RuneScape:Requests for adminship/Derilith


 * First request

Derilith
Hi, I'm Derilith. (Note: I created this page and I messed up, so start over time).

What I've done

 * Made lots of edits (over 1000)
 * Made useful templates
 * Started a couple pages
 * Made some transparencies
 * Welcomed many users
 * Told vandals not to vandalize
 * Made sigs for people
 * Voted in many community discussions
 * Revamped a couple articles
 * Been here since December '07
 * Made a policy
 * Made useful contribs
 * Be friendly to users
 * Just be a nice guy!

Overall, I think I'd be the friendly admin and the one to help others in times of need. Here's how I'll do so:

Vandal policy
1st bad edit: Warning 2nd bad edit: Another warning, this time more bold 3rd bad edit: 3hr block, and a notice on the user talk page 4th bad edit: 1 week block, and warning telling them this is their final warning 5th bad edit: Infinite block.

Conclusion
I don't know what else to say, just let me have this chance. Thank you all, 02:22, 2 August 2008 (UTC).

''I, Derilith, 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, 02:22, 2 August 2008 (UTC).

Discussion
Comment/question: About your "vandal blocking" policy, how would you know if the IP was possibly a dynamic one? Besides, I don't think you should be indefinitely blocking IPs anyway, because they can change. Just wondering what you think about that. Butterman62 (talk) 03:17, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - @Butterman: If it's an IP, then, I won't bother with the whole policy, so it would skip straight to block unless the situation isn't that severe. 03:24, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Neutral/comment: First of all, you still haven't totally answered my question above, on whether you would indefinitely block IPs. Second, what concerns me is that you may consider good-faith edits vandalism and block for that, as I have seen that you have made questionable uses of the rollback tool, which did not follow the H:RV guidelines. Can you explain those please? Butterman62 (talk) 03:59, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Pending - So, you've made some templates, some pages and a policy, but no links? Linkies please? Also, IPs should get a year block at the most. 06:06, 2 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment - @Chia: Templates: this, this; Pages: this, this, this, revamped this this; Policy: this policy, but its still proposed. To your other thought, I think if IPs get blocked a year, they'll just change an vandalize again if they're true vandals like this guy. Hope this helps. 13:45, 2 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment - @Butterman: I wouldn't infinitely block an IP adress, because they'd just come back on another IP anyways. Other vandals usually quit after a 1 month block, anyways. Those rollback evidence thingies: some of the, I don't know what in the world I did, but the one with Template:GEPrice, was so that the price would automatically update, but the IP simply typed in the number. 13:54, 2 August 2008 (UTC)


 * About the rollback, that brings into question your understanding of policy. It seems that you've been assuming bad faith in those instances. Also, the rollback tool is for vandalism only, and that you're not supposed to revert non-vandalism without explanation, according to RS:AGF and H:RV. So, it seems you've either been misusing rollback or assuming bad faith, both of which are inappropriate, especially for a (prospective) administrator. Butterman62 (talk) 21:47, 2 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, but I never knew that was bad faith. Whoops 17:51, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Support: I support him because he's helpful to the community. -- 5chidori talk (contribs) 02:19, 3 August 2008 (UTC)