Wookieepedia:Requests for user rights/RFA archive/Immi Thrax

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that was successful. Please do not modify it.

Immi Thrax (9 admins + 18 users/1 admin + 8 users)

Two-week deadline from the first request. Voting ends October 17, 2022.

Support

1. Immi Thrax. When I say that name, there's a good chance everyone here knows who I'm talking about, and the many ways she has helped transform Wookieepedia into a more welcoming and supportive environment. From completely rewriting historically problematic articles such as breast and the Slave Leia outfit, to taking newcomers under her wing to mentor and encourage them, Immi has done it all. Last year Immi stepped up to help guide the site to where it is today, and not only pushed us to be better, she showed us how to do better. The most important quality Immi has though, is that she cares. Time and time again I've seen her put everything aside to help a user who was struggling and needed someone to talk to. Over on the LGBTQIA wiki, where myself and Immi are both admins, we've granted her the title of mom friend, because of how she goes out of her way to make sure everyone is safe, happy and healthy, something I see her doing here on a regular basis as well. I could go on all day about the great things Immi has done, and why she will be good for the community, but that would result in several more paragraphs saying things you already know. Immi is a leader here already in so many ways, so let's give her the formal title. Immi Thrax for Administrator! Supreme Emperor ^Holocomm 20:43, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
2. The sentiment above is shared by all. Leadership like hers is lightning in a bottle. Jedi Sarith LeKit (talk) 20:51, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
3. Immi has become a wonderful and vital part of our community and already embodies many of the best features we can hope for in an admin. Her mentoring and support of other users has been inspirational to see, and she's brought an important new perspective on many old and outdated policies and traditions that many of us had never thought to question or reconsider. I look forward to working with her on the admin team and congratulate her on a nomination well deserved! Ayrehead02 (talk) 20:54, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
4. I feel like I've seen the leadership qualities in Immi's work so far that make her excellent administrator material. Personally, productivity in terms of pure edit count seems to me like just one side of the coin of what makes one a good administrator. Imperators II^(Talk) 21:18, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
5. An editor is more than their edit count. Context also factors in–Immi spent the last year getting an entire wiki built from the ground up. I also think Immi is a semi-needed voice among admins and will bring a different perspective to the group. NBDani ^{Yeager's Repairs} 21:26, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
6. Edit count is not everything, and in my opinion Immi has more than established why this is something she has earned. Rsand 30 (talk) 21:38, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
7. I would normally share the concerns of activity levels expressed below, but I like to see the time away building the LGBTQIA+ Wiki, which I have actually used as a resource several times now, from the ground up as a sort of résumé-building absence. Immi's activity before the departure and upon her return have proven she has the dedication to this wiki and its community to truly lead it in a better direction, and her fantastic work on the LGBTQIA+ Wiki shows she has the skills it takes to handle the difficult aspects of the admin role. It's definitely time for some different perspectives on the admin team, and Immi has proven that she's able to look at policy and tradition with both reverence and criticism, a balance that is not easy to master. And I know I beat this drum a lot, but we need more editors, and Immi has been instrumental in our efforts to attract more long-term editors through her welcoming and encouraging attitude. I totally understand the hesitations due to activity, but I often have to work in the gray in my line of business, and here I feel like the circumstances call for a degree of nuance. Whichever way this vote goes, I'm confident Immi will be joining the admin team at some point in the relatively near future. MasterFred(talk) (he/him) 21:47, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
8. Immi is one of our friendliest and most dedicated editors. In spite of all the drama surrounding the deadnaming saga last year, she has been a driving, positive force of our community. She's a great status article reviewer and writer, and she's proven herself to be an effective leader as the founder of the Pride WookieeProject and an admin of the LGBTQIA+ Wiki. While this may be a tad premature as a what seems to be an out-of-the-blue RFU with frankly inadequate input from other Wookieepedians before being put to a formal vote (it's good to clear or guage any potential opposition before starting a formal vote since it's unfortunate that we've got to be divided right off the bat on an RFU for such a good person as Immi), I'm not concerned about activity levels, given that she spent a bulk of her time setting up the LGBTQIA+ Wiki with Fandom. Sure, admins' edit count requirements is a set-in-policy condition for being an admin here, but Immi remains actively engaged with our community; this, coupled with her reason for absence being to put her skills into action setting up the LGBTQIA+ Wiki and undoubtedly gaining a great deal of experience that would come into handy as part of the admin team here, sufficiently covers this particular criterion for me. I was hesitant while deciding whether to support this nom or not this time, because going by the admin activity requirements Immi's admin rights would have been removed had she been admin during her absence, but ultimately it checks out for me. I agree with ecks that this isn't the right time for Immi's RFA, but I'm confident that she'll take up the responsibilities of a Wookieepedia administrator well, so if we're going to make Immi admin, I just think we may as well do it now. OOM 224 21:52, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

   Third and final wall of text from me: I'm happy with Immi's responses below, especially after speaking with her via DMs. I wouldn't know what I'd do if I was in her position, and she's handled this really well despite being embroiled in such exasperating circumstances. I'd never have expected such a draining debate here, and frankly I'm disappointed by some of the misinterpretations as well as passive-aggressiveness expressed by either side. Frustrations are understandable, but don't be so quick to judge other individuals. No one should be expected to be dealing with what Immi's dealing with here, but the very fact that she's adapting to the situation with such level-headedness and is telling of her leadership capabilities within this specific Wookieepedia community. We need all the help we can get on the admin team, and someone with her resilience and good-will… not only is Immi deserving of adminship, but I think the administration, indeed, Wookieepedia as a whole, would be acting in our best interests to seek Immi as an admin. I believe adminship would benefit Immi and us not only as a form of recognition of her role here, but as a very practical position of leadership to be bestowed upon an effective editor; wider access to sysop tools and a political basis in order to better actively maintain, manage, and improve this wiki and community. The overreactions here—again on either side—have shown that the Wook is currently at a tense and divisive point; a critical juncture. And still, Immi is trying her best to remain fair and considerate. Everyone is free to openly express their concerns, so oppose and discuss further as you will; this is not to insinuate that the choice is wrong or holding progress back, only that I believe supporting Immi on this nom, now that it's started, would just be a great thing. Going by the current ratio of user votes, the nomination is on the verge of failing, which would be sad; all this fighting for a functionally net change of zero—adminship is just the same editor with an official position, extra buttons, and bragging rights. If anyone has any lingering doubts, take the words for what they are: I sincerely recommend them to support this nomination at this moment. At the very least, is an oppose vote really necessary? Not because it's the "right" thing to do or because who's voted what or said what—I loathe to keep track—but because it's a preferable outcome that would benefit the administration, Wookieepedia, and every one of us. OOM 224 21:57, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

9. We don't necessarily need a new admin, but that shouldn't prevent us from electing someone who deserves adminship, and Immi certainly does. In my opinion, edit count is one of the less significant criteria of what makes a good admin. 01miki10 ^{Open comlink} 22:00, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
10. I really don't know what else I could say that hasn't been said already. Fred summed up very well why I think this is a good idea even though there was a recent hiatus. Immi, you're a bright light in this community. You've made the experience on this site better for all of us. I think you'd do terrifically well as an admin. Dentface (talk) 22:02, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
11. Immin is a perfect fit for the leadership position. I feel that using someone's activity is a cop-out given the activity (or lack thereof) of some of the current admin team. And we all know that the number of edits can be misleading if those edits are good, quality edits, especially for a role that needs community development and moderation skills, which Immi has in abundance. Manoof (he/him/his) (talk) 22:29, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
12. Per all the above really, I'd say it's quality over quantity in this case. To put in some personal comments, Immi has been a very positive force for the Wook community and I've been able to learn some things from her myself while engaging with WP:PRIDE. Kudos. Braha'tok enthusiast ^{Hello there} 23:13, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
13. This was a tough decision due to eck's understandable comments, but I do not think Immi's recent period of inactivity should be a barrier here simply because I have no doubt she will be back to her upstanding and positive influence. I also had some hesitancy due to the out-of-the-blue nature of this (per OOM), but reflecting on that, it is a fairly trivial concern. As an admin, Immi can more officially represent some of the great things that she has contributed for the site itself and more importantly, for the community. Wok142 (talk) 01:31, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
14. Actions and spirit speak more that whatever the numbers may say. In my eyes, Immi has proven that she is nothing but dedicated to this wiki and its continued excellence. In her time here she has helped usher in important and necessary changes to this site at all levels, displaying leadership skills and community awareness that I can't help but admire. And on top of everything, she's a wonderfully friendly editor who always acts as a bright ambassador for this site, a trait I really value in an admin. I'm more than happy to cast my vote for her here. My only regret is that Azmorigan's wife couldn't be here with us today to celebrate. RattsT (talk) 06:13, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
15. I wholefully agree with my co-supporters (and Immi's comments bellow), but I'll resume with my own words: Immi ethos, extra-personal skills, and overall personality demonstrated very early on that she's made of leadership stuff, and would be a perfect fit for the administration team, especially because of her distinct style. It has been a sincere pleasure to work with her those recent years, and I am looking forward to have such a positive force reinforcing our already solid team of admins. NanoLuuke^{Cloning Facility} 12:23, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
16. Coming in from my limited hiatus to support this nomination fully. I don't think there's been a Wookieepedia community member who has been so influential in the direction this community has taken. Reading everyone else's messages, it's clear that everyone feels the same. Immi has always been a force for change, and I am confident in her ability to lead and continue to be a positive influence in this community. Immi has my full support. --Vitus Infinitus^Talk 15:48, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
17. While I can understand the idea of avoiding granting adminship to someone with a long period of absence and/or inactivity, I don't feel as though this invalidates the push for adminship of this specific user. Immi has set herself apart far more than basically anyone else that's active on the wiki, and though she hasn't been an admin yet, I've seen many users from both this wiki and others approach her with the same respect any admin may receive, and sometimes even as a user with some authority. Obviously respect isn't everything, but it's definitely very telling to me when someone is so influential that they command the respect of others without even holding a position of power. DFaceG (talk) 22:49, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
18. Sir Cavalier of One^{(Squadron channel)} 18:28, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
19. Green Tentacle ^(Talk) 20:24, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
20. Rakhsh (talk) 23:50, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

    After reconsidering my vote, I'm actually going to support her nomination. Immi has definitely earned this after all the work she has done. Erebus Chronus ^(Talk) 23:06, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

21. If Immi is elected, she'll be the first female admin in seven years. You can count the number of active female editors of wook on your fingers with a few to spare, as far as I'm aware, and that's not a random coincidence! Wook has in the past been a hostile space towards women, and though that has absolutely improved, there's still more work to be done. I've certainly still witnessed misogyny on wook in the past year that I've been an editor, and the recency of the deadnaming situation has really not helped with wook's reputation. While wook isn't responsible for the general reputation of the wider Star Wars fandom, it absolutely also contributes to the lack of female editors on here. Making wook a welcoming space for women is always going to be an uphill battle, and it's going to be a battle that's never over. It's going to express itself in insidious ways that might not be obvious to male editors. I'm not accusing anyone of being deliberately sexist (though we also have to recognise that there are going to be wook editors who are). I am saying that it's possible to be unintentionally sexist, and that intention doesn't always erase the sexism itself. Things still need improvement, and it's a mammoth task that Immi can't accomplish by herself, but having Immi in a position of authority, one that's elected by the community, is going to help women see that wook is now working towards being a place for them, too.
    I can't express how much it means to have a female editor who is so visible and loud and willing to push for change -- it makes me feel like I can make a difference here too. Immi has made huge strides towards making Wook a friendlier place towards women and queer people, and that's the kind of contribution that isn't necessarily reflected in edit counts. Sometimes she's been the only active female editor for months at a time, and the amount of strength it takes to be constantly pushing to make wook a better place is enormous. Immi being a woman isn't the only reason I'm voting in favour -- as others have said, she's friendly, always willing to help, and she works hard to improve a community she loves and believes can be better. Some might not be aware of how much it matters to me, and likely at least some other female editors, to have someone who understands and can call out shit when it happens. I haven't even known Immi that long personally (although I saw her around and was very 'wow, wish I could be friends with Immi, what an inspiration' but too shy to do anything about it), but her wonderful reputation preceded her, and I think she absolutely deserves this. Dropbearemma ^(she/her) 03:56, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
22. Plume Tray (talk) 05:36, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
23. Per everyone else. Immi is a great user and an amazing person, and I trust she will make a fine addition to our administrative team. LucaRoR ^(Talk) 12:38, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
24. grunny@wookieepedia:~$ 13:49, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
25. DarthRuiz30 (talk) 21:12, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
26. Been working with Immi for over a year now over on the LGBTQIA+ wiki, and to say she deserves this would be an understatement. She is a phenomenal contributor and person, and I think having her on the administration team would be beneficial. It would be so great to those females on the wiki (or considering editing the wiki) to have someone like Immi to represent them. She's an amazing user who wants nothing but the best for Wookieepedia. After everything she's done for this place, giving her access to the tools to further improve the wiki is something this place needs. User:SnowedLightning/Sig2
27. Gone back and forth on this over the past few days, I can see both perspectives and I do think the nomination is a tad early, but I doubt the supporting voters will be proven wrong. Two points of consideration have put me over the line: Diversity and taking a stand. Dropbearemma's covered a lot about the importance of having an active female editor. As a male, I don't think I can totally understand the alienation that might prevent other women from feeling that they'd be welcome in this community. I believe that voting Immi in would be a great step in broaching this divide, allowing her to be a more effective representative of the Wook in online and offline spaces. And I'm comfortable in the knowledge that this won't feel like a tokenistic inclusion. Immi's qualities as an editor and active participant in the community are readily apparent to everyone. The other selling point for me concerns Immi's attitude in divisive matters. She was determined to stand up for her beliefs against the opposition of others during the chaos last year, in defiance of the shitstorm it caused. She is often willing to justify her positions in a calm, steady manner on Discord. We as a community are better off for that. It's a quality I wish I had more of in my own life and I think it'll be essential for a new admin. So I think Immi will do an excellent job and knock my smaller doubts aside if voted in to adminship. Commander Code-8 ^{Hello There!} 01:35, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Immi's personal qualities aside (SE has said everything that needs to be said in that regard), I simply cannot support an admin candidate whose last 1,000 edits go back a year. This might be a bit hypocritical coming from me (who is officially on vacation right now) but it's not my RFA. I would be more than happy to support Immi's nomination in the future if she maintains her current activity level and community engagement, though. 1358 ^(Talk) 20:56, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
   • I initially tried to avoid this, but given several users' more-or-less subtle digs at my reasoning, I feel like I have to clarify my position. Naturally, raw edit count only tells part of the story, but I think it's a good surrogate marker for activity levels nonetheless, given appropriate context. WP:A establishes that administrators must make at least 250 mainspace edits in six months—this is a minimum and I'm pretty sure most if not all RFA candidates in the past 15 years have had 250 mainspace edits in the past month, let alone past six months. In August, less than two months ago, Immi—had she been an admin at that time—would not have met this minimum activity requirement. However, like I said, raw numbers do not tell the entire story. What stands out to me the most is the absence earlier this year. Everyone is entitled to time off from the Wook, whether that be for vacation, editing other wikis, mental health, you name it. That includes Immi and everyone else on this site. And whereas her work on building the LGBTQIA+ wiki is admirable, we are looking for a new Wookieepedia administrator and that's why Wookieepedia activity is my absolute top criterion. It is true that some administrators—me included this past summer—are more absent than others, but I personally think that's all the more reason to elect someone who is guaranteed to stick around. Of course it's never possible to guarantee anything like that, but the second RfA requirement, six months of active contribution, attempts to accomplish that. While Immi's contributions total more than six months of active editing, I would personally like to see more than 2-3 months of sustained, continuous activity, before supporting this nomination. Immi's contributions to this wiki in all its aspects certainly speak for themselves which is why I would be more than happy to cast a support vote if she keeps up the good work. 1358 ^(Talk) 21:54, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
2. Per ecks - I'm happy to see that Immi is starting to become more active after what felt like a long break, but as of now I don't think the moment is right. JediMasterMacaroni^(Talk) 21:01, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
3. SE makes a pretty strong argument, and as someone who's been helped out personally by Immi in a couple instances I agree with it, but honestly idk if we really need another administrator at the moment. Unless there's something I am unaware of, the admin team is doing fine currently. Fan26 (Talk) 21:04, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
4. Echoing ecks's comment. I haven't interacted a lot with Immi, but from what I've seen and read, all of what SE is very true. Good work, but my support will arrive in the future. Samonic ^(Talk) 21:06, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
5. I'm a torn. Immi is one of our best editors. The work she has done is amazing, and she is a fabulous person. We also are a bit short on admins. However, ultimately I must agree with ecks that right now is not the best time. VergenceScatter (talk) 21:06, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
6. Immi's work on this wiki has been nothing short of fantastic, but I feel she is not yet ready for a position of leadership. In my opinion, an administrator needs to have consistent long-term activity and a good awareness of the site's policies and standards. I also feel we do not really have an "admin shortage" at the moment. I'm happy to support Immi should the need for more administrators arise and, per ecks, if she keeps up the good work here. UberSoldat93 (talk) 04:56, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
7. I'm inclined to agree here. Corellian Premier^MTFBWY 13:39, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
8. per my comments in neutral and everyone above. BloodOfIrizi (talk) 22:22, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
9. Thank you for at least responding to me, Immi. However, my concerns were not addressed, so I cannot support this nomination anymore. Erebus Chronus ^(Talk) 00:50, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Neutral

sigh I did plan on supporting Immi for admin but good points were brought up by ecks, JMM, and the others who opposed. stuck at a crossroads, so neutral vote it is. my support will definitely come in the future, but as mentioned by ecks, not the right time yet BloodOfIrizi (talk) 23:02, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

PLEASE forgive me, Immi, but I must abstain from taking either side at this time. The points expressed by everyone has left me with no choice but to remain neutral during the nomination. You've been nothing but an inspiration and a hard-working soul ever since you arrived at Wookieepedia, but, as someone whose been gone from the Wook for months, a little more time is needed before I can accept either side. Erebus Chronus ^(Talk) 16:37, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Optional candidate Q&A

Hey y'all, Immi Thrax here, tackling some of the pre-existing Q&As and welcoming others!

Responding to responses and other observations:

• Want to hear me talk about Wookieepedia? Video from Community Connect 2022, the Fandom Through the Years panel, with moderator Brandon Rhea.
• Part of why I could accept the invitation to become a launch admin at LGBTQIA+ Wiki was being available for it since I'm not currently an admin here. That became an unplanned hiatus here when we were given an unexpected launch and had to go into crisis mode. When things stabilized, I was able to get back to active here. Heck of a way to gain wiki admin experience! We began building the wiki last September but the sudden launch was in January. So, my edit counts during that all-hands-on-deck mess through this June aren't the best way to evaluate my activity or commitment.
• In my edit history, there's a slowdown and gap every August. I take a hiatus during that time for personal reasons that I will share privately if requested (I'm open about it, but I'm cautious about sharing in a public forum). I encourage everyone to attend to their mental health and step away when they need to.
• To further describe that unplanned hiatus: the entire LGBTQIA+ admin team had to abruptly become moderators of hostile discussions, misblamed attacks on us for Fandom decisions, personal attacks on us as a team and on me as an individual, and ones that involved heavy matters I usually only deal with as a social worker rather than a volunteer on a wiki. Because of that, February through April 2022 are when I was not active here as an editor (outside of my ongoing noms and WP:PRIDE) but was still actively engaged with supporting Wookieepedia in ways outside of raw edit count. I also didn't walk away from here during or after our worst period last year. Instead, I believed in us enough to fight for Wookieepedia even while blocked and defended our community to the fandom and to Star Wars creators when we were getting attacked as a whole for the actions of only a few. I've been told more than once that I "saved Wookieepedia".

Additional question(s):

1. Maybe this would end up overlapping with the responses above, but what further improvements do you hope will be achieved by the Wookieepedia community in the somewhat-near future and/or, say, ten years' time? OOM 224 18:29, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

   This is an ongoing process, so it's hard to give it a time-frame, but I hope to bring back more editors who left due to past issues and resolve those issues where possible, demonstrating that we welcome people who were formerly made to feel unwelcome, and bringing on board new editors and improving their early experiences to retain them. That involves both feeling welcome (not getting pushed out by bad early experiences) and making it easier to understand how the Wook works as they're getting started as an editor. I want us to continue reviewing and revising policies to keep up with where we're at, like the recent overhauls of WP:LG and WP:MOS, especially for clarity issues. It's hard to follow the rules if you don't understand them! I hope someday it won't be easy to list the only women and people of other demographic categories editing because there will be so many of us that we no longer stand out. Immi Thrax (she/her) (talk) 14:22, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

2. One of the things that seem to be omitted on this page or when accepting the role of an admin is the existence of Discussions. I would argue that every Discussions user has an equal claim to being called a Wookieepedian as every editor is. I have firsthand witnessed you and the other admins on the LGBTQIA Discussions, and your passion for keeping peaceful discord on that platform. I can only imagine the amount of behind-the-scenes work y'all did over there. You mentioned being an admin who focuses on collaboration and connections. You are an active editor, but you have a minimal Discussions presence (which is not a requirement to be an admin, lest anyone mistake that it is), and we rarely see any admin make an effort to engage with fans and users. Will you bring that same zeal as the passion you had/have at the LGBTQIA wiki to Wookieepedia Discussions, both publicly and behind-the-scenes, and if so, how will you? Jade Moonstroller (talk) 23:52, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

   Sorry for my delayed response, Jade! I've thought about for days, and I have to say that because the relationship between the wiki and Discussion sides of Wookieepedia and LGBTQIA+ Wiki are so different, I don't think what I do there would carry over here in a comparable way. My level of involvement in the Discussions there primarily came from the necessity of how we got launched—I never intended to be a moderator, concentrating on content and policy, but there was too much happening for only the people who'd planned to focus on modding to do that alone. Now that things have calmed down, the number of active Discussion users is much smaller there than here. The majority of posts deal with questions and conversations about real-life topics that have a different weight to them than talking about something you're a fan of. Some of those I take the lead in addressing (when someone brings up serious mental health concerns or abuse) to recommend resources because of my skill set. I also try to keep up with questions about the wiki itself and suggestions. I'm not aware of where/if that currently exists here besides the ongoing ask an editor Q&A post. I'd be interested in talking to you and other Discussion mods about how you could be better supported behind-the-scenes, but I'm not sure at this time what I'd have the energy to contribute to publicly. Immi Thrax (she/her) (talk) 21:53, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

3. Hi Immi, congratulations again on your nomination. I would like to raise some concerns about some comments you made about this vote as I think it can reflect on your approach as a leader. It doesn't feel great to me that you would insinuate that an oppose result would just tarnish the positive progression the Wook has had in recent times. I also don't appreciate you referencing in the same case that "multiple Star Wars authors and SW.com contributors" follow you. That comes across like you're implying that the big figures (and thus the circles on social media like Twitter) are going to be informed about the vote if it was unsuccessful and there'll be a stir about Wookieepedia, similar to how it was in 2021 (which you also referenced). I can't just decisively say what you meant by these comments, but they do worry me (as well as several others) as they give me the vibe of a "this will not end well for you" argument about your own admin vote, something I feel is a bad quality for an admin. While none of this changes how highly I feel about what you have done for the Wook in the past and present, I would like for you to clear up what you meant about this. Feel free to take your time in responding (though preferably before the vote closes :P). Braha'tok enthusiast ^{Hello there} 18:55, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

   Hi BE, and thank you. I see how my concerns can come off that way, especially after I had a hand in removing a bureaucrat who used those exact words ("this will not end well for you"/"give me one reason why I shouldn't" etc.) to bully people until doing as he wished. Whether or not I become an admin, Wookieepedia doesn't exist in a Wook-only-vacuum, and we should stay aware of how we're viewed by people who may or may not become contributors or just visitors here. As I mentioned on Discord, part of my personal and professional mindset is anticipating and preparing for possible disasters in case they should come to pass. That can be something like hurricane prep that becomes second nature when you go through them enough, or much more personal (interpersonal violence).
   Based on years of criticism levied against Wookieepedia like April Fool's Day 2014 and the 2021 situation specifically, I suspect that eventually this vote will get noticed by someone not participating in it and go public, and that it could be a disaster. When it happened last year and reached the level of SW authors and contributors commenting on it, I defended us to them (ex. explaining there was more to us than those two bureaucrats), and I helped salvage our reputation through that plus WP:PRIDE. But because of that, I've become more individually visible than I used to be and I'm not an anonymous figure, for better or for worse. Some people partially blamed me for last year because I interacted with the tweet that blew this up publicly, overlooking that I was encouraging people to participate on Wookieepedia (not driving them away) and countering the false accusations and rumors.
   After what we as a community and I personally went through last year, I have no intention of making this public myself. I anticipate what could come to pass and think it's something we ought to prepare for as a possibility if it trends in that direction so we aren't left scrambling as we were before. I fear, to use your words, that "there'll be a stir about Wookieepedia, similar to how it was in 2021" and that it would "tarnish the positive progression the Wook has had in recent times" if the nomination of a well-qualified woman failed based on different standards than those that were applied to the last decade of all-male nominees before me. I've noted how the lack of female admins almost kept me from becoming an editor, how we're still a rarity, and how Wook still has work to do related to women. Pointing these possibilities out isn't intended to be threatening, but if I was silent about it, it would feel to me like I had foreseen a potential problem for the community yet withheld information vital to the survival of the Rebellion it because it could be personally damaging for me to even acknowledge it. Immi Thrax (she/her) (talk) 10:56, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

   A different flavor of something to be prepared for: if my nomination succeeds and that becomes public, it could draw attention from the likes of TFM, G&G, and KF that have made hateful comments about our direction and some about me specifically. Attention from them would be further controversy/drama to either ignore or be prepared to face. The KF forums in particular, even though they're currently struggling to remain online, concern me and I don't know how far they'd go. Whatever the outcome of this, there may be strong reactions outside of the Wook that weren't a factor when evaluating prior candidates whose votes were largely an internal matter. Immi Thrax (she/her) (talk) 12:01, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

   I thank you for responding to the message, Immi, but there are certain concerns that were not really addressed in this response. After what took place the other day, it's been seen that those who do oppose your nomination could be framed as sexist and against the amount of transitioning that took place after the incident last April. While that was likely not your intention, it does unfortunately come across in a negative light, which does hurt me because I have never once been sexist in my entire life. Furthermore, I don't feel myself or anybody else should be preparing for the aftermath of this vote, regardless of whether or not it succeeds. Also, still bringing up the fact that several licensed SW authors and SW.com writers follow you on social media feels like an indirect attempt at intimidating people into supporting for this vote, because it's almost like you're saying "These guys follow me on social media, so if you opposers win, there could be problems." But, there really shouldn't be any problems because it does not concern them or anyone else outside of this community; only should it concern the current administration, our Fandom representatives, editors and whoever else is in our community. It's also best to remember that our previous controversy only began to involve outsiders because of people screenshotting the discussions in our Discord server and posting them on Twitter (I will not delve deeper into last year's incident because it hurt lots of people). All in all, I do appreciate your efforts to fix Wookieepedia's reputation over the past year, but I would seriously love for you to address these concerns of mine. Erebus Chronus ^(Talk) 20:39, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

   I hope it will be understood that alerting people to a possibility is not the same thing as issuing a threat. (A factual correction: The prior controversy began days before the Discord allegations, while the vote was still live.) To me, I let people know when I'm concerned something could go wrong because I care what happens to them or I'm in a professional situation where we're making a safety plan. It's preparing for if things do go wrong because when you're already in an emergency, it's often too late to think and you fall back on what you know and have prepared for. It's not trying to scare or manipulate; it's being aware of those possibilities and having options ready, just in case. Maybe this comes from different life experiences and having to be on guard for my own safety and helping other people with theirs. Immi Thrax (she/her) (talk) 22:42, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

   I may not have been clear enough about this in prior responses, so in case this didn't come through: I'm not making this public, I don't want us to go through that kind of drama ever again, and I don't personally equate an oppose vote with being sexist. Someone may or may not be sexist if they vote that way; the vote itself doesn't automatically mean that someone is. Immi Thrax (she/her) (talk) 04:25, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

   Thank you for addressing these Immi. I wasn't really intending on changing my vote, just clearing the water here. Braha'tok enthusiast ^{Hello there} 06:37, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Comments

• Nomination accepted via Discord. Supreme Emperor ^Holocomm 20:43, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
• I'm going for something a bit unusual, as we don't usually argue about this kind of thing, but the current trend worry me enough to warrant that I take the time and effort to do this: While I did read every other vote annotations before casting my vote, I must admit that having taken a few hours to digest the opposition main and sole argument, it fall completely flat in my mind. Supposedly, the number of edits would be an indication of dedication and commitment to Wookieepedia, and in general I would agree. But there is not a single doubt in my mind that Wookieepedia is very important to Immi, as she's demonstrated quite clearly prior, sometimes during, and after her LGBTQIA+ Wiki-related hiatus, and she's far from lacking in term of internal policy knowledge. Unlike my current self deciding on a whim to build a wiki for a incoming video game, unbothered by anyone and anything in my ivory tower, Immi had to step-up when proposed by Fandom to build that resource. I'm not saying she didn't wanted to do it, but she must also have felt it was important and essential to do it, in the same way she felt it was important to build LGBTQIA recognition on Wookieepedia, and felt compelled to do it out of a sense of duty to the community. That's not an easy challenge that she and others like Supreme Emperor had to tackle, and for those of us who, from time to time, took an interest on what they were doing, it was clearly very taxing, leading to her participation on Wookieepedia to be sacrificed in the process. From my (limited) point of view, they had to deal with a lot more trouble during that period that any administrator of Wookieepedia had to over the years, in the same time frame. And yet, we argue that her selflessness, commitment and skill honed or/and acquired during that time should be ignored in face of an arbitrary productivist quota that has nothing to do with her demonstrated capability and motivation? What are we? Amazon? I'm discouraged by the thought that we would chose to penalize her for engaging in an endeavor that swallowed most of her energy and where she proved twice-over she the material of which admin are made of. I personally cannot fathom the logic behind such a position. NanoLuuke^{Cloning Facility} 16:50, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
  • I can't really speak for anyone else who voted oppose, but I don't think the edit count is a valid measure of someone's worth and never said it was. I do disagree with that sentiment and as I said my vote was just because I didn't see the neccessity in a new admin at this time. If we were to lose a leader Immi is very well the first person i'd say ought to be on tap. As it is, this nomination is likely to pass and the oppose votes are small in number, clearly not representative of the community's larger feeling, so I don't see the point in making an issue out of this publicly. Fan26 (Talk) 16:57, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
    • We did lose Zed42 as an admin and contributor not long ago (well, technically, since April). And without that, I fail to see how having more people in a position of leadership would be detrimental to Wookieepedia, if we as a community trust a user as much as we trust Immi, why should we refrain from elevating to a position from which they could do even more good, again that too don't make sense to me. Second, the user count is 11 versus 6, on the basis that admins are counted separate from users (wording on the vote rules is somewhat confusing and could be interpreted as admins being counted within users too, but after having scoured everything RFUR and the initial CT, nothing has ever clarified this point, so I assume it separate based on a Occam's Razor approach), so the possibility to have this vote to fail, and the message that would send, does worry me. NanoLuuke^{Cloning Facility} 17:31, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
      • Per Forum:CT:Administrator Voting, non-admin users' and admins' votes are counted separately. 1358 ^(Talk) 21:31, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
        • While that's also my interpretation, and I did check that CT (thanks OOM for correcting the missing </s> btw), it's not exactly crystal clear. Technically, admins are still users (autoconfirmed, emailconfirmed, sysop, user). And the mention "(seperated from user votes)" could be interpreted as "we first count everyone, regardless of roles, THEN if that pass, we move on to administrator votes only (and then to possible bureaucrats veto... but that was removed in 2008)". I get it, it's an old policy, people at the time were less regarding when writing and subjecting them to vote, but it could be useful to have it updated in the future so that the counting method has no possible secondary interpretation. NanoLuuke^{Cloning Facility} 04:51, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
          • Yeah as well as scrapping the neutral vote I think there's definitely need for a rewrite for clarity once this vote is over. Ayrehead02 (talk) 09:44, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
  • Valid points; it's good to share and discuss our thoughts so that we're able to understand each other better. I can't speak for anyone else, but I get the feeling that those voting oppose, when it comes to judging someone's potential as an admin on this specific wiki, would rather see a Wookieepedia admin candidate's efforts be spent on here rather than any other site. I think we all agree that Immi is well-qualified and meriting of being an admin here, and her dedication with the LGBTQIA+ Wiki should prove exactly this to anyone. The way I see it though, someone deciding to vote oppose could be thinking something along the lines of: "this is someone with great admin capabilities who is already very dedicated as a community leader both here on Wookieepedia for WP:PRIDE and elsewhere, but how do we know if she'd stay consistently active here and spend her leadership qualities not just across the Fandom platform and on WP:PRIDE, but specifically on Wookieepedia as a whole." So while I disagree with the conclusion of this reasoning, the logic is still sensible to me. Perhaps I shouldn't need to mention this, but I without a doubt believe that everyone participating in the vote so far is coming from a place of absolute good faith with respect to both this wiki and to Immi herself. I don't think those questioning the opposition's rationale are here to accuse them of making a mistake either. However, I do recognise a very clear sense of skepticism going on between everything here, and that's fine. We're a diverse mix after all. I'd encourage everyone to avoid judgment and, like what Nano's started here, to maybe clarify how they're thinking in order to prevent ill-feelings. OOM 224 17:39, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
    • I certainly did not intended to paint anyone under a bad light, and my concluding comment about my inability to fathom the argument may appear that way, but I insist this is about providing a, maybe more informed, perspective which as (even very partially) witnessed her struggle with the LGBTQIA+ Wiki, and I was trying to make clear that Immi temporary hiatus from here wasn't of her own desire and volition. NanoLuuke^{Cloning Facility} 17:54, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
• I wanted to look at the question of activity seriously, if we are expected to consider that a measure of one's requirements to be an admin. Eck's claim that Immi's last 1,000 edit count goes to last year is interesting, and I'm not too sure why such an arbitrary number was used. However, I decided to go back to 1,000 edits, limited to mainspace, since that is really the measure we are interested in. Immi's 1000th edit was on 27th October, 2021. Ecks' was 18th October, 2021. So by this measure, on average, Immi has contributed more to Wookieepedia's mainspace. By Eck's own admission, she has met the requirement of 250 edits in the last 6 months. I don't feel like the reasons of a lack of activity are either evidenced or justified, and I don't think that should stop admission to admin when existing admins show comparable activity levels when looking at longer projections. Statistically that is what you want, as that means the admins are covering each other on their breaks, and looking at short-term activity with a break will naturally skew the outcome against anyone who has taken a recent vacation. Manoof (he/him/his) (talk) 12:41, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
  • Indeed. When things like "what is a neutral vote" are reviewed, I would also suggest revisiting "They have actively contributed for at least six months to the wiki." This does not say "for each of the previous six months", nor does it define what constitutes "actively contributed", leaving it up for interpretation. I've contributed for more than three years, which is at least six months. There is also no indication that the activity requirements for admins to retain their positions ("at least 250 mainspace edits in any six-month span") or for bureaucrats ("least 500 total edits combined in the mainspace, Wookieepedia:, File:, MediaWiki:, Template:, and Category: namespaces in any six-month span") will be applied to any previous span of six months in the history of someone being considered for that position. I would not have met it in the span of 2022-02-01 to 2022-08-01, but I was not nominated in August—I currently do meet that. This is also excluding the leeway granted to existing admins and BCs, "excepting prior explanation of inactivity", which I've of course explained. Immi Thrax (she/her) (talk) 20:11, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
• One thing I want to dispell is the idea that what happens on Wook doesn't have any impact on the larger fandom. It's quite the opposite. While we aren't official, people look to us for guidance. I say this not to encourage voting one way or another, but as a reminder that there's no us vs them, we're all one fandom. What we say and do does get discussed and looked at, and we should always be willing to look inward and learn how to improve ourselves. The reality is that historically women have not felt comfortable editing on Wook in years past, and while we've made great strides in changing that, we do still have work to do. Having a strong, intelligent woman like Immi on the admin team will not only push us to look at things through a different lense, it tells people that women are welcome here. Time and time again I've heard people say they thought about joining, but got discouraged by the lack of female editors, and just didn't feel comfortable. Any steps we can take to help women feel more comfortable here will only grow the Wook, and help us continue to improve, As heated as this has gotten, I want you to take a moment to just think about who Immi is, and what she's helped accomplish. She's always had the best interests of the community at heart, and that's a quality that benefits all of us. We all want the same thing, to keep improving and growing the site, and I truly believe that this helps us further that goal. Supreme Emperor ^Holocomm 23:09, 13 October 2022 (UTC)