Forum:CAWiki:Requests for Adminship/TopsyKretts3/Voting Archive

Not yet.WingZeroKai 01:52, September 7, 2011 (UTC)

Although the candidate has demonstrated a splendid performance of good deeds, the atrocious ones are also numerous in turn. Several major to not-as-significant events were caused by Topsy after all. Events such as the "Mass Category Spam Incident", or even the "Clan Page Removal Incident" were all part of his deeds. On top of that, his occasional long to short term disappearances from the wiki is also plentiful. To conclude, Topsy's good deeds are heavily outweighed by the horrid and therefore should not be allowed to receive the rank of administrator. He may have what it takes to be an administrator in the future, if he is able to correct his mistakes and reform his attitude. Sorry Topsy, no hard feelings? Also, What gives? We already have 5 administrators... why do we need another one? Plus, you should be satisfied with your rank as a moderator. An administrator has the same powers as a rollback. -Mclinsky 02:08, September 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * Uh... nope. Synop users can delete/protect/edit MediaWiki pages, and a bunch of other stuff. Rollbacks can only rollback edits and block users. 02:59, September 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * I had Wikia set it up so that admins are like rollbacks in everway except that they can edit the MW: pages, delete, and protect. Rollbacks can block, edit admin protected pages, and most other things needed. There is not much difference. See Special:ListGroupRights. -- 04:22, September 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * To add on even further, i have heard of his status within the Nexon Forums... if his behavior on the Nexon Forums is as terrible, then why should we allow him to trample the community of the Wiki? (restored)

Neutral — This candidate has made good and bad edits. The plus side is we have more admins, meaning more protection and more information, since he usually makes good edits. The minus side is that he has the potential to cause threats. I just dunno.  Negabandit 86  03:46, September 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * Not exactly... Even if he is made an administrator, it doesn't mean that the flow of information is going to increase. It's just a title, he'll still be the same as any contributor.Mclinsky 02:14, September 8, 2011 (UTC)

I just feel he lacks the maturity. I personally think that at this time I would not like him representing the CAW in any way. The way I see him act on the nexon forums is in a troll-like manner. imo atm he doesnt understand how big of an audience we serve. Take his personal polls he puts on our homepage (here). Why is that even allowed? I've taken those down multiple times only to find them back up. Aren't things like that supposed to be on userpages, and not for everyone to see? Not everyone cares about Kretts' personal things, and for those that do it should be on your userpage. We're also not supposed to attribute to ourselves on articles (Like, idk. the main page), but for some reason his name always ends up appearing there. For the above reasons I;'d have to say oppose until further notice. Point 1. -- 04:18, September 7, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - Z e r o E x a l t e d ( T a l k ) &bull;  C o n t r i b s. 00:26, September 9, 2011 (UTC)User:ZeroExalted - I don't think it's prudent to "modify" your opinion once you've cast it. And I thought we were against "broken link"-colored usernames?
 * Modify? What are you talking about? Colored names are purty, you jelly :D
 * Several people who've "voted" have edited their reason at least once.
 * I don't see that as a problem... it's fine aslong as they don't completely alter their perspective. I added onto my original reasoning too, just providing a wider view of the situation to whoever reads it.Mclinsky 00:28, September 9, 2011 (UTC)