Wookieepedia:Requests for user rights/RFB archive/Graestan April 2009

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

Graestan (12 admins + 21 users/4 admins + 5 users/0)

Two week deadline from first request, voting ends May 13.

Support
  1. I believe that we really need another BC. One is never here, another's in the military, and a third isn't here all that often. Graestan, I feel, is the best choice. He is very dedicated, and can be found on IRC and Wookieepedia quite often. Graestan is an Inq, a member of the AgriCorps, being one of the founders, and has been an administrator since 2007. He is also a true leader. Graestan has helped me a great deal, and I know that I'm not the only one who's been helped by him—far from it. I believe he cares about this website, and wants to benefit it in whatever way. As a BC, he would be able to do even more to help Wookieepedia. He can be a leader at an even-higher profile, while performing necessary BC tasks, like giving people rights. In short, Graestan is a great user: he's bold, dedicated, and a leader. I believe it would be in the best interest of our beloved Wookieepedia to make him a bureaucrat. Chack Jadson (Talk) 00:35, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
  2. Per Chack. I believe there is a great need for another BC who is active, and I can't imagine anyone more suited than Graestan. He's helpful, friendly, dedicated, cares about the site, and he is a leader in the community who will greatly benefit the site in this position. Grunny (Talk) 00:45, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
  3. —Silly Dan (talk) 01:14, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
  4. As I did the first time around, I fully endorse Graestan as a Wookieepedia BC. The fact is, there is no sound justification for not supporting this nomination. There is no "We don't need another BC," because that just doesn't fly anymore. Chack's comments perfectly illustrate the state of Wookieepedia's BCs. He can't even name the fourth BC. Can anyone? We have BCs who haven't used their sysop powers but once in the past three years. We don't have a BC currently who is around enough to even give someone their earned Rollback or Administration sysops after the expiration of an election. Trak Nar's vote ended five days before a BC finally got their act together. The fact is, we need another BC. Graestan has done more for this site in his time here than any two people combined. He's helped usher in new levels of status article quality, both FAN and GAN, the likes of which Wookieepedia has never seen, or any wiki for that matter. Wookieepedia is, hands down, the best wiki on this planet, and we can all thank Graestan for it. He helped foster in the AgriCorps, which is an excellent training tool to help new users acclimate themselves to the Big Leagues of Wookieepedia article writing. He goes out of his way to help expand Wookieepedia's roster of consistent and quality contributors. He represents this site to the best of his abilities, not as a politician, but as a blue-collar editor. He knows what it's like to be in the editing trenches on a consistent basis. He created an external blog to help introduce casual users to the inner workings of the site they might not see from a quick glance at the Recent Changes. He gets people involved. He’s always there to run the Mofferences, to run the Inqmoots, to run the AC meetings. In many ways, Graestan is Wookieepedia, and we wouldn’t be where we are today without him. Vote to support someone who has sacrificed more than two years of his everyday life, day in and day out, to help improve Wookieepedia. Toprawa and Ralltiir 01:21, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
  5. Yes, absolutely, I do indeed concur, wholeheartedly. Wait, wrong franchise. Anyway, yes. Graestan is the one person who is almost always available at any given time (within reason, he is human) and not likely to flip out and flounce on us. He's an active defender of the site and its users, and a better public representative of Wookieepedia than many people, myself included. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 01:25, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
  6. I can't think of anyone who deserves to become BC more than Graestan. Putting aside the fact that Wookieepedia needs another BC, Graestan invests a great deal of his time and energy to helping this site function. He looks for the trouble spots and sets himself to work, as he did recently in regards to the Inquisitorius and FAN page. Furthermore, he does not feel that he is above others, quite the contrary he goes out of his way to help new users. He was one of the first "old hands" to help me when I was a noob, and I highly doubt that I would have come this far without his advice and encouragement. Graestan is exactly the kind of person we need as a representative of the best that Wookieepedia has to offer. Cylka-talk- 01:46, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
  7. Per Tope, Chack, Cylka, Culator... ok, per above. We need a BC who is around for what seems like all the time. So... yeah. Everything else has been said before. JorrelWiki-shrinkableFraajic 02:14, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
  8. Per Jorrel Fraajic. There's nothing left to say, at least that I can think of. Master JonathanJedi Council Chambers 04:29, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
  9. Much like how a forum needs active admins and global mods, then Wookieepedia needs the same thing. And Graestan is perfect for the job. Hell, I thought he was a BC to begin with! Trak Nar Ramble on 04:38, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
  10. There really isn't much I can say that already hasn't been said. Graestan is helpful, committed, and diligent, and also possesses good leadership qualities. And as it's been stated before, there's a definite need for more bureaucrats. CC7567 (talk) 05:03, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
  11. Per Tope. A great user, both content and community-wise. He's tolerant and encouraging to new users, which I'm sure has helped more than just me get started on the site. SoresuMakashi(Everything I tell you is the truth) 06:26, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
  12. Per the above. - Cavalier OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 07:45, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
  13. Per above. MauserComlink 08:00, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
  14. Per above. I don't know what else to add. Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 14:32, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
  15. I don't put particular weight in an admin being a bureaucrat, because it's really just a tool. But at the same time, they are the public faces of the site. We need another BC. Our current BCs are either not active or else largely useless. Grae is one of few users who cares enough about the site not to disappear and who's active and more importantly aware of what's going on at any given time on the site. I actually agree with Hydro about Grae not having a detached attitude, but I think a balance of the balanced and those that really care is necessary, because having a detached attitude is often synonymous with 1. not having a great idea of what's going on on the site at any given time, something Grae possesses more than anyone, and 2. being a bit too timid. Anyway, there's only maybe three or four users, imho, with that attitude - one of them is already a BC, another probably isn't really active enough, another mightn't want it, etc. Ideally, I'd like to see two or three more BCs elected and two demoted, and this is hands down the best place to start. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 17:19, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
  16. GroceryBagGrocery Store 22:58, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
  17. Per, well, other people above. Jonjedigrandmaster (Jedi beacon) 23:01, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
  18. To be honest, I was a little iffy at first per some of the comments below, but I have to give him my support. And I see no problem with having more than a few extra bureaucrats around the site, and there are several people now I would also consider right for this position. It definitely doesn't hurt us to have one or more new ones added. —Xwing328(Talk) 02:32, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
  19. Like Xwing, I've held off voting, weighing the objections below. But I personally can see no reason not to support Graestan for BC. - JMAS Hey, it's me! 03:24, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
  20. I'm in favour. I can't see why not, really, despite the valuable points presented by those opposing. SingAurraSing 04:49, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
  21. The guy is an embodiment of everything bureaucratship is all about. Even if you somehow have reservations based on his personality, it is quite obvious that he's supremely dedicated and active. I am a bureaucrat myself, and I am certainly not the most neutral dude around. Put your politics aside and let this happen for the good of Wookieepedia. --Imperialles 13:20, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
  22. Everyone else said it better, so I'll just leave my support right here :) OLIOSTER Sith Emblem 23:31, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
  23. We haven't exactly seen eye to eye recently, but I have to say, he works hard on this site, and that makes him deserve my support, no matter my personal feelings about him. Kilson Likes PIE 01:09, 02 May 09 (UTC)
  24. Not much else to say really, per everyone else. JethLordMaster (Talk) 03:11, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
  25. Ridin' on the Short Bus... IFYLOFD (You will pay the price for your lack of vision!) 00:14, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
  26. Per last election and everyone else here. Good luck Grae. — Charitwo (talk) 13:44, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
  27. Pranay Sobusk ~ Talk 16:07, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
  28. Normally I do not vote on these due to the combination of the snowball effect and not knowing as much about the users very often. This time, however, I can say that while people have made valid comments on both sides of the issue, I personally believe that Graestan is more than capable of fulfilling the role of bureaucrat in the manner worthy of the wook. I also believe that some users overvalue the role as some "prize" or "promotion" as some have suggested. It is also ironic that some users seem threatened by a new bureaucrat, regardless of whom it would be. — Fiolli {Alpheridies University ComNet} 03:01, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
  29. While I agree with members of the opposition that bureaucratship is not an award, I disagree in the belief that giving this privledge to Grae would be the case. As has been stated above, he is an incredibly dedicated editor, a talented writer, and a strong and willful administrator. There is no one at this moment that is more deserving of this honor and it should be bestowed upon Graestan as soon as possible. Darth Trayus Sith Emblem (Trayus Academy) 05:57, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
  30. No objections. QuentinGeorge 07:41, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
  31. Per the bunch above. :) Tyber J. Kenobi's Droid 22:38, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
  32. Oh... an active bureaucrat would speed decisions along, it's true Enochf 00:00, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
  33. Graestan(Talk) 00:01, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. I want to start by saying that I don't question either Grae's commitment or value to the wiki. I think he's a good contributor, and I think he's made several fine improvements to the way the wiki operates. But bureaucratship is not an award or trophy. I had several concerns at Grae's first nomination. For what it's worth, I believe he has improved in those areas since then. But I still feel he has the tendency to get overly emotionally invested in things, to fall into the middle of conflicts and controversies. I don't believe he exhibits the sort of detached attitude that I feel the highest level of user rights should go to. That's not a personal criticism of him, by the way. There are several admins, including myself, who I feel also fall under that category. There are others that don't, and if Grae's nomination does not succeed, there are some I would like to put up for consideration with their approval. To be honest, the BC position itself doesn't have the power or importance I believe it once did, when BC has veto power in many issues; even if Grae passes, and I wish him luck in his new job if he does, I don't think he's going to go off destroying the wiki. But as I'm being asked if I feel he is the right person for another BC, I'm sorry, but I don't. Grae, I hope you don't take any offense, and I trust you will see this as it's meant: a professional, not personal, opinion. - Lord Hydronium 05:16, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
  2. I have to agree with Hydro. It's not that Grae isn't a good admin or user, or that he'd be a bad bureaucrat. But I don't believe that he's the best candidate for bureaucrat we have. I have, historically, been against voting for someone for bureaucrat just because there's a feeling we ought to have a bureaucrat, and whichever person is the first to get nommed we vote for. It's not a case as with admins, where if they're good enough then, sure, give us another. Bureaucrat isn't a case of good enough; it's a case of the best filling a handful of spots. And nothing against Grae, nothing against his ultimately getting the job if that's how the vote goes, but in my opinion, as fine a candidate as Grae is, there are one or two better candidates. Havac 06:23, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
  3. Per Hydronium and Havac. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Talk page) 19:31, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
  4. I'd have to agree. Grae's a very good user and all, with some good edits, however I don't feel he's the best candidate at this time. I fully welcome him continuing editing in this excellent way he does and proving me wrong however, for now, I'll be going with Hydro and Havac. :) --Darth tom Imperial Emblem (Imperial Intelligence) 20:00, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
  5. —Tommy9281 Dark side Master SWGTCG (No quarter given, all exits sealed) 00:58, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
    Grae's a fine, fine user. But per Hydro and Havac. IFYLOFD (You will pay the price for your lack of vision!) 23:33, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
  6. Per Hydro and Havac. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 23:39, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
  7. Per above. DC 01:18, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
  8. The concerns that have been raised make me think that while Grae is one of our most excellent contributors, I have reservations that make me think there would be better choices to be a bureaucrat. WhiteBoy 02:23, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
    • The irony of this vote coming from you of all people is nothing short of mind blowing. This site has some serious bureaucratic problems, take the pun if you want, and it starts with people like you, WhiteBoy, who have no presence on this site whatsoever and don't do an ounce of anything that can be considered constructive by any stretch of the stupidest person's imagination. It would have been more responsible for you to resign your position as a BC than it would have been to oppose this nomination. Toprawa and Ralltiir 04:05, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
    • I'm seriously tempted to strike this under the "single issue voter" policy, considering WhiteBoy's last 50 contributions in any namespace stretch back to 2007. It really disturbs me that a minority of admins who are threatened by change can undermine an obvious mandate of the people. Good job, everyone, you've effectively prevented progress once again. Jack Nebulax would be proud of you. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 23:47, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
  9. Greyman(Talk) 13:58, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Neutral
Optional candidate Q&A
  1. Why do you think we need another bureaucrat?
    • At this point in time, the need outweighs all other considerations. After seeing someone who worked hard to win her election have to wait five days to get her group rights (although Trak is a quite easygoing person and likely wasn't inconvenienced), and then to find myself and others having to notify the current bureaucrats on the site and even to hunt them down elsewhere to remind them of their duties, I decided to stop dismissing offers to nominate me because we need active bureaucrats. While I have no personal issues with the four current bureaucrats, I grudgingly accept that they have too much occupying them at this time to execute this function effectively. Imp's in compulsory military service, for instance.
  2. How do you see the difference between an admin and a bureaucrat?
    • Honestly, ever since my first nomination for the bureaucrat position, I've striven to be a leader regardless of my status on the site. The only real difference to me anymore is the actual tools available to bureaucrats, be they user rights on the wiki or founder access in the various IRC channels. Everything else can be done by any admin, and almost any user, on the site so long as they put their mind to it and don't back down from responsibility.
  3. What will you use your new status for if your nomination succeeds?
    • To be quite honest, the only real difference is that I will take a hand in the granting and removal of user rights. I already pursue the other leadership sorts of things I'd previously only assigned to bureaucrats, such as planning and running Mofferences and trying to mediate when I see situations boiling over.
  4. How many admins do you think we need?
    • We're doing very well right now. Adding active users like Cylka, Jorrel Fraajic, Cavalier One, and Chack Jadson to the team has us patrolling the recent changes and spreading our sysops tools out very effectively. More established admins (such as me, last month) can take a break now without feeling like they're abandoning the site to vandals and trolls. Of course, there are a number of users I still see on the up-and-up and would love to have as admins alongside me in the future. I very much enjoy spotting the potential in people.
  5. How many bureaucrats do you think we need?
    • At least one more, or I wouldn't have accepted this nomination from Chack. I'd initially put this off, feeling that I was already achieving my goals for the site and myself, but after seeing the sore need for more active bureaucrats I accepted that it was time for me to step up and be nominated again.
  6. What should happen to admins/bureaucrat candidates who disappear for awhile without warning, leaving many questions, projects, and that sort of thing hanging?
    • Hey, if we know you're going, like with Imperialles and his patriotic duty, there's really no problem at all. It's only when there's a real mess to be cleaned up and no explanation to anyone else on the site that I see it as irresponsible. Even then, it's manageable, with Wookieepedians' propensity to take up the problems of peers as their own and move forward as a site. Graestan(Talk) 02:27, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Comments
  • I'm Graestan, and I approve this nomination. Graestan(Talk) 02:30, 30 April 2009 (UTC)