Call of Duty Wiki:Requests for Adminship/DarkMetroid567

This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page, other than for maintenance.

Request for Adminship: DarkMetroid567 Submitted: June 29, 2012, by DarkMetroid567 Closed: July 13, 2012, by Crazy sam10 Result: Unsuccessful

DarkMetroid567^{Talk • Contribs • Edit count}

Hello, I'm DarkMetroid567 and I am making a request for sysop rights. Around this time of year, more news is released about the upcoming Call of Duty game, this year being Call of Duty: Black Ops II. With this new information, we get new users, and some more in November when Black Ops II is released globally. With these new users, more moderating is required in all parts of our Wiki, including IRC, Chat, forums, blogs, and mainspace articles.

Since I joined about a year ago, I have done my best to contribute to the Wiki. This brings me to my first reason: moderating the blog comments. Many of our anonymous users come for News Team blogs so they can receive news about the latest game in the Call of Duty series. As news for Black Ops II continues to come from various sources throughout the year, even more users will come as I stated previously. With sysop rights, I am able to delete comments and block users if they have violated any of our policies multiple times.

Currently, I have Custodian rights I was given from the Image Reform Project to rename images. Tools would come in handy to delete images so I can participate even more in the image project. Although I don't do much countervandalism due to other users covering it, I have done a fair amount of work on the mainspace. There has also been some times where an admin was needed so I could block vandalizing users, lock pages, and delete pages if needed.

I typically edit the Wiki during the day (anytime from 6 AM PST to 6 PM PST) and the beginning of the night (from about 8 PM PST to 3 AM PST). I have set to familiarize myself with the Wiki's policies and improve on mistakes admins have warned me about in the past. I'm on IRC and Chat nearly everyday, making it easier to contact me. With the tools, I would mainly do work in the Chats, blogs, and filespace. I also try to frequently voice my opinion in the War Room from time to time. I'll do my best to improve on any faults pointed out by the opposition. You can view my editcount and contributions at the top of the page. Thanks! DarkMetroid567^okay 04:31, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Support

Support — Once again, I'm not an editor but I still have seen the amazing work that DM has done on this wiki. He gets along with everyone and makes changes that are contributing and constructive. While we do have many admins already, there is no reason why we shouldn't add another, such as DM,(struck out by request) who by the way is absolutely hot.  S^WIFTTALON 05:10, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Support — DarkMetroid567 is a great editor, and he has experience in all categories. He should have admin rights. Metl^Talk 05:17, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Support — DM is a very good editor, and a great person. I see him all the time editing, and his edits are great, to say the least. He is active in the discussions, and is always a helping hand, as well as very friendly. I see no reason why I shouldn't support. Madnessfan34537 http://i.imgur.com/lL5xjBH.png 05:52, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Support — DarkMetroid is an excellent editor, with more than 5,000 edits. He is also very mature for his age, as well as being an active participant in the War Room. I really do think he should have administrative rights. Frohman Talk 11:54, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Support — My gosh, this editor is astonishing. By that I mean, he's 12, and he's very intelligent and smart with high-quality edits and behavior; which I really wouldn't expect from a 12-year old. I don't want to say he deserves sysop rights but he's very well-worthy of earning it. CoDE-2KGo to my talk page!13:03, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Can someone tell me if DM is really 12, or is it just a joke? --MLGisNot4Me ^talk 13:06, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Its just a fairly overused joke, I wouldn't mind it, if it didn't disrupt the RfA....Argorrath _{おしゃべり}13:08, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

In addition to my support reasoning, he's very mature and immaturity from him is very rare the way I see it. He's also very friendly, often being a helping hand for someone who needs help and being an excellent friend and very trustworthy. He's experienced in many, if not, all categories of tools; thus making him a good candidate for adminship. CoDE-2KGo to my talk page!13:14, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

I wasn't using "DM is 12" as a joke, I was using it to support my reasoning. For being 12, he's very intelligent and willing to edit stuff other typical 12-year olds are too lazy to do so. And yes, he is really 12, I guess. CoDE-2KGo to my talk page!13:14, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

I don't see how his age even matters in this case. So what if he is 12? All that matters is that he's a good editor. Lyra_(SPNKR)^{is the bo$$} 13:29, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Age should not be a deciding variable in an RfA, but for the record: I am 12. DarkMetroid567^okay 14:33, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Although that is all true; to me, an average 12-year old isn't like DM. An average 12-year old is pretty lazy, who wouldn't even accumalate 5,000 edits like DM has; and this is the way I used DM's age to back up my vote. For a 12-year old, he's done so much more than an average 12-year old could ever do. CoDE-2KGo to my talk page!21:01, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Again, I have serious doubts that age matters in the RfAs. If you're basing your support on his age, I'd have to say it's not a very good reason tbh. Say, an "average" user wouldn't do the things that DM does, but the age mention in there is a mention I find totally unnescesary.-Diegox223 ^{Zed's dead, baby.}21:46, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Per Diego, it seems that the main point of your support is that he is above average because of his age. Pierogi^Talk 14:23, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Support — In one year you made 5,000 edits? Damn I haven't even gotten past 300 yet and you might be the only mature 12 year old on the internet. Snipergod (talk) 21:05, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Firstly, edit count is an arbitrary number. Secondly, we shouldn't base his admin capabilities over his age. --MLGisNot4Me ^talk 21:11, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

I'm going to have to ask you to change your reasoning if you want your vote to count. We already said age is irrelevant. Redskin-26 21:15, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Neutral

Neutral — Subject to change: You have raised some decent points. I personally do like your current attitude and you are definitely a nice user. However, there have been some times where you have displayed questionable behavior in the chat and in other places.

Your point about blog comments doesn't make any sense because of the existence of Blog Patrol.

Essentially the only thing preventing me from supporting is a general lack of community involvement. It seems like you could be more active in more areas of the wiki such as AFD, the War Room, and the ID. I also think you're one of the more quiet users on the chat, but that doesn't hold much weight.

In all, I do think you are an aspiring candidate, but your reasoning isn't all that secure and your community skills, while they're there, need to be improved upon. Joe Copp 04:44, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

I admit I need to be more active in the AFD and the ID (I've tried to put more input lately), but I think I've done quite well in the War Room. As for the Blog Patrol point, requests are closed and they have been for a while. DarkMetroid567^okay 04:47, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Pending — I'll have think this one over. --MLGisNot4Me ^talk 11:43, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

y u put pending The Wikia Contributor ^{T | C | E | Q} 12:51, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Because I'm not yet sure whether to support or oppose? --MLGisNot4Me ^talk 13:03, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

I crossed out the vote per Forum:Removal of "Pending".

Crazy sam10 • Talk

07:09, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Didn't remember they were removed *pokerface* --MLGisNot4Me ^talk 09:49, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Neutral leaning towards Support — I haven't seen most of his edits, but he seems like he could use these tools wisely, and maturely. He could, however, improve on some very, very, minor flaws I am nacho (talk) 21:51, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

"He seems"- You can't really judge someone by what they seem to be. For example, you could think that a nice person seems like a bully. Pierogi^Talk 21:05, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Neutral — I'll stay completely neutral in this one. --MLGisNot4Me ^talk 20:15, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Neutral leaning towards Oppose — Since the only thing makes me unsure about him is his maturity, even he's a good editor. I'd better stay neutral in this RfA. 12:51, July 10, 2012 (UTC)

Neutral — While I trust, and have personally confided in DM on multiple issues, and have listened to and can respect his decisions on wiki, the Opposition brings up some negative points that I just can't ignore, unless I were to let my own bias get in the way. http://i.imgur.com/KUDLq.png 02:35, July 12, 2012 (UTC)

Neutral leaning towards Support — Per Damac. No doubt you have the potential to be a good admin, but the time just doesn't seem right to me. http://i.imgur.com/vm7BQ.png 11:20, July 12, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose

Oppose — I have not seen behaviour from DarkMetroid567 that is representative of his ability to be an administrator. He is friendly and helpful but I am not convinced he is in the correct mindset to be an administrator at this time. I feel that personal bias might affect what he does.      07:27, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Any logs or something to support such a claim? -- <choose><option>azuris_</option><option> Azuris^talk</option> 07:32, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Nope, sorry. I don't stalk DarkMetroid567 and log everything he says unfortunately. That doesn't affect my opinion on his behaviour though.      07:35, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Can you describe this behavior? I've tried to think of times I've been what's considered immature, but I usually try to stay calm and friendly. What's behavior that doesn't fit an admin? DarkMetroid567^okay 07:46, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

I'm going to be that guy and say that it's hard to explain. It just doesn't seem you're in the right mindset at the moment. I'll try to explain it better if I can. If I cannot explain to you sufficiently, I shall retract my vote.      11:06, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Wait, where could personal bias take effect on the wiki? DarkMetroid567^okay 16:28, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Chat bans/wiki bans/discussion moderations etc. etc. As I said, if my explanation is not sufficient I shall retract my vote.      05:33, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

My response to Pierogi below is the same as a response I would make for this statement Per my statement below. DarkMetroid567^okay 05:34, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Everywhere ranging from edit wars to blocks. Pierogi^Talk 00:39, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I see. While everyone has some bias, I try to stray away from it. I'd like the Wiki to be kept fair. DarkMetroid567^okay 00:44, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose — DM is undoubtedly a good contributor, but I don't really see why he requires the tools at this time. His behavior and maturity have also been a problem in the past. I also agree with CoD4, I don't really think DM is in the right "mindset" to be a efficient admin right now. I also have some serious worries about your contributions. The majority of them are blog comments and you are not very involved in the smaller projects across the wiki. I think you are perfectly fine with the tools you have now.Redskin-26 15:07, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

My 2,000 or so blog comments came from when I first started editing (and is one reason why I created my account), but I don't understand why that should cloud over my work in other sections. As I said to Joe Copp, I've recently tried to be more productive in areas like COD:AFD and COD:ID. DarkMetroid567^okay 15:15, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

I never said it clouded your other work. But a few people in the support section pointed out you have "over 5000 edits" when a majority of them are just blog comments. Redskin-26 15:18, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Am I the oen of the few people who really think "X" number of edits (in general) don't affect on how the admin's going to work?.-Diegox223 ^{Zed's dead, baby.}17:03, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Of course it doesn't. Joe Copp 17:07, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

My point was most of the supports are coming from "He makes good edits". A lot of people make good edits. Of course making good edits isn't a bad thing. But that alone and that you are a nice guy doesn't necessarily make you a great admin candidate. Redskin-26 19:13, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

But then again, what else is there? Contributions and personality are really the only major factors towards a good admin candidate in general. From what I've seen in successful RfAs, many candidates rely on those factors alone, but that doesn't necessarily they're the only things they should rely on. DarkMetroid567^okay 19:30, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

There's the knowledge of the wiki's policies and principles along with a sense of leadership. Joe Copp 19:34, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

That's a good point, although I don't truly agree with having a sense of leadership. After all, administrator rights are only really janitorial tools. DarkMetroid567^okay 19:36, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Also, about the tools. I stated I would mainly use the tools for chat and blog comment moderation, mainspace maintanence, and image deletion. The last two would be quite handy. I've put a good amount of time towards the image project and have encountered many images needed to be deleted. There's also been situations where I've needed an admin to delete a page or redirect, so tools would simplify the process. DarkMetroid567^okay 07:23, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Like I said, you are a nice guy, but you have had behavior problems in the past and I question your maturity still. I'm going back to my original points here, you aren't really involved in the smaller things across the wiki and you rarely put new ideas forward in the War Room. I don't see why you need the tools and I think you are find with what you have. Redskin-26 19:40, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Also, you say you need the tools to help chat, why!? Chat has enough help as it is and if you just need Chat Mod rights why don't you plead to a Administrator to why you need them. Redskin-26 19:41, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Eh, if I can obtain the tools I don't see why not. It's not really what I'm focusing on here. DarkMetroid567^okay 19:44, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

"Also, about the tools. I stated I would mainly use the tools for chat and blog comment moderation, mainspace maintanence, and image deletion." You already do Mainspace Maintenance, joining blog patrol would allow you to help moderate blog comments and like I said Chat Mod would allow you to help chat (Although it honestly really really doesn't need anymore help). I really like that you want to help more but I don't see the reasoning behind going after Admin tools at this point. Redskin-26 19:49, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Sadly, blog patrol requests are closed. Since it's a right that's received by becoming an admin, I feel it's still a good enough reason in my opinion. DarkMetroid567^okay 19:54, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Lots of us disagree. You can simply ask a bureaucrat to open the requests. Joe Copp 20:02, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Why should the ability of a normal user being able to get the right take that away from an RfA? Blog Patrol is a very powerful right in the first place. DarkMetroid567^okay 20:08, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Because you don't need Admin rights to continue to help the wiki the way you have. Redskin-26 20:55, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose — Per Red.(Update on stance as of 09:56, July 1, 2012 (UTC))Even though you yourself might be a good editor, it comes off to me as you are somewhat bias to the older users of this wiki while in the mist slightly ignoring and opposed to the newer users, a good editor, just more or less bias to the older cast.Argorrath _{おしゃべり}15:09, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

There's no reason to treat an older editor better than a new editor, although new users may need some help editing. The date on a userpage doesn't mean anything. Any good edit is a helpful edit, regardless of the editor. DarkMetroid567^okay 23:31, July 1, 2012 (UTC)

Weak Oppose — Per Red and CoD4. (Adding as of 15:09, June 30, 2012 (UTC)) I feel like you have your heart in the right place. However, I feel that your behaviour can sometimes come off as slitghtly disrespectful to new users. Pierogi^Talk 15:13, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! I guess I should be doing better work at assisting and encouraging the new users. DarkMetroid567^okay 20:22, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose — Per Redskin, he hasn't shown why he needs it. Phillycj 15:36, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose — Per Red and Cod4

Oppose — Per Redskin and COD4 Talk 16:29, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose — Per Redskin and CoD4. http://i.imgur.com/E2uiO5T.png Smilular^Talk http://i.imgur.com/KNXWYe1.png 17:24, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose — Per all. Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 21:39, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose — Per Cod4 and Red.I.W. F.T.W. _(talk)20:08, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose — Per all of the above. N7 TC 20:37, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose — Per all, he has no need for the tools. --Bats a.k.a Rarity Filly  20:58, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose — Per all. The Wikia Contributor ^{T | C | E | Q} 04:07, July 1, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose — I do not believe DM will be able to handle the administrative tools at this point in time. Per all. PotatOS^{Wanna Test?|My Own Test Chambers|Ohaithar}

Handle? Please explain, potato. DarkMetroid567^okay 04:55, July 1, 2012 (UTC)

Let's just say I do not fully trust you with them and I dont think you are ready to use the tools yet. I don't know how to further explain this. PotatOS^{Wanna Test?|My Own Test Chambers|Ohaithar}

Oppose — I'm going to have to agree with the opposition here. You're not the best behaved user on the site which is natural of a user for sure to misbehave, but the way CoD4 described your behavior makes me not trust you as much. You've got some experience yeah, and you know how the tools work but would you ever be able to cope under pressure is the question - I don't think so. Everything else I oppose to you by is mentioned by Redskin. tl;dr: per all. YELLOWLUCARIO ^TALK  19:25, July 3, 2012 (UTC)

So you're basing part of your oppose on something you haven't witnessed? Pierogi^Talk 20:14, July 3, 2012 (UTC)

Plus, he didn't really describe it :P Pierogi^Talk 01:33, July 9, 2012 (UTC)

Comments/Questions

Comment — He's too 12 PotatOS^{Wanna Test?|My Own Test Chambers|Ohaithar}

Nice try potater. DarkMetroid567^okay 06:06, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

forever 12.PotatOS^{Wanna Test?|My Own Test Chambers|Ohaithar} 190.218.45.29 06:11, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

This is the 3rd or 4th joke I've seen in the RfAs. Can we start to cut it out, it's getting rather stupid now.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

06:21, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Per Sam, it's rather pointless and irrelevant. Madnessfan34537 http://i.imgur.com/lL5xjBH.png 06:23, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Comment — May I ask opposing users with the "per" votes to provide better reasoning? I won't do much improvement when two opinions represent seven votes. DarkMetroid567^okay 17:20, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

TIL I can't agree with somebody. http://i.imgur.com/E2uiO5T.png Smilular^Talk http://i.imgur.com/KNXWYe1.png 17:26, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Just read the two opinions then. Pierogi^Talk 17:27, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Nowhere did I state that you can't agree with someone else. All I'm asking for is expanded reasoning, even if it means a sentence or two. A "per ____" just isn't helpful. DarkMetroid567^okay 03:59, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Asking for more detailed explanations is actually a good thing. It shows he wants to improve. Remember that COD:CON also dictates that the arguments are looked at, not just the numbers of votes.      05:32, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Comment — Keep age out of this please, it's not relevant.      14:28, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Comment — Well, you wanted reasoning, so I wrote some reasoning for you.

To put it simply: I don't really think now is a good time.

You're a great editor and all that, but I do remember some maturity/behavior "issues" with you in the past and I don't think it's a good idea to let someone with issues in the past be an admin of a wiki. As for specifics, I don’t really remember any specific things, but I do remember that they were there. Adminship, while it just gives janitorial tools, is more than just that. Admins are (supposed to be) the leaders and most respected of the wiki. Sure, you can do some beneficial things with the added tools, such as helping with the image project, blog patrolling (which either the BP guys are really quick or I didn’t see a problem in blogs for a LONG time), and stuff like that, but I don’t think you have the “whole package” with the maturity yet that being a leader of a website needs to have.

If you ask me, I’d say to just work with what you have now, give the impression to newbies as a mature editor and to the oldies as a greatly improved editor, and give everyone the opportunity to forget any issues in the past. If you really feel like you need/want adminship when the time comes around, I’d say try again in mid fall/early winter. But not now. Not with the issues in the not-so-distant past. I.W. F.T.W. _(talk) 21:14, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

"Admins are (supposed to be) the leaders and most respected of the wiki." No they aren't. Being an administrator isn't some high up position in society, they are tools and nothing more. DarkMetroid567^okay 21:30, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

True, but new users turn to Administrators for guidance, help and to answer questions. Redskin-26 21:33, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

DM, what you said is not true. We want admins who are well respected so we can trust them. And IW, people can change, so their past doesn't really matter unless it was recent. Pierogi^Talk 21:37, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Per Pyro. --MLGisNot4Me ^talk 21:42, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

"not-so-distant past" *cough* Y u no read carefully Bohater *cough* Redskin-26 21:44, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

(Reset indent) "but I do remember some maturity/behavior "issues" with you in the past and I don't think it's a good idea to let someone with issues in the past be an admin of a wiki." Pierogi^Talk 21:48, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I know people can change, it's just that DM should show that he did for longer before he is given adminship.I.W. F.T.W. _(talk)21:52, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

What will be the difference between now and later? DarkMetroid567^okay 23:00, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Let me put it this way: who would you rather trust, someone who has recently started becoming more mature or someone who has shown mature behavior for months on end?I.W. F.T.W. _(talk) 23:29, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Any proof of this recent behavior? Pierogi^Talk 23:33, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

If mature, why not? Both have the same risk of becoming more immature. DarkMetroid567^okay 23:36, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

(Reset indent) @Pierogi: "As for specifics, I don’t really remember any specific things, but I do remember that they were there." I kinda mirror Cod4's oppose vote.

@DM: True, but the latter has more of a longstanding reputation of being mature. I'd much rather have an admin with a reputation of being mature than an admin who just recently started becoming more mature. I.W. F.T.W. _(talk)23:44, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Wait, so you're basically basing that reasoning on something that could totally be wrong, and thus the reasoning behinds it and one of the points itself dies? If you can't gather proof, just what may have or may have not happened, then I'd recommend to, you know, get some links or people who have seen this immature behaviour (more than 2) to actually base your point into something. Just my 2 cents.-Diegox223 ^{Zed's dead, baby.}01:51, July 1, 2012 (UTC)

Closed --

Crazy sam10 • Talk

13:45, July 13, 2012 (UTC)