Editing Battlestar Wiki:Requests for adminship/Ricimer
From Battlestar Wiki, the free, open content Battlestar Galactica encyclopedia and episode guide
More actions
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
'''Neutral''' | '''Neutral''' | ||
# I think Ricimer is one of our strongest contributors on this wiki: the various battle pages, starting with the [[Fall of the Twelve Colonies]] are some of his most excellent work. And, while sometimes a bit too gruff in his responses, he's ready to fend his point of view or sources from all comers. We're still working on improving his funny bone (he wasn't too pleased with the non-sequitur [[Toaster]] and [[The Battlestar Galactica Drinking Game]] articles, with some important dissent), but Ricimer's dedication to keeping the wiki informative, dynamic and from becoming a farce cannot be denied. | # I think Ricimer is one of our strongest contributors on this wiki: the various battle pages, starting with the [[Fall of the Twelve Colonies]] are some of his most excellent work. And, while sometimes a bit too gruff in his responses, he's ready to fend his point of view or sources from all comers. We're still working on improving his funny bone (he wasn't too pleased with the non-sequitur [[Toaster]] and [[The Battlestar Galactica Drinking Game]] articles, with some important dissent), but Ricimer's dedication to keeping the wiki informative, dynamic and from becoming a farce cannot be denied. | ||
:*As an admin, I'm torn a bit. I think Ricimer is a fair person, but Ricimer has also documented that his gruffness can be taken the wrong way, causing others to be put off. Unfortunately, when he has been personally attacked, he tended to respond back in the same way, something that an administrator (in my opinion) can never do. I would recommend that voters look back on both Ricimer's contributions and missteps and judge for themselves. I think he'd be a good admin, but as both contributors and as administrators, we all have to show responibility, tact, and neutrality. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 12:15, 24 December 2005 (EST) | |||
# <s>FOR. I won't elaborate because I need to get to the bank and then make a movie time.</s> --[[User:Day|Day]] 14:08, 21 December 2005 (EST) | # <s>FOR. I won't elaborate because I need to get to the bank and then make a movie time.</s> --[[User:Day|Day]] 14:08, 21 December 2005 (EST) | ||
:: On second thought, I don't know that I can vote one way or ther other. I certainly respect Ricimer's edits and have enjoyed his comments on various talk pages. I also think he's improved as far as newbie-biting is concerned and I expect that, as time moves on, he will show that this improvement isn't just a momentary thing. However, when things get tense and Ricimer is personally involved, I think he can be less cool-headed than I'd like an admin over me to be. I'm not even talking about the rather rediculous debacle with Jzanjani. Just that when someone disagrees with Ricimer, he sometimes over-reacts either because he's taking it personally or... I have no idea. This seems to happen every so often to new and old members alike. I pretty much agree with Spence: Ricimer has most of the qualities I look for in a leader who I'd like to follow, but level-headedness (while not a deal-breaker exactly) is important, so I will have to ABSTAIN. --[[User:Day|Day]] 02:30, 27 December 2005 (EST) | |||
'''Comments''' | '''Comments''' | ||