Hey fellow nukapedians, fallout fans. I hereby run for an adminship on nukapedia wiki --Cassie ~可愛いの猫 05:52, June 3, 2016 (UTC)
Why should I become an admin?
I wouldn't really wanted to become one for a reason, but sometimes an extra hand might be needed since I cover the right timezone. Been editing in the wiki for awhile now, got the patroller and chatmod rights for helping out both in the main space and chat. Sir Chad (Agent C), has been occupied everyday cannot keep an eye out encouraged me to get the diploma. That's why I was told to run officially fair and square.
Availability
Monday - Sunday: 3:00PM through 4:30AM PST (11:00PM - 12:30PM UST)
Editcounts
| There should have been a list of this user's edit counts here, but the edit counts feature is no longer available. |
Am I really needed
When an admin is needed around the timezone I'm living in, they tend to be offline around the timezone I cover. This wiki, along with the discussions has been crawling with vandalism/spam were it can't be dealt with in an immediate matter without asking for VSTF's help. I would be glad if I could give a hand to the community were it's possible.
Poll
| ||||
Yes
I support-Bblob30 (talk) 06:08, June 3, 2016 (UTC)Bblob30- I support this as Cassie is the friendliest staff member I met here. What is the Music of Life? talk 05:55, June 3, 2016 (UTC)
I support as well. This user has really fostered a sense of comfort in discussion in the chat, promoting discussion and debate, so long as it's productive and doesn't devolve. Many chats don't allow disagreements to take place, especially of a regular user against mods. A chat where people are allowed to disagree is a good thing.-D3v14nt13 (talk) 06:08, June 3, 2016 (UTC)- I support.XXProValencia, Sole Proprietor 09:23, June 3, 2016 (UTC)
- I support you, great person to talk with and handles chat well Dweller111 (talk) 09:40, June 3, 2016 (UTC)
- I am voting no because she should have done this ages ago. I err mean yes. Agent c (talk) 13:43, June 3, 2016 (UTC)
- I support this as Cassie was one of the first people to speak to me when I signed up; she made me feel like a part of the community and that's the type of person we need running the place --PengYen (talk) 13:59, June 3, 2016 (UTC)
- I support Cassie becoming an admin. Great Mara (talk) 14:54, June 3, 2016 (UTC)
- I support too Morrigan101 17:18, June 3, 2016 (UTC)
- I think cassie has proved she is a responsible mod from the time ive been on here and believe she can be trusted as an admin Camalex97 (talk) 17:28, June 3, 2016 (UTC)
- Although I'm new I know numbers don't lie! As a computer geek of many years the most important thing I've learned is the most diligent data base maintenance is done by people who have the most time in it!, And loving it is important! Also one thing I do know having worked in management, sometimes a temper means passion, just reign it in and you have dedication! Got my support --Coloradofree (talk) 20:41, June 3, 2016 (UTC)
- Paladin117>>iff bored; 21:14, June 3, 2016 (UTC)
No
- motivation below - Greets Peace'n Hugs (talk) (blog)
- She's a cool user, but it seems her temper can get the best of her at times. Per Peace'n Hugs. Sigmund Fraud Talk Contributions 17:08, June 3, 2016 (UTC)
- I don't really see the need to elect Cassie as an administrator, mostly because she has a temper which can get the best of her, and has a neglect to do a job on chat sometimes as opposed to the other chat moderators and administrators, let alone Discussions and its moderators. I don't have any personal dislike for Cassie, and she is a decent conversationalist/user. However, most of the other administrators/chat mods can do their job and they do a damn good one. A couple of the administrators and moderators will take the time to patrol around on a routine, and some do it sporadically, but I feel as though an administrator should patrol the pages as a routine. If Cassie was able to do that if elected, then I'd be proven wrong, but currently, Cassie doesn't get my vote because there's no way I can be convinced that she's fit for the job. --TheRoyalNate (talk) 17:33, June 3, 2016 (UTC)
- Motivation below. 寧靜 23:49, June 3, 2016 (UTC)
Neutral
- I Shall abstain for the reason below. --MjaxMajoran
Excluded votes
per haste/temper and it doesn't take adminship to clean up vandalism. motivation is poor, as well 76.115.141.109 17:10, June 3, 2016 (UTC)
Comments
There are a few reasons for my no vote. I am concerned that you may ban too lightly in my opinion. I have seen you ban people from chat of which I thought that I wouldn't think twice to reverse them if they appealed those bans with me. Another main point of concern to me is how people are handled sometimes. And by that, I mostly refer to sometimes snaggy comments or placing those copy/paste boxes on people their talk pages rather than taking the time to explain something and really help them. As an admin, you represent the community and you have to make sure to make a good impression at any time. - Greets Peace'n Hugs (talk) (blog) 10:08, June 3, 2016 (UTC)
After Reading what has been said by Peace n Hugs, And due to my relatively new position on this wiki, I will retain a neutral vote, a tie breaker if needed. As I can see she has done much good on the wiki and even could do more, which I respect, however due to my limited knowledge and interaction with her... It wouldn't make sense. My vote is Yes if a Tie break is needed. Heyo! User_talk:MjaxMajoran (talk) 17:07, June 3, 2016 (UTC)
Nate. We absolutely positively need someone with admin powers on Discussions in the US evening. The current regulars are not able to, or choosing not to, meet the current need. Agent c (talk) 18:24, June 3, 2016 (UTC)
My experiences with Cassie have been largely positive, and I think that she is good people. But when it comes to holding leadership roles, I do not believe that she should be given the administrative tools.
When Cassie first started becoming active again in... 2014? She waited until a month of activity had went by, and immediately started asking if she could throw up a tools request, even though the majority of her edits were to her profile, or to making friends with other users (such as by signing their friend lists, etc.). This is always a red flag, but not a serious one by itself.
But it did not stop at trying to get the tools as soon as possible. Since then, she had started up what was basically mini modding, even going so far as accusing a user of achievement boosting, even though that was not her place, with her responses to other users becoming robotic and impersonal, to the point where I even had a discussion with her once, explaining that empathy can go a long ways, instead of just throwing the book at users, and causing for them to leave the wiki out of frustration.
These are qualities that no administrator should have. Users should strive for the tools to better the wiki, and to help users. The positions should not be seen as political offices, which is the feeling that I get from Cassie, as to how she personally views the tools. I am not saying that as fact - that is just the impression that I get.
I think that Cassie has great potential. She is dedicated, generally a nice person from the times that I have spoken with her, and she must love this wiki to have stuck around this long. But she has picked up a lot of bad habits already, something that usually does not happen until after the tools have been acquired.
My main advice at this point, is to become more warm and empathetic towards our users. Stop sending robotic messages out, and actually sit down with users to try and understand them better. Stop reporting people/chat-banning people, for minor offenses. Something that I think a lot of people forget, is as to what it is like, being a new user on a wiki as large as Nukapedia, and trying to grasp at all of the rules and such. It is a frustrating process, and treating them like actual people can go a far ways. 寧靜 
23:49, June 3, 2016 (UTC)