Guild Wars 2 Wiki:Requests for adminship/Xeeron

Xeeron

Xeeron (talk • contribs • logs • block log)

Started 09:42, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Status

Unsuccessful, removed from both bureaucrat and sysop roles. 06:30, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Candidate statement

Most of you will not have seen me in a good while: Not being in the beta, and having stopped playing GW1 a while ago, I went into hybernation. The wait for GW2 was simply to long to stay active. Those who were around earlier, probably know me, for the rest a quick history of my wiki activities:

I started out at the (then only) GW, where I first got very active in starting up the build section. I also was among the starting editors of GWW. After the sell out of GW, I moved over completely to GWW, where I have been sysop for a long time, and occasionally been bureaucrat. My main fields of activity were the inner workings of GWW: Policy discussions, arbitration, organisation of categories, that kind of stuff. I never was among the "in" crowd, or any kind of crowd really. I also try very hard to look at everything unbiased. That is probably is my best quality here.

Both me and my guild are definitly playing GW2, so I am sure that I will become more active again once I actually get to play the game that this wiki is about. However, I can certainly understand if you feel that you'd rather have bureaucrats who were more active during the wait for GW2. --Xeeron 09:42, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Discussion

• Xeeron's work on this wiki has been almost exclusively in policy. He has worked to help develop the foundations of this wiki and I don't think that that should be discounted. While he hasn't be active regularly, he has demonstrated that he can and should be trusted with sysop tools. However, I think that activity, in one form or another, is necessary for being a good bureaucrat and Xeeron hasn't been all that active recently. While any sysop can delete stuff or block users or resolve conflicts that arise, I feel that bureaucrats need a level of current community awareness that I don't think he possesses at this point. Aqua (T|C) 12:06, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
• Per Xeeron's own words, he is not really active here; IMO, not nearly active enough to be a bureaucrat or even a sysop. When/if he becomes more active, and assuming that at the time we have a need for more admins, then maybe a request for adminship would make sense. But right now he does not have enough activity in this community to show proper judgment as an admin. Erasculio 13:43, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
• Never discard a person who can be trusted to weild power responsibly, and effectively. Even with a reduced activity level the skill, knowledge, and ability is clearly present. Please retain, and encourage increased interest and participation. Rudhraighe 15:49, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
• Agreed with what Aqua and Erasculio said. I simi remember you and I see that I voted you down in your last bureaucrat election, but I cant seem to find out why, that said I know that I had a reason that i am betting was justifiable. so i want to see you more active on this wiki before I can say yes to ur RfA.- Zesbeer 22:16, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
• Well here's an old name... Remember Xeeron back in the day of the original Guildwiki with the drama with Gravewit hoopolah and Wikia takeover... I do trust his judgement quite a bit, and if you say you are coming back then I trust that too. He has played a key role in all the main GW related wikis in terms of policy and really knows what he's doing. At least for the moment I would say "weak support" for him keeping his seat until I see him in more recent discussion in key topics, I'm a bit hesitant to give a more stronger support for him. --Lania 00:43, 07 April 2012 (UTC)
• If you don't end up liking Guild Wars 2, would you become inactive? Manifold 01:43, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
• Although I haven't had too much experience with Xeeron myself, I have seen some of his actions, and would fully support him as being a Sysop/Bureaucrat. -- Lacky 07:42, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
• The level in activity in this community is in my eyes less important then others stated, although I understand their concerns and reasoning. He has the qualities I like to see in an admin, and I believe that Xeeron will be a good admin here. -- Cyan 08:01, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
• I could trust Xeeron back in the day and missed him when he left. I think his best quality is very much needed in the upcomming storm of drama in the initial day's of Guild Wars 2. --Silverleaf Don't assume, Know! 09:13, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
• Even though I have no idea whom Xeeron be and what actions he may or may not have taken. I'll stay neutral to his RfA. I wish Xeeron the best of luck with the whole RfA stuff. Ge4ce-Talk-Contribs 10:55, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
• I feel that Xeeron's expertise in PP management and enforcement/education will be a great asset in the months approaching the release of GW2. He has shown that he possess more than the ability to stalk the wiki and use tools from time to time. He approaches disruptions without bias and with a fair thought in his mind. And while I agree that his level of activity has been much lower than we'd like it as of late, I feel it would still be appropriate to maintain his adminship on this wiki. One such recent example that popped into my mind was the issue involving CAJOS. Venom20 12:35, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
• I agree with Aqua and Zesbeer. Though you might do a lot when the wiki was in the beginning phase, but being an admin isn't about what you did in the past, but how good you can do in the future. It is not convincing, that having been inactive for so long, to make me trust that you'll be certain to be active in a foreseeable future. So sorry, I'm afraid I can't give a yes. Glastium talk 05:34, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
• You are pretty much before my time so I don't know you, but looking back at what you have done on this wiki I support you staying a Sysop/Bureaucrat. In my opinion, the bureaucrats don't need to be major main space editors as that what the community is for. From what I had looked at, Xeeron takes both an unbiased and thoughtful look at discussions which is why I support him. He has qualities I would want in an admin and the only thing I think is missing is his lack of activity could be a sign that he isn't current on what is happening on this wiki. The current happenings is something an rfa can catch up on, but those qualities are something that are either there or not and they seem to be there with Xeeron. 03:26, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
• I find that I am honestly too unacquainted with Xeeron to provide my own support. This is not to say that Xeeron is not fair or not thoughtful, but I would similarly like to understand how these qualities make themselves evident based on something other than sources from years prior (and from situations I have no context for). Redshift 12:44, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
• Please leave an elaborate comment about why, or why not, the candidate should retain his seat. Discussions are desired!
• …