SmashWiki:Requests for adminship/Nyargleblargle

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 RfA was closed as successful.
	Reason:	Strong community support with decent enough discussion capability. Very fency, but at this point, it may be best for the wiki to have a fresh admin. Toomai Glittershine The Brass 14:41, 29 September 2015 (EDT)

Nyargleblargle (talk • contribs • edit count • RFA page)

Candidate, please summarize why you are running for adminship below.
Hi, I'm Nyargleblargle. Since I joined in early April, I've made over 1,800 edits to the mainspace and hundreds of file uploads intended for the mainspace. Eight of my most significant contributions include:

• Creating most of the existing Smash 4 moveset subpages (Not without a little help from Toomai)
• Creating most of List of character biographies
• Creating Miiverse (universe), which was the source of dozens of red links at the time
• Spearheading the creation of Official Custom Moveset Project (with the template being designed by Miles)
• Playing a significant role in coding Template:TournamentPlacementRow and its header counterpart, as well as implementing it on a few Smasher pages
• Uploading over 100 Smash 4 idle pose images and playing a large role in splitting the idle pose pages
• Helping to anchor Smash 4 trophy pages
• Creating the menu templates for every game except Brawl

I've also been trying to do a lot of janitorial work, such as tagging pages for speedy deletion, reverting vandals, and moving pages once consensus is reached. Becoming an admin would allow me to increase my efforts by deleting pages (with consensus, of course) and blocking vandals.

While I recognize that I've only been on this wiki for a few months, I have been very active (being on the wiki for 3+ hours per day at my peak back in June), giving me a lot of time to learn the ropes of this wiki and learn from my mistakes. I also recognize that I've lacked dispute resolving experience in the past, but I'm very active on talk pages and have been trying to improve my skills. Plus, despite the policy, it can be very difficult to settle a conversation for good if you're not a beraucrat.

Thank you for your consideration. Nyargleblargle (Talk) 16:30, 21 August 2015 (EDT)

Support

1. You're a very useful user, I can see you becoming a good admin. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe Nutta. 16:36, 21 August 2015 (EDT)
2. Strong support You and Serpent King both have made significant contributions. I wish you the best of luck. Ganonmew (talk) 16:39, 21 August 2015 (EDT)
3. Reading that reply you made to that first comment, sounds like a logical approach to settle disputes. Also, you were a trustworthy contributer, so I'm sure you'll be a trustworthy admin. I wish you the best of luck! Berrenta (talk) 17:06, 21 August 2015 (EDT)
4. Support. You've been a big help to this wiki, plus it wouldn't hurt to have a few more admins. Good luck! John PK SMAAAASH!! 09:15, 22 August 2015 (EDT)
5. Strong support You're a great contributor, and I have to agree with Berrenta that your response to the below question is a very logical one. You know what you are doing, and I have yet to see you abuse rollback. You also seem to have a thorough understanding of each smash game. Best of luck to you. Serpent King (talk) 10:12, 22 August 2015 (EDT)
6. Per Ganonmew. Kudos to the both of you. Aidan, Master of Speed and Aura 10:13, 22 August 2015 (EDT)
7. Strong support. You are an amazing editor, and I really think that you becoming an admin is a very good idea. Your edits are incredible, and you've been so helpful here that the wiki wouldn't be the same without you. Plus, Smashwiki could benefit from a few more admins. LittleMacmain97, the World Circuit is mine! (Talk) 10:38, 22 August 2015 (EDT)
8. Support, beyond a shadow of a doubt. Levelheadedness, an understanding of a situation, a high presence and no evidence of water-spine. No objections. ScoreCounter 12:37, 22 August 2015 (EDT)
9. Strong support. You are kind, trustworthy, A useful editor... I see you becoming an excellent admin. Plus, we could do with having an extra administrator around to fight (and block) the vandals/trolls. Good luck! INoMed (Talk) 07:13, 27 September 2015 (EDT)

Oppose

1. ...

Neutral

1. Neutral. Another case of an excellent contributor who I'm not sure has made clear what kind of admin they would be. At this point I don't feel like I can say whether you'd make a good one or not. Your answer to my question gave me a mixed vibe, so that didn't really help make my decision the way I'd hoped. Miles (talk) 13:10, 22 August 2015 (EDT)

   have to know, what about the answer didn't you like? Serpent King (talk) 18:45, 22 August 2015 (EDT)

   Dodging the point about how to resolve a dispute aside from "look at the strength of the arguments and their counterpoints", which is overly vague, and lack of response to the part of the question regarding when Nyargle had an opinion on the subject. Miles (talk) 19:31, 22 August 2015 (EDT)

   I don't intend to be disputatious, but for clarity, my original answer was intended to represent all three situations (it's likely that I would have presented a comment by that point). I'd try to avoid personal bias to a reasonable degree. Nyargleblargle (Talk) 19:55, 22 August 2015 (EDT)

   The point I was getting at is that as an admin, you are expected to resolve disputes, including ones in which one has a personal investment in the results. Your answers are inoffensive but also (in my opinion) kind of sidestep the point, hence why your answer was not "wrong". It merely didn't convince me to change my starting point of "neutral" to support or oppose. Miles (talk) 20:12, 22 August 2015 (EDT)

2. Neutral: Per Miles; akin to Serpent King, you are a very competent user with not much to show for possible usage of admin powers. Your cases are very similar. DarkFox01Fooooox! 20:22, 22 August 2015 (EDT)

   I don't get why people keep saying that. I can provide nightly protection of the wiki, while NB can provide daily. We've both dealt with vandals enough to understand what to do if one should come lurking. As there are currently only 2 active admins on this wiki, posting vandals on the admin board will not quell the vandal until an admin finally does show up. More trustworthy and competent admins means more protection, and I personally think we both meet these criteria. Serpent King (talk) 20:32, 22 August 2015 (EDT)

   Now that I've looked into more detail regarding edits, I understand where you come from. I'll see what I think about this. DarkFox01Team Dark Fox, reporting for duty! 20:39, 22 August 2015 (EDT)

3. Neutral: I'm in a tether totter for this. While you are a userful, nice editor with great thinking and one of the best rfa candidates, you seemed to have very few core problems, as noted from some other old users. Disputes for instance, while not everybody is perfect. I looked at your answers about disputers and your answers seems to be questionable. Now if you look at the users who successfully passed the rfa, they have great disputes control. Or in case for Unknown the Hedgehog, a user who failed the RFA, he has a good trait like being a sociable person who keeps their cool. Any of your positive traits that links towards your disputes, would be a boon in your RFA. Right now, I'm not sure if I can trust you as a admin. My opinions will change if you demonstrate your positive traits that links to your disputes. Luigi540 (talk) 21:41, 4 September 2015 (EDT)
4. Neutral, not been around long enough and more of a contributor rather than admin in my eyes. As many have said, not a huge bunch of reasons you really fit the slot of what admin is. I'd support, although I believe you are a better contributor than an admin. F0rZ3r0F0r (talk) 06:16, 25 September 2015 (EDT)

Comments

General question: Suppose there were to be an edit war between two well-respected users, User A and User B. The two have an disagreement about the content or layout of a page, and after other users contribute to the talk page discussion, no clear consensus is reached. How would you, in an admin role, act upon the situation if a) you agreed with one of the two positions; b) you disagree with them both; or c) you have no strong opinion on the subject at all? This isn't a test question with a right or wrong answer or anything; I just want to gauge how you'd handle a situation of this sort. Miles (talk) 16:51, 21 August 2015 (EDT)

In all cases, I'd probably look at the strength of the arguments and their counterpoints, and make my decision based mostly on that, with some small compromises made to accomodate the other half if possible. Nyargleblargle (Talk) 16:58, 21 August 2015 (EDT)

Could you please elaborate on what action would be involved as a result of "making your decision"? Miles (talk) 17:15, 21 August 2015 (EDT)

Modification (or lack thereof) of the layout/content according to the edits. Actually, I forgot to mention that if the edit war violated SW:1RV, I'd probably issue warnings (and blocks if it was ridiculously intense) to those who made, well, more than one revert. Nyargleblargle (Talk) 17:19, 21 August 2015 (EDT)

If we have four active admins on this wiki (including Serpent King and Nyargleblargle passing their current RfAs), I would probably suppose that this should clear out the lack of admin problem. Should OT be back active, I personally think five active admins would be too much for a low-medium-ish sized wiki, although useful if admins can make sure other admins don't become too powerful and stuff. I just wanted to put that out. Dots (talk) The Sigma 17:44, 21 August 2015 (EDT)

Considering the numerous amount of users on this damn thing, I don't see how having 5 leaders (I stretch that word's definition) would be considered too much. Aidan, Master of Speed and Aura 10:15, 22 August 2015 (EDT)

Other large wikis may need many times more admins than said five. For example, the Mariowiki has 20,000+ articles and many users are guaranteed to edit on a daily basis, so maybe they do need many admins to keep things running. SmashWiki is a medium-sized wiki, not small and inactive like Wikibound, but not huge and traffic consuming like Wikipedia is, so personally three or four active admins is pretty viable already. Dots (talk) The Yoshi 10:46, 22 August 2015 (EDT)

As I write this comment, there is a vandal on the wiki who needs to be blocked. No one is there to block this guy. It certainly would not hurt anything to add two more admins. John PK SMAAAASH!! 11:56, 25 August 2015 (EDT)

Do RfAs usually take this long? Same thing can be said for SK's. Ganonmew (talk) 18:50, 29 August 2015 (EDT)

Mine, yes. Not 100% on Serpent Kings, but I believe so. Nyargleblargle (Talk) 18:56, 29 August 2015 (EDT)

Just looked Miles' up. Started November, 2008 and ended December 2008. By that timeframe, you're still young, but I'm not. Serpent∞King (talk) 19:08, 29 August 2015 (EDT)

@Nyargle: I'm talking about them in general.

@SK: If so, why is yours not over already? And there is no one opposing Nyargleblargle's, so it should end by now. Ganonmew (talk) 19:15, 29 August 2015 (EDT)

Toomai said that he doesn't quite know what to do with mine. Nyargle's honestly hasn't run long enough to make a sound decision. By the way, this conversation is in the wrong place. It should take place in the talk page. Serpent∞King (talk) 19:20, 29 August 2015 (EDT)

Nice to know. Sigh. Ganonmew (talk) 19:22, 29 August 2015 (EDT)

For posterity's sake, I'd also like to add splitting Crowd to the list. Nyargleblargle (Talk  · Contribs) 18:14, 5 September 2015 (EDT)

And merging the ladder pages into Ladder (technique). Nyargleblargle (Talk · Contribs) 09:43, 19 September 2015 (EDT)

No opposition ye and a bunch of Support votes. Yet this still seems like the wiki is undecided on this RfA. Hmm. Dots (talk) The Arwing 21:34, 5 September 2015 (EDT)

To be fair, it's only been just over two weeks. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe Nutta. 21:38, 5 September 2015 (EDT)

okay, now it's a little more ridiculous. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe Nutta. 08:09, 14 September 2015 (EDT)

You may have seen that I withdrew mine. Serpent∞King (talk) 12:24, 14 September 2015 (EDT)

So its been a month now and looks like its also going nowhere. For the supportive side, we once again have mostly users who are very active but have been on this wiki for only around a year or less while we have not so active but more experienced users on neutral with no opposition yet. Otherwise, this could be seen as a stalemate and it wouldn't be over for months unless if more users share their opinions. Dots (talk) The Mega Man 19:59, 22 September 2015 (EDT)

Personally, I'd think that the more active users have a better idea than the less active users, even if we aren't as experienced. After all, we see what happens more than the inactive users do. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe Nutta. 21:13, 26 September 2015 (EDT)

Miles is also a fairly active user since Smash 4's release and an admin himself, but yes, he's not as active as Serpent King and Nyargleblargle in comparison. Dots (talk) The Gangnum Style 10:05, 29 September 2015 (EDT)

I'm admittedly considering requesting bureaucrat status just as a result of these RfAs sitting around idle for so long. I respect that people like Toomai can have other things come up in their life and aren't around 24/7, but at the same time it's awkward to leave things like this hanging. Miles (talk) 12:25, 29 September 2015 (EDT)

Are you SURE that you want to do a Request For Bureaucratship? INoMed (Talk) 12:33, 29 September 2015 (EDT)

I said I was considering it, nothing more. I don't want to sidetrack the conversation here beyond that. Miles (talk) 12:37, 29 September 2015 (EDT)

We really do need another 'crat (although, as you probably can guess, i'm not particularly fond of the idea of you being one), but let's get some more admins first. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe Nutta. 13:14, 29 September 2015 (EDT)

---