Suppa chuppa

Suppa chuppa TalkContribs • Last 20 Forum - Main - User talk editsEdit count

Suppa chuppa is one of the most dedicated and persistent anti-vandals I have met. He's one of the few people I know that will go back and check RecentChanges for previous, unreverted vandalism. Suppa is one of the most active users on the wiki, and letting him block users and delete pages would help everyone. He has innate understanding of our policies, and knows how to use them. Lastly, he's just someone who is hard not to like. ʞooɔ 08:11, March 1, 2011 (UTC)

I, Suppa chuppa, 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. 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, Suppa chuppa Talk 08:13, March 1, 2011 (UTC)

Questions for the nominee

1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
Should this request pass, a large part of my administrative work would be counter-vandalism (i.e. blocking vandals, deleting spam/unnecessary pages and images, etc.). Some people may argue that the wiki has a sufficient counter-vandalism base and that vandalism is not a serious issue at this time, but unfortunately this is not true. Lately, there has been much vandalism that has gone undetected for long periods of time, and much of this vandalism is un-reverted for several hours. I go through all 24 hours of recent changes every day, and there is a disturbing amount of vandalism that is missed. Furthermore, I am usually active at times when most American users are asleep, and I feel as if I am the only person looking through the recent changes during these times, so administrative tools would enable me to better deal with vandals during these time periods. Additionally, my cvu edit-count may seem rather low, but that would merely be a consequence of me requesting blocks through IRC as of late.

2. What are your best contributions to the RuneScape Wiki, and why?
Personally, I feel that my best contributions would be in the field of counter-vandalism and article re-writes. I am always watching over the recent changes and correcting edits/reverting current vandalism. It is many times frustrating having to always turn to sysops in IRC when there is a particular user who needs to be blocked, and it can usually take a while before it happens.

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 not really had any encounters with other users that I would call “conflicts” since I started editing here. However, there have been a few extremely minor disputes (the most recent being whether or not the “z” in “z-buffering” should be capitalized) which are way too insignificant to really consider. I am generally an easy-going person, and I always try to avoid getting on the bad side of other people. Should something arise and there be a legitimate conflict in the future, I don’t think I would react very differently. I tend to always keep a cool head, and I rarely become livid, so I don’t think that I would lose my temper and do anything rash.

Additional questions (asked by the community if necessary)

Some users are opposing you for undoing edits without a summary. Can you please explain why you do this and if you will continue to do so? ʞooɔ 08:41, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

Since that issue has been brought up, I have ensured that every edit that I undo receives an explanation. It is rather difficult to continue to do something like that after multiple people mention it. As for why I did this in the first place, I cannot truly say. Additionally, I never really knew that anyone thought anything about undoing without summaries. I guess it is somewhat easier to do so when you're going through hundreds of previous RC edits to merely undo a good faith edit rather than reverting it. To me, an undo felt "nicer" than a revert as it showed that I had actually taken the time to review it rather than reverting it. Additionally, the connotation of the two words, "undo" and "revert" made the undo seem a bit nicer. However, now that this has been pointed out, I will ensure that all such edits receive a proper summary. Suppa chuppa Talk 08:49, March 4, 2011 (UTC)


Support - ʞooɔ 08:11, March 1, 2011 (UTC)

Support - He'll be a great admin (By the look of all his edits). --Cakemix 08:15, March 1, 2011 (UTC)

Support - He does an amazing amount of anti-vandalism and knows when to block people and when certain policies need to be used. Hunter cape (t) Sentra246Blue hallowe'en mask 08:22, March 1, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - I didn't notice all the undo's with no edit summaries, which is something an admin really shouldn't do. Hunter cape (t) Sentra246Blue hallowe'en mask 07:10, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
That's a pretty half-ass reason to oppose if you ask me. Maybe weak support. But to change from support to oppose over that is a bit ridiculous. Whether he uses rollback or undo, even without edit summary, does not at all affect his ability to be a successful administrator. HaloTalk 07:07, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
Support - It's quite easy to see when someone changes, like suppa has in the last week. He doesn't use the undo without a summary anymore and I highly doubt he will in the future. I agree with the people that say that the reason I opposed is quite a minor thing, but I wouldn't want an admin doing it. But because it is such a minor thing, it shouldn't stop him from being an admin if he doesn't do it anymore. I don not see any reason he shouldn't become a sysop now. Hunter cape (t) Sentra246Blue hallowe'en mask 06:50, March 8, 2011 (UTC)

Support - We need to fill the holes that are in our antivandalism these days. Suppa does a great job in this. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 11:17, March 1, 2011 (UTC)

Weak support - Good choice, yet nothing noteworthy. --クールネシトーク 00:00, March 2, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - He seems to see a magical difference between rollback and undo without a summary [1]. I can't support that in an admin. Ajraddatz 00:22, March 2, 2011 (UTC) See below.

Can you cite other examples of this? I see where you're going, though. Magic-iconStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance 00:54, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
Nevermind, there are many other examples in his contribs. Magic-iconStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance 00:56, March 2, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Ajr, and I wish I saw you more on the Yew Grove. Andrew talk 03:54, March 2, 2011 (UTC)

Support - One of the biggest anti-vandals out there. I would love to see him as an admin. S T Y G 04:02, March 2, 2011 (UTC)

Support - Everyone knows I have a thing against RfAs and new admins, and that I strongly think we have enough. But in the Aus timezone, we don't. Suppa seems to be the best candidate for administrator right now, imo. A lot of the time it seems either me or ocassionally Cook are the only ones covering this time, but you can't count me as I only counter-vandal by request in IRC. Suppa is constantly in the IRC, giving me requests to block when I am there, or reverting both current vandalisms or those from hours ago that our other 60 admins and 100+ active users missed. All 3 who have opposed above I have not seem once during this "Anti-vandal" gap and seem to only exist in that situation where we get "3 admins on 1 vandal". And can someone please explain to me why using 'Undo' instead of 'Rollback' is such a disastrous action worthy of oppose? Chicken7 >talk 05:49, March 3, 2011 (UTC)

The point is that undoing without an explanation is pretty much the same as rollback. The contributor will wonder why their edit was taken away. If it is in fact a vandal edit, undoing is fine and it doesn't matter which button you click. I have no idea if the above linked edit was bad or not. Not curious enough to check atm. BTW, stop being racist.--Degenret01 06:03, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
My understanding is a little better. And I don't see how racism comes into this Lol All countries of the world are filled with people from all walks of life and many varying countries. I can't see where I said something derogatory. >.> Cheers, 06:19, March 3, 2011 (UTC) (Chicken7 >talk)
You are supporting in part due to his being Aussie, which is racist to all non Aussies.--Degenret01 07:00, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
Since when is Texas in Australia? ʞooɔ 07:08, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
What Cook said. And, I am simply supporting based on what I see from when I am on the wiki, and what I have seen in his contributions. I don't oppose American-time requests, even though I do think they are unnecessary. We just need to consider what is necessary for the wiki, and sysopping Suppa would significantly lower the period of time vandalism goes unnoticed and not acted upon. I truly don't see how that tiny issue above is so huge to deserve oppose. Chicken7 >talk 07:19, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
You both just failed the "understanding Degen jokes" test.--Degenret01 07:29, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
awwwww i fort i pasd dat tesst b4 :(:(:(:(:((:(::(:( Chicken7 >talk 07:33, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
Okay, back on topic. The reason it is important is looking long term. New editors and IPs seeing their edits taken away with no explanation will often be discouraged and think "Eff that wiki", and we never see them again. No, it does not happen every single time, he is not driving them away with a flamethrower. But some people will react that way, so it is the wikis interest that every undo of a non-vandal edit have a decent summary. I do not personally yet have an opinion if he does it too much or not, I am simply offering you the thoughts on why it is bad.--Degenret01 07:45, March 3, 2011 (UTC)

Full support - Yes, he has made some errors. How human of him. But being the good smart human he is, when these were pointed out he said "oops , my bad, I will not do that any more". Looking at the thousands of things he does right, and his maturity level, I will accept that this one mistake is behind him. So there is totally no reason to oppose this now. --Degenret01 07:53, March 3, 2011 (UTC)

Strong Support - Yay me for finally supporting an RfA that doesn't have near unanimous support!@!@! But seriously, I completely trust Suppa as a sysop. He is an excellent countervandal, an exceedingly nice person, and someone who displays erudite and adept judgment capabilities. In addition to bolstering our current slightly underperforming countervandalism facilities, I completely trust Suppa in consensus determination (which, as I have found out firsthand, is generally what older sysops do after the countervandalism aspect is taken over by others).

As for the undo without edit summaries objection, I have one word: really? That is a very small issue. It is not a character issue, but a procedural one. I am confident that Suppa, having noted the objection on his RfA, will provide summaries in his undo edits when needed. I must also express the trivial nature of this issue, for most users and many current sysops do not always provide edit summaries in undos. (I believe I myself have used rollback a few times when I wasn't going to provide an edit summary for an undo.) It's not going to kill the wiki.

The large positives that Suppa brings far far outweigh a small negative. --LiquidTalk 12:26, March 3, 2011 (UTC)

I've downgraded my support from strong support to a normal support, since I really don't think this warrants a strong support. I originally wrote "Strong" in there to make a point to the opposers. --LiquidTalk 00:26, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
I hope you know that doesn't affect the final outcome at all, as your reasoning is still the same. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 15:45, March 7, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - He should really start using the summary a bit more. I still remember this where the creator wanted to be asked first before being deleted. It was his first article and there was bound to be errors. A nice message on his talk page would really tell him why it was redirected, but Suppa decided to just redirect it to the Glitch page. Thatoneguy:p reverted it back and Suppa decided to use rollback instead of undo and post a summary. He did not even post a message on Thattoneguy:p's talk. I don't mind another anti-vandalism admin around here since I don't really patrol RC as much as I used to; however, I think he should really start using the summaries a lot more so we don't have random people leaving wiki because their edits were reverted/redirected and aren't told why. Santa hat Powers38 おはようヾ(´・ω・`) 12:54, March 3, 2011 (UTC)

Support - Alright, so I wasn't actually going to oppose this RfA, but I wanted to try something. I assure you, I wasn't disrupting the wiki to prove a point - the concern that I had was a valid one, and might still be recognised later on this RfA. However, I'd still prefer to not disclose my reasons for doing so just yet.

I think that suppa is a great editor and candidate for adminship. Yes, he could use edit summaries more, and I don't see why he (undo) without a summary instead of [rollback], but whatever. I would encourage him to do so in the future, and definitely for the duration of this RfA. His countervandalism work is awesome, and he would have a good use for the sysop tools. Ajraddatz 14:03, March 3, 2011 (UTC)

Comment I find the entire "undoing without a summary" business to be utterly ridiculous. I know from experience that when you're looking through 200+ revisions at once for vandalism, you can feel like you don't have time for a summary, especially for those whose reason is abundantly clear from looking at the diffs. I have also noticed that we seem to view undoing as somehow "nicer" than to reverting. Why this is I can't be sure, but in many places I've seen edits that could have been reverted, undid instead because somehow it seems nicer.

Are we really going to deny an incredibly capable anti-vandal access to tools he can use because he does something that everyone else does? Of all the reason to oppose an RfA, this has to be one of the strangest I have ever seen. Yes, there was a thread a year and a half ago on this issue. But very, very few people follow this rule. Looking through the most recent RfAs, all of the successful candidates (with the exception of Ajr) had done this exact same thing a considerable amount. I am guessing that Suppa didn't know about that thread. What he did see was other people undoing without a summary, and he thought it was okay. From what I can tell, he has never been told that this was not allowed. Now that he knows that it's a no-no, do you really think he will continue to do this? He is the very best anti-vandal we've got and to reject this RfA on something so petty is beyond me. ʞooɔ 18:17, March 3, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - I admit he's a good anti vandal, no lie. I just don't like him undoing without summaries. We don't need to lose editors because they wonder why it their edit is gone without even knowing why. I still remember this. (lol rollback) My edits were reverted and I didn't know why. I pretty much hated Karlis and wanted to leave the wiki for helping out until I started getting better at editing. It was then I found out my edits didn't followed the Style Guide. Santa hat Powers38 おはようヾ(´・ω・`) 09:35, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

Support - I have checked his recent edits and it appears that he does do a LOT of anti-vandal work. Yes, he does revert when he should undo, but is that really a reason to oppose the RfA? I am sure that every single member of the wiki has been lazy at one moment in time and clicked the appealing rollback instead of the undo. I am sure that he is very trustworthy, as I do not think he has ever been in any disputes. I can see no real reason why I should be opposing and I can be sure that he will make good use of the tools. Therefore, he receives my support. LordDarkPhantom 18:41, March 3, 2011 (UTC)

Weak support - You are clearly a good anti-vandal, and although the blank undos are not enough for me to go oppose or even neutral, they are enough to weaken my support, though you have been working on this. Template:Signatures/Ciphrius Kane 22:05, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Support - Considering the fact that he's about the best anti-vandal we have, and that he's about the only person who checks ALL the recent changes, I can't see how undoing edits without a summary is enough of a reason to oppose. Jarvald 01:36, March 8, 2011 (UTC)

Support - Suppa is an excellent countervandal and would benefit greatly from the tools. Basing an oppose on some summary-less undos is rather absurd and blowing up an extremely trivial matter. 222 talk 07:38, March 8, 2011 (UTC)

Closed - Suppa chuppa will be sysopped. C.ChiamTalk 00:49, March 15, 2011 (UTC)