RuneScape:Requests for adminship/Joeytje50

Joeytje50
Since I have become a more active antivandal recently, patrolling the logs and recent changes, I have seen my use for administrator tools increase rapidly. I would like to request these tools, so that I am able to control the vandalism more easily.

''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 tools because I realise that this is a serious offence. If the community finds that I have done so, my tools will be revoked, and in extreme cases I could be given a community ban. Signed,'' 13:00, May 4, 2011 (UTC).

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

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

'''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?'''

Additional questions (asked by the community if necessary)
I see you do images a lot, and occasionally I see you do some anti-vandalism. The thing I most recognize about you is your fantastic images, but what makes you special apart from other users? What makes you worthy of sysop tools? 22:29, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * I am very active in antivandalism, which would be the part I will use it for the most, and I also know enough of Mediawiki, CSS and Javascript to be able the to edit that namespace well. I won't be very active at closing threads and that kind of things, but I will be very active at the other 2 areas. 23:20, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

Discussion
Oppose - The first reason I oppose is because you have had this as a goal for as long as I have been aware of you. You have even asked "What should I do to become a sysop?" rather than "What can I do to improve the wiki?". You seek this for a status symbol, not to benefit the wiki. Secondly I oppose this because of a severe lack in your communication skills. You frustrate even our most calm and reasonable people in discussions with circular logic and outright ignoring of points raised that are counter to your view. Sysops need to be able to clearly explain reasons behind their actions, and you are unable to do this even now. I would not trust you to use sysop tools correctly.--Degenret01 21:41, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * "You frustrate even our most calm and reasonable people in discussions with circular logic and outright ignoring of points raised that are counter to your view." Amen. 21:52, May 4, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - I wholeheartedly agree with what Degen said. In addition, I must point out that I cannot help but notice a severe lack of maturity. This manifests itself on the wiki and in the IRC. If someone is going to talk in a ridiculous manner, then one of the surest bets is for you to do it. Furthermore, I cannot think of anyone that uses the smiley face (or some other face, as the case may be) more frequently than you do. On serious discussions, I'd be happier if we limited those to complementing the text, not as a standalone comment. (I can think of two instances right of the top of my head, which is quite excessive for something this trivial. I'm sure there are more than that.) I also noticed that you seem to be highly uncivil in several discussions when people disagreed with you. There are so many discussions where it is you versus the rest of the community, and most of the incivility happens there. This is not the kind of maturity that I expect from a sysop. 02:46, May 5, 2011 (UTC)

Support - I disagree with the notion that Joey is undergoing this process for the reason of attaining a "sysop status". He has changed greatly since he first joined the wiki, and his contributions lead me to believe that he edits in order to improve the wiki. He's a great counter-vandalism user, and he catches a lot of vandalism during hours where we have little to no sysops around, so he clearly would have a use for the tools. 03:45, May 5, 2011 (UTC)

Not yet - I agree that Joey is active in counter-vandalism, I've seen it. But I think he still needs a few months to work on his maturity, it has improved over time but not enough. 06:23, May 5, 2011 (UTC)

Support - Joey may not be the "maturest" person on the wiki, but seriously, there are quite a few cases of sysops blowing up on people. If we wanted to play that game, we wouldn't have sysops. Being a sysop is NOT A BIG DEAL and should be given out based on trusting him to do the right thing, and a valid need. He has the valid need (based off the 20+ requests for sysop-related tasks DAILY in IRC), and I feel we can trust him not to abuse the powers. He's clearly shown improvement in all qualities discussed above, and is showing a genuine care for the community. 13:21, May 5, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose, per his inability to communicate with other editors. I have on multiple occasions been frustrated with this user's actions, especially when I need to state something upwards of five times before it is actually read. A sysop candidate should never be in a situation on a forum where it really is them vs everyone, and I'd hate to see how you'd handle a situation like that with access to the block button. Sorry, 13:47, May 5, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - Hell to the no. I'm going to be very blunt here, so fasten your seat belts, kiddies. It's impossible to discuss anything with Joey. He just doesn't get it most of the time. He ignores what people say, puts words in their mouths, misconstrues everything, and doesn't understand the concept of admitting when you are wrong, instead resorting to digging himself an even deeper hole while laying on the blame on others. I can't even begin to tell you how much time I've wasted going in circles with him during Yew Grove discussions just trying to get him to understand the most simple logic. Is he a good guy? Yes. Good wikian? Definitely. However, seeing as he can't even handle himself on the Yew Grove, imagining him with sysop tools sends a chill down my spine. 20:50, May 5, 2011 (UTC)

Support - I haven't been here for a while; but Joey really dedicates his time to the wiki. Whenever I'm with him he is always spending his time on the wiki. Whenever I'm not; he's still wioth the wiki. Joey combats several vandals daily. Thanks to his devotion I support. KolakCC 00:06, May 7, 2011 (UTC)

Not yet buddy - I have to side with Liquid, Degen and Soldier on this. 01:48, May 7, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - Extremely sorry on my part, but I just can't. You have probably the greatest intent (with the exception of Parsons) on the wiki; however, your ability to look at the big picture in discussions is nil. You need to expand, view everyone's opinion, then make a decisive conclusion. You can't just focus on one small detail. You are able with images and editing skills, but I cannot trust you with the tools. Again, extremely sorry on my behalf. 11:07, May 7, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - Although I'm not the biggest poster, I still see things that go on around the wiki. In my many viewings of the Yew Grove and talk pages, Joey has seemed to be very uncivil towards a number of wikians, and as a sysop, you cannot persue disagreements in such a bad manner. Being a sysop is about sucking it up, reading what others have to say, replying is the need be, and staying civil during each and every step. The antivandal and image work is nice, but with the current standing, I cannot support you to have sysop tools such as the block button. 02:01, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

Not yet- I think that you deserve to be a sysop, but I don't want people being blocked because you have the power to win a dispute that way. If you can handle that then I give you my whole hearted support. However, I think we should give you an award for your image work. :-) 06:03, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

Overall oppose - You are an extremely valued editor, however more often than not, you try to force your opinion on those around you. As an example, take Forum:Drop logs for monster and item pages, where you argued continuously with the opposers, and after Gaz closed the thread, you promptly proposed a WikiGuild for the project, basically nullifying the outcome of the thread and gaming the system. While that was only one incident, it's only an example - your opinions are very strongly held, and it causes me to doubt whether you'd use the tools as the community wanted, or how you wanted, such as closing threads. Secondly, your maturity. I agree with Liquid on this one - while I don't log into RS or IRC any more, I can remember you being a little too laid-back, even when users asked serious questions. People logging into chats quite probably want answers, not a joke concerning bukkits or whatever. 15:52, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * If anyone cares, (and so that there are concrete examples, in case the closing bureaucrats are getting fidgety), I'll provide this to complement Real's example. In addition to the slovenly grammar and writing style, Joey essentially insisted that I delist the image immediately. I don't see why an extension in lieu of an immediate delisting is such a big deal, but apparently it was. Furthermore, I was accused of refusing to delist because I "liked the image," which was obviously not the case as I had supported the delisting. It seems funny to me that for someone who went through the discussion and tallied up the positions (including mine) somehow missed my signature. It's one of the less egregious ones, but I'd rather not pull out the more egregious ones unless absolutely necessary. 16:02, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - Although I really want to support this, I have a few worries about Joey being an admin. 16:05, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - Like Zam, I want to support, but I worry about how you handle opposition. I still remember when you blew up because you were warned and blocked for your behaviour. 16:58, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - Per pretty much everyone. Although he has matured, Joey still does not play well with the other children and is usually a source of conflict on the Yew Grove. Your editing and counter-vandalism work is excellent, but I still have serious concerns about your maturity and your ability to effectively communicate and compromise with other editors. -- 17:06, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, your answer to question three sounds incredibly insincere. Saying that "I realized I shouldn't have done it, and learnt from my mistake" is just a cookie cutter response. Why shouldn't you have done it? What did you learn? Currently, It gives the impression that you are simply telling us what we want to hear. -- 17:10, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Especially since a block was issued for your actions... 17:18, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Shortly after the incident with Degenret I was still full of anger. I wanted to create a desysop thread, and because I was told it would be better not to do it, I didn't. I have looked back to it quite a few times, and I started to realise I shouldn't have become so angry after a while. I understand it goes way too far to do what I did then. I have also changed a lot in the 7 months that passed, and now I stay calm at all times. I would never ever block someone because of reasons like a personal conflict, and I would stay calm and discuss it with the user and maybe others when needed. And of course, when I am not completely neutral on a case, or I'm not sure what I would have to do, I would not close a thread. This would includes disagreements with others on the thread, which would make me less neutral. So in short, I have learnt that I should stay calm at any times, and also do so. 19:40, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, the blocking incident was seven months ago. This, however, was only last month. The discussion was quite heated and uncivil at times.... Changed a little? Sure. Changed a lot? I wouldn't bet on it. Sorry, Joey. 22:18, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

Support - Joey's a great user, and I trust that he would use these tools wisely. He also told me to do my own trans which helped me a lot. 23:30, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose Way too immature to handle it. See above for examples 16:41, May 10, 2011 (UTC)

Neutral/Support - Joey could definitely use the tools. On the IRC you can always see him requesting blocks, and I do think that, although he doesn't usually seem serious and mature, he knows where to draw the line. Everyone seems to think that his argumentative skills could use work (which I can see), and knowing Joey, he'll definitely work on this after this RfA. I will fully support his next RfA, because I know he'll make the changes, right now though, I'm not entirely sure. 21:33, May 11, 2011 (UTC)

Support - I've never seen him step out of line once, contrary to the above opposes, and he's one of the best editors out there imo. Genuinely a good candidate for adminship. 13:51, May 14, 2011 (UTC)