Editing Battlestar Wiki:Requests for adminship/The Merovingian (2)


:''The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a [[BW:RFA|request for adminship]] that '''was unsuccessful'''. '''Please do not modify it.'''

===[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]]===
[[Battlestar Wiki:Requests for adminship|Back to RFA]].

'''[{{SERVER}}{{localurl:<nowiki>Battlestar Wiki:Requests for adminship/The Merovingian (2)</nowiki>|action=edit}} Vote here] '''
'''(3/3/6) ending <nowiki>03:18</nowiki> @ June 16, 2006 (UTC)'''

I know this is shocking that I writing this RFA, but I wanted to nominate him so I can say: “You’re doing the right thing now.”

Over the past few weeks, I have been watching Merv, just to see if his attitude towards people, me, and others has changed for the better or worse. While it has improved and is not “perfect”, I think after all I been through with Merv, I am ready to fall in. For the past two times, Merv has nominated himself for Adminship, without much success. This time around I have nominated him.

I could use the excuses on my "List of Merv" actions and the PDF file from his SciFi board post to justify for not doing this, but I am giving him a chance to prove he is worthy at being an admin.

He’s on top of the news of Battlestar Galalaica, has contact contact with the crew/cast of the series, and has now proved to be a "regular" Joe at the SciFi.com boards in which before he was acting like the Wiki was his. I know this is a shock for most of you to see this, but it is true. I hope you all agree with me and vote him unanimous to be an admin. He is now worthy of an adminship. Merv, if you accept, take the red pill and ''I’ll'' show you how far Alice’s hole really does go. (Or if you’re a Cyprus fan, "Kanas is going bye-bye.") --[[User:Shane|Shane]] <sup>([[User_Talk:Shane|T]] - [[Special:Contributions/Shane|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/Shane|E]])</sup> 22:20, 9 June 2006 (CDT)

:''Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:''
<!-- IMPORTANT: Only registered Wikipedians may vote. Nominees should not vote for themselves. See [[Battlestar Wiki:Requests for adminship]] for more.-->
'''Support'''
# [[User:Shane|Shane]] <sup>([[User_Talk:Shane|T]] - [[Special:Contributions/Shane|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/Shane|E]])</sup> - Per Nominator
#''Support with caveat'' I am not sure how this board truly works, since it doesnt have a very user friendly board for these discussions. Never the less, I would like to speak on this matter and I would hope that my words have some impact on the discussion. I would hope that some of you know me, at least by reputation by now. And while I will recap a bit about myself, it isnt because Im looking for any attention, it is to clearly set the stage that I am not a stooge put up to anything by anyone. I represent as well as can be, a truly neutral party and opinion. The Merv and I go back as far as my first days on Skiffy.  He and I dont agree on much. Hes a liberal, pretentious, self deluded mommas boy who makes up for his frail ego by over reacting to every slight. Ive never seen him turn the other cheek or show anyone some grace if there wasnt some angle in it for himself. Those are his well known and documented negatives.  And baby those are some serious ones. Lets be frank. His people skills suck.  he'd have trouble getting work at an Iraqi prision. But... If he did get that job, AND the other guard could be aware of and manage his tendency to beat prisioners for looking at him wrong... he'd be a fine guard. Truly. Not one prisoner would escape or fight nor would any drugs or bad gaurds get away with jack on his watch. He'd run a tight ship.  He is an exceptionally hard worker. And what is Wiki if not a lot of tedious hard work? He is idealicly suited for this job...  Notice I did not say as an Admin.  He can do his job without that power or prestige. But, he is human, and male.  And he does need his ego stroked.  We all do.  Being an Admin IS a suitable reward for his work. And if you can show him the grace he hasnt shown others, including myself, as he has lied about me and attacked me for my politics and not politiclly but personally, but if you can deal with who the man is, and I mean know it, accept it, manage it and bitch slap him with revokation if he doesnt listen, then Id say the deal is one you should make. Think of him like the badboy basketball player.  You know he's gonna have off the court issues.  But I will say this, you probably will be hard pressed to find a better person than the Merv. Good luck Merv... I truly wish that when you do get this, you realize that HUMILITY and GRACE will get ya further than being an ass... Sincerely, Rachel Faith Anderson.... (RFA)  <--- aint that a heck of an ironic thing for this... LOL {{unsigned|RachelFaith}}
#Hi all, short and to the point Merovingian has been one of the main reasons that BattlestarWiki is so popular as it is today. His articles are, to me, well thought out and it's obvious to everyone here that he nearly works himself to death because of the amount of articles he creates and edits. To sum it up he deserves the Adminship. --[[user:lordmutt|Lordmutt]]

'''Oppose'''
#The KoenigRules incident took place just a month and a half ago, and was part of an ongoing series of questionable behavior which the Merovingian has exhibited since the beginning of his time with us. Although his behavior since then has been exemplary, at present I have no reason to believe that this pattern will not recur. --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 01:50, 10 June 2006 (CDT)
#*Peter is right on adopting a "wait and see" attitude regarding this matter.  While apologies were extended, I am still being very cautious.  As a result of the "Trash KR" campaign, someone from M.'s camp did phone my workplace, trying to make the supervisors see that my scholarly research was without merit.  Whether the intent was to remove me from the institution (or not), the fact is this was a BIG DEAL.  People like M. need to see that what they say can impact on others' behavior.  And they need to bear the responsibility for their actions- even those that they may not have contributed directly to- but even indirectly- through the malicious campaigns that they started.  I still have not had apologies extended from M. regarding the call to my workplace.  It would have been nice, but so be it. And as long as M. thinks he had no bearing in the issue, then that reflects badly on him and his character.  Unfortunately, I too see that other things will arise that will cast this site in a bad light, as a result of M.'s behavior.  Just my two cents here.  Sorry for the rant, but when your career is on the line, you cannot forget the individual(s) that were involved.  I just hope situations like this never happen to you.  --[[User:Koenigrules|Koenigrules]] 12:53, 11 June 2006 (CDT)
#I've seen some of the interactions at the Sciffy forum with respect to the last incident, and I'm not convinced he's mended his ways. I've seen his work (when he's not interacting with other people) and he definitely has a talent at what he does, but I don't think this is an appropriate role for him. In any case, this is premature. --[[User:Larocque6689|Larocque6689]] 22:31, 10 June 2006 (CDT)
# I think I have to vote oppose, as well. I have said, in the past, and will probably say again, that I think Merv is an invaluable asset to this Wiki. I still don't see how that translates into being admin material. I also strongly disagree with nearly everything that RachelFaith said. Adminship is ''not'' a "suitable reward for his work" because Adminship is not a reward. Similarly, if you know a player will have problems off the court, you might still sign him, but you're not going to make him a coach or put him on any of the decision-making owner-consulting committees (if you're smart). I, like Peter, am not convinced (yet) that Merv's problem behavior will not recurr. I remain hopeful that it will not. However, there should be a bit more on your resume than not having problems to be an admin. You need to be better than "no longer bad" at people skills. I'd be looking for something in the "good" to "excellent" range in that respect. --[[User:Day|Day]] <sup>([[User talk:Day|Talk]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Administrators' noticeboard|Admin]])</sup> 00:26, 14 June 2006 (CDT)

'''Neutral'''
#I don't really think this should be done at the moment, we have more than enough admins for right now. Especially since this is a long hiatus there is no real necessity for any new admins. I'd say we should postpone the RFA to October or November, when Season 3 starts and new information will really start being pumped in and a new admin may actually be necessary. --[[User:Sauron18|Sauron18]] 02:46, 10 June 2006 
#I personally believer we have plenty of US timezone admins right now and I dont think Merv has done anything amazingly special to warrant creating a new post. Thats why I am neutral on this. --[[User:Mercifull|Mercifull]] 05:08, 10 June 2006 (CDT)
#Since there seems to be no immediate need, I concur with [[User:Sauron18|Sauron18]] --[[User:Gougef|gougef]] 10:23, 11 June 2006 (CDT)
#I still think The_Merovingian may indeed be good future adminship material, but this has never been more in doubt than over the past month, and I find the timing of this RfA a little questionable. Merv is still experiencing significant backlash over what happened with KR, and I think how he handles it will be quite relevant to the sorts of challenges he might have to face as an admin, but it is too soon to tell. I want to see how Merv handles himself in the coming months. And I want to see what happens to his behaviour when the heat is off (if it ever does come off). These are big questions that didn't exist when I cast my supportive vote in Merv's previous RfA. Until I have had time to see them answered, I have to remain neutral. I'm just not sure this is the wisest time to be doing this.--[[User:Dogger|Dogger]] 00:11, 12 June 2006 (CDT)
#I'd hate to turn away a good admin based on their timezone. Counting against somebody for living in a particular timezone in favor of somebody living in another would seem to be selecting for something than quality. I am pleasantly surprised at some of the trends in this continuing series of RFA's. Winning over RachelFaith and Shane are events that I would not have anticipated, and it gives me hope that in time Merv will win over the remainder of the opposition. I can't support right now (as I have done in the past), as I don't think it is likely that the community is quite ready for this. Yet. However, I have more hope now that this will eventually happen than I have in the past.--[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 07:50, 12 June 2006 (CDT)
#Merv's comments and replies (that is, the demeanor in which he replies) continue to be less abrasive in tone, and his research and resources continue to be helpful. I'm unsure if another admin is needed at this time, and I too want to see the last incident disappear into memory. I have little objection to Merv's eventual move to adminship once we have a need and, most importantly, when another RFA is entered, there are more positive comments on what was done by Merv vs. what was ''said'' by him recently. Sad to say, despite lots of progress, it seems Merv still has a "reputation" to repair. I know better, which is why I stand at "neutral." --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 13:48, 12 June 2006 (CDT)
'''Comments'''
*Shane, are you only "giving him to chance to prove he is worthy at being an admin", or do you actually personally believe that he is? --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 01:45, 10 June 2006 (CDT)
* Existing Admins: Is there a need for another admin? IMHO, along with a qualified candidate, there should be a need. just my 2 [[cubits]] worth. --[[User:Gougef|gougef]] 10:27, 10 June 2006 (CDT)
**We are not in urgent need of new admins right now, but our staff is smaller than it looks, and I would not object to a new admin on principle. --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 12:25, 11 June 2006 (CDT)
**We may be in need for more admins in the future. But as the situation currently stands, between the active contributors like Shane, Mercifull, et al. and the admins, we have it more than covered. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]]</sup> 12:59, 11 June 2006 (CDT)
* Regarding Spencerian's comments: I'm not sure repairing a reputation, in and of itself, is really something very relevant to whether somebody is qualified to be an admin. The behaviour that caused the reputation in the first place may very well be relevant, but if so I think that behaviour should be considered independently of any effects on their reputation in one quarter or another. This would appear to turn an RfA into a popularity contest with the community at large, when it is already not supposed to be a popularity contest even with those here. However, as I have stated, how somebody handles a concerted backlash may indeed be relevant to how they would handle the duties of an admin. In any case, it is the actions of the candidate himself and not any reputation that I suggest should be considered.--[[User:Dogger|Dogger]] 23:45, 12 June 2006 (CDT)
* I'm going to let this RFA run its course quitely (originally I was going to set all of the fields up, etc.):  If there is need to find proof of my maturity, instead of even replying to a 20 page rant started in a thread in the messageboards [http://mboard.scifi.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=1870484&page=0&fpart=31&vc=1 here], as Larocque6689 and others have been doing, I did the mature thing and A) just walked away instead of replying B) I have been private messaging KoenigRules working things out, instead of dragging things out into public view.  Long story short:  I was totally shocked that someone would call up his workplace and am horrified and really sorry if it happened even indirectly as a result of anything I've done, as that is a truly frightenning prospect.  I thought I had already made it clear I was sorry for that but apparently I wasn't clear enough on that and I'm sorry that I left KR thinking I wasn't sorry for that for weeks like this.  I like what Spencerian said.  As for the number of Administrators:  Memory Alpha has over 10, and just an idea to toss around, but Memory Alpha lets anyone post; you don't need a username and account.  I think they can do this because they have more Admins, and as a result, they get a lot more info added in while at the same time they're able to police their wiki adequately from trolls and spammers because of the increased Admin number.  Perhaps we could eventually shift back to allowing people to edit without having to get usernames and everything; yeah it's free but many just don't bother to go through the trouble.  I don't know, that's what they do; just an idea.  --09:47, 13 June 2006 (CDT)
**I don't give a damn for what anyone in the fan community has to say for or against you. Your dedication and the quality of your work here are self-evident, and I honestly believe that you are making a concerted effort to correct your behavior issues. I have every faith that if you keep up your effort, you will eventually make admin here, and I will be happy and honored to vote for you when the appropriate time comes. --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 01:28, 14 June 2006 (CDT)

'''Questions for the candidate'''<br />
<!-- The following are generic questions. Users may add questions to be asked in this section.  However, should a user do so, please notify the nominee so that he or she may answer the question prior to the deadline for the nomination.  Thank you! -->
''A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:''
:'''1.''' What duties, if any, would you anticipate helping with? Please check out [[Battlestar Wiki:Project List]]'s for a list of projects.
::A. 

:'''2.''' Of your articles or contributions here, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
::A. 

:'''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.


:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion.  <font color=red>'''Please do not modify it.'''</font> 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.''