RuneScape:Requests for adminship/Hapi007

Hapi007
First RfA

Second RfA

If you've seen Hapi's previous RfA or any of the conversations I've had with him in-game and on his talk page then you already know that I always told him to work more on anti vandalism before trying another RfA. I was so focused on anti vandal work that I didn't even think of the community aspect. There are a lot of wikians out there that would make great admins because they are involved in the community in some way but don't spend their entire life on the CVU. Hapi is one of these wikians and unfortunately my "advice" is probably what has held him back for so long. If anyone deserves adminship, it's Hapi007. I can't think of someone more community focused. Without him there would be a lot more image work to do and we would be short one always happy (hey nice pun ) personality. I suppose you could consider this nomation my way of repaying what I have owned to Hapi for a long time, and that's the opportunity to help out the community even more with the sysop tools that he proved he could be trusted with a long time ago. 04:00, September 29, 2009 (UTC)

''I, Hapi007, 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,''. 11:59, September 29, 2009 (UTC).

Discussion
Support - as nominator. 04:00, September 29, 2009 (UTC)

Support - Per Soldier 04:03, September 29, 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - While I don't demand that potential sysops spend their lives at the CVU, Hapi has done literally no anti vandal work. He has no need for any sysop tools. 04:30, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
 * He has had some in the past, but like what was said on the Yew Grove discussion regarding anti vandalism and RfAs, anti vandalism is not the only thing people need sysop tools for. If someone is trusted and community minded then why shouldn't they be given sysop tools? 04:31, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
 * Being a sysop is not a big deal, thus there is no reason to give them sysop tools unless they need them and will use them. I'm not saying Hapi is not a good editor, but he simply does not need any sysop tools. 04:33, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, so you can confidently say that being a sysop is 100% about anti vandalism? I think not, and who says he won't use them? 04:35, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
 * I am not saying its 100% about anti vandalism, but look through his contribs and tell me, which of Hapi's activities will become easier or more effective with sysop tools? The argument that he could use them, I feel, is null. Will the admin tools change his preferences about how he spends his time on the wiki? Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with what he does, but his activities are not indicative of someone who needs admin tools. 04:41, September 29, 2009 (UTC)


 * "Comment - While we're waiting I'd like to know whether or not Blackhole looked at Hapi's contributions before nominating him and noticed that there has been NO anti vandal work. What is the point of being an admin if you have no experience with dealing with vandalism..? :/" - Soldier 1033 from Hapi's second RfA. Just thought I placed this here. :| 07:18, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
 * I guess you didn't read what I wrote for this nomination Powers. I no longer base my opinion mainly on anti vandal work so I am disregarding your comment until you read everything. 19:57, September 29, 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - I really, really do want to support this on account of how long Hapi's been here and his thousands of valuable contributions to the wiki. However, I've looked through his edits, and I agree with the point that Psycho Robot brought up that Hapi doesn't show any need of sysop tools at the moment. On top of that, when I looked for any rollbacks to see if Hapi knew what vandalism was, the last few reverts I found were all violations of RS:AGF.

See this, which I feel is a misuse of the rollback tool. He also followed up by reporting Hellomoon15 (the user in question) to the CVU. The user in question had created the account back in 29 July 2009, but only had edits for a total of eight days at that point in time, which means that the user was relatively new to the wiki, and the edit could have easily been a mistake. It is also worth noting that the Hellomoon15 did not do any blatant vandalism (inserting "lolololol" for example), and simply customised the template, while not being aware that Hapi was using it.

In this edit, Hapi rollbacked an IP's changing of the price from 642 to 650. If this information was wrong, I don't think it warranted a rollback. However, I went to check the GEDB chart myself, and it seems that the IP was actually inserting correct information.

Also, here, Hapi reverted an IP's edit (the IP was actually a registered user who wasn't signed in). The IP's edit removed some trivia and even explained their reasons in the edit summary, so I don't see why there should have been any need for a rollback.

Yet another assumption of bad faith I found was this edit, where Hapi reverted a user's edits even though the only change made was in the capitals (Party hats -> Party Hats).

There are a more of such edits, but it is worth noting that there are cases where Hapi has used the rollback tool properly. So I'm going to have oppose for now, on the grounds that there are too many cases where Hapi has violated policy by assuming bad faith. 08:15, September 29, 2009 (UTC)

Not yet - I believe that Hapi is one of the most and understanding, humorous and expansive editors on this wiki, but then the ugly head of the apparent rollback "misuse" comes up, Hapi has always been an editor who I have respected and looked up to, but in this case i'm going to have to stick to not yet, maybe if you can follow the policies and attend to the issues described above, the next time you go for adminship I may reconsider my opinion. 12:11, September 29, 2009 (UTC)

Pending Hapi is a good example of a person who could use the the other tools a sysop has, such as restoring pages and images and doing page moves for all his picture work. Yet I am also concerned about the edits Caleb has brought up. Before the end of this 2 week period I would like to see Hapi using undo more, with adequate edit summaries. Hapi, take time and be patient, and don't feel pressured. You have done an incredible amount of work for this wiki and it is recognized.--Degenret01 14:22, September 29, 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - You're very nice and all, but the issues Caleb brought up are very important. RS:AGF is very important: it is one of the baselines of the wiki.

Of course, your image edits are all very good, I think we all appreciate them very much, but anti-vandal work? Not a lot, and you often assume bad faith, even with small changes.

For example, look at. How was that bad faith? Treasure trails are Clue Scrolls, so he was right removing it! He even explained it in his summary! You could have at least looked it up to see if he was right...

If you can improve on your anti-vandal work/policy understanding, then I might support. But not this time. 14:35, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, Treasure Trail rewards =/= Clue scroll drops. Still, again, a rollback wasn't necessary. 14:44, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, I misread that sentence then. 16:26, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
 * It was an easy mistake to make, and using a rollback on it was ABF. 17:05, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
 * Well that's awkward... It seems like more people think it's the same thing  19:54, September 29, 2009 (UTC)

Support - Per Soldier. 17:07, September 29, 2009 (UTC)

Support - I am tired of the late RFA storm we have had, but hapi is somebody I know I would always support when his rfa rolled around. He is friendly, an active image contributer, and I think there are some admin tools he could make good use of. 18:37, September 29, 2009 (UTC) Support - Would use the tools well. He's made many great contributions over the time. His intentions would always be for the good of the wiki so I don't see why there are any opposes. It's not a biggy, and let's hand it to him. I mean...he's nuts with what he does. 18:48, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
 * Bonz man, I think the concern that Caleb and I and a few others have is would Hapi block some one who wasn't a vandal? With the best of intentions, yes.--Degenret01 00:28, September 30, 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - per Caleb; it is important that we always assume good faith. In addition, he seems to have disdain for community discussion, when responding to a response to his previous comment, which seems to show closed-mindedness to things he doesn't know about. These three things are very concerning for a potential admin, as admins should assume good faith, at least minimally participate in discussion, and be open-minded to the wiki as a whole. Butterman62 (talk) 19:16, September 29, 2009 (UTC)