D&D Wiki:Requests for Adminship/Badger
Badger[edit]
Voice your opinion (4/0/0) 100% Approval; Ended 07:08, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
I am, as on June 19th, nominating the user known as Badger for adminship here on D&D wiki, if he'll accept the nomination. I've carefully gone through his numerous edits, and he has consistently added high quality, well-formatted, and most importantly: fun material to the wiki. In discussions, he is very clear and concise and helpful. In the past he has directed newer wiki users to individuals who may assist them in specific questions. As he already displays all the qualities of adminship, I think the community would benefit from his advanced ability to assist.
- Badger Facts
- Edit count: 1221 (as of nomination)
- Joined D&D wiki on July 24th, 2009
- Omnivore in the weasel family
Hooper talk contribs email 06:07, 19 June 2011 (MDT)
- Candidates Prelude
I'd like to begin the usual series of questions with this remark. I'd like to thank you for the nomination, and I accept it gladly. I am not entirely convinced that this wiki needs another administrator, but if the community feels it does, I would be willing to accept the role. If you have any questions for me, feel free to include them in the Support/Oppose/Comment section below, and I'll respond as quickly as I can.
- Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve D&D Wiki in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:
- 1. What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with? Please read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list on Wikipedia before answering.
- A: Well, first and foremost I suppose I would be deleting content that needs it. It's my opinion that half-finished content (and bad content) reflects very poorly on the wiki, and I'd like to remove content that isn't worthy. However, I'd like to think that most of my work would be divided among two fields: policy clarification and enforcement, and community building.
- Lately we've been having discussions and confusions about what is going on, and we don't seem to have a full on policy to which we can refer. In the past we just said "Check Wikipedia", but we're big enough (and different enough) that we should get policy of our own.
- Also, I'd like to work to foster a greater sense of community, both on this site, and across other sites. This would be done by helping teach the ropes to new users, and being able to steer new users toward older users who know the ins and outs already.
- 2. Of your articles or contributions to D&D Wiki, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
- A: Well, I suppose this is probably embarrassing, but my favorite page is my Hooker, a class I adopted and turned into a pretty nice April Fool's class, that looks like as good as some of the more serious classes on the site. However, I'd say that my best work has been on talk pages, teaching newer users how to build and write up their own content.
- 3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
- A: Green Dragon and I have clashed horns on a number of occasions in the past (as many active users will know), but I think throughout the discussions I've been able to keep a level head (or at least a mostly level head) and come to some sort of a conclusion. If nothing else, I've never gotten a warning, which I suppose suggests that I'm being pretty reasonable and calm. These sorts of squabbles crop up every so often, but that's to be expected on a site of so many people with diverse opinions, I suppose. I will probably keep having these minor spats every so often, but as long as we can come out of them ahead, with clearer policy, and everything out in the open, I suppose that it will be worth it.
Discussion
Support
(please see nominator paragraph above for explanation) Hooper talk contribs email 06:07, 19 June 2011 (MDT)
I would actually like to say that Badger's and my discussions have been full of usefulness. On Talk:Blood Knight (3.5e Prestige Class) his input really steered the article to a finished product. I would imagine others would say the same of the discussions they have had with Badger. Sometimes, however, I worry that he is thinking about something that relates but may not relate entirely, for example on Talk:DnD Links. However, as I was reading Talk:Blood Knight (3.5e Prestige Class) many times he was referring to things that did not seem important to me at first glance however ended up creating a finished product.
I think that Badger already has shown he will help in areas where the administration is lacking. For example help pages serve a purpose, while User:Badger/sandbox3 has taken that purpose into consideration and expanded upon it where it is lacking. I know I have considered implementing this into the help pages but then actually considered merging it with preloads and/or create new inputboxes. I think it's a great idea with merit, however potentially hard to implement into inputboxes where I thought it would serve the most use. The policy D&D Wiki may be lacking could very well be the same and I look forward to discussing what policy may be lacking. This is the same with links, however that seems much harder to discuss for the reason that what one does with his spare time is of no concern to D&D Wiki. Seeing things can sway one, and I look forward to the help Badger will provide in areas where the administration is lacking.
I find that Badger has helped articles like the Hooker (3.5e Class) become something more than vandalism. He mostly chimes in on talk pages, helps with vandalism, and contributes with the improving, reviewing, and removing articles; all of which are very important and create better content. I find that the two fields Badger desires to contribute in as well as his expanded contributions with the improving, reviewing, and removing articles will be of great use for D&D Wiki. I support Badger for adminship. --Green Dragon 13:35, 20 June 2011 (MDT)
Not much to say that hasn't been said. It's clear that Badger is hampered by an inability to block users, lock or delete pages, etc, so let's give it to him. JazzMan 16:35, 21 June 2011 (MDT)
I agree. What this wiki needs is more Badger, so we'll suffer less badgering!--Wrecan 17:46, 22 June 2011 (MDT)
Oppose
Neutral