SmashWiki:Requests for bureaucratship/Miles of SmashWiki
Miles of SmashWiki (talk • contribs • edit count • RFB page)
Candidate, please summarize why you are running for bureaucratship below.
I'm Miles of SmashWiki. I have been a SmashWiki editor since May 2008, and a SmashWiki admin since December 2008. I previously presented myself as a candidate for bureaucratship in August 2009, and was unsuccessful. It has been 6 years since then, and circumstances are very different. The site is different, the userbase is different, and I feel that I have matured as a person, as an editor, and as a leader for this community.
A bit of history: for a very long period of time, SmashWiki has operated with a single bureaucrat, who as a result is responsible for managing all the responsibilities of that role. When SmashWiki moved from Wikia to being hosted by Porplemontage in 2010, our last active bureaucrat was Emmett, who was unable to continue in that role. Upon leaving, he promoted then-admin Toomai to bureaucrat without a formal RfB process. In the five years since that time, Toomai has been SmashWiki's sole bureaucrat.
Toomai has done an excellent job. Nevertheless, I believe that the site could be better off having more than one bureaucrat, so we are not singularly dependent upon him. In light of a few instances of somewhat reduced activity from Toomai, I feel that I would be a good candidate for the bureaucrat role.
There's a few main tasks that I would be empowered to act upon as a bureaucrat that I cannot as an admin:
- Renaming users. Toomai has generally done a good job with this, and I feel I could do so as well.
- Interwiki table management. Not a crucial point, but given that some Smash series lack NIWA wikis to link to, we may want to discuss if there are other wikis worth cross-linking to through Special:Interwiki (for example, the Xenoblade Wikia).
- Managing user rights. Requests for rollback and requests for adminship have been languishing a bit of late. We've had 6 RfAs in the last few months; 4 of these have only been resolved by the candidate withdrawing themselves, including one case where the RfA more or less sat there unresolved for two months. I feel that nobody benefits from leaving things unresolved for so long, and a few weeks is usually plenty for most issues in the RfA process to be spelled out in such a way as to present consensus or lack thereof.
So what makes a good candidate for bureaucratship? This is a bit of a tough question, given that we have not had a new one in so long. However, I think I am a good candidate for the following reasons:
- Experience. I am one of the most experienced editors on SmashWiki, in terms of time and quantity of edits; as to the latter point, counting both my old and current accounts, I have over 22,000 edits to SmashWiki. I have a deep familiarity with both Smash and this site.
- Back-end contributions. I have contributed significantly towards writing and updating policy for this site. I authored pages like SW:NOT, SW:TRIVIA, SW:IMAGE, SW:NEWGAME, and SW:TONE; I also worked on a significant revision to SmashWiki's Help pages to make them less Wikia-styled. I regularly make updates and revisions to SmashWiki's infobox and navigation templates, in order to make the site more useful and navigable.
- Front-end contributions. I also frequently work towards contributing to SmashWiki's mainspace content. This includes editing existing pages, but also implementing many other large pages from scratch. Recent examples of this include overhauling List of voice actors, and creating List of minor universes, List of Super Smash Bros. 4 character posters, List of composers, and Tournament legal (SSB4). I also have worked on large batch edits such as standardization of Japanese names, and implementing pages for Smash Tour items and Mii costume characters. Another area I frequently contribute to is managing ongoing projects like tracking recent appearances, keeping the amiibo page up to date, and updating the downloadable content page.
- Dispute handling. Handling disputes between users is one of the most difficult tasks an admin is faced with, especially if both users are displaying good faith and are not factually incorrect. I will admit to having had difficulty with dispute handling in the past, but I believe I have gotten better at such things, and I take seriously the feedback of other users. I seek to find a middle ground where the needs of the wiki and the desires of the users involved are best satisfied, whenever possible. Consensus is key, and I frequently seek more users' opinions whenever a discussion appears to have gotten stuck, as a way of trying to reach a better conclusion.
With all that said, I would appreciate your thoughts, and would be glad to answer any questions. However you vote, I hope that I can continue to be a good leader for SmashWiki. Miles (talk) 00:49, 1 November 2015 (EDT)
Support
- Support We probably need more bureaucrats since Toomai hasn't been online frequently. ZeldaStarfoxfan2164 (talk) is a never lover boy 00:53, 1 November 2015 (EDT)
- Strong Support I've seen you around every day. You're a great sysop. Like ZeldaStarfoxfan2164, we may need more bureaucrats since some of the bureaucrats are inactive. That would be a fresh start to have a newer bureaucrats. Luigi540 (talk) 01:00, 1 November 2015 (EDT)
- Strong Support Per the previous two, we need a new bureaucrat, and you've done an amazing job as an admin. Also, no hard feelings on your opposition of my adminship, I've been doing my best to improve. Disaster Flare (talk) 01:21, 1 November 2015 (EDT)
- VERY strong support You are a very good administrator, very good at dispute handling, uses the blocking tool effectively, and last of all, we need a new bureaucrat, as toomai isn't on frequently. INoMed (Talk • Contribs) 04:01, 1 November 2015 (EST)
- Same as INoMed It's true you can be stubborn or hasty sometimes. But the important thing is, you learn from your mistakes. You've been an invaluable contributor to this wiki, and you've been doing just as well since the day I joined. Plus, a semi-active bureaucrat (Toomai) isn't enough. Drill Blaster Mark 2 (talk) 04:51, 1 November 2015 (EST)
- Very Strong Support per everything I said so far. Toomai appears to be out-of-touch, and the Marth incident had been resolved nicely (no thanks to
August 17, 2015
- 14:4714:47, August 17, 2015 diff hist +145 User talk:45.37.25.25 →Welcome
- 10:5610:56, August 17, 2015 diff hist +1,717 Talk:King Dedede (PM) →My reasoning.: new section
- 10:4310:43, August 17, 2015 diff hist +197 King Dedede (PM) There are missing facts and confusing logic on this page. I'll detail it on the talk page.
- 10:3610:36, August 17, 2015 diff hist −1 Ganondorf (PM) My bad, whoops.
- 10:3510:35, August 17, 2015 diff hist −32 Ganondorf (PM) I don't think that is really a nerf as his down taunt was never an attack before 3.5. Unless this is because Warlock Punch was removed in the same patch down taunt became an attack, this should not be considered a nerf.
- 10:1910:19, August 17, 2015 diff hist +245 User talk:Miles of SmashWiki/Archive16 →Thank you for, uh, answering my question.: new section
August 16, 2015
- 20:3020:30, August 16, 2015 diff hist +221 Talk:Greninja (SSB4) →Is my trivia relevant?: new section
August 13, 2015
- 20:5520:55, August 13, 2015 diff hist +322 Talk:Marth (SSB4) We need to stop.
- 20:3220:32, August 13, 2015 diff hist +372 Talk:King Dedede (SSB4) →For those complaining about the stance of the Changes from Brawl.
- 17:4917:49, August 13, 2015 diff hist +260 Talk:King Dedede (SSB4) →For those complaining about the stance of the Changes from Brawl.: new section
- 16:4816:48, August 13, 2015 diff hist +138 User talk:Miles of SmashWiki/Archive16 →I no longer have respect for your vendetta.
August 12, 2015
- 15:2915:29, August 12, 2015 diff hist +316 User talk:EndGenuity →About your edit summary...: new section
- 08:2508:25, August 12, 2015 diff hist +121 King Dedede (SSB4) →Changes from Brawl
August 11, 2015
- 18:5518:55, August 11, 2015 diff hist +772 King Dedede (SSB4) →Changes from Brawl
- 18:4218:42, August 11, 2015 diff hist +40 King Dedede (SSB4) →Changes from Brawl
- 08:3208:32, August 11, 2015 diff hist −7 Link (SSB4) →Update history
August 10, 2015
- 20:1120:11, August 10, 2015 diff hist −13 User talk:Miles of SmashWiki/Archive16 →I no longer have respect for your vendetta.
- 20:0820:08, August 10, 2015 diff hist +176 User talk:Miles of SmashWiki/Archive16 →I no longer have respect for your vendetta.
- 19:5419:54, August 10, 2015 diff hist +97 User talk:Miles of SmashWiki/Archive16 →I no longer have respect for your vendetta.
- 19:0919:09, August 10, 2015 diff hist +69 Talk:Marth (SSB4) →"Subjectivity"
- 19:0919:09, August 10, 2015 diff hist +483 Talk:Marth (SSB4) No support for this.
- 18:5718:57, August 10, 2015 diff hist +252 Talk:Marth (SSB4) Read between the lines. Why am I included in such a touchy topic?
- 18:4618:46, August 10, 2015 diff hist +494 Talk:Marth (SSB4) I'm not supporting this. I'm not going to pretend Marth has a halo and is Sheik.
- 18:3118:31, August 10, 2015 diff hist +365 User talk:Miles of SmashWiki/Archive16 →I no longer have respect for your vendetta.: new section
- 18:2718:27, August 10, 2015 diff hist +83 Talk:Marth (SSB4) →"Subjectivity"
- 18:2218:22, August 10, 2015 diff hist +1,066 Marth (SSB4) The first proper attributes summary is here.
- 17:3817:38, August 10, 2015 diff hist +198 Talk:Marth (SSB4) →"Subjectivity"
- 17:3417:34, August 10, 2015 diff hist −4 Marth (SSB4) →Changes from Brawl
- 17:3317:33, August 10, 2015 diff hist −5 Marth (SSB4) →Changes from Brawl
- 17:2517:25, August 10, 2015 diff hist +35 Talk:Marth (SSB4) Nargle, Miles, leave the job to me.
- 17:2117:21, August 10, 2015 diff hist +200 Talk:King Dedede (SSB4) →To all D3 players
- 17:0917:09, August 10, 2015 diff hist +202 Talk:King Dedede (SSB4) →To all D3 players: new section
- 16:1116:11, August 10, 2015 diff hist +213 User talk:1337 B33FC4K3 This is getting awkward.
- 16:0716:07, August 10, 2015 diff hist +308 Link (SSB4) →Changes from Brawl
- 16:0016:00, August 10, 2015 diff hist +83 User talk:1337 B33FC4K3 Bias and disrespect to a character's dedicated players at its finest.
- 15:4415:44, August 10, 2015 diff hist +259 User talk:1337 B33FC4K3 →To Brian and Miles
- 15:4015:40, August 10, 2015 diff hist +145 Talk:Lucas (SSB4) →1.1: new section
- 15:3715:37, August 10, 2015 diff hist +173 User talk:Miles of SmashWiki/Archive16 →To Brian and Miles
- 15:2715:27, August 10, 2015 diff hist +578 User talk:Miles of SmashWiki/Archive16 →To Brian and Miles: new section
- 15:2515:25, August 10, 2015 diff hist +579 User talk:1337 B33FC4K3 →To Brian and Miles: new section
- 14:5314:53, August 10, 2015 diff hist +201 User talk:Miles of SmashWiki/Archive16 →Seriously, stop.: new section
- 14:3414:34, August 10, 2015 diff hist −3 Marth (SSB4) Think about the way you worded that. Just a minor grammar issue tho.
- 14:2614:26, August 10, 2015 diff hist +286 Marth (SSB4) →Changes from Brawl
- 13:1313:13, August 10, 2015 diff hist +1,534 User talk:1337 B33FC4K3 →~~You cannot keep doing this.~~
- 09:1609:16, August 10, 2015 diff hist +532 User talk:1337 B33FC4K3 →~~You cannot keep doing this.~~
- 09:0809:08, August 10, 2015 diff hist +992 User talk:1337 B33FC4K3 →~~You cannot keep doing this.~~
- 08:5608:56, August 10, 2015 diff hist +1,229 User talk:1337 B33FC4K3 →~~You cannot keep doing this.~~
August 9, 2015
- 19:0419:04, August 9, 2015 diff hist −347 Talk:Mewtwo (SSB4)/Archive 1 →Buffed or Nerfed?
- 18:5718:57, August 9, 2015 diff hist +347 Talk:Mewtwo (SSB4)/Archive 1 →Buffed or Nerfed?
- 17:5817:58, August 9, 2015 diff hist +311 Mewtwo (SSB4) →Changes from Melee
), so I feel you are the optimal bcrat as of now. Ganonmew, The TERRIFYING Evil Clone 05:27, 1 November 2015 (EST)
Oppose
- ...
Neutral
- Neutral leaning towards support: First off, I do not disagree with anything you said below. The reason this is not a full support is because I have not forgotten the Marth argument (and similar, that's just the one that stands out most to me), which I felt that you handled entirely wrong (as you probably recall). That was a while ago though, and because I have not seen anything remotely like that since Marth, I can move past it (mostly). Looking back on it, would you have handled the situation differently? Serpent∞King (talk) 01:32, 1 November 2015 (EDT)
Comments
Can you provide me some specific examples of currently unhandled tasks that require a bureaucrat, and additionally, how exactly you would handle them? Serpent∞King (talk) 01:00, 1 November 2015 (EDT)
- I mentioned the three types of task that are bureaucrat-specific that I cannot do as an admin. Renames are fine as they are, and interwiki things I haven't proposed yet (but a related task is on my to-do list). That leaves requests for _____, of which there are two active. Nutta/Nutty's RfR has been left hanging without a reply on Toom's part for most of a week, which is questionable (I would answer him with yes, seek another, clearer example). DF's RfA is new enough to warrant more time before a decision. The main issue I was noting lately was, as I stated above, the several withdrawn RfAs recently. Several were indeed skewed towards opposition, but yours in particular seemed to be withdrawn more due to delay than anything. Instances like that lead me to believe that having more than one bcrat would be beneficial. Miles (talk) 01:19, 1 November 2015 (EDT)