RuneScape:Requests for adminship/Sentra246

Sentra246
__NEWSECTIONLINK__

I am nominating Sentra246 for adminship. He is a constant anti-vandal, and keeps watch over the Recent Changes when few others do so at those hours. He's an active member of the community in all areas, from Yew Grove to the clan chat to IRC. Most importantly, we have been in need of more Aussie/Kiwi administrators since Chicken became inactive and the others have stopped editing quite as often. I hope you'll support this request for adminship, because I think Sentra can use these extra tools to help the wiki. 11:14, October 30, 2010 (UTC)

''I Sentra246, 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 powers because I realise 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, 11:27, October 30, 2010 (UTC)

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

If I get the tools i will mainly be involved in maintenance and anti-vandal, by blocking, deleting pages ect.

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

I would say my best contributions are maintenance of articles and adding information after large game updates, like Dungeoneering and the new treasure trails and also anti-vandal warning them and reporting them to the cvu.

'''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 have had a few running problems with a couple of editors and I usually just try to avoid the people I always seem to have conflicts with as a way of trying to deal with it. When I have different opinions with someone about what should be on an article I try to ask someone else for there opinion just so that it is neutral.

Additional questions (asked by the community if necessary)
Question: Since several users (including myself) are concerned about how you would actually use the tools, can you give us any insight into how you might do that?  14:03, October 30, 2010 (UTC)

I assume you are talking about which parts of the tools I would use and why I have a use for them. Well as I said above I would block vandals and do maintenance like deleting pages and merging histories ect. I think i have a use for them as there is a bit of a lack of sysop's in the Australian time zone. We have Ruud the days he comes on, which isn't everyday and the same for Degen. We also have Caleb who is only semi-active but that's it since Chicken and Evil Yanks left. Hope that answers your question. 23:51, October 30, 2010 (UTC)

Discussion
Support - Lots of antivandal work, and constantly steals my reverts. 11:19, October 30, 2010 (UTC)

Support - I trust Glenn, he is a brilliant anti-vandal, and he works well as a custodian. I was going to nominate him myself in the upcoming weeks, but it seems Cook has taken that chance away from me. In all seriousness, Glenn is one of the hardest working editors on the wiki at the moment in time, and he will make an amazing admin, whether or not, of course, it is too dark and not so bright. 11:26, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * You're not going to forget that are you? 11:30, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it is going to become a historical quote 12:34, October 30, 2010 (UTC)

Strong Oppose - Glenn, I think you are a great editor, but you just don't need the tools. You only have 59 cvu edits, which justifies that you don't need blocking. You stated in the irc that you won't determine consensus, and deletion is really not that urgent. Sorry. 11:33, October 30, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Glenn, you are a wonderful asset to the wiki during Australian time zones. You are constantly watching over the recent changes, and constantly conflicting with me. Besides from anti-vandalisim, you are very active in the community, especially in the IRC (CANDY MOUNTAIN SENTRA). You are a wonderful editor and I would love to see you go far with the wiki. 12:00, October 30, 2010 (UTC)

Support - You are a very good user. You stay calm at any times and really helped me when i had that thing with degen. If someone should have adminship, and if someone can be trusted, it is you. 12:34, October 30, 2010 (UTC)

 Super Strong Oppose Oppose - He is a nub. You are a great editor and could use the tools well. But, there are better editors than you that arent admins yet. And, you arent...how do i put this... well a link might explain it better. Ultra Sentra-Brand Spam. Im allowed to be immature, as an admin you arent... This oppose might still be changed during the course of the RFA though. - 13:07, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Although I hate to link other people to opposes, but look at certain discussions held by Rwojy, and the large amount of admins who like their lulz ;P, I'm not calling them immature, but what Glenn has done is light compared to some others. 13:18, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, i guess you have a point there. And its not like he is always like that... he just seems to have an attraction to editing my pages constantly... I have to see a psychiatrist now... Im still thinking - 13:24, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd like to point out that "better" editors is an inadequate word. (AND a terrible reason to oppose).  Legit use of AEAE-no editor is better than another, some may just be more qualified for being a sysop.   13:38, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * But I mean better... There are editors that are better than him at editing. You disagree? If I'm going to support an RfA it's going to be for the best person for the job. And I don't really think it's Sentra :/ The CVU and Cat:delete get cleared out pretty fast already. This is my opinion and I don't really feel that they are 'bad reasons' - 14:02, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm...I guess...it just seemed like you were attacking the person more than their edits. Who says anyone "better" wants to even be a sysop?  I agree with the oppose...just the reason...well meh.   14:06, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see. Well, it's a bit hard to comment on anything except editing when you know someone through the wiki and for personality I would normally just compare maturity. Now for this next bit, just keep in mind that this scale is a big one. I think that Evil is a much better editor. To me he just appears to know a more than Sentra. Which isn't to say that Sentra doesn't know a lot, just not as much as evil. And evil's RfA failed. I think it was something like 'doesnt need the tools' in most of the comments. So if evil failed then... you see where I'm coming from? - 14:18, October 30, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Just FYI, this is always a good guideline to help you decide. And Sentra has has an editor review here if you want some other user's opinions.-

Support Per Burnt Me Plox.-- 13:19, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Why? You aren't even going to "per" someone?   13:38, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Mind your own business Haloo, why do you have to boss me around? And I called you Haloo on purpose. -- 23:19, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * You have to put a reason for your stance otherwise it won't be used when the decision is made on this rfa. This is because we are not a democracy and the decision is made on reasons not how many support or opposes there are. 23:23, October 30, 2010 (UTC)

Strong Oppose - Per Chess. I generally disagree with him, but this time he said everything I was going to say to a tee. Thanks bro. 13:42, October 30, 2010 (UTC)

Strong Oppose - Do we really need another admin right now? I know people don't like the we have too many admins argument, but I find it very applicable. We don't need 80% of the users here to be administrators. Pages marked for speedy deletion are cleaned out very quickly, there are more than enough counter-vandalism admins, and none of the other areas that administrators are able to edit/improve really need much work either. You are a great editor, and I would definitely trust you with the tools. That comes to my next point; you don't display a strong need for the tools. As said above, only 59 edits to the CVU, I don't see you tagging pages for deletion much, and very few requests on RS:AR. Additionally, and this is a very minor thing, I like any users to be able to use correct spelling and grammar during important situations. It looks much more professional. 14:18, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * I Srtongly agree about the spelling (I can't even tell if that was on purpose)   14:26, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Whoops... 14:43, October 30, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Per above, except for when Ajr mentioned that we have enough admins. This implies the usergroup is exclusive and that a high number of administrators are dead-weight, both of which I disagree with. 15:00, October 30, 2010 (UTC)

Strong oppose - First of all, the wiki does not have a need for an additional sysop at this time. Both of the tasks that Sentra mentioned when answering his questions (deleting pages, blocking vandals, etc) are all sufficiently covered right now. Second of all, Sentra hasn't been that active in countervandalism. Granted, I'll admit that I'm in a different time zone, so I may not see all of his work. However, looking at his edit report I see that he isn't the most active anti-vandal. The maintenance work that he mentions does not require sysop tools (besides deleting, but the speedy deletion category is cleaned out very regularly). Lastly, I share Ajr's concern about grammar. If Sentra is unable to use proper spelling and grammar (I see that he has not capitalized many of the instances where he says "I") in a serious discussion page where proper spelling and grammar is a must, I cannot support him. 15:08, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * While I feel somewhat uncomfortable with this being the case, I too share in Liquid/Ajr's concern regarding grammar. Communicating in the game itself is a different story, but it's difficult to take somebody seriously on the wiki if they frequently make the same grammatical/spelling errors. 15:16, October 30, 2010 (UTC)

Strong Oppose - Chess really summed it up, that and there is no need for another admin. 15:57, October 30, 2010 (UTC)

Not Yet - I disagree with the fact that we do not need additional sysops at this time. We have a lack of sysops! Sentra is an exceptional contributor to this wiki, and I trust that he would use the tools well. However, he has not achieved much as of now. I would like him to achieve more, then I would support. 21:57, October 30, 2010 (UTC)