SmashWiki:Requests for adminship/Aidanzapunk

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

Candidate, please summarize why you are running for adminship below.
Well, let's see here...um...well, for one, I'm active most of the time, arguably more so than other admins on this site. For two, I have a very good idea of what should and shouldn't go on here. For three, the time the rollbackers had to stall this recent vandal is quite frankly ridiculous.

I have a computer that I can use, but I have access to my phone at all times, so I can work from both systems. In addition to that, thanks to my phone, I'm one of the fastest users here to respond to something, so I can deal with vandalism quickly should it turn up.

I'd appreciate thoughts on this, and I do hope this goes well.

Support

1. EXTREME Support You are an excellent rollbacker, very kind to others, not wanting to abuse admin powers, and unlike others, I think that your conflict resolution is actually good. a great RFA candidate IMHO. INoMed ^{(Talk • Contribs)} 13:26, 20 October 2015 (EDT)
2. Very Strong Support I can already tell just from the short amount of time that we've talked that you'd make an excellent admin. You're kind to others so people don't feel hesitant to talk to you about something, you've made some strong contributions to the Wiki, and while a little more experience under the belt couldn't hurt, you already have enough in front of you to be accepted, should they accept you. Good luck. :D Disaster Flare (talk) 13:39, 20 October 2015 (EDT)
3. 100% Support I've been constantly around ever since 2015. I've always noticed who did what change. I took the time to go through all of Aidan's contributions and discussions. Long story short, yes. For all the above reasons, definitely worth to be an admin. Drill Blaster Mark 2 (talk) 13:48, 20 October 2015 (EDT)
4. Strong Support I think that more admins is the way to go in lieu of all the vandalism. You are active, and I can contact you if I catch one overnight too. You have levelheadedness and, in my opinion, are plenty trustworthy. Serpent∞King (talk) 14:11, 20 October 2015 (EDT)

   I am shifting to Support mainly because I partly agree with Miles that this feels rushed. Serpent∞King (talk) 14:57, 21 October 2015 (EDT)

5. Support per everything above so far. You seem to be active when we don't have admins online so you could deal with vandals in that timeframe. DekZek, The creature of your nightmares 14:21, 20 October 2015 (EDT)
6. Per everyone. To be more specific, needing to hold off a vandal via rollback shouldn't happen if we have active admins. We need you. Ganonmew, The Evil Clone 16:05, 20 October 2015 (EDT)
7. Support. You'd be great with the janitorial tools and have pretty good dispute skills. My only worry is that you could be a bit more straightforward, as your attempts at conflict resolution don't feel definite. Other than that, though, I feel you would be a great admin. Nyargleblargle (Talk · Contribs) 16:13, 20 October 2015 (EDT)

   Shifting to Weak support. Nyargleblargle (Talk · Contribs) 06:38, 21 October 2015 (EDT)

8. Support Despite it being questionable to have these tools, user is well liked by the community and is strongly supported already. Dots (talk) The Sigma 16:26, 20 October 2015 (EDT)

Oppose

1. Slight oppose On one hand, you're very active and usually quickly and quietly deal with vandals like you did today, much quicker than the admins often do. On the other hand, you're kind of unpredictable. All of the very minor trivia points that you get involved in arguments about, and (to bring up something from awhile ago that isn't completely relevant but is making me unsure) the whole "is Luigi a semi-clone or not" which made me feel very unwelcome on the wiki when I first started. Right now, with your strengths in vandal handling but poor wiki handling, I think rollback is the best place for you. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by BOO! Or maybe Nutta. 14:52, 20 October 2015 (EDT)

   I can understand the critique about the unpredictability, as I've noticed that in myself, even outside the wiki. That said, all I really want to do is help, and becoming an admin will certainly help out with that. Aidan, Master of Speed and Aura 15:47, 20 October 2015 (EDT)

2. Oppose. Attempts at conflict resolution are mixed at best, and in several places concerning. Little demonstrated need for admin powers, as most of your stated reasons can be done without admin powers. This seems like a rushed RfA in the aftermath of an obnoxious vandal. I would suggest you try again later when you can better demonstrate that you have what it takes to manage the responsibilites of adminship. Miles (talk) 16:16, 20 October 2015 (EDT)

   Even I'll admit this seemed kind of rushed in my opinion, but I can honestly feel that it can be put to good use outside of the main reason I put this up in the first place. Aidan, Master of Speed and Aura 16:19, 20 October 2015 (EDT)

3. Oppose. Looking at your contributions, your conflict resolutions are a mixed bag. While you handle certain conflicts well, you exhibit defensiveness of inordinate levels when it comes to your own disputes, and demonstrate questionable reasoning skills while doing so. The way you react to things you find undesirable and frequent use of vulgar language comes across as juvenile and out of place. I agree with Nutta Butta and Miles in that you have not showed the wiki why you should have admin powers, as you are already doing a great job in dealing with recent vandals. I would suggest you consciously grow and apply yourself more before taking on higher responsibilities. Aardvarkian (talk) 04:13, 21 October 2015 (EDT)

   The "frequent use of vulgar language" stems from the fact that I tend to use it a lot, even in common conversation. Just throwing it out there, it's not exclusive to argumentation. Aidan, Master of Speed and Aura 07:19, 21 October 2015 (EDT)

   Can I add that SmashWiki is not censored? Ganonmew, The Evil Clone 15:38, 21 October 2015 (EDT)

   That doesn't matter. You have much more control over what you type than what comes out of your mouth. And with that there's little excuse for some the reactions you exhibit here. I'm not saying you should censor yourself. I'm just saying that there are better, more effective ways to put things, and many times when you use use those words, it is not necessary. Improper use of language is actually the least of my mentioned concerns here, though. (Aardvarkian's Talk Page • My Contribs) 19:06, 21 October 2015 (EDT)

4. Oppose I am getting a very strong impression that you initiated this for the wrong reasons, and your blurb is not very convincing in terms of how you'd be a better-than-average candidate. More than anything else, this feels like "admin for the sake of more admins". Toomai Glittershine The Hammer 17:05, 21 October 2015 (EDT)

   Initially, yes; as Miles stated (and I then agreed with), it was a bit rushed due to an obnoxious vandal. However, given more time to think about it, I feel that I can put other admin tools to good use. Aidan, Master of Speed and Aura 17:09, 21 October 2015 (EDT)

   Could you clarify? Nyargleblargle (Talk · Contribs) 17:54, 21 October 2015 (EDT)

Neutral

1. Neutral Normally this wiki wants admins who can handle user disputes, and I don't think user handling records are necessary to become a sysop. That should be a job for Bureaucrats. ZeldaStarfoxfan2164 (talk) is made in America 13:26, 20 October 2015 (EDT)

   "Users who wish to be promoted should demonstrate a steady commitment to this wiki, and be able to point to reasons that the sysop tools would allow them to do better editing."

   ...I'd say that applies to how this could help me. Aidan, Master of Speed and Aura 13:29, 20 October 2015 (EDT)

   I remembered when I applied for an RfA, I actually knew how to deal with vandals and made strong contributions to this Wiki. But when they asked lots of questions about user dispute handling, that's when I gave up. ZeldaStarfoxfan2164 (talk) is bad for me 13:37, 20 October 2015 (EDT)

   I can do user dispute handling. I'm good with dispute handling in general, to be quite frank. Aidan, Master of Speed and Aura 13:38, 20 October 2015 (EDT)

   I know not every admin is good at all fields, some are better at user dispute handling than others. Even Miles and OT got into a dispute with each other, then Miles got into a dispute on a Marth page. ZeldaStarfoxfan2164 (talk) is a never lover boy 13:44, 20 October 2015 (EDT)

2. Neutral I would admit that you were just like me a year or two back then but even I don't really think that I'm responsible to take on admin duties yet, even after being on this wiki for almost 5 years. For the reasons you game me, your a great user but adminship is somewhat questionable as of right now. Dots (talk) The Cannon 14:41, 20 October 2015 (EDT)
3. Neutral Whilst I would usually agree with this RFR, however slightly,
   1. This feels like a knee jerk reaction, almost.
   2. You shouldn't base part of your RfR on, and therefore recognise any vandal.
   3. Trying to aim for solely unaminosity in a DR is, to be honest, never going to work.

Whilst, all of these, in and of themselves, I'm okay with, together, they kind of bother me. I might change my decision in the future depending on what I see, but for now... I'm unsure. ScoreCounter 04:31, 21 October 2015 (EDT)

Also, addendum - that is not how I would handle a new user with a bad username. Actually explain what they did wrong, then link the appropriate policy, as well as SW:FIRST. Just linking to the Policy is okay for older users, with newer ones, it's just not helpful, and comes across as curt. ScoreCounter 13:15, 21 October 2015 (EDT)

I personally wouldn't have linked SW:FIRST. Yes, I should have explained what they did wrong in the first place, and I'll admit that. Aidan, Master of Speed and Aura 13:18, 21 October 2015 (EDT)

1. Neutral I agree we need more admins, and that you would be a good choice because you're on frequently and revert a lot of vandal edits. However, I kind of agree with Aardvarkian's points. I feel there should be a "lower-ranking" admin position whose sole job is to block vandals. (Sorry it says "1." at the beginning of this vote, but I'm not sure how to fix that) John PK SMAAAASH!! 18:24, 21 October 2015 (EDT)

Comments

Before I vote, I do have to express my concern that you messed up the placement of this RfA. Serpent∞King (talk) 13:29, 20 October 2015 (EDT)

I don't even know how the hell I did that. I just copied the stuff from the main RFA page. Aidan, Master of Speed and Aura 13:30, 20 October 2015 (EDT)

...never mind, I see how I fucked up. My bad. Aidan, Master of Speed and Aura 13:31, 20 October 2015 (EDT)

Question: What makes you think you're qualified to be an admin, aside from handling vandalism? Miles (talk) 13:40, 20 October 2015 (EDT)

To be honest, that was the main reason I had in my head when I first put this up, but thinking about it a little more, there's more to it than that; I can help new users find the end of the tunnel if they're lost, I can help old-timers in a debate (should one come up), and I'm very good at making sure people are doing what they're supposed to do. As I mentioned earlier, I'm arguably on more often than you or any other admin, and to be honest, the wiki could use someone who's able to reliably be there when they need it. (And that was in no way intended to offend you or anyone else here.) Aidan, Master of Speed and Aura 14:35, 20 October 2015 (EDT)

I'd like to give you a hypothetical question because I'm curious to see your answer. Let's say there's a new user ("Alph") and two experienced users ("Brittany" and "Charlie"). "Alph" makes a change to a page's layout that you personally support, but the two experienced users revert it repeatedly. It ends up in a talk page discussion, where support and opposition to the change is roughly equal. How would you resolve the situation? Miles (talk) 14:42, 20 October 2015 (EDT)

Well, it would depend on:

1. The reasons given regarding support and opposition
2. Regarding the personal preference, how it looks on the page itself.

In a debate like this, it would really depend on unanimous decision, but because of the circumstances, thinking outside the box would be required. Aidan, Master of Speed and Aura 14:53, 20 October 2015 (EDT)

Could you link to two or three examples of attempts you've made at conflict resolution? It doesn't really matter if they were actually carried out, but I'm looking more for how you go about it. Nyargleblargle (Talk · Contribs) 15:32, 20 October 2015 (EDT)

The first thing that comes to mind off the top of my head is this, but even then, it was just a minor attempt. For a somewhat better example, see here. Aidan, Master of Speed and Aura 15:41, 20 October 2015 (EDT)

If you're talking about the latter argument on the Mario Maker talk page, then that's a really bad example. After examining the situation from multiple angles, it was a matter of Aidan clinging onto something he was clearly incorrect about, even when he was given a sufficient opposing explanation, and wanting to end the dispute early, all whilst in a poor mood, and ultimately over something so minor such as a trivia point. Aardvarkian (talk) 02:05, 21 October 2015 (EDT)

Whether or not he was right is a matter of opinion, but him attempting to end the dispute early makes sense given how minor the issue was. I was more impressed by his first attempt, though, and I did bring up my concerns with the second point in my vote.Nyargleblargle (Talk · Contribs) 06:36, 21 October 2015 (EDT)

Ok, to be fair, the Mario Maker one was a bit lacking, but again, I was in a foul mood, as something had come up that same day; however, I did end up reexplaining my side of the argument, once I had woken up from the night before, and had gotten out of the foul mood. Aidan, Master of Speed and Aura 07:09, 21 October 2015 (EDT)

I mean, when it boils down to it...there haven't really been a lot of major arguments on the wiki (aside from whatever the hell these two will argue about). Aidan, Master of Speed and Aura 07:17, 21 October 2015 (EDT)

Oh, I see. You did explain yourself afterwards, which is good. You didn't allow tension to boil, and explained why things went down the way they did. Aardvarkian (talk) 11:56, 21 October 2015 (EDT)

Exactly. Aidan, Master of Speed and Aura 11:58, 21 October 2015 (EDT)

I'm not impressed by how far you are willing to go to preserve your versions of the text, or your reasoning skills in disputes with decisions made in editing. However, I do think that will has proven to be very effective in your dealings with vandals. I am unsure if Adminship is necessary for further use of that. (Aardvarkian's Talk Page • My Contribs) 12:46, 21 October 2015 (EDT)

I think the best way to put it is I'm good at settling arguments between two other people, but not really good at settling arguments where I am one of the two people arguing. That may or may not hinder my chances at landing this adminship thing, but that's the way I see it. Aidan, Master of Speed and Aura 13:07, 21 October 2015 (EDT)

Afuck FUCK THIS SHIT IM OUT

---