RuneScape:Requests for adminship/Haloolah123

Haloolah123
It is my pleasure to nominate Haloolah123 for Adminship. He helps out in many different ways around the wiki, and is always there to help new users. More importantly, he combats vandalism regularly, and knows when to warn and when to report. His skills in resolving conflicts are great and have helped the wiki avoid some uglier situations, and will help him as an Administrator. He is dedicated to the wiki, being one of the most frequent editors in the past few months, on a variety of subjects, from the Dungeoneering journals to creating Signatures. In short, he is a dedicated, helpful person who be able to use these tools for the betterment of this wiki. 23:39, May 24, 2010 (UTC)

''I accept this nomination for adminship. I have read the policies concerning administrators. I realise that this nomination may fail. If I do get community consensus, I promise not to abuse my powers because I realise that this is a serious offence and if the community finds that I have done so, my powers will be revoked and in extreme cases I could be given a community ban. Signed,'' 23:48, May 24, 2010 (UTC).

Questions for the nominee
1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?

The always obvious anti-vandalism work would be one of my main priorities. There have been a few occasions in which there has been repeated vandalism and there have been no sysops around (I think in one instance, I had to wait 15 minutes before I could get someone to block. I believe Dtm142 was in the clan chat at the time, but fighting nomad, and thus unable to assist me.)  I often times ask certain people in clan chat to check CVU and block someone for me (as well as speedy d/m), but it would be nice to be able to do it myself. I understand when to report/block, and I leave multiple warnings before reporting someone, and make sure they aren't attempting to make an article better. I would also move images. A lot of people don't want to do this, because of all the pages you have to go through and change the links too, but some images really need name changes, and I would be willing to do quite a bit of that whenever I could. I commonly check the speedy deletions, speedy moves, and new user help page, to see if I can do anything to help people in those places. I would also like closing yew grove threads. It's probably one of my favorite things on here (the yew grove that is) and I like participating there. Additionally, I would find it very useful to not have my actions throttled after two moves, this can get annoying when trying to move large groups of pages.

2. What are your best contributions to the RuneScape Wiki, and why?

I completely reformed the summoning training guide. It had originally listed ways such as "gold charms only", "green charms only", and "minimizing shards" (which could have been called "blue charms only" for all the blue charm pouches it contained.) Ask anyone with 99 summoning or even...let's say 88, and almost all of them will have used every type of charm, just because they can be time consuming to collect (some stop using gold/green at higher levels however.)  It doesn't look very pretty, but it does show a real way to train summoning, and a guide that people could actually use and benefit from now.

I also proposed the Forum:"User requests" Page-which (with administrator requests) has been turned into the RuneScape:User help page. I believe this was a valuable change, that provides more information and help to users, while not being quite a strain on syops. (Also allowing some requests to be completed faster).

I have also done significant work on many dungeoneering skill pages. I added tables to quite a few of them, adding the correct level to do things, how much experience those actions gave, and what was required...etc. It was a lot of work, but it was important to get this stuff up quickly. A lot of work still needs to be done for this, but we have taken leaps and strides in the past month and a half.

We had the Summer 2010 Wikifest recently. I made/managed the clan chat. I hadn't even planned on attending at first, but about a week before the fest Steler sent me a pm, and asked if I would be a fest mod. I didn't really know much about it, but I figured I'd give it a shot anyways (I do have some extensive knowledge on running large groups of people/clans from my time with Lost Souls/Soul Fire/Death Upon Us/Crimson Knights). I didn't really get much of a chance to participate in the fest (actually I was only there to judge for about 10 minutes), as I was ranking/changing mute settings, but that was fine with me, and from what I heard the fest was a great success and much better than any previous ones we have had. So, I'm glad we managed to do that.

'''3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?'''

Yes. I have had a few arguments/discussions that have become very heated. Plenty of people know this. It's the kind of person I am. However, I am always able to separate myself from it. I don't get angry about it, and I take a break if it's needed. I never let it get the better of me or affect my editing in any way. I try to keep a cool head, apologize, and move on, and it generally works. I can't say that I'm friends with everyone here, I've probably made a few enemies, but I don't let that interfere with how I treat people. I've manage to keep a cool head, and I remember that everyone's opinions are equal, even when I disagree with them. I always try to be nice, and hope I receive the same in return. If anyone wants to look at what I'm talking about, read some of the later sections of my talk page.

Additional questions (asked by the community if necessary)
 Question - What difference will you make to the current administrative team, and what actions will you make that will improve the current performance of RuneScape Wiki administrators in general? 12:04, May 25, 2010 (UTC)

Well first off, I would make sure any sysops asking for bribes were treated with harshly. This would eliminate chances of favoritism happening and things such as that. I know that I could be trusted with these powers (given my current track record), and that I would be able to make a positive difference for the bettering of the community. I will make sure that all of our policies are enforced, including upon sysops. (But I will also keep RS:UCS in mind, because that is probably the most important policy of all.) I don't need to be a sysop to be a good editor (just like anyone else, but this is a common misconception), but I could be aided in it. (Note: the part about bribes was somewhat a joke for Chicken, because I don't actually think we have this going on...lol. Also, thanks for asking me the question, this section isn't used enough in RfAs.)   12:20, May 25, 2010 (UTC)


 *  Question - What difference will you make to the current administrative team (where "5 admins jump to block each vandal-during peak times"), and what actions will you make that will improve the current performance of RuneScape Wiki administrators in general (how will you make a difference other than being the sixth admin to jump on vandals)? (Clarification by Chicken in game-if he wants to modify, he can.)  01:16, May 26, 2010 (UTC)


 * I do play during peak times, and yes I would be jumping on vandals at that point in time if I am chosen to be a sysop by the community. But I also play when not so many other sysops do (maybe shall we say...non-peak times), and I would also like to add that there are other points than being an anti-vandal about being a sysop.  You have to help the community, because new editors will be the ones making decisions that could affect the wiki soon, and we want them to be making the right decisions.  While sysops should have a good idea on how to be an anti-vandal, and be well practiced in that art, it is not all that being a sysop is about.   01:16, May 26, 2010 (UTC)


 *  Question reiterated - I'm talking about all administrative actions, not just blocking vandals. 5 admins jumping to delete a page. 5 admins jumping to response to an AR or problem report. 10 ranks jumping to kick a vandal in the cc. Any experienced user, such as yourself, are welcome to help new, inexperienced editors without being an administrator. Many administrators is not necessarily a good thing, and can cause changes in attitude of the general community, as well as changes in the way situations are dealt with. 14:12, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Now I feel that you are basing your claims off the basic argument "One sysop can do it, so we don't need more." I think that is a very poor argument, and that it should rather be based off contributions.  I do help new inexperienced editors (shown below+contribs), and I'm not about to stop doing that.  Many sysops is not necessarily a good thing, but it's not necessarily a bad thing either.   14:31, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not going to say any more, as I do not wish to turn your RfA into an argument about Sysop numbers. But there are multiple reasons why many sysops is a bad thing. And I'm not basing it off "One sysop can do it, so we don't need more." More of a "A steady number of active sysops can do it, and we don't need 75% of the wiki." Cheers, 14:37, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * So...71+1 = 75%? That is borderline slippery slope/cause and effect fallacy.   14:44, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Also Chicken, I am not really seeing the 5 sysops pouncing on each vandal.  21:58, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * You know very well I wasn't using a statistic, and I'm talking about the future. It's like when you reach a milestone, you qualify to be a sysop. It should be based on the wiki's needs, and not a user's trust by the community. And you wouldn't see 5 sysops pouncing on each vandal, because you haven't been in the situation where you need to. And how does that history help? You only see the admin who was 1st to respond. Plus, the admins don't pounce to respond to the CVU, they pounce on the recent changes. Users are blocked/warned in a matter of seconds. As long as you keep responding to my question/statements, so will I... 10:46, May 31, 2010 (UTC)

' Question - A IP address (1) edits Exchange:Cannonballs, changing it price to an outrageous value. They then (2) edit Wise old man by changing a header to a expletive. They then (3) edit Desert Treasure by correcting a grammar error. What do you do? (Please explain what you would do after each edit as they happen.)' 14:07, May 29, 2010 (UTC)

Edit 1.

I would leave them a (GEMW 1) edit warning.

Edit 2.

I would leave them a Disruption Warning.

Edit 3.

I would do nothing. However, the next vandalism edit they made I would give them a 1-3 day block depend on the severity of Edit (2) and that edit. 14:20, May 29, 2010 (UTC)

My Answer: Your 1 and 2 sound good but I would have given block of anonymous users only as this could be a school and this would stop (or slow) any further vandalism from the IP address. 14:33, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * You would block him for fixing a grammatical error? *confused*   14:35, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, sorta. You have to think this of this as being more than one person at an IP address, not a 'he' but a 'them'. This is the norm for most schools (on wikiapedia); some good edits, some vandalism. So they must create an account to edit which does not deny them privilege to edit but added step. 14:40, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * With all due respect, no. A far more likely possibility is that the person heeded the warnings, and decided to start contribute productively. Such a case happens pretty often, much more so than other people might think. On a shared IP, one would see a real mix of productive/unproductive edits, and should deal with each case accordingly, and blocking only if it would prevent a streak of harmful contributions. 15:04, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Why would you block someone when they went and fixed a grammatical error? Maybe they are taking the warnings for what they are worth and being a good editor. 15:05, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * You don't get it. This isn't someone, this is some people. You have to this of this IP address as a shared account. 15:09, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * No, you don't understand. There is nothing in the scenario to suggest that this is a shared IP address. One doesn't assume that an IP is shared by looking at it's edits, one finds that out for a fact using a good WHOIS. 15:10, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nothing? Would a vandal go out and vandalise two page then suddenly be good? and WHOIS doesn't always work. Last time I used it, it said the person was at a internet provider. 15:14, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, actually, vandals come back and make productive contributions all of the time. It happened twice to me yesterday. Also, you weren't using the right WHOIS if you got an ISP. 15:15, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Just saying, but last time we did this (something like this at least-Ajr's anti-vandal judgment-which is very good) it involved Ajr's talk page, and was completely fruitless, if you guys want to discuss it go ahead, but I'll be sitting this one out.  15:18, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, I meant for situation to happen with in 5-10 mins not hours or more 15:33, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * I understand that, actually, and was basing all that I said off of that. However, I am not going to continue with this. 15:36, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * I should have made a better situation, like more edits and switch 2 and 3, to convey my point. Sorry. BTW what is a good WHOIS because I used like 15 different one and they all go to an ISP. (IP address: 96.49.84.131) 22:10, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Still, it's warn twice, short block 3rd time (rule of thumb), unless there are other things affecting the circumstances.  22:12, May 29, 2010 (UTC)

Discussion
Support - When I first joined the Wiki, Hal helped set me up with a great sig and userboxes. Since then, he has been such a pleasure and has really helped me get on my feet about how to do different things on the Wiki. He is so deserving of Adminship. Goodluck hal! 00:16, May 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - If I recall correctly, isn't Haloolah the one who was editing as an IP for awhile before we finally convinced them to create an account due to their awesome contributions? I think they would be a great admin  00:21, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think that may have been Hello71, but I'm not sure. 00:26, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, either way, both of them are awesome. I still support ^^ 01:02, May 25, 2010 (UTC)

Great Support Neutral (See below) - Ever since I joined the wiki over a week ago Haloolah has been very helpful in the wiki. Every time I am watching the recent updates page there is no 10 pages that go by without his name as the editor in one of them. Very quick and efficient editor and I think administrative powers would help him in his edits, and the wiki as a whole. Best of luck to you! 01:30, May 25, 2010 (UTC)


 * After remembering the situation that arose and the actions taken place I'm going to have to change my vote. Keeping a cool and mature head is something that an administrator should always have. -- 03:05, May 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * I would argue that I did have a cool head. I wasn't angry or anything, and this was one instance. But, I respect your opinion nonetheless. 20:29, May 27, 2010 (UTC)

Support - As was already mentioned, Haloolah does a lot of vandalism work. He seems to have a good grasp on what needs to be done to help improve the wiki. I believe he would make a good admin and use his powers well. 01:38, May 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Really good at coming up with a guide (which I FAIL at). I haven't really seen the anti-vandal work, busy doing my own anti-vandalism and probably not noticing. Helps when he can. I think he would use the sysop powers wisely. 01:53, May 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose While I like Haloolah, I do not think this is the time for him to have admin tools. His recent discussion here has me concerned about his ability to just drop something that is obviously unproductive and going nowhere. Admins should be able to be more flexible and understanding and go more with the spirit of policies instead of a word for word following of them. I do not believe Haloolah is really there yet. I do think that in a couple more months I will be able to support depending on how his future interactions with others go, and I hope I can then (if that is even needed). I recognize he has made some really greta contributions to this wiki, and he is a prety good guy. But that is not the point to RFAs. Sorry Haloolah.--Degenret01 10:40, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * It's cool. I can't say I didn't see this one coming . I admit that I got overly involved. BUT I did apologize, and say that I had been completely in the wrong, and Ajr forgave me. While I was in the wrong, I did fix the situation. I can get in arguments very easily, but they don't make me angry or affect my editing. 11:13, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yea, I did notice it didn't seem that you were angry, and I was glad to see that.--Degenret01 12:13, May 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - I see him around a lot and he makes some very good edit and is useally very cool-headed and mature, also see him around recent changes requently. 10:58, May 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Does lots of stuff. Important stuff. Editing stuff. Rollback stuff. Helping people with stuff. -- 01:24, May 26, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral - I'm sorry, I don't really know you and that is my fault for not being around as much as I used to. That said, I just wanted to let you know that I've read your RfA. Good luck to you. 04:05, May 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * It's nothing to apologize about. In fact, thank you for remaining neutral. It would have been inappropriate to support/oppose without knowing more, so thank you for not doing so. 21:50, May 26, 2010 (UTC)

Weak Support - You deserve it, but I'm not sure if you need those tools. 14:39, May 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * Why would you say that? Is it due to the fact that there are already so many sysops? Or due to the fact that you don't see I will have much of a use for them? 21:48, May 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm saying it because I don't think you will have much use for them. 16:53, May 29, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Has qualified in my opinion. 15:00, May 26, 2010 (UTC)

Support - He's always helping out those who need it and contributes so much to the wiki. When I found out he wasn't an administrator a while back, I was surprised. He definitely deserves it. 21:52, May 26, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I'm in agreement with Degen here. Despite RS:AEAE, sysops should be examples of our most mature and experienced users. While I have no doubt that you have enough experience, I'm just not sure if you display the proper maturity that I believe is required of sysops. Just because you have made amends with the users you have clashed with during your time here does not excuse the fact that you stirred up a conflict in the first place. Please don't think I'm suggesting you go around looking to make trouble, that is clearly not the case, but I would have liked to see a different course of action in some of your interactions. Sorry. -- 01:20, May 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * AEAE has nothing to do with this really. AEAE is way overused. However, I would argue that this way a very rare occasion, and not the pattern of my actions. I do get overheated sometimes yes, but I do not believe they are the majority of the time. Also I would argue that it doesn't matter who starts things. (And if you look closely, Evil started it, I was only trying to provide evidence for his point.) But nonetheless, I understand and respect your point of view. 01:32, May 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * I simply brought up AEAE to avoid someone saying "but why do admins have to be better than us if we're all equal". -- 01:39, May 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, thanks for adding your opinion. 01:50, May 27, 2010 (UTC)

 Comment  - I would like to address the "argument" for lack of a better work that took place between Ajr and I (as well as a few others). I take full responsibility for initiating and continuing this, when I should have seen it was unprofitable and discontinued it. It is a fair argument for opposing this, and I wouldn't have it any other way. I would however like to also state, that it is an extreme example of my behavior. I am often much more reserved and laid back, this is not my common attitude, and I hope people see that. 02:01, May 27, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral - I'll start of by saying that my vote here displays no bias against him as a result of various things. I do not really see a need for him to have sysop tools; he is not heavily involved in counter-vandalism, he doesn't upload lots of images, and doesn't really do anything else that would require admin tools. I'm not opposing because I see this user as being very mature, respectable and of good judgment (with the recent exception on my talk page). However, in regards to the argument on my talk page, we are all human. We will all make mistakes, and all that we can really do about it is make up for those few mistakes that we make after the fact. He has done that, which more than repairs the mistake in my mind. Ajraddatz Talk 02:53, May 27, 2010 (UTC) Support - I was going to nominate you myself actually...-- 19:31, May 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Of all points made on this page, I would say you have the best one, so thank you. I would agree, I do not have a strong need for sysop tools, I will continue to edit the wiki no matter what the turnout on this is. I do however believe they will help me, but this is up the community to decide. I am not quite the anti-vandal you yourself are. (Just for everyone's reference-I have edited CVU 60 times, given warning messages 68 times. See here). No, I don't upload a lot of images, but I could help in moving them. (Considering I've tagged around 50 for being moved-which is quite a bit of work.) So overall, I don't need the tools for any speicific reason, but I think the wiki could benefit. Also, I thank you for posting a well thought out comment. 11:44, May 27, 2010 (UTC)

 Comment  - I must say, I find it somewhat disheartening that people are so stuck up on one incident. I tried to do the right thing, I failed. I didn't do it out of anger, I did it because I thought the it would keep more potential editors around, I was wrong. I admitted it, I apologized, I was forgiven. Everyone make mistakes, if you think all sysops are perfect I suggest you look a little closer, but I won't name anyone. I have stricken-through all comments as they did not reflect how I feel, but I still think this is a pretty half-ass (clean-up my language if you want) reason to oppose. I think Ajr has the best argument on this page. However, I understand why people think this way, but I just can't say it's really all that valid of a reason (alone) to oppose. If you have other reasons, please share them. 21:11, May 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, people are saying how this argument isn't mature. I can't say this about all sysops...but here's a few examples of "maturity", (not to rag on anyone-because all of them make hundreds of excellent contributions weekly) :

You may see this as good fun, but it really shouldn't be done (and I believe it was addressed), but I'm tired of hearing about maturity when I'm probably more mature than quite a few sysops. It feels pretty darn cheap to me. 03:29, May 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * One
 * Two
 * Three
 * Four
 * Five
 * Some advice that I would have for you now is to not do what you just did above. It would be better for you to prove how mature you are, as opposed to how immature wojwoj (and others, but mainly wojwoj of course) are. 03:36, May 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * You do have a point there. But a lot of that comes from people looking at my contribs, most specifically: here. I was merely making the argument that I feel that they are looking the other way/applying a double standard. 03:56, May 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * I had no idea this sort of thing was going on.  06:41, May 29, 2010 (UTC)

Support - I ask that you consider him for adminship, I've known him for awhile now I think half a year or more, and watching him has inspired me to join runewikia the other day, I believe he truly deserves to be an admin. He's a great guy and has great leadership skills. He's very intelligent and very active when he is committed to something. I wish you all well, and I hope you can find it in your hearts to accept Haloolah123. Best of luck to everyone, -

Slight Oppose - As with a few others, I'm concerned about your understanding of AEAE, it may be overused but it's what we have for now and we have to live with it. Anyway, I was in the CC not too long ago and we were talking about the RSW guides and I remember Hal saying something along the lines of "Our guides suck they're written by low level players, me and Arin should write them" not his exact words, but yeah. Also when we have discussions in the CC things can, obviously, get messy and people get into arguments over small things like boss fights; you can often see Hal using quickchat to show his combat level (138) to gain the upper hand in these arguments, I'm not sure if I'm being pedantic but to me, that's a clear violation of AEAE and I find it hard to support this RfA. But, on the other hand; you've done brilliantly since joining this Wiki, you're in the heart of most YG discussions and you're always looking to improve on the wiki. Come back in a few months proving that you understand AEAE and I'll be sure to support. 18:44, May 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry if I sounded mean. 19:02, May 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * No, you didn't sound mean at all. However, you are taking what I said greatly out of context. I was responding to someone who didn't understand why the boss guides weren't written for high levels. Also, I was completely kidding about Arin and I writing boss guides. While I'm sure we could make some very good ones between the two of us, they would probably only help around 5% of the community here. I'm sorry if this came across differently, because I didn't mean it like I think people saw it. I admit, I like to brag a bit with the 138, but when it takes you over 5 years of dedication to get something, you might want to brag a bit about it too. Often times however I am using this as a justification to why I would know more about training combat than someone who isn't maxed (and thus my ideas would be more beneficial if used.) I don't see this as a breach of AEAE. I believe that all editors are equal, but we do not all have equal abilities. Q is amazing at making scripts and finding very unique ways to do things. Arin is probably one of the most efficient skillers I know. All people (editors) are indeed equal. But our opinions are however not equally balanced. Ex: If you were going to use a guide to max your combat-Who would you trust, someone with their levels in the 70s, or someone who has over 150 million combat experience, all 99s, many of which are well over the experience required for 99s? Yes, the bragging is excess, I apologize, and I will try to keep it to a minimum from now on, but I am generally attempting to use it for justification as to why what I'm saying is generally the most correct answer. I believe I have a full understanding of AEAE and I hope you understand what I'm trying to say. 21:19, May 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * It all depends on whether or not the level 70 knows what he/she is talking about, and the same goes for the level 138. A level 70 wrote a whole novel that became canon and level 138s aren't excempt from the possibility of being incompetent in guide making nor not knowing how to train in the most effective manner. An editor is an editor, and it doesn't matter who it is who wrote something; it matters whether or not it's reliable material. 06:27, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * That has very little to do with effective training methods. While a level 70 might say yaks are the best place to train, I would be able to say that armoured zombies can be twice as fast under the right circumstances. A novel doesn't require high level skills, just a basic knowledge of the game. While a basic knowledge may give you ideas for good stuff, generally high levels who have been playing for long periods of time while know the best stuff. 13:34, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * The point is that it doesn't matter what someone's combat level is, how long they've been playing, or anything like that. If you're saying someone knows more than someone else just because of a level they have in-game, I don't have confidence in you having a full understanding of AEAE. 19:32, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * That's not quite what I'm saying. I'm saying that I would in most causes have a better grip on things involving combat.  (In a prideful way.)  We are all equal, but our abilities are not.   19:38, May 29, 2010 (UTC)

Support - I feel that some of the opposers are just overstretching the boundaries of AEAE, Yes, All users and editors are equal, but overstretching the polices to the extent that they have during this RfA seriously annoys me. On the bright side, with the one exception of the troubles on the talk page, which technically were resolved and no true attacks came out of, I believe that Haloolah is an amazing all round editor. He tends to do alot of mainspace work, contributes into the yew grove, helps out on the anti-vandalism and is always there to have a good chat and laugh on the talk pages. I personally believe, before I get nagged to death by the sysops, that through all, Haloolah is a great candidate for RfA and should be allowed the tools to do the extra work with. 22:34, May 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose - After the way he talked to me in the clan chat in breach of RS:AEAE, and per above, Its a no from me now 14:04, June 8, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - While I see the point of bringing up the one instance of Haloolah123 and Ajraddatz, I don't think it's something to focus on. He didn't get mad enough to resort to personal attacks, he apologized, he was forgiven. Beside that was one hour to his 5 months of editing (which is 0.0277777778%), a small amount of time. He will do a fine job, use the tools well, and deserves the position of sysop. 07:01, May 29, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per summnub, I couldn't sum it up any better then he has. Hal is a great guy. Coelacanth0794 14:49, May 29, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose I usually take my time and try to get a good feel for someone before I make a decision and what I do see is a small lack of maturity from Haloolah. His response to the above opposes make me feel that some more time at the wiki may be better in this case. The fact that he get in arguments easily is an attribute that is not needed in a sysop. I also feel some elitism in the fact that he is level 138. The fact that he has stated that he being 138 makes him "know more" than others sounds elitist and especially this sentence "I am using this as a justification to why I would know more about training combat than someone who isn't maxed" really shows poor judgment. 15:06, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Poor judgment? It's called brutal truth. When someone asks for the best method to train something. They mean the "best method", that's what I give them. I know you aren't going to change your opinion, so I'll keep it sweet and short. 15:13, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * A RFA is not a place to try and defend yourself. I am simply giving my opinion of what I see. Being a 138 does not mean that you always have the best methods. (if that was the case Amaurice would be the answer to everything on the wiki). I am also not saying that you do not have valuable information, however there are many editors and sysops that that do not even play, and their posts may be more useful to the wiki than the die-hard player. 15:19, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * I would agree with that. (By the way, I know I brag, I'm 18, male, and maxed combat...it's just kind of a fact. While it may change my attitude, it doesn't affect my editing.) I have never spoken to Amaurice, but I imagine both him and ShySteph have quite a bit of knowledge in the best ways to do most everything in the game. 15:23, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * One other thing, (this being my first rfa), you say it's not the place to defend yourself. Are you just supposed to basically answer the questions and leave it alone? If that is the case I'll go strike through all my comments. 16:06, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * I wasn't asking you to strike though your comments. What I see above (this is my opinion) is that every oppose is met with an argument (not a heated one) by you. Each Oppose is met with a response. An RFA is designed to see if the editor is ready and has a need for more responsibility. All of this is achieved with opinions of other editors. If you do not like their opinions, there is no reason to argue them. Second, when your maturity is brought up, you throw other sysops under the bus by saying "look at them, they are immature too". That is not a valid argument. Those instances were dealt with (I believe) and hopefully those sysops have learned from that. Third, and I should have mentioned this earlier, you even mention that "I do not have a strong need for sysop tools". Why do we need a sysop who doesn't need the tools? I am sorry that I take being a sysop as a responsibility and a commitment, and I take it quite seriously. These are my opinions why I have Opposed 17:15, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * There are many sysops who don't need and don't use their tools. And yet they are sysops. I shouldn't have mentioned names (and they have been removed), that was a stupid argument, and I apologize. 17:42, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Those people are sysops, because they used to need those tools. 17:43, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * I did not suggest that you strike through or remove any of the discussion on this RFA. The fact that you have problems when people are critiquing you goes back to you having the maturity level to handle being a sysop. 17:59, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * I would say you really have to know me in real life to really make the judgment call on that. I was removing stupid arguments I made (not because I thought you wanted me to, but because I myself wanted to.) I wouldn't call it have problems, I just like arguing/discussing. It's a hobby for me, if that's not how RfA's are supposed to go down I'm sorry. I just like to justify things...sorry.  18:05, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * It seems like you have a thing of acting before thinking... From what I have seen is you say something in the heat of the moment, and later on realize what you had said and go and take it back. Which is okay as long as you resolve the issue and take it back, but a sysop needs to have a cool head in heated moments and know how to handle situations in a professional manner. 01:53, May 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * You're right. Sadly I realized that earlier this week.  I had finals this past week, and was under a ton of stress, so I started taking things way too personally and things went downhill from there.  That's somewhat why I wrote this.   01:55, May 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Just remember that if this does rfa does not go through, that does not mean you can never be a sysop, you can always get nominated again and have another go, if you're up to it. 02:14, May 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep, thanks   02:26, May 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Although I would sure find it useful in closing YG threads...I like those. Also on the "need the tools" note...very few sysops actually need them, but almost all of them are able to use them, and that's what I meant.  Basically, I was saying I would find them useful, but there is no reason I couldn't keep on editing without them.   20:08, May 29, 2010 (UTC)

Strong Support - Since I created this account to help the Runescape Wiki, I always seen him enthusiastically make signatures for people, including me, and making lots and lots of edits. I think adminship powers can help make this Wiki even better than before. Good luck Haloolah! 19:31, May 29, 2010 (UTC) Neutral - I took a really long time thinking about this. I think too much emphasis has gone in the recent RfAs about the number of admins, so I don’t think that’s a problem. However, what definitely worries me is that you have a TON of edits in such a short amount of time on the wiki. This could mean making quick reactive instincts (as brought up previously) and jumping to actions. I'm glad that I do see you around a variety of pages making a lot of good edits so that's good. However, I'm still not quite sure exactly why you would need the admin tools. I looked at your edit report of moving images (since that's something you said you would do), but only around 80ish out of 5000 edits were related to a move. You'd have my full support later down the road and good luck to your RfA. 04:06, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Assume good faith about their edits :s 14:40, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * If you're talking about AEAE, I'm not going to take part into another AEAE discussion. >_> Not sure if you are talking about AGF? 16:12, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think he meant to link to RS:AGF.  22:21, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Whoops, sorry about that..meant to link to AGF lol. I was a bit tired this morning O_o 00:23, June 2, 2010 (UTC)

Slight oppose for now - As others have said above, I just need a bit more time to observe you in discussions, based on recent arguments (most of them mentioned above). While you tell us that you have recognized that lately you have been quick to jump in arguments and quick to take things personally, I would just like to see you prove it. I think it's great that you've resolved all recent arguments, but saying "Sorry" just isn't enough to sway me. I'd like to see an improvement, and you've already made the first step by telling us. Thanks for that, and keep it up. I realize we're all human, and make mistakes, but right now, I just don't think the vibe is right to fully support. Just follow through with what you've been doing, and I'd be glad to fully support your next RfA, if there is one.

Aside from the oppose stuff, I think you are a wonderful editor and leader who always has good faith and understanding in mind. You seem to be one of the few who are really focused on enforcing policies and managing the community. You have a great variety of edits under your belt, and they've all been constructive. I feel that you could use the tools to help you in your editing. Keep up the great work. 05:36, June 2, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I'd like to emphasize up a point that has already been brought up once or twice;


 * Just because we have 71 admins, that does not mean we should stop recruiting new ones. If somebody can use the tools to their extent (and, of course, if they qualify for them, and are supported by the community), then they should be given them. Theoretically, only one active person needs sysop tools to effectively keep a wiki even somewhat under control and managed. The other 70 admins here are extra helpers. All admins and users are equal, however. If a user qualifies, can use the tools, and will use his advantage of special tools to better the wiki, why should he not be given them? Per RS:AEAE, anyone and everyone has an equal right to RfA, and based on that, the argument that states "there are already so many admins" is very poor, and should not even be used in order to be fair to everyone.

Please keep that in mind. Nobody needs sysop tools, editors will only want sysop tools to use/help them in their work. Haloolah has said himself, he would still continue to be a constructive editor no matter what the turnout of this RfA. I had another point in mind, but I forgot it... I'll post again if I remember. 05:36, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * That is an excellent point, this should be quoted in future Rfa's if someone brings up how many admins there are. 22:24, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, the RuneScape Wiki has around 2,800-3,000 people editing it each month. 40 active admins isn't exactly a crazy number for that. Like said above, if they user has a use for the tools, and is trusted with them, why not? 22:27, June 3, 2010 (UTC)

Support - He can be trusted with the tools. My experience working with him on the wikifest tomorrow has proven that to me. If he believes he can use them (and he does, seeing as how he opened an rfa), then I see no reason to oppose. 21:28, June 4, 2010 (UTC)