Guild Wars 2 Wiki:Requests for adminship/JonTheMon/Archive 1

JonTheMon

JonTheMon (talk • contribs • logs • block log)

Started 06:31, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Status

Succeeded, retains sysop role. 20:49, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Candidate Statement

My fellow wikians, at this momentous occasion I come before a seemingly divided wiki. The clash between the old guard and fresh blood could be ugly and create lasting rifts in our community, but I believe there is another way. I believe that instead of GWW and Guildwiki and new GW2W users, we're all just "members of Guild Wars 2 Wiki". In that spirit, I am coming before you to ask for your support to keep me in office (sysop) and to explore granting me additional power (bureaucrat).

During my term in office, I have mostly been known for technical and janitorial work, but I have not shied away from interpersonal conflicts. One technical issue that I was a part of successfully enacting was border protection (abusefilter). I've also been active as part of homeland security (recent changes patrol). In interpersonal conflicts and heated discussions, my role was to diminish the intensity of the situation and get users to think and talk calmly about the situation at hand.

If you, the constituency, decide to grant me additional bureaucratic powers, let it be because I have demonstrated trustworthiness and good judgment. Promotions made by me would be comprised mainly of community consensus, but contain healthy doses of other bureaucrat's opinions and my own judgment. Demotions would follow in a similar manner, but could be expedited by the severity of misconduct.

Today is a good day in the life of this wiki. The community is on the right path and there's good news on the horizon (release!). I hope that you put me in a position to do the most good for this site. Thank you. And Dwayna bless.

Discussion

• Explanation of why the candidate should retain rights/be given additional rights.
• Approve from meh, as you stated you have been doing a good job of being a syop and i am sure u would do well as a b-crat- Zesbeer 12:22, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
• Jon's reconfirmation really doesn't require a campaign speech (in-theme, too!). Jon is currently the most "social" sysop, a role that definitely needs to remain part of the administrators list. Especially inter-personal conflict usually requires a touch of social involvement, and I feel Jon is the only administrator who has shown to be involved with users on such a level. A conflict will sometimes be instigated a while before the actual conflict occurs. Without social involvement, conflicts would only be dealt with with administrator-objectiveness and at face value. Sometimes knowing a user well enough should raise an eyebrow when they suddenly change their attitude in a conflict. This doesn't pardon their behaviour, but the reason for their behaviour against a certain user (or users) can/might be found in previous discussions, where comments from the "victims" are personally attacking the arguments of the "changed attitude" user at a level where hot-headedness is the most anticipated reply. The only way to fairly resolve such a conflict is to be involved with participating users (where possible) and judging the conflict from that stance, instead of judging it as a standalone event where one is simply crossing the line and the other(s) simply being targetted. It's a sensitive subject within the admin team because where exactly do you draw the line. Regardless of where you draw the line, the admin team needs a sysop (at least) who takes the time to involve themselves with the various users on the wiki, something Jon appears to be doing more so than the rest. - Infinite - talk 13:07, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
• I would not like to have Jon as a bureaucrat for one admittedly small reason: this. I do not agree with his opinion that admins are "leaders of the community"; asking for users who believe themselves to be so is IMO opening the door to admins who believe they are better than the community they are working for, which is and has been a source of significant drama and issues to the wikis. Bureaucrats here are really a small deal; they're just sysops who very once in a while follow community's consensus in promoting or depromoting someone. It appears, however, that a considerable part of the community sees them as slightly more, though, which annoys me greatly. Promoting someone with such point of view - that admins are "leaders" - to bureaucrat would only reinforce the view that such admins are The Real Thing. Plus, it's not like we have the urgent need for more bureaucrats so we would have to give the position to anyone. Erasculio 15:08, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

• It depends on whether they are leading by example or leading through force. I believe all admins should possess the former quality before they can be trusted and chosen to wield additional power and responsibility of sysop tools. Jon is the model of a wiki administrator as well as of valuable wiki editor and user, and in addition to remaining as an admin, I also hope he will rise to the responsible position of bureaucrat. Mediggo 15:57, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

• JonTheMon is a sysop on all three wikis- GuildWiki, GWW, and GW2W. There can be no doubt that Jon has earned the trust of the entire community, and not just one segment or another. I strongly support Jon retaining his position as a sysop and I suggest that he be made a bureaucrat as well. Jon is a manifestation of the will of the wiki, and there is nothing his pervies cannot heal. 17:32, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
• I also support Jon, per Felix and Infinite. Aqua (T|C) 17:35, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
• I'll support Jon as well. Even though I'm not as active on the wiki as I used to be, I still see him doing his job, and doing it well. -Fabian 17:41, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
• What more can be said in addition to Infinite and Felix's comments? Jon is a unique sysop that is also a very good editor, and gets his hands dirty by diving into the everyday nitty gritty details of the wiki editing cycle. If there is someone who can exemplify the idea of "leading by example" I can think of no one better than Jon. Giving him more power with a bcrat seat will only strengthen the wiki. --Lania 15:46, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
• I agree with Infinite and Felix, I see Jon as a very capable sysop. -- Cyan 15:49, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
• I support any course of action that leads to me not having to read such a long assed campaign speech again. --Xeeron 11:21, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
• Being one of the most active sysops who hasn't really taken any extended break compared to any other sysop should already be an automatic retention as sysop. He has already shown that he has both the character and the community knowledge to take on the bureaucrat role (as per what appears to be the majority expectation of what a bureaucrat is). -- ab.er.rant 10:41, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
• Stalwart protector against vandals, chief AbuseFilter-er, seems to be online 24/7. Regarding bureaucrat, what I said at Guild Wars 2 Wiki:Requests for adminship/Poke also applies here. pling 18:49, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
• What Felix said. – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 19:18, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
• As one of the present and active sysops, Jon has shown that he's capable and involved--no questions there from me. I do hesitate in offering similar support for being a bureaucrat: Jon's 'platform' is entertaining, but I again, like with my other bureaucrat RfA considerations, would like to be more familiar with Jon's actual as-Jon methods of approach/understanding/resolution before saying I could support him. I do also note that I somewhat disagree with the involvement of personal discretion in promotion; stating that his approach to 'promotion' is 'mainly' community-based seems to go against the grain of this process of confirmation--this, however, is complicated; it is and should currently be taken as a separate sidenote to my neutrality on his nomination as a bureaucrat. Redshift 09:40, 3 May 2012 (UTC)