Call of Duty Wiki:Requests for Adminship/Cpl.Bohater (3)

I, Cpl.Bohater nominate myself for position of admin. As new Black Ops 2 information is revealed, the wiki's readership will increase, increasing the need for another admin. I have over 6 months of experience with blog patrol tools, over one year with rollback and custodian, and 22 months as a regular user. I am also a recipient of the Anti-Vandalism award and the Notable Image Contribution medal. I have well over 6500 edits, which includes hundreds of redlink removals and hundreds of licensing corrections.

I will use the tools to help perform maintenance, such as deleting unused images and broken redirects, deleting flamebait and spam blog comments and pages and blocking vandals and trolls.

Links for reference:

Contributions

Editcount

Deletions

Thank you for your time, Pierogi^Talk 22:05, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

Support

Support — Can't see why not. Template:Sig/MLGisNot4Me 22:11, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

Support — You do have a lot of potential to be an Admin. You delete spam/troll comments, you warn trolls and people who don't license their images. and you contribute extremely well to the Wiki. Angel of Anarchy _(Jeremy14) · Talk!22:21, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

Support — Per MLG--Sgt. Sackboy17 23:59, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

Support — Pierogi has been a tremendous help on the Wiki always doing the kinds of tasks the other users would just not bother with. He has shown to me the dedication and motivation to keep the Wiki in the best shape that he can, when he can. I cant think of a reason why he should not be on the admin team as I think that he will only add to the team, not detract from it. And thanks COD4 for putting this RfA back in perspective and Sactage for the good point.File:20PX SIG.gif Talk 06:07, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

Support — Per Whiskey all the way http://i.imgur.com/3lHP1.png http://i.imgur.com/yOq1z.png http://i.imgur.com/DvSlh.png 13:12, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

Strong Support — Per Whiskey, he took the words right out of my mouth. Madness fan 34537 http://i.imgur.com/lL5xjBH.png 16:44, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

Support — Per Whiskey, Bohater's ethic has proven him to be a great potential addition to the ~~cleanup crew~~ Administrator Team Rose Pichu 21:11, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

Support — Pierogi has shown quite the amount of experience and potential while contributing to the Wiki. I believe he will do a job better than he is already doing if his nomination ends up successfully. DN thekos 21:19, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

Extremely Strong Support — You deserve the tools, I think you can do as a good sysop. You have over 10,000 Edits, is a dedicated user, not even a chat mod, a excellent Custodian, and has many other things that come to mind. In my opinion you should of been a bureaucrat by now :3. Also per Whiskey. --Bats a.k.a Rarity Filly 23:17, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

uhh.. he has 6000 something edits... http://i.imgur.com/vm7BQ.png 03:43, June 25, 2012 (UTC)

Support — Per Whiskey. Pierogi is a great asset to our community, and keeps the Wiki looking presentable. http://i.imgur.com/wM6YJ.pngAces! - Wordshttp://i.imgur.com/wM6YJ.png 23:24, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

Strong Support — Bohater is an extremely good user who is strongly dedicated to the wiki. Although I have not always thought he was extremely mature, he has certainly changed a lot, he is now an amazingly responsible and mature editor. Overall, yes. Sp3c^Schneller 01:42, June 25, 2012 (UTC)

Support — Grade-A admin candidate who has shown a huge amount of dedication to this wiki ever since he started. Pierogi will do a fantastic job and I have no worries about this. It's been a pleasure for Pierogi to be with us as an editor for as long as he has and I would love for him to be an admin. No matter what has ever happened previously between him and I. 01:47, June 25, 2012 (UTC)

Support — ^ http://i.imgur.com/vm7BQ.png 03:05, June 25, 2012 (UTC)

Support — I'd like to know why he wouldn't get admin rights when he's done so much good to the wiki. + Per WHISKEY and everyone else. CoDE-2K Go to my talk page!04:21, June 25, 2012 (UTC)

Neutral

Oppose

Oppose — I honestly can't see why you would need the tools, to be honest. I really only see you clearing redlinks, so if you could better explain why you need the tools, I could possibly support this Request for Adminship. DarkMetroid567^okay 22:13, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

"such as deleting unused images and broken redirects, deleting flamebait and spam blog comments and pages and blocking vandals and trolls" Also note that you can't see him do stuff he can't do. --MLGisNot4Me ^talk 22:18, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose — I don't feel the description fits what you can't do already. You already have Blog Patrol, and the other maintenance links are empty. All you seem to stand to gain is blocking rights. At this time I feel everything you claim you will do with the rights are already covered well enough.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

00:30, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

"deleting flamebait and spam blog comments and pages" With blog patrol you can only delete comments. Also, the way I see it, maintenance can never be fully covered. There will always be users that create maintenance work for others, so the maintenance lists will never be empty. Pierogi^Talk 00:36, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose — Don't see any immediate need for the tools; I haven't seen that much meaningful activity at this moment in time, most edits made at the moment are "clearing red links," which can easily be done by a bot. Smuff^{[citation provided]} 02:18, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

I had bot flags for most of yesterday and today, in which I managed to accumulate around 150 edits, so that is why you didn't see me much. And for how maintenance can be easily done with a bot, the same can be argued for CVN work. Pierogi^Talk 02:23, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

And as you can see, running such a bot requires a rather large team of people who are fluent in code and servers to do so, and the bot does not deal with blocks. A good 60% of your recent contributions have been botwork. Smuff^{[citation provided]} 02:36, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

Maintenance ≠ bot work. While there are bots that can do that, as you stated above, maintenance is still and important part of running the wiki whether by bot or by user. Pierogi^Talk 02:45, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

Either way, pages are no longer locked when archived. Had you made this RfA a few weeks prior before said forum was made and made the argument, "I can also use my tools to circumnavigate fully protected pages in the interest of maintenance," then fair enough. However, as anyone can now edit an archived page, I (and presumably Drk since he picked up on edit concentration also) see no need for sysop flags at this moment of time. Smuff^{[citation provided]} 02:50, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Just to point something out: just because something can be done by a bot does not mean it always should be done by one; in fact, I find that users who do tedious tasks which could instead be done by some automated process show a large amount of merit and dedication to the wiki, and are essential to keeping the wiki well-organised and running as it should. User:Sactage/s.js 03:48, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

Not Yet — While you seem like you would be a great admin, you don't need the powers. At the moment, all you would need is the bot flag, so you dont spam RC with your clearing redlinks, but you have everything you need. 02:31, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

"You don't need the powers" Can you please elaborate? Pierogi^Talk 02:33, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

I mean that as it stands, you can very easily contact an administrator via IRC or Chat. Mabye in a few months, but i can't honestly see the need for you to have admin tools atm.

04:16, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

Comments/Questions

Comment — I rarely see you actively contributing to the War Room. This is an important trait in an administrator. Joe Copp 22:45, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

I contribute as much as I can to the war room. Whenever I do not, it is most likely because I am staying neutral on the topic. Pierogi^Talk 22:49, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

A quick look at some of the current forums shows that the most you usually say is "I agree" or "Per X." When you look at some other administrators such as Azuris or KATANAGOD, they frequently put forth and/or argue their ideas with logical reasoning. If you don't do the same thing, there's no way for me to know if you possess such a skill. Joe Copp 22:59, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

I say "per x" so that I don't sound repetitive: there is no point in repeating what another user just said. Pierogi^Talk 23:03, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

While that is true, it doesn't harm to add a few points of your own to solidify the reasoning. Joe Copp 23:04, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

That is true, however the points I think of myself I often find while reading through the debates. Pierogi^Talk 23:07, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

Comment — My question is if Pierogi can afford the costs of being an admin? Isn't he too poor?--GodPray 02:51,6/24/2012

he cant afford anything noob. http://i.imgur.com/vm7BQ.png 03:29, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

Comment — Might I ask that no one argues that there are enough admins already? It is a very old fillibuster argument, and has no relevence to what the candidate can do as an admin. Thank you. Metl^Talk 02:58, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

I have a totally irrelevant question. Is this pre-emptive, or are you saying it because you think someone used it as a point (which isn't the case).-Diegox223 ^{Zed's dead, baby.}

03:06, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

Pre-emptive. I've gotten sick of it being used as reasoning on RfAs, because it is a point conpletely irrelevant to the candidate's capabilities as admin. Metl^Talk 03:34, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

Comment — I don't know why everyone is saying Pierogi doesn't need the tools because he "already has enough to suit him". He's still keeping the same tools if he is made admin, so what is that point trying to say? Would it not be useful to give Pierogi some more tools to work with? Remember we're supposed to be looking at the candidate and his ability to be an admin. If Pierogi can be a good admin, what is the issue with him already having whatever tools he does? 04:20, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

^ This. --MLGisNot4Me ^talk 13:07, June 24, 2012 (UTC)