BSG-WIKI SM.png
Share Your Thoughts!

Shape the future of Battlestar Wiki with this short survey!

There may be algae cookies and hydronic mushies. Mmm... Trick or Treat!

Battlestar Wiki:Requests for adminship/The Merovingian

From Battlestar Wiki, the free, open content Battlestar Galactica encyclopedia and episode guide
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that was unsuccessful. Please do not modify it.

The Merovingian

Back to RFA.

Battlestar Wiki:Requests for adminship/The Merovingian|action=edit}} Vote here (4/2/4) ending 04:46 18 March 2006 (UTC)

The Merovingian (talk • contribs) – Self-nom.

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I am the Merovingian, and I accept this nomination. --The Merovingian 15:59, 11 March 2006 (CST)

Support

  1. Dogger 02:41, 12 March 2006 (CST)
Sorry, I did not realise what a collaborative process this kind of vote is, thus my simple vote without an explanation, and my absence from this page and suddenly coming back to find that all sorts of discussions are going on. This may be too late to make any difference, but for the record, I agree with the ideas that an adminship should not be a trophy nor an entitlement. I am not here voting for The_Merovingian because we are friends on SciFi.com. In fact, The_Merovingian is all about facts and doesn't pal around, and I daresay there are few people at Skiffy who would not hesitate at the question 'Is The_Merovingian your friend?' That being said, I do consider him a friend in that I think I understand what drives him and I respect it and I find that he returns the respect in kind. But that is not why I'm voting for him. I have seen The_Merovingian get into a lot of scuffles on SciFi.com. He can be merciless with newbies, to that I can attest. However the number of repaired relatioships The_Merovingian has on the board is almost as high as the number of his altercations -- and I am one of those repaired relationships. When he is faced with superior facts, he has no trouble at all acknowledging. He can be haughty and arrogant, but when someone responds by getting nasty, vicious, and vulgar, there is a line he will not cross. And when a newbie begins to 'get' him, that relationship is almost instantly repaired. I have never seen The_Merovingian stalk someone throughout the board and seek revenge by finding excuses to heap more ridicule upon them. That shows an ethical boundary and at least a measure of level-headedness. The only 'headbuttings' that I have seen get out of hand, are the ones in which Mero's opponent is well known for driving conflicts to extremes with other users. In at least one case, this opponent was eventually banned for this behaviour. Because Mero's dedication to detail is so prodigious, and his temper has very clear limits that I have never seen exceeded, and he is quite willing to repair relationships with someone who is also willing, I have no trouble with the idea of him having the power which I have come to understand as 'the mop'. I realise that I am a short-history user with few edits, and truth to tell I don't know if I will ever become a very regular contributor, though I will always follow the impulse to fix someting obvious. But that's where I stand on The_Mero. I would have no problem with him as an admin on the scifi.com board, and I have no problem with him as an admin here. Take this for what it's worth from a casual member; I expect nothing more. --Dogger 06:07, 19 March 2006 (CST)
  1. Mazzy 09:41, 15 March 2006 (CST)
  2. Member since 16 March 2006. Vote will not be counted. --April Arcus 10:31, 17 March 2006 (CST)
  1. Support. It looks like he's got the skiffy vote. He's got my vote too, though the price he'll pay is a thorough explanation of it. I weighed both the pros and the cons carefully before voting this way. Lets start with the cons. 1) Merv can be short, sarcastic, and can generally push peoples buttons and rub them the wrong way. His diplomacy (joke courtesy of Merv, I hadn't caught that until today) has gotten a lot better lately, especially with regards to edit summaries, which were where I think most people were getting annoyed. People DO read the edit summaries, and what you say in those can end up being as important (or even more important) than the actual edit. 2) Merv has a rep for biting newbies. "Noobies are the rungs on the ladder of success; don't hesistate to step on them." Exhibit A Part of this is just how he operates anyway (he's equally short and sarcastic with everyone). However, he has of late made significant strides Exhibit B in both welcoming newbies, as well as calmly discussing issues with them Exhibit C. There still might be some room for improvement Exhibit D (maybe greet them BEFORE assuming bad faith), but nobody's perfect. (And he's been greeting more folks than I have.) Those are the main items I have in the con pile. Now on to the pro's. 1)He's an outspoken advocate of the wiki at scifi.com. Exhibits E and F are present higher up on the page. Whenever a topic comes up that has some coverage over here, you can pretty well count on Merv to provide a relevent link. That leads to more eyes on the subject, and hopefully more contributors eventually. 2)Merv is a zealous fact checker. Anybody can baselessly speculate elsewhere, but Merv holds the wiki to a high standard, ensuring accuracy. (I think he gets frustrated when he realizes that such standards cannot be upheld elsewhere.) If he makes a claim, it's going to be grounded in canon, and if you can disprove it in canon he will acknowledge his error. 3)Merv is a tireless contributor. He spends a lot of time figuring this stuff out, and it shows. His zealous dedication may have something to do with the contempt he has for those who show little thought or effort behind their words (but I'm just speculating). I was tempted to copy an excerpt from an argument he had here to Scifi.com. In it, the person Merv was having a discussion with accused him of not being a dedicated enough BSG fan (having not seen TOS), and therefore of basically having too much of a life outside of BSG. I nearly fell out of my chair laughing, as his biggest detractors over at skiffy usually claim quite the opposite. In the end, this RFA isn't a popularity contest. (Though I may be biased, having been selected as an admin with the fewest popular votes ever.) The RFA is about whether or not Merv will use the mop as it is intended to be used. I believe he shall. That being said, I caution Merv to remember that if he thought he was under scrutiny before, it will be doubly so now. Your detractors/enemies are likely to look for any excuse they can find to try to take your mop away. It is my hope that you don't give them one, and instead crack them over the head with your mace of facts, pin them against the wall with your shield of canon, and then... maybe win them over with that razor wit. So that we can have some more productive contributors here at the battlewiki. --Steelviper 08:11, 16 March 2006 (CST)
  1. Artlogical 12:08, 16 March 2006 (EST)
  2. Member since 16 March 2006. Vote will not be counted. --April Arcus 10:31, 17 March 2006 (CST)
  3. Grafix 08:51, 16 March 2006 (CST)
  4. Member since 26 February 2006. Vote will not be counted. --April Arcus 10:31, 17 March 2006 (CST)
  1. Lordmutt 17:11, 17th March
  1. JohnH 20:33, 17 March 2006 (CST) What Steelviper said
  1. Well, as a prolific and well known Sciffy poster, and I am sure my reputation precedes me even here, where I have not truly participated, as much as lurked. I feel compelled to make the case FOR support of "The Frenchmen". And let me tell you why. He asked me. Who am I to have any true sway among the wiki? I have truly only contributed to one other wiki in my life. I am a wiki reader, lurker, user... Im not a contributor. Further, the Frenchmen and I have had our rounds and bouts on Skiffy... and even some not nice words he said about me. Yet, he had the courage to ask for my vote. Folks, as a long time politico, THAT impresses me. He isn't afraid to do what it takes to get the job done. So, say what you will about his sometime irratic personality, wiki isn't a clique, or it sure as hell shouldn't be. It's about getting the job done. And I for one, for what it is worth to you, submit that vote, this vote, this word, and humbly suggest that those who can do so, be allowed to do so. Thanks. Rachel Anderson.
  2. Member since 18 March 2006. Vote will not be counted. --April Arcus 01:12, 18 March 2006 (CST)
  3. Rachel Faith, Adminship is neither a populary contest nor a matter of politicking.--Noneofyourbusiness 22:54, 17 March 2006 (EST)

Oppose

  1. I've found the Merovingian more than a bit vindictive and superior-sounding. He has a tendency to declare a particular article or piece of information to be useless or redundant while others disagree, acting as though his opinion was the universe's absolute standard of truth, and is not very open to discussion about it. He nominated himself, what does that tell you? If it was me (and it won't be, for I have no interest in the position at all) I would have asked an admin if they would nominate me. --Noneofyourbusiness 12:16, 16 March 2006 (EST)
  2. Member since 3 March 2006. Vote will not be counted. --April Arcus 10:31, 17 March 2006 (CST)
  1. While Merv has made vast improvements in the past months, I still do not believe he is administrator material. An administrator has many tasks, however, one of the most important administrator tasks is conflict resolution, since is it a task that not everyone can do. I believe that Merv has demonstrated that he has a holier-than-thou attitude, especially towards newbies. He is an EXCELLENT contributor, of that I am more than sure. However, he can continue to contribute in the professional methodology and high-volumes he has shown, without being an administrator. Also, it is not as if we have a shortage of administrators here at Battlestar Wiki. The five we have are fast, fair, and knowledgeable. In short, the powers that would be granted to Merv as an adminstrator would not positivley augment his best qualities (his knowledge of all things BSG, his thoroughness, and his rapidity), but rather would amplify his shortcomings. (his occasional rudeness, and shortness with newbies) I have come to respect Merv as a major contributor to the wiki, but with the desire to uphold the quality and continued prosperity of the wiki as my number one goal, I cannot in good concience vote positive on Merv's self RFA. [EDIT] I followed Peter's link to the "what adminship is not" essay at wikipedia, and I believe that the second article in that essay applies VERY strongly here: Adminship is not an entitlement --Kraetos 15:58, 16 March 2006 (CST)
  1. Vote fraud. Even if he had a more votes than Oppose votes, it would have been 80%. --Shane 22:54, 16 March 2006 (CST)
    • That is a serious accusation, which I will insist you back up. The fact that Merv's friends from SciFi.com came here to vote for him should certainly not be a mark against him, although the weight we should give to their opinions can be debated. --April Arcus 23:31, 16 March 2006 (CST)
      • I have looked around the Scifi.com boards and the weight he has there out-weighs here. Even though I am usually not against the person, but the method on how these votes would be counted. It just so happens two nights before it ends, votes popup and a large part of the support comes from SciFi.com. Sounds like private messageing favors to me. Nothing against Merovingian, there are over 1,000 people on these wiki, and only the ones that have been here less than a month would have gotten him Adminship. Hold it against me if you do, but that is my reason. --Shane 00:02, 17 March 2006 (CST)
        • In my opinion, your vote should be decided based solely on your judgement of Merv's qualifications and character. We can address the Scifi.com issue afterwards. --April Arcus 01:01, 17 March 2006 (CST)
          • Moved vote to Neutral based on Joe's new policy on 3 Week Notice. --Shane 10:34, 17 March 2006 (CST)
            • Hasn't Shane been registered since at least 20 January 2006? What's the 3 week notice in this case? --Steelviper 11:08, 17 March 2006 (CST)
  1. Oppose. I respect Merv as, probably, the most prolific and accurate contributer to this Wiki. The posts above have enumerated much of what he's done for the Wiki. So that's not why I'm voting oppose. I'm also not voting oppose regarding Merv's experiences head-butting with other users. I think he's come a long way with that and been able to think about his communication with others here from new angles. I think he deserves some recognition for that, as well. One of the things I was thinking about when mulling this over and deciding how I'd vote is actually best summed up in Peter's link below. Specifically, it is not something to be made the prize in a bet, even if it is just one vote. Also, there are a few comments regarding admins that Merv has made that make me think he misunderstands, slightly, the role and status that an admin (should) play and hold here. He has implied that admin votes when seeking consensus count a bit more and that admins hold some other kind status-oriented powers like that. Just in case it's not clear from my tone, I think that point of view is not a good one for a user to have, let alone an admin. Lastly, though Merv seems like he's outgrown some of his abbrasiveness, I think he still lacks a certain patience. If he finds some error that is not easily solved (something more than editing, like moving a page, or merging two, etc.), he will tend, in my obsevation, to make the change as soon as he proves to himself that such action is needed. I've picked up cues from those who were admins before me that, even if I (or whoever) cannot conceive of a half-decent reason to not make the change, it's still best to wait a few days in case someone else has one (or a week, maybe... more... this is fuzzy). Often, this just delays the appropriate action, but it allows all parties to voice their opinions before their folly is demonstrated and more meticulous (or whatever) minds prevail. This flaw is actually part and parcel with Merv's tendency to catch a lot of mistakes quickly. The man is like the Flash... He just needs to learn when to slow down to the speed of us mortal who cannot run on water. --Day 01:43, 17 March 2006 (CST)

Neutral

  1. April Arcus 23:19, 15 March 2006 (CST)
  2. Durandal 04:55, 17 March 2006 (CST)
  3. Shane 10:34, 17 March 2006 (CST)
    • Hasn't Shane been registered since at least 20 January 2006? What's the 3 week notice in this case? --Steelviper 11:08, 17 March 2006 (CST)
  4. Joe McCullough 12:02, 17 March 2006 (CST)

Comments

  • Merv's behavior and contributions have been excellent lately, but given his sometimes mercurial disposition, I would feel more comfortable supporting his RFA if it were taking place in a few weeks' time. I will not oppose it, but I will have to contemplate the matter more before I can decide whether to support or cast my vote as neutral. --April Arcus 18:12, 11 March 2006 (CST)
    • Nonetheless, I have chosen to make the vote now. Vote what you want.--The Merovingian 18:14, 11 March 2006 (CST)
  • Why is it that I cannot vote on this page? I have been registered for months and my email has been authenticated since November, but whenever I click the Vote Here link I get an apparently illegal url that includes an unresolved subsitution (FULLPAGENAME), and it comes up 'Bad Link'. I tried in Safari, in Camino, in Firefox, and in Internet Explorer for the Mac. No dice. Can't vote.--Dogger 23:39, 11 March 2006 (CST)
    • Okay, I just voted by using the 'Edit' link and adding my name to the list, instead of by using the nonfunctional 'Vote Here' link. I hope that is acceptable.--Dogger 02:39, 12 March 2006 (CST)
In order for the "Vote here" button to work, you have to paste in the full wiki page name where the FULLPAGENAME was. I fixed the link (for those that don't want to just "edit". I also updated the vote count to reflect Dogger's vote (which was perfectly acceptable). --Steelviper 07:48, 12 March 2006 (CST)
  • Don't know what you guy's are on about, i'm a n00bie(or was) and merv is perfectly nice to me, helping me with wiki standards, rules, methods etc, more than anyone else did. Like you said, he does alot here. It's best to reward people for that. - Lordmutt 17th March, 2006
  • I just got back. Is the vote resolved now? --The Merovingian 22:58, 17 March 2006 (CST)
    • It's still open for a few more hours. --April Arcus 01:07, 18 March 2006 (CST)
        • No it's not. I asked this on my personal page, but for some reason; our signatures are using "CST"; central time. But it says that the poll ended at 4:46 UTC; that's Grenwich Mean Time, and was at 12.:30 in the morning Eastern Standard Time. --The Merovingian 09:16, 18 March 2006 (CST)
          • You need to go into your Preferences and edit your Time Zone settings. It's fairly painless. A few clicks and you should be good to go. -- Joe Beaudoin 18:07, 18 March 2006 (CST)
Also, Merv. Please notice that a user added a question for you to answer. --Day 21:21, 18 March 2006 (CST)

Questions for the candidate
A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What duties, if any, would you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Project Pages for a list of projects.
A. Episode Summaries, episode analysis, episode questions, episode notes. Character bios. Cylon series. Spearheading the Writer/Director category project. Furthing the Timeline project (and fighting the grave threat posed by the Season two timeline discontinuity). The Battles series. Going through every source of information available, be it GalacticaStation, GateWorld, NowPlayingMagazine, Lucy Lawless fansites, Ron Moore's blog, the official messageboards, several shadowy rumor mills which I cannot disclose, and the podcasts, in order to obtain, analyze, developed and post as much information as possible on this Wiki, and turn it into a truly reliable "go-to" site for up to the minute BSG information.
2. Of your articles or contributions here, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. The battles pages, all of which were of my own design (I made the battleboxes for Lord of the Rings battles on standard wikipedia, and when these were done, I wanted to keep doing something like that so I created the battles series here); secondly, due yo my vast knowledge of BSG trivial facts and analysis, I have made great contributions to the episode guides, and as it's not like I have a life outside of this :) I'm usually the first to post notes for an episode up after it airs (though this is not a rule), and I'm really happy with the episode guide stuff I've done (check the history tabs, etc). I guess a random sampling of some of my better works would be Downloaded, Cally, Uniform, Fall of the Twelve Colonies etc., my great contributions to Life Forms of the Twelve Colonies (ever vigilant), and pretty much the entire episode guide. I spearheaded the most recent movement (after debate for months) to give Cylon copies who have become individuals their own character pages, and to consider them separate characters.
3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
A. They are beyond count. Yet of late I have met these challenges with firm determination and responsibility.
4. What can't you do as a standard contributor that administrator-ship would enable or allow you to do?
A. Well for example, I would be able to delete a page like "NBC" immediately, instead of having to wait a considerable amount of time for this woefully misleading information to be removed from our online encyclopedia. --The Merovingian 00:49, 19 March 2006 (CST)

User:The Merovingian I think I'd be good for administrator because of A) My stagering knowledge of all things BSG (haha), B) my extensive body of work here notably on the episode guides, battle pages, and C) My good looks. I'm formally putting myself up for nomination, etc. --The Merovingian 22:46, 10 March 2006 (CST)

My campaign music: enjoy --The Merovingian 18:31, 11 March 2006 (CST)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.