RuneScape:Requests for adminship/Frede173

Frede173
I would like to nominate Frede173 for adminship. I've had the inclination to do so for some time now, due to the high volume of anti-vandal work he has done over the past few months, but I have held off until he has reached the sort of edit count that is usually expected these days. The wiki would definitely benefit by giving Frede173 the ability to block all the vandals he finds. 14:01, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

''I, Frede173, 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,'' 14:52, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Questions for the nominee
1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in? - Mostly dealing with vandalism, but if a problem comes up, i'll do my best.

2. What are your best contributions to the RuneScape Wiki, and why? - Hmmmmm ... Reporting countless IPs for vandalism and creating tonses of redirect 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?''' - I don't remember any 'conflicts' ...

Discussion
Support - As nominator 14:01, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Support - Per nominator, Frede is an honest, friendly, helpful wikian who would make an excellent admin. -- 14:13, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Support - He's been very helpful and would make a great admin. -- 14:28, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Support - Frede is one of those users who you just know would be a great admin. He's been friendly, helpful, honest, and involved in the community, and I've seen him reverting vandalism on many occasions. -- 15:27, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Support - A lot of the time the CVU gets flooded by Frede's reports, easier for him to deal with them himself. Would capably use the tools. 15:34, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Support - An excellent anti-vandal. I constantly see him on the Recent Changes reverting vandalism and reporting vandals to the Counter Vandalism Unit. The wiki would definitely benefit if he were given administrative tools. 15:43, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Support - Per above

Weak oppose - I, too, think Frede is a great contributor, and I hate to be the dark cloud, but to me, bragging about rollback rights in the sig -> huge loss of confidence in nominee. While I'm trying to assume good faith here, doing so indicates to me a wanting of the adminship powers as a status symbol or for bragging rights, which I would hate to see. Butterman62 (talk) 19:44, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Neutral - I think that he is also a great contributor to the anti-vandal work, but, I don't really see much of forum edits. I feel that this also is important, as it shows that you are a part of the community. Possibly get more involved into the community, and I would be more than happy to see you, a great anti-vandal worker, get admin duties. 20:09, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I decided to change my vote to slight oppose, after reading other opposes, I do see where they are coming from, and notice that they are true. 11:03, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Support - I see him around a lot, so he seems like a frequent participator in RS wiki. He's also come off as helpful and positive. To me, he's a really nice guy with a good sense of humor. 22:04, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Oppose Not careful enough in his evaluation of vandals. Recently (before he received rollback) reported incidents to the CVU that were not vandalism and in no way could be construed as vandalism if he actually took the time to read the edits. Sysops must be patient and take time to evaluate edits before proclaiming its vandalism. Assume good faith is getting seriously overlooked in this wiki and tossed by the wayside all too often.--Degenret01 01:14, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Support - Butterman, that's your reason for opposing nearly every rfr/rfa. Even though frede has the rollback crown in his signature, doesn't mean he's bragging about it or being arrogant. Frede is a great anti-vandal worker and he would be a great admin. 09:29, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


 * AEAE states that Everyone is equal, when someone adds something that seems like showing their rank, it looks like they are trying to address that they are of higher authority. I know that frede does not have that intention, but I would like to point that out. 09:35, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Supirion, if that's not why you would have a rollback crown in your sig, then why would you have it? No one needs to know you're a rollbacker. Butterman62 (talk) 11:36, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with Butterman here. I think any use of a crown in any sig on this wiki is showing off and bragging, and it disgusts me any time I see one. Players from Runescape will automatcally associate a crown with authority/power, so it gives a wrong impression right off the bat.--Degenret01 21:43, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Support - Per Hurston (nominator). 09:31, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Support - Per nominator. The wiki could use a great anti-vandal admin. I see him a lot in the wiki and I think he deserves it. 02:50, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Neutral - I really like you Frede and think you would be a responsible user. I'm not opposing right now on two things. First, you do great anti-vandal work. I'd like to know that you have read all the policies you would be responsible for implementing and monitoring other users on, and second, you were nominated by Hurston. I respect Hurston's opinion a lot, so if he see's potential in you, that's saying something (although that may be a little bias of me). Let me know if you've read up on the policies, okay. 04:19, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Additional Question: - I've also noticed that you've reported users for vandalism that have only made a minor change or minor vandal. Usually these are waved off (by me anyways) with a warning issued being enough. Would you block them or issue the warning and end it at that? 04:23, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * If these are the policies you're talking about, yes. I've read them.
 * The block will depend on the vandal ... Incorrectly updating the GEMW isn't as bad as replacing multiple pages with 'Roonscape sux!@!@!' 12:49, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * What Bonzi is trying to say is, if you didn't get it, is that, if a vandal happened to changed something like "This is a dangerous minigame" to "This is a safe minigame" will you block or warn it? 12:51, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Warn him. 12:54, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Support - Per Hurston. 19:24, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Support Degen as we are all humans we all make errors and you all took all my words nothing to say that isnt here =x-- 02:50, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * To the first half of your sentence, yes we do, so we shouldn't be blocking for what may be an error. It is better for 10 vandals to go unblocked than to block a single innocent. Yes, I borrowed that. And to the second hslf of your sentence, WHAT? Can you rephrase clearly please?--Degenret01 02:52, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Question: If someone changed the price of Exchange:Shark to 99999 coins, would you block them or issue a warning? 02:52, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Warn him first, block if he continues to incorrectly update it 08:19, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Weak Oppose - You have done loads of anti-vandal, work possibly the most here, but I don't see any yew grove work. I think you need more community participation. 17:20, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Weak support - Frede could definitely use the extra tools for vandalism, but he isn't involved in community. Improve that, and you would be even a bétter admin. . 13:56, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - You should be more active on yew grove, have more mainspace edits (other then just 50% redirects) and tbh you are a bit soft on the idea of blocking, which is weird because you do report a lot.. 08:56, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I really don't think he is soft at blocking. Most admins gives an IP one chance if they vandalize. After they do it again on another article or the same one, they block. That is what frede is doing. He warns them first and gives another chance and then block. -- User:Powers38 forgot to sign his comment, on 08:59, 31 May 2009.
 * Earlier he said he gives em 12h, 24h and 36h bans. If that isn't soft.. 10:17, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Most IPs are one time vandal anyways.=/ If they do come back, I'm sure frede will most likely block for a longer day. 10:19, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Support Per Hurston 14:22, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Comment - I may as well ask Frede this; why do you have a rollback crown in your signature? No one's really addressed why anyone would have one, so I'm asking you. Butterman62 (talk) 14:51, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not the only rollbacker with a rollback crown in his signature. Ahem ... If you take a look at my signatures history, you will notice the left 'object' always has been changing. While the Green h'ween is my favourite in-game item, i have used the left 'item' to show something about me. (Rune scimitar/2h = I'm F2P, Danish flag = I'm Danish, Rollback crown = I have rollback rights)
 * And there you go: I might  'show off' , if that's what you want to call it. 16:45, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I know you're not the only one. But ever since you obtained rollback abilities, the rollback crown was the picture, and since then, it has been the only picture. I could understand that there would be something worth knowing concerning your RuneScape membership or your nationality, but if your rollback rights are something "special" to show off to distinguish yourself from other editors, I would think adminship would also be something "special" to show off for the same manner, something that would make me cringe before RS:AEAE. With Degenret bringing up assumptions of bad faith, that combined with a feeling that adminship is a "royalty" position is a terrible combination for a potential administrator. Butterman62 (talk) 17:36, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * We are all humans, and nobody is perfect. I will change my signature (like that will make any difference) for now. 17:55, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Are you going to show off the admin crown if/when you become an administrator? Butterman62 (talk) 18:31, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Butterman, even I had the sysop crown in my signature until the other day. Hurston has it in his signature as well, yet no one has asked us why we have it in our signatures. I actually think it's important for people to know who sysops are in case someone needs to contact one ASAP. I don't understand why this issue is suddenly being raised on this RfA. 18:44, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Soldier, I remember I did question you about that (remember that IRC thing?). Perhaps finding a sysop was an issue at the time, but now we have the admin requests link, which is clearly visible on every page in the sidebars. I can't force anybody to remove anything from their own signature, and I think you and Hurston have handled sysop duties very well, so I have nothing to worry about at the moment (unless one of you were to try to obtain bureaucrat status, where this might play a role in my opinion). In addition, Hurston showed no indication that he would want to do so, and I was very busy/inactive in real life during Soldier's RfA.
 * However, as for Frede's case, it was a warning to me of not being suitable for adminship, a slight warning which warranted waiting for other opinions, at which point Degenret's observations (who had looked more in-depth than I did) put another factor in. Finally, I asked Frede himself his motivations. I found his response unnecessarily arrogant and evasive, when he said, "I'm not the only rollbacker with a rollback crown in his signature. Ahem ...", and finally admitting, "And there you go: I might  'show off' , if that's what you want to call it". I put the factors together and concluded that, in my opinion, it would be unwise to give Frede sysop tools.
 * Please keep in mind, Frede, I don't hate you. I'm just doing what I think is best for the wiki, as I believe all wiki members have a responsibility to make sure that the encyclopedia, the grand project, if you will, stays in good quality and is a friendly environment to edit in. We have had instances in the past where, concerning adminship, people have had their sysop powers removed because the community judged them to not create a friendly environment, and I would not want such a thing to happen. Again, I believe that you are a wonderful editor working to encyclopedia, and please do not take this as that I will never support any consideration of your adminship again. Keep at it, and I'm sure you'll be given the broom and shovel someday. Butterman62 (talk) 19:30, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * There may be some cases where including a crown is showing off, if the person is particularly interested in power (naming no names here), but I really don't think this is the case here, so I would be inclined to RS:AGF. This is not a self nomination, so it is not like Frede is really pushing for power himself, I'm pushing for it because of all the good anti-vandal work he has done, and I want to see him blocking people. 08:40, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Neutral - I had a rollback crown in my signature during my RfA and this issue was never brought up. I don't Frede is purposely using it as some "status symbol". It's just a crown and it looks cool in signatures. Anyways, I would also like to see you involved more in community discussions as being an admin is not all about reverting vandalism. 17:20, 31 May 2009 (UTC)