Battlestar Wiki:Requests for adminship/Day

Day

Battlestar_Wiki:Requests_for_adminship/Day|action=edit}} Vote here (6/0/0) ending 23:57 26 January 2006 (EST)

Day (talk • contribs) Day is by now a veteran contributor, and I have greatly appreciated his tireless efforts to improve the wiki. He is intelligent, slow to anger, an excellent communicator, and a pleasure to work with. I believe that adminstrator powers would help him further his work here, and that he would exercise such powers prudently and responsibly. --Peter Farago 22:51, 19 January 2006 (EST)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Er... Accept. *blush*

Support

--Peter Farago 22:48, 19 January 2006 (EST)
--Ricimer 22:53, 19 January 2006 (EST)
--Spencerian 00:14, 20 January 2006 (EST)
--Support. Tireless, methodical, nit-picker that plays well with others. --Steelviper 08:42, 20 January 2006 (EST)
-- Great with the new folks, very patient and diligent. I'd be glad to see this guy made an admin. Joemc72 08:47, 20 January 2006 (EST)
--Watcher 23:01, 21 January 2006 (EST)

Oppose

Neutral

Comments

Wow. I, ah, am flattered.

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.

Well, there's Characters and Standards and Conventions, which I like working on. I also hope to help organize and contribute to an image-themed project which might be shaping up, if that get's going. I also like to see links to redirect pages eliminated and am willing to go through the "What links here" pages to make it happen.

However, that's all stuff a normal user can do. I'm not sure, really, what I expect from admins on a Wiki, so I'm not quite sure I can say what I'd do with admin privelages/resposabilities. I've been, in the past, low level admin on a couple of MUSHes and by the time I got to that point, I had a pretty good idea of what I expected admins to do for me as a player and so I expected myself to do those things for others. Here, I guess that involves cleaning up stuff that needs deletion, identifying areas that need improvement (whether in added content or in organization) and drawing attention to those areas, and being able and available to mediate any disputes between users (including other admins).

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

Well, I rather like quite a few of the images I've grabbed, especially for articles that've needed them. In particular, I guess, I like how these few examples turned out. I've done very little, in my opinion, writing for the Wiki, as far as generating new content.

On a less content-centered note, I've put a lot of thought and effort into the various coordinating projects around that give things a more unified feel. In particular, I'm rather proud of what we've accomplished over at Battlestar Wiki:Standards and Conventions.

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?

Only one user has ever caused me stress. I wasn't alone in being stressed by him and I was kind of on the sidelines for that one. I think most reading this will know to whom I'm referring.

That one incident aside, I had a bit of a difference of interpretation with Peter Farago once. I wouldn't say it caused me stress, though. Explaining my POV to him and having him explain his to me was actually kind of fun and ended up enriching (in my opinion) the Sacred Scrolls article.

Other places where I've had respobilities similar to what I imagine admins have here, I have been in some tight spots with people before, where I and/or another user/player has gotten upset. However, as far as I know, none of those episodes has ever ended with the other party feeling as if I'd treated them unfairly.

Part of that is learning to recognize when it's happenning so that you can suggest a break in order for both parties to step back and take a break. On a Wiki that's aided by the nature of how we (mostly) communicate here: it's time-delayed. Remaining objective and logical is key in sorting out disagreements that may have a tendency to become emotionally charged.