Guild Wars 2 Wiki talk:Requests for adminship/Aquadrizzt

Resolution

Much has been said about Aqua's positive contributions to the wiki, and rightfully so. It's unquestionably true that Aqua has improved the wiki immensely over the course of his time here, and it's certainly relevant to discuss a potential sysop's history on the wiki in terms of activity level and/or quality. If that were the only measure of what's needed to be a sysop, Aqua would pass with flying colors. In fact he'd probably already have been an admin from his previous RFA.

Several comments have either focused on or at least brought up that Aqua one of the few big-name GW2W editors that isn't "from" either GW1W or GuildWiki. While fairly true, all I can really say to that is 'So what?' I don't see any more relevance than whether a sysop/potential sysop has played GW1, or been on GW2Guru, or Wikipedia, or Reddit, or Slashdot, or was raised in Wyoming. We all interact with various online and offline communities in our lives, and anyone unable to separate out preconceived notions from other communities isn't admin material in the first place.

I think the point that hasn't gotten due attention, either brushed past as a given due to Aqua's positive editing contributions, or touched on with vague unease in a few cases, is how Aqua will use the sysop tools. While I don't think anyone would suspect Aqua of purposely abusing such tools, well-intentioned poor use is potentially just as damaging. Sysophood is surprisingly nuanced work, and I think Aqua is just too eager to jump in headfirst when a calm and measured approach is necessary. Even stuff that looks easy on the surface, like warning users having a dispute, banning vandalbots, deleting pages: sometimes you need to take a larger view at it to make sure that you aren't getting heated and involved, that it's not just a clueless user, that the page doesn't need to sit awhile to be discussed/turn into a redirect/get What Links Here cleared up/etc.

I'm going to quote something I said when discussing JonTheMon's possible bcratship: "There are times when you do have to set aside personal judgment in the face of clear and informed community consensus, but you can't just wipe your hands of it, say it's not your call, and go whatever way the wind blows. It is your call; that's why we get paid the big bucks (figuratively. We don't actually get paid)." I believe this is one of those times where it would be easy enough for me to say that enough people have said "support" and none have said "oppose", so pass it, wipe my hands of it, and leave it on the community's head whatever may happen... But I think I would be doing the wiki a disservice as your bcrat if I did that. I've discussed this at some length with Pling, and both of us are convinced that Aqua is not currently ready for adminship. - Tanetris 21:59, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

To provide a few examples, and to elaborate on possible areas of improvement:

• this is something that should immediately strike you as "new user testing with redirects". Putting a delete tag on it isn't particularly appropriate, and nor is the message; it's not even something like "incorrectly placed redirect", which would've been slightly better. Even more better would be saying something like "hi, here's the sandbox, happy editing" - assuming good faith, helping out a new user, being welcoming or at the very least informative. Knowing when not to use sysop tools is important. I suppose it's an example of the nuance that Tanetris mentions, in something as everyday as deletion (or not-deletion).
• this also is something that I don't feel comfortable reading. It's expected that people from the official Guild Wars Wiki may try to do similar things on the official Guild Wars 2 Wiki without realising we'd rather they didn't. When something like that pops up, it requires patience, not an iron fist.
  • Similarly, although it's not really an admin role, you could also improve your general bedside manner: User talk:Spotina#Signature image. I'm a blunt person - I don't always see the need in padding things out with flowers and pretty little niceties. Some situations don't need floweriness, sometimes it just makes things verbose, some people aren't offended by bluntness. However, there are times when flowers help.
• this shows a misjudgement of the mood of that section. To be honest, it also struck me as trying a bit hard to seem adminly (something that Mediggo commented on in the RfA), particularly when combined with Guild Wars 2 Wiki talk:Community portal/Archive 5#Administrators. It's important that a prospective admin should want the sysop tools; as brought up on Infinite's RfA, this is a volunteering project, and giving sysop tools to someone shouldn't be a case of "I do not want these tools, being the honourable gentleman that I am, but I must needs take on this burden if you so wish", instead it's an extension of that volunteering to admin responsibilities. However, it shouldn't really become over-eagerness. There aren't really secret handshakes. Unfortunately, there are no celebratory strippers either.

Right now, as Tane says, I don't think it would be the best course of action to sysop you. However, I still think you're one of the most constructive users here and I don't want to discourage you from continuing. Given what's ahead of us (beta(s) and release), there'll be a lot to do and projects where you can play to your strengths. pling 23:06, 7 June 2012 (UTC)