FANDOM


Forums: Index > Wiki proposals and applications > Adminship Request - JASPER42 II
 
Gametitle-Wiki
Gametitle-Wiki

Hello ladies and gents, I'm Jasper and I wanna be an admin.

Who Am I?

I first joined this wiki in May of 2010 and became relatively active rather quickly. In the summer of 2011 I quickly became a chat regular, I did have a downtime not long after that for personal reasons, but have since returned and been rather active for quite a while. I ran for admin a very long time ago with a rather positive response but it was ultimately decided that I needed more time and was instead given rollback rights. Since then I have proven my worth enough to become a moderator, I now feel that there has been more than enough time for me to try running for admin again.

But why do I deserve it?

Why me?

-Firstly I like to think I have a pretty impressive edit count, in nearly all areas of the wiki.

-I am well known and connected to the community. I ran a semi-popular blog series last summer and am active in both wiki discussions and community blogs. Being an admin is about more than just a large edit count, and interacting with the community is very important.

-I have also created a lot of content for the wiki, be it articles, categories or templates.

Quests

Trophies/Achievements

People

Places

Perks

Consumables

Templates

Categories

  • Category:Audio needed
    • Audio needed (Fallout)‎
    • Audio needed (Fallout 2)‎
    • Audio needed (Fallout 3)‎
    • Audio needed (Fallout Tactics)‎
    • Audio needed (Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel)‎
    • Audio needed (Fallout: New Vegas)‎

-I spearheaded a project which caused a lot of audio for quotes to be added to the wiki, many of which I uploaded myself.

-I am already a moderator, and have been for some time. I am regularly in chat and perform my duties as moderator when needed.

-People like me, I help to bring a friendly atmosphere to the wiki and have even been told by some users that I'm the reason they use the wiki at all.

-I care about the wiki, and have shown this by starting discussions and votes on ways we can improve it, including who can endorse chat moderator applications and the current discussion on placeholder images.

-I also already have access to many of the wiki's social networks.

-I have recently been working on the important task of citing information articles.

-I've added a large amount of the content on the graffiti article.

-I have access to the GECK and am knowledgeable of how to use it, as well as being familiar with most of the templates on the wiki.

Edit Count

Type of edits Edit count
Total 16,134
Article 5,579
Talk 457
User 1,958
User talk 1,120
Fallout Wiki 335
Fallout Wiki talk 9
File 1,058
File talk 0
Template 92
Template talk 2
Module 0
Module talk 0
Category 42
Category talk 0
User blog 236
User blog comment 3,328
Blog 0
Blog talk 0

Am I Needed?

Honestly, my answer is yes. Recently a lot of admins have been coming dangerously close to inactivity, for whatever reason. and it never hurts to have a little extra man power, we used to have a lot more admins than we do now and I think that it's better to be safe than sorry. There have been a number of times fellow users have come in looking for an admin, but with none to be found as well as times I have personally had to scourer recent changes looking for any admin who might be active when one is needed. When it comes to things like vandals, it's best to get them out the way ASAP.

Poll

Poll finished on 12:02 am August 22, 2014 (UTC).
Poll
  • A consensus must be reached by voting before any action is taken.
  • You can vote by placing one of the following lines in the appropriate section:
    • Use # {{yes}} ~~~ if you support the proposal.
    • Use # {{no}} ~~~ if you are against the proposal.
    • Use # {{neutral}} ~~~ if you wish to abstain.
  • Please do not edit other people's votes.

Yes

  1. Icon check Jasp deserves to be an admin, and his contributions prove that. Him and I tend to get along greatly, and I've always liked him. If he can get rid of that occasional condescending side of him, he'll be one of our best users imho. Enclavesymbol 00:29, August 15, 2014 (UTC)
  2. Icon check Long overdue. Yes Man defaultUser Avatar talk 05:20, August 15, 2014 (UTC)
  3. Icon check Your work on the Notable Quotes swayed the edit part for me. The only concerns I do have are your mediation skills. I fear you may not give newer users the patience their learning curve may require but beyond that, I have nothing else to fear of you. Also, I trust nobody has any problems if I replace the asterisks/bullet points with the conventional hashtags/numbers do they? --The Ever Ruler (talk) 07:18, August 15, 2014 (UTC)
  4. Icon check Dedicated to all areas of the wiki and certainly a trustworthy member of the moderation staff. Jasper is abrasive at times, however if anything the wiki could use some abrasive leadership, especially as our administrative staff is lacking numbers and we inch closer to a new Fallout title. A most excellent dude and bodacious request. Neko-signature Archmage NekoNeko's Haunt 19:12, August 15, 2014 (UTC)
  5. Icon check Greets Peace'n Hugs (talk) (blog)
  6. Icon check Jasper has a long history with the wiki that stretches long before I joined. He is a dedicated hard worker, and his contributions reflect that. He has a strong presence in the community, and is always in chat raising issues and discussions that lead to the betterment of the wiki, despite the fact that he may not always be on the better side of the argument. I do not always agree with the things he does or says, but that is only a natural. Jasper has the skill sets and the presence that we need for an admin, and he has the responsibility and restrain to use the extra rights that come with them appropriately. I firmly believe that he has earned this position. ---bleep196- (talk) 19:56, August 15, 2014 (UTC)
  7. Icon check Jasper is one of the most active and frankly, memorable users here. He's blunt but fair in all the interactions I've seen him in. That being said, he has the temperament and skills to fill the role of admin. Be the best you can be. -- MHsig Watch in awe! 23:05, August 15, 2014 (UTC)
  8. Icon check The only question i made when I saw his application was: Why is he not a admin yet? He helps, informs and changes the wiki and its users on a way that only a small number of people is able to.RocketPig13 User RocketPiggy 15:30, August 16, 2014 (UTC)
  9. Icon check Dipping Sticks Dead Gunner's SMG JPG1 "Float" 04:29, August 17, 2014 (UTC)
  10. Icon check Jasper, while having a hard exterior, is actually one of our better users and is willing to be here for the wiki. We are in need of admins I believe and personally I think having him on board would be fine. Please treat these rights well. RangerSequoia "Some say this user used to be a Moderator..." Wiki 04:57, August 17, 2014 (UTC)
  11. Icon check Pretty much a no-brainer. He's a frequent editor, involved with the community, and has a long history with the wiki. I'm surprised he wasn't an admin sooner. Boltman BOLTMAN FOREVER 06:26, August 17, 2014 (UTC)
  12. Icon check You're brash personality hardly diminishes your worth and necessity. One by one, our administrators are leaving, and as a continuous contributor to the site, as well as active community participant, I humbly agree that you should be an admin. Here's for more projects in the future.--User ncr A Safe People is a Strong People! 20:49, August 17, 2014 (UTC)
  13. Icon check Yes a million times. Navy athletics Don't give up the ship! Bill the goat 20:53, August 17, 2014 (UTC)
  14. Icon check --WrightEveryTime 22:27, August 17, 2014 (UTC)
  15. Icon check See comments 69.l25 (talk)
  16. Icon check I can't very well have a nemesis that is not my equal now can I? Also, I have confidence that Jasper will be a wonderful admin. Richie9999 (talk) 01:12, August 18, 2014 (UTC)
  17. Icon check Well, considering all facts, you have my vote. Energy X 21:47, August 18, 2014 (UTC)
  18. Icon check So far Jasper has been an excellent moderator, enforcing the wiki's rules when needed, and from what i've seen, he's a good guy. I believe that he will be a great addition to the Nukapedia's administration council. Matt2077 (talk) 12:46, August 21, 2014 (UTC)

No

  1. Icon cross I wish I could say YES. I want to be a friend to all & if it was just about ME I would just let it go. Sadly we have a bully that seeks more power than has ability to keep in check. Jasper dose not play well with others. Jasper dose not except friends who don't agree with him. I can deal with open debate but he would be a dictator.
    • Why have I been away so long ~ I was try'n to play nice SaintPain TinySaintPainHere to help."
  2. Icon cross. OK. One of the biggest reasons I "retired" from this wiki was because there were a quite a number of people here that I no longer desired to be, or wanted my name to be, associated with. I grew tired of the incessant arguing for the sake of proving one's self smarter or better than others. As long as these divisive people are here, we will continue to have severe problems between users. I really had no intention of voting on any more inane policy proposals or new user rights requests, but I find myself compelled to vote when one of the people who I believe is part of the problem here asks for more rights. For what it's worth, there's far worse than Jasper. Generally, he's a fairly likeable fellow. But his penchant for arguing ad nauseam is bad enough in chat that I'd prefer he not even be a chat moderator, let alone an administrator. I don't herald his "bluntness" like the rest of you. You do not need to insult and browbeat to make your point. Jasper, as it seems you will get these rights, please take what I've said constructively and under advisement and prove to me that I'm wrong to lump you in that group with the others. The Gunny  UserGunny chevrons 01:12, August 20, 2014 (UTC)
  3. Icon cross I do not want to seem as if I am jumping on the bandwagon here, but I have been analyzing this request since day one, and I have been thinking back on the Jasper I have gotten to know since 2010 during my days as an anon. And as I have been thinking back on the past and comparing then to the person you have portrayed yourself as today, I have not seen the change necessary to separate the two. I originally decided to vote yes, hesitantly, because we do need administrators in place for when Fallout 4 comes out. But thinking on it further, I cannot allow that fear to dictate my vote, or else I will find myself using the same voting justification that I vehemently disagreed with back when Theo was running for admin. I am sorry, but you are not a leader in my eyes, and my vote needs to reflect my inner beliefs. ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 01:32, August 20, 2014 (UTC)
  4. Icon cross Same with SaintPain. One more thing: You are extremely annoying. --WastelanDrifter (talk) 16:53, August 20, 2014 (UTC)
  5. Icon cross See comments. --Skire (talk) 00:02, August 22, 2014 (UTC)

Neutral

Excluded Votes

  1. Icon neutral Since June 20, you've switched up your editing, changing from mainly forum & blog comments to mainly mainspace edits. While I like the switch -- it's what I'd want to see from an admin -- you've only been editing mostly articles for shortly under two months now. For me (building off of the "three months" activity requirement), you haven't demonstrated that you're going to keep up these new edits. If you end up switching back to chat, forums, & blogs only -- a possibility hardly out of the picture at this point -- that's not admin material. 69.l25 (talk) 04:59, August 15, 2014 (UTC)
  2. Icon check I have decided to vote yes. I still have a few reservations, as I do not quite see you as a leader. But we do need admins, and you are certainly one of best options floating around. And if Fallout 4 is around the corner, then we will certainly need all of the help we can get. ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 21:18, August 17, 2014 (UTC)
  3. Icon check I was admittedly a bit on the fence about this, but two things mainly swayed my vote. For one, I looked a bit at some of your TP communication in the last few months and I found (a bit surprisingly) that your demeanour was actually very composed, helpful, and courteous. Your bluntness, which some others have mentioned, is not uncommon or even undesirable for an admin (as we have had many rather candid admins in the past). With these enhanced communication skills along with a recent surge in editing activity, compounded with your years of experience as a moderator, I feel like a yes vote is more appropriate. Also, I found your response to Leon's comment on this very forum to be succinct, polite, and very reasonable. This confirmed the thought that you are indeed ready for admin. Not sure of how much value my opinion is to you at this point (seeing as you will get the rights almost certainly), but here it is. --Skire (talk) 20:32, August 17, 2014 (UTC)

Comments

Being your second request, shouldn't the forum be renamed to reflect that? --Skire (talk) 00:53, August 15, 2014 (UTC)

I do not believe there is any rule stating such. I always assumed that was just so you'd have a different forum but with the same naming convention. JASPER//"Do you like hurting other people?"UserRichard 00:54, August 15, 2014 (UTC)
You're right -- there isn't. It's just something that people do for the sake of transparency, which I believe is very important for any position here... I don't any reason not to. --Skire (talk) 00:59, August 15, 2014 (UTC)
Transparency is important, but I did outright state that I ran before and even linked the forum. JASPER//"Do you like hurting other people?"UserRichard 01:01, August 15, 2014 (UTC)
Which is why it shouldn't make a big difference. Ultimately up to you of course! =) --Skire (talk) 01:02, August 15, 2014 (UTC)
I have moved the forum since, as you say, there is no reason not to. JASPER//"Do you like hurting other people?"UserRichard 01:13, August 15, 2014 (UTC)

Not even 8 months ago, I would have voted no without hesitation. But you have been improving a lot this year with your interactions, and it is hard to outright ignore your many contributions. For me, however, the problem is whether or not you offer anything unique to this wiki. While your edits are good, they are not exceptional, and many of your accomplishments, while commendable, are not enough to separate you from numerous other editors.

I do not say any of that to dismiss what you have done, nor to diminish how much you have done to improve this wiki. I appreciate everything you have done, and you do an amazing job as a Moderator. But at the same time, I personally do not see you as a leader. I have not really seen any unique accomplishments from you, nor have I seen much public experience from you in helping to diffuse situations or go out of your way to help users become accustomed to our wiki and community.

I am not voting yet, as I would love for the chance to hear more from you as the forum continues on. Good luck with the request! I will do my best to have a proper vote up before this ends. ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 00:55, August 15, 2014 (UTC)

Quickly, most of the other users may think I am going to vote "No". To be honest, my vote is still in determination. However, Jasper, you can change that quickly. If you could speak with me in chat here soon (or whenever we meet). Nothing hostile or serious, just two men chatting and figuring out a bit more about one another. Right now my stance is 65-70% "Yes" and 30% "No". Before I vote I would like to be in the 85-90% "Yes" area. This is just so I know I am ready to vote. And as Leon said above, good luck my friend. RangerSequoia "Some say this user used to be a Moderator..." Wiki 05:58, August 15, 2014 (UTC)

Would you be against being moved to the inactive list if your editing goes back to blog comments & forums and you aren't consistent with using admin tools? In other words, at what point would you consider yourself an inactive admin? 69.l25 (talk) 22:46, August 17, 2014 (UTC)

The inactivity rule has been scraped, thus I would be against anyone being moved to the inactive list. As I have stated, the view that you work under, that admins are for editing, is not one I share so I'm afraid I have to disagree with your premise that if I only edit blogs, comments and forums that I am an "inactive admin". Now, if in theory we did still have the inactivity rule (and thus people could be claimed to be inactive admins) then the distinction of when I would become an inactive admin is already defined, but it would not be while I am still using this wiki to any capacity.
The way one would measure an admin's activity would not be though the number of edits they make, but if they turn up for duty, as an admin's job is not to edit, it is to administrate. Admin tools do not aid in basic editing, they aid in banning users and deleting content (as well as some of the technical aspects of the wiki such as style and what features we have) so, if we were to test to see if an admin is using their admin tools that means we would need to introduce a ban quota, which I'm sure we all agree is an awful idea. JASPER//"Do you like hurting other people?"UserRichard 22:54, August 17, 2014 (UTC)
Okay, so without the inactive list, my question is this: At what point in activity would you give up your admin rights? At what point does your activity (i.e., your activity administrating) become too low to keep your rights? 69.l25 (talk) 23:02, August 17, 2014 (UTC)
Never. Because that is not a rule we use anymore. We do not strip people of their rights for not being here, that went away with the rest of the inactivity rules and I shouldn't be held to a different standard to everyone else. However, should an individual feel my (theoretical) inactivity is a problem then they are more than welcome to submit a motion of none confidence, or a reconfirmation request.JASPER//"Do you like hurting other people?"UserRichard 23:09, August 17, 2014 (UTC)
I'll do this a third time just for clarity: 1) What is "inactivity" to you? (Define it.) 2) If you reach inactivity, will you give up your rights voluntarily (without a reconfirmation)? 3) Is there a situation in which you'd give your rights up voluntarily? 69.l25 (talk) 23:19, August 17, 2014 (UTC)
1)Inactivity to me is a total lack of presence on the wiki (be it article, blog, forum or chat) for an extended period of time (possibly 6-9 months). 2) No. Chances are if I've become inactive I did not plan to be, thus I wouldn't be in a situation to turn in my rights. 3) Yes. If I feel that I no longer wish to be part of this wiki, or no longer will be able to be part of this wiki. JASPER//"Do you like hurting other people?"UserRichard 23:24, August 17, 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. Now here's what's holding me back from voting yes:

You said in your "Am I Needed?" section: "Recently a lot of admins have been coming dangerously close to inactivity." Yet, not a single admin even comes remotely close to inactivity as you've defined it (complete lack of presence... for an extended period of time [possibly 6-9 months]). It seems to me like you're just playing the inactive card here. Why exactly did you say that a lot of admins are close to being inactive?

The other thing that's holding me back is the fact that even if you have a complete lack of presence on this wiki for 6-9 months, you won't voluntarily give up your rights; we'd have to wait for a reconfirmation request to get rid of them or have you want to leave the wiki entirely. How is your attitude in any way going to help our inactivity issue? 69.l25 (talk) 23:33, August 17, 2014 (UTC)

When you asked what my definition of inactivity was I assumed you meant "a level of inactivity that would cool for rights removal" and not "inactive as a general lack of presence" as I meant it when I said many admins are becoming inactive. I said that because they're not here when needed, and that's what's important. I don't think any of our admins are in need of being recommed because of lack of activity, but there isn't always someone around when we need them.
As for the point of me not giving up my rights should I be inactive for that period I ask you this, why should I? No other admin is held to that standard. Ausir is still an admin and he is banned. And I ask you this: If I have been away for 6-9 months, but did not know I was going to be, I wouldn't have been able to turn in my rights, and since there is no rule that says my rights cannot be stripped in such an event me giving up my rights should that happen isn't possible.
Should I end up becoming what I have defined as inactive I shouldn't be expected to have my rights taken away automatically, and nor should anyone else. The fact I am not willing to be held to a standard nobody else is is preposterous. JASPER//"Do you like hurting other people?"UserRichard 23:47, August 17, 2014 (UTC)
No, I don't think you should have your rights automatically stripped if you reach inactivity; you should look of an opportunity to relinquish them yourself, or, otherwise, you'd likely be reconfirmed.
I'll end with one last question: if you have been completely inactive for 6-9 months -- no activity at all -- and then you came back, would you keep your rights, assuming you haven't been reconfirmed, or give them up? 69.l25 (talk) 00:03, August 18, 2014 (UTC)
It would be pretty unlikely I would give them up, unless when I came back I was not intending to stay. I do not expect anyone else to do the same and having inactive admins isn't going to hurt us any less than having less admins. JASPER//"Do you like hurting other people?"UserRichard 00:08, August 18, 2014 (UTC)
Well, thanks for taking the time to answer my questions and discuss this. Unfortunately, I absolutely disagree with you on most of what you've said about one voluntarily relinquishing their rights; I think you have a duty to do so when you go so long without using them -- that you have to be voted in again after 6-9 months, since you most easily could have changed during that time. But this isn't the place to go that far into that argument.
You really have improved with discussion & communication, though, so I'm willing to take a chance. I still think your increased mainspace editing was done to make this request look a bit more polished, but I admit that if you can keep it up, you could make a good admin. You said below that you're not stopping the new editing anytime soon, though, so I'll take your word and vote "yes." This could be a big mistake, but I'll go ahead and trust that you really will do everything in your power to maintain this level of activity. 69.l25 (talk) 00:35, August 18, 2014 (UTC)

Responses

A few people have raised issues/questions I have not responded to yet, which I feel I should, so I'll do them all here and now.

To GECK anon's neutral vote: You raise fair points and, although I think you are wrong about thinking I may not keep these edits up, I cannot blame you for thinking is, especially when I expressed similar thoughts on your application. I can only say that being an admin is about more than editing and I don't plan to stop editing any time soon. I'm sure we'd both like to see me prove you wrong :).

To Leon's comment: I, again, cannot argue with your base logic, but at this time there is very little that any one person can offer that nobody else can, short of coding (which, I'm afraid, I do not understand very well), however manpower is also important and I have, I believe, demonstrated a good number of skills, as well as knowledge, which will help the wiki. As for your comments about defusing situations that is, again, a fair point. However, I will say that the chance to do so does not come up very often (thankfully, as that would mean even more drama) and when it does it is best left to the current admins, as we all know a non special rights user trying to act as an admin will only make matters worse.
Whichever way you chose to vote, I thank you for your input and look forward to what you decide.

To Gunslinger's comment: Thank you for giving me the opportunity to sway your vote in my favor. I will happily discuss any concerns you have in chat when you are free. JASPER//"Do you like hurting other people?"UserRichard 04:18, August 17, 2014 (UTC)

I'm not going to disagree with the no votes but I am sorry you all feel that way. I will!, however, try to explain to Saint Pain that everytime he thinks I am assaulting him I am actually just trying to have a discussion and his inability to understand what people say, coupled with most people's inability to understand what he says makes him think I am attacking him. I don't expect him to change him vote, nor was this an attempt to do so, but instead just me trying to explain things to him.

I thank you all for voicing your concerns, especially to Leon for changing his vote to do so, as I cannot hope to get better if no one ever tells me I need to. I hope the idea of my getting these rights isn't too bad for you and I hope that, should I get them, I will be able to change your opinion of me. JASPER//"Do you like hurting other people?"UserRichard 03:26, August 21, 2014 (UTC)

Hope that is the way you see it - I felt dishonest with my original vote, and I know it will be better if you know how I truly feel over the request. The way everything is going, you will likely get the rights, and you can rest assured that I will not have a spasm about it. ;) I will have to trust that with the responsibility the position comes with, that you will be given the chance to properly grow into it with time. If you do get the rights, all I can really ask for is for you to treat the position with respect and integrity. ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 19:45, August 21, 2014 (UTC)

I apologise for the last-minute (literally) nature of my change, but I cannot in good conscience support this request. Ultimately, I've reflected and realised that despite all the good progress in the last few months there isn't enough for me to maintain a yes vote. I feel like a lot of the major editing work and character changes were concentrated in the few months leading up to this request and I would like to see a longer period of showing consistent leadership skills and high quality editing. The nature of the present is not a reason to forget about the past. I still have questions about activity consistency, but more importantly I recall the overwhelming condescension that came from you a few years back that led me to generally avoid chat. Now today I am certain that we maintain excellent relations between us but I am not thoroughly convinced that that particular bit of you has been erased for good. As you will most likely get the rights, I honestly look forward to being proven wrong. --Skire (talk) 00:10, August 22, 2014 (UTC)

Consider it a "No" from me too. I was changing my vote and writing a long explanation when my computer crashed, so I'll leave it at this: I tried to be okay with taking a chance, but I'm really not convinced that you're going to keep up the activity, which is important. We'll see what happens, though. I really hope you keep up the good job. 69.l25 (talk) 00:25, August 22, 2014 (UTC)

Result

We have a lot of yes votes, but some rather detailed no votes. I wanna see where KC and J stand. Agent c (talk) 14:11, August 22, 2014 (UTC)

We've noted the objections, but the sheer force of numbers carries the day. We hope to see you outside of chat and use these powers on the editing side of the wiki. Admin powers have been issued. 22:48, August 22, 2014 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+