Wookieepedia:Requests for user rights/RFA archive/Jonjedigrandmaster

< Wookieepedia:Requests for user rights | RFA archive
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that was successful. Please do not modify it.

Jonjedigrandmaster (9 admins + 13 users/0/0)

Two week deadline from first request, voting ends February 14, 2011.

Support
  1. Jon's been a Wookieepedian since January of 2009, pretty much the whole time providing the very picture of an exemplary user. He is a master of the article nomination processes, with 15 successful featured articles and 73 good articles to his name, as well as membership in both the AgriCorps and Inquisitorius. His extensive knowledge of the topics in the articles he nominates has made him the top writer for WookieeProject Legacy Era as well as the leader of WookieeProject New Sith Wars. The August 2009 Wookieepedian of the Month, Jon was awarded rollback rights in December of that year for his extensive work patrolling the recent changes, dealing with vandalism and other bad-faith edits. But none of that is why I have nominated Jonjedigrandmaster for adminship; indeed it is what he has accomplished since December of 2009 that impresses me most. Jon is very active in the site's processes, from Trash compactor to Consensus track, always delivering measured, well thought-out, and civil opinions on decisions to be made. Jon does not vote along any lines aside from his own careful reasoning, never losing his cool or consistently voting with or against any particular user. He has developed into one of the most respected quiet leaders of the site, and I would be honored to have him join the ranks of the admins. Graestan(Talk) 00:06, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
  2. IFYLOFD (Floyd's crib) 00:30, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
    Sure. Ajraddatz 00:56, January 31, 2011 (UTC) (Vote struck, reason: Per policy: Less than 50 mainspace edits -- Grunny (talk) 02:18, January 31, 2011 (UTC))
  3. So much orange! JangFett (Talk) 01:03, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
  4. Most definitely. Jon has been a significant asset to the site, the type that are quite hard to find out there, and he has also proved to be levelheadedly mature in community issues. He has earned it and thoroughly deserves it. CC7567 (talk) 02:05, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
  5. Per above. Great editor, will be a great admin. ~ SavageBob 02:11, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
  6. Jon is an excellent user, who will only benefit the site with the mop. Plus, you know it's time when other users start confusing them for admins ;-). Grunny (talk) 02:13, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
  7. definitely support. Jon is an active and supportive user who appears to have the best interests of the Wook in mind. <-Omicron(Leave a message at the BEEP!) 02:14, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
  8. Per Grae and Grunny. Also, I love the response to question 15 below; the classic engineer's answer. Master Jonathan New Jedi Order (Jedi Council Chambers) 03:35, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
  9. Cavalier OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 08:31, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
  10. Jon's one of the best there is. Darth Trayus(Trayus Academy) 09:00, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
  11. Per Jang. ;-) Jugs is an excellent user who… per Grae. :P So it's Yes with a capital y. 1358 (Talk) 13:03, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
  12. —Tommy 9281 13:18, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
  13. Yay Jonny Boy!!! MasterFredCommerce Guild(Whatever) 13:47, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
  14. Lol at question 15. Seriously though, duh. Jon is a great candidate. Chack Jadson (Talk) 23:50, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
  15. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 17:51, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
  16. This is long overdue. Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 19:10, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
  17. Korsa3 20:39, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
  18. NAYAYEN—it appears to be a frammistat 21:07, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
  19. What they say. –Tm_T (Talk) 06:14, February 2, 2011 (UTC)
  20. Per Grunny's last point and what a lot of others have said. Plus, major bonus points for the response to #15 :) —Xwing328(Talk) 03:35, February 8, 2011 (UTC)
  21. Jugs is literally the most deserving candidate walking these grounds right now. I think everything I could possibly say in support has been said in one way or another already. Long overdue. Toprawa and Ralltiir 19:13, February 8, 2011 (UTC)
  22. OLIOSTER (talk) 01:24, February 9, 2011 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Optional candidate Q&A
  1. Why do you want to become an administrator?
    • My ultimate goal on Wookieepedia has always been to help upkeep the site, be that by writing and reviewing articles or fighting vandalism/fanon. We're already the largest repository of Star Wars knowledge on the internet; and I take it as a responsibility to not only make sure we are the most thorough repository, but also the most reliable. Becoming an administrator would help me help the site.
  2. In your opinion, what is the role of an administrator?
    • The roles of an administrator are many: like rollback users, and really any user who chooses to do so, administrators police the site and revert vandalism/fanon. They are peacekeepers who keep potentially hostile situations between users from getting out of hand, and who are trusted to weigh in on various aspects of the site's workings, technical and otherwise. And just like every other user on the site, they are article writers, fact-checkers, reviewers, editors, etc.
  3. In your view, do administrators hold a technical or political position?
    • Of course, I'm going to have to give the clichéd "both" in response. Certainly they have technical responsibilities, such as the deletion and protection of articles and the archiving of SH and CT threads, but—because of these technical duties themselves, as well as the fact that administrators are voted upon by the community to begin with—they hold an inescapably political position, too.
  4. How do you feel admins should use their power/stand in comparison with other users?
    • Administrators should use the tools they are given only when they are needed; abuse of them shows only that they aren't capable of the responsibility of possessing them. And in standing with other users, the one and only difference is that admins are trusted to have those tools. Beyond that, they are really just veteran users of the site, and their input is equivalent to any other experienced user's input.
  5. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
    • I have been in conflicts before, mostly small things that work their way out pretty easily, but there have been some that became pretty heated in the past. I've always wanted only what's best for the site, and I try to keep my emotions in check and be as objective and fair as possible. Remaining open to opposing arguments and maintaining civil, non-ad hominem discussions are essential to resolving disputes.
  6. Of your articles or contributions to Wookieepedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    • If I had to single out a few, it would probably be my first status article, because it taught me so much about the nominating process; Relin Druur, because it was a lot of fun to nominate something from one of my favorite SW novels; Darth Zannah, because I got to enjoy working with another user on such a major subject; and that crazy-long mission. All in all, though, I'm really just glad that I have the opportunity write and expand articles on the site anywhere and everywhere that I can. Really, when you get down to it, the articles are what this is all about, and being able to help out in a thousand different ways on the most complete encyclopedia of Star Wars available anywhere is an extremely satisfying thing.
  7. What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with?
    • I'll do whatever I can whenever I can. I definitely picture myself monitoring the RCs plenty, and if I see an article that needs to be deleted or protected, I'll delete it or protect it. But really, if there's any admin-related job I see that needs to be done, I'm not just gonna let it sit there. :P
  8. How important is it for you to be involved in things such as CT, FA, GA, and other community-centered items that involve discussion and voting?
    • I find it extremely important to be involved in such things—but it's not just important for me or for administrators; it's important for everybody. FAs and GAs are the backbone of the site; they're articles that are certifiably the best we have to offer. The more people get involved in writing and reviewing status articles, the more reliable and thorough our site becomes as a whole. And as for CTs and other community-centered items, well, the answer is in the name. They're community-centered items. As a part of the community, it's important that every active user weigh in on them; how else are we supposed to get an actual gage on what the community thinks?
  9. Do you think admins performing actions (I.e. deletions, blocks, etc.) for reasons not covered on policy should be sanctioned/punished? If so, how?
    • Gonna have to give another cliché response here: this has to be treated on a case-by-case basis. If the administrator has a perfectly legitimate and logical reason for his or her actions, then of course he/she should not be punished. But if the administrator is not acting responsibly or is somehow abusing his/her powers, then punishment should be handed out, just as it would to any other user.
  10. What is your policy, if any, of welcoming new users? Should you welcome a new user, do you look at his/her contributions beforehand? What about anonymous IPs?
    • I have never actually welcomed a new user before; someone else usually beats me to it. :P But if I were to welcome one, I would probably take a quick glance at their contributions first, to make sure they don't have a history of recurring vandalism.
  11. How would you react if someone undeleted an article you'd mistakenly speedied? Under what circumstances would you consider it appropriate to undelete an article mistakenly speedied by another administrator, if any, and how would you approach this task?
    • I would find out why it was undeleted. Presumably there would be a good reason for the act (I find it hard to believe that an admin would randomly start vandalizing the site by undeleting nonsense articles), in which case I would apologize for deleting it in the first place. If the admin suddenly did turn into the site's most dangerous vandal, I doubt he or she would get very far before he or she was blocked for vandalizing the site, just as any other user would be. I would consider it appropriate to undelete a speedied article if I discovered that the article was legitimate. If that was the case, I would leave a message on the talk page of the admin who deleted the article, letting him or her know of the situation, and then I would undelete the article.
  12. How would you react if your user page was vandalized? Under what circumstances would you block the offender? Is there anything else that you would do in this situation?
    • I would react no differently than if it was another user's page that was vandalized. I would revert the edit and give the offending user a warning. If the action persisted despite the warning, indicating that the user knows of our policy, and is intentionally defying it, I would give the user a block.
  13. Under what circumstances would you consider blocking an established user?
    • Established users should receive no special treatment. Remember that they should know our policies better than new users, so they really have no excuse for performing "blockable" actions, if you will. Basically, I would treat them like any other user. I would give them a warning first, and if their actions persisted, either a second warning or else a block, depending on the content and severity of their actions.
  14. If you could change any one thing about Wookieepedia, what would it be?
    • I can't think of anything in particular for the moment (except for maybe a pay raise :P). I'm sure things will come up in the future, but that's what CTs are for.
  15. Would you look at a glass to be half-empty or half-full?
    • Neither. I just see a glass that's twice as tall as it needs to be.
  16. Do you feel the current blocking policy is too restrictive, not restrictive enough, or OK as it is?
    • I think it's OK as is; it seems to work well enough, and we treat things on a case-by-case basis anyway in order to ensure fairness.
  17. Have you ever considered becoming a regular visitor to the Wookieepedia IRC chat?
    • I usually pop on once a day or so; I was off a lot recently because of a poor internet connection, but it has finally been fixed.
  18. How do you feel about people who already have some influence on other Star Wars communities (TheForce.Net, StarWars.com) trying to change policies here?
    • Basically, all users have a right to discuss our policies. I don't think we should give any extra weight to users from other Star Wars communities; they have just as much right (no more, no less) to discuss and change policy as any other user on our site.
  19. How many clones do you think fought in the Clone Wars? (Note: You are wrong no matter what answer you give.)
    • One. Kyle Katarn.
  20. Who is the most awesome Jedi of all time? (Note: The only correct answer is Kyle Katarn.)
    • Hmm…not sure on this one, so I'm just gonna take a wild guess. Is it…Kyle Katarn?
  21. What's more important to you: consensus or policy?
    • Well, policy is effectively what runs the site, but consensus is what dictates policy. So, at the risk of being cliché yet again, I believe they are equally important.
  22. Have you had any previous leadership experience (in your community, on the web, etc.)?
    • I don't have leadership experience on the web, but I was the leader of a team at an engineering camp last summer, and I've led multiple school-related projects.
  23. What is your attitude towards users who have quit the site or have been banned, but still continue to attempt to influence the site in any way?
    • I have no problem with users who show interest in returning to the site and acting in a completely civil, productive manner. If, however, the users are trying to influence the site in a negative way or are otherwise causing undue disruption, then they should be dealt with just like any other users causing disurption.
  24. What is your wiki philosophy?
    • Of the utmost importance is the article content: its accuracy and thoroughness, because that's what the reasers are visiting the site for. But in order to have that, you have to have an active, knowledgeable, and engaged user base, with fair and practical policies to guide them. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 01:30, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
Comments
  • Accepted nomination via e-mail. Eligible for adminship via the 1.5-year service exception. Proved age rules on the site were silly from the day he joined. Graestan(Talk) 00:06, January 31, 2011 (UTC)