomination fails, please wait a reasonable period of time before renominating yourself or accepting another nomination. Some candidates have tried again and succeeded within a month, but many editors prefer several months before reapplying.
- Expressing opinions
- Any WoWWikian is welcome to comment. The candidate may respond to the comments of others. Certain comments may be discounted if there are suspicions of fraud, such as contributions from very new editors. Please explain your opinion by including a short explanation of your reasoning. Your input will carry more weight if it is accompanied by supporting evidence.
- To add a comment, just edit the page, Always be respectful towards others in your comments. You may wish to review arguments to avoid in adminship discussions.
Nominating
Nominations must be accepted by the user in question. If you wish to nominate a user, contact them first before making the nomination page. If they accept, create the nomination and ask them to sign their acceptance. To nominate either yourself or another user for adminship, add a new level 3 section underneath the Nominations section.
Nominations
Pcj
- Created and maintains the tooltip scripts which are used by default by every user of the wiki; so, obviously trusted.
- Over 20,000 quality-ridden edits throughout the wiki (I use Special:Random to find problems with pages); so, obviously experienced with dealing with the wiki and its tools.
- Also: voiced on IRC, member of the crazy people, and a patroller; so, obviously involved on the wiki.
The decision should be obvious, if not overwhelmingly so.
My user name is Pcj and I approve this message. --Pcj (T•C) 03:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Discussion
- You're awfully quick to tag something with a speedydelete or a stub or a bot-overhaul request with what appears to be thoughtless abandon. Will this continue? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sky2042 (talk · contr).
- When I first started here, I was more of the "deletionist" ideologue (and am probably still somewhat of that mentality)...I didn't really like seeing stubs over 30 days inactive. The pages I marked at that time usually had at the very most one sentence. Several times I crossed the "does not qualify as SD" line...but then SD are evaluated by an admin and I was reviewing on which pages the admin who was handling most of my SD tags at that time (Gryphon) was removing the {{sd}} tags from instead of deleting...and Gryphon did contact me a few times during that period regarding that subject. Then I'd say I went more into a stub/cleanup tagging phase...which is much less destructive, of course. However, I do mark guild stubs over 30 days for speedy deletion per WW:GUILD if they do not meet the requirements. I move pages per WW:PA, WW:PC, and WW:GUILD all the time, and disagreed with Kirkburn on the placement of some pages at one time because WW:PC did not have a notability exception. Now that there are bots to do a lot of the work, I try to tag it such that the bot replaces as little of the page is needed to match the given boilerplate. I do tend to like bot-created item pages with any user content added within the confines of the boilerplate later, maybe too much. I mostly use the full Foxbot tag on pages which are either new or only have the tooltip and external links (meaning perhaps Foxbot will generate a superior source description in addition to correcting any flaws with the tooltip), and tiponly for the remainder of the pages. With pages on which a Laurlybot page is used, I have gone back and restored any text I've found Laurlybot to replace from an erroneous tag by me, and generally only tag new pages with Laurlybot tags now, otherwise I use {{boilerplate}} to indicate the page needs further review.
- Hardly thoughtless, though I do try to evaluate pages on a case-by-case basis, which leaves it hard to explain every decision I've ever made. I would certainly do my best to not be reckless when it comes to deleting things as an admin. --Pcj (T•C) 04:15, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- It seems that Sky is concerned about two particular aspects of an admin that I also thought of when wondering if you would do well:
- Decisions made affect the wiki positively, reflect the goals of WoWWiki, and reflect the spirit of the wiki.
- All possible attempts to consult with other admins or members of the wiki before decisions are made, considering reasonable periods of time, level of disclosure, and seriousness of the issue, have been made.
- So, (and I'm not sure being so interviewy is appropriate here, but I'ma do it anyway
) but would you link us some examples of where you did these things?
- It seems that Sky is concerned about two particular aspects of an admin that I also thought of when wondering if you would do well:
- I also want to say that your contributions beyond qualify you for adminship. The JS you've added has certainly benefitted the wiki, and I'm really glad to have you as part of the community! --DuTempete talk|contr 15:21, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- I'll answer the second part first, because it lends itself to answering the first part, and that's the way I wrote it originally. Most of my collaboration takes place on IRC, where I'm active. It's therefore a bit hard to link to such collaboration, but I might be able to find logs were it to come to that. Suffice it to say that I do collaborate. You might consider the discussion I had recently about combining {{Infobox Warcraft character}} and {{Npcbox}} on the VP or one of the times I received and worked with input on the JS:
- WW:VP#Even more tooltips...
- WW:VP#Settip bug?
- WoWWiki talk:Village pump/Archive20#Hover tooltips!
- Besides that, I worked with DarkRyder on his APB project (as well as using his ZoneMapNote idea as the basis of my coordinates hover tooltip). And I have been known to welcome people to the wiki...probably one of the biggest contributors in that area.
- To address the first part of your question more directly, as I mentioned above, I did recently convert the {{Wowbox}} templates to use class="darktable" for better integration in the wiki, a change I received acclaim for, though some didn't receive it so well (then there are still others who benefit by it, and just like the hover tooltip functionality). I created WW:GOUS and was the member who originally asked for user style support [1].--Pcj (T•C) 15:53, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- I'll answer the second part first, because it lends itself to answering the first part, and that's the way I wrote it originally. Most of my collaboration takes place on IRC, where I'm active. It's therefore a bit hard to link to such collaboration, but I might be able to find logs were it to come to that. Suffice it to say that I do collaborate. You might consider the discussion I had recently about combining {{Infobox Warcraft character}} and {{Npcbox}} on the VP or one of the times I received and worked with input on the JS:
- I also want to say that your contributions beyond qualify you for adminship. The JS you've added has certainly benefitted the wiki, and I'm really glad to have you as part of the community! --DuTempete talk|contr 15:21, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- Do you really think you're capable of being a fair and just admin?
- You seemingly pick and choose what few people you care to give the time of day and be courteous towards, everyone else gets a dismissive and rude treatment from you (no, i'm not just talking about myself, though i'd love to hear your reasoning for having some sort of vandetta against me). All attempts to collaborate with you or offer suggestions has been met with hostility. Despite what some may think, your tooltip script is pretty awful and i'd be shocked if you didn't think otherwise. Before anyone decides to point out that they've not seen anyone else do it, others have, i am (merely because i'm sick of the problems with the current one), pcj simply did it at the right time when support was added to do so. To further add to that, pcj and admins (who don't work on it) are the only ones who can introduce any related javascript to the site and because of this he has free reign to do whatever he wants, and push any changes and features he wants to without any sort of discussion or concensus before and after the implementation. To make matters worse, there is no clear proccess to challange any of your changes and attempt to do so is met with silence on your part. You've also been quick to make sweeping changes both related and unrelated to it, such as over-eager speedy deletes and major template changes, without any sort of backing or discussion. You're constatly going further than simple "good faith" can support.
- Simply put, i think you're going to continue to be "trigger happy" with edits and very selective of how you treat people and therefore fail at meeting a basic requirement of an admin. Your seemingly good history is twisted by the fact you've recieved an unprecedented bias and control from admins you have favour with, and can't honestly be put in the same boat as everyone else's contributions because they have not had that sort of oppertunity to achieve the same results. If you do become an admin, it should be on your own merit, not the favours and blind eyes from admins and trust you've gained from it, something that i feel needs to be resolved long before you becoem a candidate. -- Zeal (T/C) 17:17, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- A couple of points to make here - the js has to be under pcj's namespace because otherwise it cannot be developed. It cannot be in a free-for-all namespace due to it being a security risk, and it cannot be in the normal namespace because then pcj wouldn't be able to edit it. In a catch-22 situation, the js could be moved if pcj becomes an admin.
- Now, as for whether pcj responds to constructive criticism, he does. I have made my opinion known to him on several occasions, and I do believe he has taken it into account. I don't like being accused of favouritism - I try and treat all members of the wiki with similar respect. This means treating them all well. I may rant about a change someone made, but that doesn't mean their effort isn't appreciated, or that someone I haven't ranted about has specific "favour" and can do whatever the hell they want.
- Nevertheless, I do agree that pcj will have to show more restraint on his changes than he has in the past, as admin edits will likely have much greater ramifications and are a more "public" face of the wiki. Kirkburn talk contr 17:58, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- As i pointed to in IRC, simply being creator does not mean someone should gain extra control. Before implementation, sure, after, no. I have no more control of any of the templates i first created on here, nor do i believe i should, i gave up that right the moment i moved them out of my userspace for implementation on the wiki. To give an example, {{tooltip}} i used to edit constantly and change things without much discussion which is to be expected (and is what pcj does atm), but this was before it became widely used. It's now restricted, i lost development rights long ago, which forces discussion and development examples for any major changes and then be implemented by a trusted admin, and that's how it should be imo. But that's not done for the tooltip related javascript, it's remained in pcj's control, and it recieves no discussion or preview of development (requests for such has always failed as i explained). This means despite him being the original creator, no one else can contribute to it, completely going against the nature of the wiki, and always keeping it in his sole ownership unlike a everything else that gets major implementation which loses it. Thus the excuse of keeping it in his userspace so he can continue to edit it is making an expection, an unfair one, as nothing and no one else has recieved such special treatment before (hence my accusation of bias).
- As far as i know, there is no technical requirement forcing the javascript to placed in the userspace. All pages are be capable of being viewed in a raw format, and again, afaik, there's no restriction in titles for the javascript extension. Security is not an issue, infact less so. I'm not suggesting that i think pcj can't be trusted, i'm sure he can, but in principle simply locking it down for admins only as is done with major templates is more secure. -- Zeal (T/C) 18:32, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- As for the quality of my tooltip script, it has developed over time, and I have listened and considered your ideas. For example, the change you suggested to add one class to all loot links was recently implemented. Your tooltip JS has its own problems (e.g., the fact that your tooltips don't move like you expect as you indicated to me in IRC). My JS allows for itself to be turned off, making it easier for others to disable it and make their own if they wish (as you did). On the talk page I linked above you yourself say you're inexperienced coding JS, so I'm not really sure why I should take your arguments seriously. In fact, I find most of your arguments hard to take seriously, since it seems to me you returned from a few months of activity and attempted to take back control of several of the templates you originally created. You've criticized Foxlit for some changes he made to one of them ({{tooltip}}), and seem to throw a tantrum when you don't get your way, as is evinced by your statements on your own user page that certain pages you helped create have been neglected since you left and that they haven't "recieved (sic) the recognition it deserves". Also, you say you "still have gripes about policies and practices in place on the wiki, as well as a distate (sic) for mediwiki (sic) itself", so I'm not really sure why I should expect anything but that your criticism of me is an extension of that. Finally, if some admins like me, that's gotta mean something. I don't know of any admin who particularly dislikes me. Even Fandyllic, though we've argued, seems to be overall fine with the idea. Everyone has the same opportunity as me, they just don't show the initiative; which, I think, having that makes me an even better candidate for admin.
- I would be open (if I become admin) to moving the JS to a locked central location, but it doesn't lend itself as much to being edited by more people because JS is a bit higher-level than MediaWiki code. The script is definitely still being actively developed, and I need to be able to address problems with my code as they arise. If I don't become admin, admins can still edit my user JS if they so wish. Overwhelmingly, though, no one else has expressed to me distaste for the JS itself as you have; in fact I've received outstanding support from everyone save you. So, if you have a problem, disable it for yourself and create your own, as you have. --Pcj (T•C) 18:39, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- Pcj is the first person I thought of when the requests for adminship got started. He has a long history of editing, and has experience in behind-the-scenes programming (Though Zeal said his tooltip script is pretty awful, and I will take his word on that). While he may have gotten over his speedy delete craze, he still tends to bot-overhaul pages if they are not boilerplated, as Sky said, even if they have content that can not be taken from the game’s files (i. e. quotes, stratiges, abilities, details). Pcj has also shown heavy bias against fan fiction, speculation, and some silly pages. With administrative powers he could swiftly delete things himself with little or no feedback. I also agree with Zeal on that he can often be bitter and hostile.--SWM2448 18:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- If by listened and considered you mean dismissing them or simply not reply, sure. I'm not a mind reader, and the critcising of my own script is not considering them either. It is nice, and i pointed that out in IRC, that you finally decided to implement something i asked for weeks before. I know mine isn't as good at it needs to be, it's still mostly your code though. I never wanted to resort to writing my own, because as you've quoted and i openly admit, i'm not experienced in javascript, i'm still learning it, and i don't like so much reliance being placed on it. That doesn't stop me from doing research, finding problems and creating workarounds and suggesting fixes though, fixes i would have liked to have discussed openly on the talk page or in IRC and implement in some way or form. Nor does it belittle my criticisms of it.
- I've not once forced my intentions upon anything on here, i've merely supported and opposed things. To my knowledge i'm allowed to voice my view all i want, and can fight for my views till the very end if i must. If it's something "deal breaking", then that's exactly what it is, and how i chose to handle that is a non-issue as long as it has no detrimental effect on the wiki (which is why i left before, things moved too far in a direction i could no longer sanely contribute in). In no way is that me asking for control of anything, not is it throwing a tantrum. So sure, i've critcised Foxlit's changes, but that's partly because he's doing some things i tried to do before and were thrown out by conensus yet he's by passed all that, and partly that the same situation applies to him, but i doubt what i say in his case will have any impact as he is an admin and thus i guess can do whatever he feels is best for the wiki.
- My criticisms of you in relation to your attitude are seperate from my opposition because of your "tainted" contributions. The latter is the only thing that would be effected my "gripes" about the policies here, and you may very well be simply a victim of that and you're not to blame, but it doesn't change their effect on your merits, which is why i think it's something that should be resolved before you become an admin, and then be nominated later on, rather that saying you should just give up.
- You honestly seem like a nice person to the right people, but as i implied in IRC, i had an issue with you before i even knew you. Before i came back, you pretty much took a hacksaw to my userspace without reason, and just blew me off when i tried to talk to you about it and even went as far as to suggest Sky was.. how to put it without overstating it.. silly, for having not done so, which just seems like malice (which is why i went to Kirkburn at the time). So in my view, you had an issue with me before i even came back, so i don't see how you can justify that with anything i've done since then.
- It's nice to hear that you'd be open to it, and i don't blame you for it not having been done so already, but it does feel too little too late, atleast for this round of nomination. The idea really is that the javascript should be stable, implemented, new dev version stablized, implemented, and so on, so arguing that you need to address problems is one caused by the fact you've not been adhering to way major templates are done, likely because you've had the freedom not to have to. Granted JS is higer-level than MW code, but i'm sure there are some highly competent devs here that could easily help contribute to it, and right now that's not happening, likely because of the closed off way it's being implemented. As to a lone voice in complaining about it, i'm not alone, just happens to be that i've sought advice outside this community, and those within the WW community do not wish to be involed. Honestly, i'd love to help out, and teach myself a few things in the process, but i can't. -- Zeal (T/C) 19:44, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- You're free to voice your opinion, but keep in mind people look at your own contributions when assessing the validity of your point, or at least they should. Now, if you're going to criticize my JS and not have your own JS in full working order, then your point loses validity as far as I'm concerned. I do review your edits to your own tooltip and keep them in consideration for my own, but at the end of the day I also have to have a working JS and keep everyone else who uses the wiki happy, too. A few of the changes I've made have been due to people complaining about things who don't know anything or very little about JS, and some of the changes may appear hackish, and a more full code review may be in order, but the fact of the matter is the JS works at the moment, and it is fairly compatible with all browsers. I'm certainly open to any admin editing my JS as long as it works when they're done, and have asked for input on the tooltips before, as linked in earlier discussions. If someone wants to add ideas for discussion and approval to my own JS talk page, that'd be fine. As for the edits in your own userspace, it was in the sandbox of a person who had been gone several months at that time, so I saw no harm in removing broken links to templates which were being deprecated (non-ParserFunctions {{if}} functionality). In any case, the old versions of those pages were still in the history and you could restore them at your leisure. If those inside the community don't wish to complain about the nature of my edits, that's their choice. I cannot presume anything but that they're fine with the current status. --Pcj (T•C) 20:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- It's nice to hear that you'd be open to it, and i don't blame you for it not having been done so already, but it does feel too little too late, atleast for this round of nomination. The idea really is that the javascript should be stable, implemented, new dev version stablized, implemented, and so on, so arguing that you need to address problems is one caused by the fact you've not been adhering to way major templates are done, likely because you've had the freedom not to have to. Granted JS is higer-level than MW code, but i'm sure there are some highly competent devs here that could easily help contribute to it, and right now that's not happening, likely because of the closed off way it's being implemented. As to a lone voice in complaining about it, i'm not alone, just happens to be that i've sought advice outside this community, and those within the WW community do not wish to be involed. Honestly, i'd love to help out, and teach myself a few things in the process, but i can't. -- Zeal (T/C) 19:44, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- Personally, I find it amusing he's a cleaner and most times I see him clutter pages up with the boiletplate stub. And most of the pages he does it to makes no sense to have it, pages like Komin Winterhoof which have all the info it needs. If more info was added other than just general info, it would ok, but to throw boilerplate stubs into all articles just cause it has but one line... That stub will never be removed, cause there just is no more information to add to it, so theres no need to add sections, or even cleanup--only way to cleanup is to remove that stub.
- That specific article needs an external links section per the NPC boilerplate. Please actually review the boilerplate before evaluating the tag. --Pcj (T•C) 21:08, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- How about this one then Threggil, explain to me whats needed. Or this one Kenata Dabyrie. All I'm currently hearing from you, is that the small amount of time it would take to place the external links on to the page isn't worth your time, and rather that quickly fix it, you'll stub it for someone else to do.
(Sssss/Slithered) 21:32, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- {{Npcbox}} on both. What I'm saying is I'm going through using Special:Random and that it's faster for me to tag the problem pages with a generic tag and possibly come back to it later if someone else doesn't. --Pcj (T•C) 21:37, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- How about this one then Threggil, explain to me whats needed. Or this one Kenata Dabyrie. All I'm currently hearing from you, is that the small amount of time it would take to place the external links on to the page isn't worth your time, and rather that quickly fix it, you'll stub it for someone else to do.
Responses
- Undecided - Pending an answer, but will support if it is satisfactory. =) --Sky (t | c | w) 03:43, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose - See discussion -- Zeal (T/C) 17:17, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- Qualified Support - As many people may know, I've butted heads with Pcj, but in spite of that I'm hoping the responsibility of being an admin will smooth out rough edges. I'm not sure how much Kirkburn discussed the RFA process with people on IRC, but I suggested we have one in e-mail to him a few weeks ago and I specifically mentioned Pcj as a candidate. That said, Pcj should probably be a probationary admin (if we have such a thing), since it would be nice for an admin to get the appointment unopposed. Zeal has some good points, so I don't want to dismiss them. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 9:35 AM PST 2 Jan 2008
- Oppose - I vote against him becoming an admin. --SWM2448 18:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose - Upon further discussion my mind has been made up, he's always hostile. And while admins are allowed to get mad, Pcj always seems to be in a bad mood. (Sssss/Slithered) 21:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
