RuneScape:Requests for adminship/Gaz Lloyd

Gaz Lloyd
As nominator: I think that Gaz has made a great job in the wiki also watching for vandals and wrong information also he has 1437 mainspace edits. 20:36, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

''I, Gaz Lloyd, accept this nomination for adminship. I have read the policies concerning administrators. I realize that this nomination may fail. If I do get community consensus, I promise not to abuse my powers because I realize 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,'' 21:54, 14 April 2009 (UTC).

Questions for the nominee
1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
 * I already have the rollback tool and have been using it diligently whenever I spot obvious vandalism (links provided if requested), however anything other than obvious I use [undo] links instead to give an edit summary. I report vandals to the CVU when I revert their edits; but being able to actively combat the vandals by banning/blocking them would cut out the middle man. The ability to delete extra pages and protect vandalised pages will stop me having to ask any admins to do it for me in the future.

2. What are your best contributions to the RuneScape Wiki, and why?
 * I'm still proud of my edit to the armour article (even though it was made coming up a year ago) (part 1, part 2), since it was a very large edit to a big article (it has since been split), and a few months later it became AotM, the first article that I had made such a major contribution to that became one. I also filled in the majority of values on the weapons table (link), and have been updating it when needed since. There a many other edits, a lot involve adding navigation templates to articles, and creating pages that had been overlooked (e.g. most of the pirate clothing exchange pages).

'''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?'''
 * Not as of yet. Should I ever get frustrated, I'll either: a) take a night off the wiki, and not enter the clan chat ingame if needed; or b) take a short wikibreak, steering clear of the wiki and the CC for as long as nescessary (but I won't be able to stay away for long, I enjoy editing the wiki and the conversation of the CC too much).

Discussion
Support As nominator. urg forgot to sign-- 20:45, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Support As member of the wiki. I see his contributions everywhere, and it seems he has posted helpful information either to people or towards the wiki itself on many talk pages. Jdogy15 21:06, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Support Always willing to help less knowledgable people out. Excellent contributions on the wikia. Good luck with being an admin Gaz 21:10, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Weak Oppose - Although your edits are great, you haven't participated in very many community discussions. I checked your Forum: and RuneScape: namespace contributions and didn't see much in regards to community discussions/processes. 22:05, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Oppose Support, as per below - As per Soldier. You are awesome when it comes to articles, which is why I did such a strong support for you in UOTM, but in regards to admin, I don't see how you really need it that much. You don't contribute much to discussion, which to me is very important that admins and users wishing to be such are active in trying to shape the behind the scenes. Just keep doing what your doing, your an awesome editor and you do a good job of it. 22:11, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment (To both Bonzi and Soldier) I admit that I haven't done much in discussions, though recently I've contributed more (especially since the break up of the Yew Grove, I could barely edit that page). I try to edit most YG threads, but even if I don't edit them, I spend the time to read them through and think them over. I've also recently added a few other RuneScape: pages to my watchlist so I'll keep up with nominations etc, and I'm contributing more each time. 11:38, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * You have contributed to a few discussions lately but that isn't the point. In my opinion admins should regularly participate in community discussions/processes such as the Yew Grove. Edits are one thing, but they aren't everything. 12:07, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed, edits aren't everything; I'm getting more involved all the time and intend to stay just as involved, if not more. 19:10, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Comment Bonzi, this is his 1st rfa he isnt obsesive-seeking power, I dont want to start something so judt take this in mind ok =). -- 13:58, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Support - Though he isn't that active in community discussions, I support him for the following reason: He is one of the more vague editors, several (alot), are yet to notice his potential. He's an excellent editor, and he reports to the CVU when he can, and he's made excellent contribs with CHUNKS info. Therefor, he gets my support.

Support When I was new he helped me with my signiture, and i hope this kindness remains when He'll Be A Mod  Celtic-Creations  *  Talk to me

Support - Per CoNgRaTzItSaCoLo.--Supirion1 21:30, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Comment - No offense, Gaz, but how does adding lots of information to articles qualify you for adminship? There is not one sysop tool that helps you edit articles. I'm not going to go around supporting everyone just because they have edited lots of articles. You need to demonstrate a need for the tools and you need to contribute to the community. There is absolutely no point in being a sysop if you don't participate more in the community, and the heart of the community is our community discussions. 22:09, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Editing shows I have dedication to the wiki. Constant reversion of vandalism and reporting of vandals shows that I will have a good use for the tools, along with the occasional delete when I find something that shouldn't be here. For both of these there's a "middle man" of sorts (be it the CVU or Template:D), which could be cut out and response times decreased if I could handle them myself. I am contributing to the community discussions more and more, and plan to continue doing so. 22:59, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not denying that you are a good contributor or anti-vandal, nor am I denying that you are starting to contribute to community discussions more. I am thinking more along the lines of long term involvement in regards to community discussions. 00:10, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Support - I don't draw the connection between administrative duties and participating in discussion. Everyone likes different things. Gaz Lloyd has shown that he prefers staying in mainspace, which is good because that is where most vandalism happens. As long as he is aware of all our policies, he should be fine.

Even if he doesn't go hard-core vandal blocking, that's okay. We are not in a situation where there is only enough electricity or computational power to sysop a set number of people or something like that; whoever is trustworthy can be given adminship. It's not a big deal. Butterman62 (talk) 00:36, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why you don't draw the connection between sysops and participating in discussions when most if not all active sysops participate in community discussions. 00:41, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * What I said was that I don't draw the connection between administrative duties and participating and discussions. While many sysops and prospective sysops participate in community discussions, and meaningful discussion is often a good indication of a user's character, when it comes down to it, the tools themselves are a technical thing and have nothing to do with community value. Now, of course, it would be nice if he were to be involved in discussions too, but to each his/her preference. The purpose of this RfA is to decide whether Gaz Lloyd is trustworthy enough to gain administrative tools. I think he is. Butterman62 (talk) 02:25, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Support - Well, yes. I think you will handle the administrative powers well. (Not that I would know...) I think that out of all of the current non-admins, you would be the best . Very kind and helpful, definitely admin material.09:59, 16 April 2009 (UTC) Support - I think that gaz is fully deserving of adminstrative tools, He's shown that anyone can come up to him with a question and be assured an answer.He has shown great article work and is probably one of the most worthy users at the moment to recieve these powers.10:38, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Most worthy at the moment is not reason enough for these tools. Adminship is not a line up process. We don't all get in line by editting lots and becoming trustworthy and then form a line waiting for someone to nominate us, but I think that is what we are doing (no offence Gaz,it's not directed at you). We should only be allowing users these rights on a need bases imo, not based on if they are helpful or can make good edits. It's great we have lots of trusted users, but I trust most users here. Does that mean that every users who is trusted gets these rights. We are handing these tools out as if they are merit points and that is too freely for my taste. 12:07, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Bonzi, this is kind of discussed on the Admin Population forum thread already, but you just said "We should only be allowing users these rights on a need bases". This question has been asked quite a bit in different forms, but would you be so kind as to explain why you believe so? Butterman62 (talk) 01:53, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure. As I said before, you wouldn't hire 5 candidates for the position just because they all meet the criteria. You would only hire 1 because that is all the demand calls for for that position. Same thing is kinda going on here. I think all the positions have been filled and no one is leaving yet so there is not a need to be "hiring more". I hope that analogy kinda helps, if not let me know and I can try to clarify it a bit more. 01:58, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmmm... I don't really associate the analogy with working at a job. With a job, you have to maximize profit, so you wouldn't be able to afford 5 people doing the same thing. Administrators are volunteers, so RuneScape Wiki doesn't have to worry about that; I associate adminship more with architects at Habitat for Humanity, reserves in the military, or something like that; they already build a lot of houses and America is pretty well defended, but they just like to have that extra backup. Butterman62 (talk) 03:04, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Support - I took a look through your Yew Grove contributions and I was quite impressed with the quality of your contributions to the discussions. This, to me, far outweighs the quantity of your edits there. I was particularly impressed by your ability to keep a cool head and fair judgement during heated discussions that involved things like banning. If you just read the diffs your calm responses are a stark contrast to the heated atmosphere of those debates. That tells me you have good judgement. You have made a lot of edits over a long period of time, that tells me you're dedicated. Your talk page looks pretty friendly and it seems that you get along well other editors. You also seem to have a good working knowledge of the tools available in the wiki from your comment about the potential of our calculators. I think you would continue to serve the wiki well, if not better, given the admin tools. Good luck. 11:20, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Support - I don't see why not. As long as he knows that discussion is going on and what is happening in the community, he doesn't necessarily have to contribute to them. I think he'd make a great anti-vandal, and as he himself mentioned, he could delete pages without the help of another admin if he came across such pages. 12:32, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * * sigh* Once again you are missing the point. 23:31, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - As per Soldier. To be honest, I never noticed you.--. 17:37, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Bonzi and Soldier. 19:22, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Support - A good number of edits annd anti-vandal work. It all looks good. 09:49, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Support - Shows he can be trusted, not too hasty. Should do well with admin tools. On a further note, since the community has said that the number of admins should not be limited, oppose votes based on the fact we "already have anough" should be completey disregarded. I am very disappointed with some people here.--Degenret01 13:43, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I know that was directed at me cause I was the only one that mentioned anything about the admin population and I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree. My opinions have changed since a little, but I still think we should do something about the admin populations but Gaz have proven himself responsible to me, which was never a problem, but he has also been a little more involved in the grove which is what I was focused on, so I changed to support. 14:32, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Support - Helpful, kind, and trustworthy. 02:15, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Support Gaz has a great deal of maturity, and has shown that they can be well trusted by the community. Also, participates well in the community discussions that are often held here. 11:16, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Closed - Gaz Lloyd is now an administrator. 01:09, 28 April 2009 (UTC)