Wookieepedia:Requests for user rights/RFB archive/Xd1358

< 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.

Xd1358 (10 admins + 23 users/1 user/4 users)

Two-week deadline from first request. Voting ends May 4, 2021.

Support
  1. OK, here we are. With our previous two bureaucrats gone, we've suddenly had two spots to fill. So, over the past several weeks, there has been a lot of in-depth discussion about who should be our next two bureaucrats. I have spoken with every member of the administration on multiple occasions about this, and there have also been several group discussions. Additionally, I have consulted with several other trusted members of the community to get their thoughts. As such, the following two admins represent the overall administration's best choices for the role, which have been backed up by many of the regular users I have spoken to. As such, I would like to bring Fred and ecks to the community for consideration to become bureaucrats.
    Before I get to the users themselves, I wanted to briefly touch on the role of a bureaucrat. Now, a bureaucrat doesn't have that much real power. We can grant user rights and hide specific edits from page histories, but that's about it. Our votes are not worth more, and our opinions only count more in situations where community consensus is unclear (and I wouldn't be surprised if such a situation has never actually happened before). Being a bureaucrat is not like being a "head administrator," and it is certainly not candy. In my opinion, a bureaucrat is simply an admin who, above all else, has an unyielding sense of dedication to this site and an incredibly strong knowledge of its workings and procedures. They should also be skilled in editing and interacting with the community, have a lot of experience as an admin, be easily contactable and involved in site matters, and all around be a figurehead of the community. I believe both Fred and ecks perfectly encapsulate these traits. That being said, let's get onto the users the administration would like to bring to the community for consideration.
    Ecks has been an admin for nearly a decade, first joining the site in 2009 and joining the administration in 2011. He's a leading member in all three review bodies, serves as our social media manager, and does vital bot work via EcksBot. Ecks has a daily presence on Discord and IRC, and truly is a figurehead of the community. Additionally, ecks' knowledge of the site is unmatched, both in regard to our policies and of more technical elements—despite his disdain for all things technical, he is highly competent in coding, and is always willing to put the time in to learn new skills that can benefit our site. Ecks is also very intelligent, always being able to think pragmatically and probe policy changes for loopholes. Additionally, ecks knows the site's history better than most of us, knowing which groups wish to harm Wookieepedia and what practices have and haven't worked for us in the past. Finally, ecks' loyalty to this site is unmatched. I know for a fact that he will always fight for our interests and will always honour community decisions above all else. He truly understands the workings of the community and the site as a whole and will protect those no matter what. I believe ecks is an excellent choice for bureaucrat.
    Ultimately, I believe that Fred, ecks, and I would work very well as a bureaucratic team. Ecks representing the "old guard," keeping in mind our past; myself as the new, often pushing new ideas; and Fred somewhere in the middle so we can find a middle ground. I believe that between us, we would represent the level heads, good intentions, political skills, and openness to progress that would serve Wookieepedia the best in these changing times. Tommy-Macaroni 20:44, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
  2. Great work! VergenceScatter (talk) 20:46, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
  3. Wok142 (talk) 20:48, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
  4. Per my comment above OOM 224 ༼༽talk༼༽ 20:58, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
  5. ecks has been here longer than most of the current users and for as long as I've been here, he's been one of the few constants on the site. He possesses the rare ability to see issues from both sides, and has a keen eye for policy issues, in addition to being level headed and fair. If you have a proposal you want to make, he can find the holes in it, and give suggestions on how to improve it. I believe ecks and Fred (with Tommy), represent some of the best in our community, and I look forward to working with both of them. Here's to you both, and May the Force be with you. Supreme Emperor (talk) 21:04, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
  6. 01miki10 Open comlink 21:03, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
  7. JRT2010 (talk) 21:09, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
  8. While I haven't interacted with ecks as much as Fred, I know he consistently makes important contibutions to the site. JediMasterMacaroniAdmiral Ackbar RH(Talk) 21:25, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
  9. There's few people who know the workings of this site better than ecks, which is just one of the many benefits of his lengthy history here. In my time here he has always stood out as someone who is fair, reliable, and above all, dedicated to the future of this site and its users. Working with him is always a pleasure and his presence here generally makes keeping the lights on all the easier. Ayrehead02 (talk) 21:28, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
  10. Cwedin(talk) 21:53, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
  11. Ecks is certainly an admin I can trust to both keep a level head and the site's best interests in heart at all times. He is absolutely deserving of this privilege and responsibility. Imperators II(Talk) 22:13, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
  12. Genuinely have no idea where this wiki is without Ecks. This is long overdue. IFYLOFD (Talk) 22:19, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
  13. Ecks is a veteran here, he knows this site better than anyone, he is loyal to the community, and he always honors the community decisions. Ecks is someone I can approach with ideas and I know he will be honest and fair with his opinion. I think we've all learned from the last few weeks and I trust him to help guide Wookieepedia in this new beginning. It is always a pleasure to work with you ecks and I look forward to the future.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 22:22, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
  14. As stated above, Ecks immediately came to mind on who I personally thought was going to be nominated to fill the role of Bureaucrat. As such, this comes to no surprise to me. Throughout all the times I've interacted with Ecks, he's always been extremely helpful, welcoming, and active in the community. Ecks has been very helpful throughout the years with his botwork, and his articles reviews are always beneficial and productive to improving the quality of the article, not to mention that in my experiences, he has always been approachable. Ecks has been a longtime administrator, who is extremely dedicated to the community's success. I've always thought of Ecks as someone who will always be responsible and helpful, and his joining of of the Bureaucratic team will take this community to the next step. While Ecks has been serving the community for quite a long time, I believe that he will be open to learning and to teaching. He has my support. --Vitus InfinitusTalk 22:33, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
  15. Let him sit at the BC triangle table :P Erebus Chronus (Talk) 22:36, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
  16. Jedimca0(Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 22:52, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
  17. I know Ecks has served as an admin for some time now, and I'm grateful to still have one of the "old guard" like him as an active member of the site. He has a keen eye as well as a great familiarity with how the Wook should operate, and I feel he is definitely deserving of this role. DwartiiDelver (talk) 23:33, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
  18. Like many others, Fred and Ecks were who I immediately thought of as natural bureaucrats (particulary echoing what Tommy said about a balance between the old guard, the new crop of users, and the middle). Ecks has been a Wookieepedian since May of 2009 (almost twelve years on the site!) and an admin for a decade. Frankly, I don't know where we'd be without Ecks. He's a trusted, steady hand with much experience. I can point to his help being valuable in several endeavors-such as the great missing backup links clearance that happened last year-and he's always very helpful. Glad to vote for him. Fan26 (Talk) 02:55, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
  19. When Tommy approached me about who my pick would be for BC, my first recommendation was ecks. I've had the privilege of working with ecks for a very, very long time. While our time here is technically similar in length, ecks was able to experience a similar controversy to our most recent one from a leadership postiion, and he also stuck with the wiki through the tumultuous canon switch, something that actually caused me to take a leave of absence. Ecks and I have disagreed vehemently over the years, but it's always been respectful. That's ultimately why I want him on the BC team, and especially if I am to serve as well. The ideological balance that would result from his admission will be healthy in making sure progress occurs, but for the sake of good, not for the sake of progess itself. There are few people whose perspective I appreciate as much as ecks', and if we both are elected, I look forward to serving with both him and Tommy. It's truly the start of a new chapter, and I couldn't be more excited. MasterFredCommerce Guild(talk) 03:06, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
  20. Strong support. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 03:19, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
  21. A long-standing admin, ecks is dedicated to the wiki and is extremely well versed in both policy and technical knowledge, valuable qualities to have in a bureaucrat. I fully trust that he will represent the wiki with the site's best interests in mind, and look forward to what the future holds with the proposed BC team of Tommy, Fred, and ecks. Zed42 (talk) 10:39, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
  22. UberSoldat93 ClanMudhornSignet-Redemption (talk) 10:44, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
  23. Not hard to ponder over.Liverpool92Ackbar HS 12:26, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
  24. <-Omicron(Leave a message at the BEEP!) 13:40, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
  25. Green Tentacle (Talk) 17:31, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
  26. Ecks may be part of the "Old Guard" (to be fair, he's more like the "Middle Guard") but he's nothing like the two banned bureaucrats so I feel the comparison is unfair just because of his response to Fandom's intervention. I like him and always felt he represented well what a bureaucrat should be. GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Winterz (talk) 00:52, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
  27. Thanks ecks for indulging me with your answer below. As I said, it was an open question, as I believe such important "political" votes should be opportunities for the nominee to reflect and commit to our history, recent or not. In fact I would argue that future administrator and bureaucrat should be required to produce something akin to a small "open" essay on how they reflect on Wookieepedia, their own place, and whatever they feel like. Sure, everyone vote because of their experiences, and perception about the nominee, but it's also important IMO for the nominee to present a some kind of "declaration". "This is what and who your voting for". Anyhow, you have my support, my respect and my vote, ecks. You've always been helpful, and I especially appreciated your support during last year archive link project. I believe your experience is invaluable for this site, and I trust you will serve along the others Bureaucrats as best as you can. --NanoLuukeCloning facility 18:01, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
  28. Hanzo Hasashi (talk) 02:30, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
  29. Was waiting on the response to NanoLuuke's question. Commander Code-8 Hello There! 07:59, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
  30. It's good to have a leadership team with a diverse range of skills and opinions that can work together. Having read Eck's response to NanoLuuke's questions, I think we have a team that can strike the right balance between working cooperatively with Fandom and sticking up for us when needs be. Hope we as a community can work together despite our differences and whatever the world throws at us. Andykatib 09:07, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
  31. grunny@wookieepedia:~$ 15:12, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
  32. Ecks was one of the people who came to mind when asked about who I thought would be would be a good candidate for BC. Nothing more to add again, just that he thoroughly deserves this! Lewisr (talk) 01:26, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
  33. Sir Cavalier of OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 18:25, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Oppose

Ecks is undoubtedly loyal and devoted to Wookieepedia, and contributes a great deal of knowledge and experience to his work. However, I don't believe he is suited to represent the Wook as a bureaucrat or "figurehead of the community." In particular, I found his response to the past month's events very troubling. In my interactions with him, I've felt that he represents the "old guard" in the sense that his communication style leaves me feeling like he expects his word to be followed. When I think of administrators I'd approach with a problem with another user, he isn't among that list. He is someone I rely upon for some technical concerns and I would gladly nominate him if a position existed for all-around-site-wizard, but I can't support him for bureaucrat. Immi Thrax RainbowRebellion2 (talk) 21:06, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

  1. Rakhsh (talk) 22:29, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
Neutral
  1. Ecks is an amazing help with technical issues and an experienced reviewer and admin, but I also have similar views on his leadership to Immi. That said, a number of people have a lot of faith in his leadership and so I am open to see what he has to offer if he's elected. So I shall seat myself here. Braha'tok enthusiast (Hello there) 07:11, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
  2. Jedi Order ImpacticForce (Talk) 20:36, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
  3. After reviewing his response to NanoLuuke and seeing other people's support responses, I'm striking my oppose vote. Although the statement Ecks gave to Fandom still concerns me, I understand that it was a "straw that broke the camel's back" outburst. I also reviewed how he maintained a levelhead in providing responses on Twitter to people who were talking about the situation. Other people's comfort in dealing with him suggests there's an interpersonal thing between me and him, and that's something for me to work on with him. Immi Thrax RainbowRebellion2 (talk) 08:52, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
  4. I've thought about this for a while and I think this is where I'll have to land. Ecks' knowledge of this wiki, its history, and its technical workings is invaluable, and I have much respect for the years he has spent to attain it. However, I also share some of the concerns listed above. The events of the past few months were a heated time for everyone, including myself, and I've reached a point where I don't think I can objectively vote on this, so this is where I will be. Considering the current numbers, though, I recognize that Ecks will likely be voted into this position, and the support comments from others do put me at ease. With that in mind, I want to recognize that this is a chance for us to move past the failings of the previous bureaucrats and renew a commitment to good-natured, community-driven growth. And I hope that Tommy, Fred, and Ecks are ready to lead it. RattsT (talk) 09:51, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Optional candidate Q&A
  1. Why do you think we need another bureaucrat?
    The most significant privilege that bureaucrats have on Wookieepedia are not the extra buttons they are granted, but rather the role in interpreting consensus in difficult situations. This is an extremely rare situation but I think we need to be prepared for it regardless. For that sole reason, we need more than one bureaucrat and ideally the number should be odd so that we do not end up with a stalemate in these situations.
  2. How do you see the difference between an admin and a bureaucrat?
    I would like to think that bureaucrats are just administrators with some extra buttons. Like Tommy said, bureaucrats are not “head administrators” in the sense that they are not managers of the other administrators. The bureaucrat role is in my opinion a necessary evil, since someone must have access to not just on-wiki privileges but also off-site assets like the Discord server, social media pages, and so on. Of course, like any group ever, there is always a need for some level of internal leadership, which is why – in my view – bureaucrats should be administrators who play a prominent role not only in the overall community but also within the admin team. They should be users who have extensive experience as Wookieepedians and administrators but at the same time, they need be open to new ideas and feedback. Just like I will continue to participate in discussions and sometimes challenge new ideas, I hope that others – admin or not – will continue to do the same. Never should anyone be afraid of reaching out to a bureaucrat or administrator.
  3. What will you use your new status for if your nomination succeeds?
    Having access to some new technical tools will be convenient, of course, but beyond that there's not much that I see changing. I stay committed to creating the best Star Wars encyclopedia out there.
  4. How many admins do you think we need?
    Setting a hard limit is unnecessary. Over the years, we have had a very variable amount of administrators. The current team manages just fine (in terms of janitorial duties), but adding more committed Wookieepedians to the team would not hurt. I am always glad to see new users stepping up and assuming a greater technical and political responsibility.
  5. How many bureaucrats do you think we need?
    Per above.
  6. What should happen to admins and bureaucrats who disappear for awhile without warning, leaving many questions, projects, and that sort of thing hanging?
    Unfortunately, quite a number of administrators have disappeared over the years. I understand that real life circumstances can change, sometimes abruptly, and I believe our current policy of six months’ absence is fair. If someone feels the need to take a break for one reason or another, that’s okay. I personally served a year in the Finnish defense force in 2015 and I was more or less absent that entire year. As long as some sort of communication is made to the community, it’s all good. 1358 (Talk) 21:17, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
  7. Around a month ago, we faced a crisis like no other, and the conclusion has left us all hurting in different ways. Yourself have been very open with your feelings on the matter. Some time have passed, surely not enough yet, and I apologize for bringing this again to the table, but as we are voting for new bureaucrats, I feel that it should be an opportunity for the nominated to express on the record their "cooled" opinions and conclusions regarding that event and/or our general history/culture and/or our relationship with our own community and the general SW community at large, since it reflect on your ethos as administrators and most importantly possible future bureaucrats. Please, take as long as you need to respond, this is an open question, and you can take it wherever you like. Thanks. --NanoLuukeCloning facility 10:00, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
    Thanks for the question. What started as a simple procedural vote quickly developed into a complex struggle over not only the naming policy but over Fandom's authority and administrative abuse and authority. I personally supported the effort to change the naming policy and my issue was never with that; rather, it was about Fandom interfering in internal Wookieepedia processes and doing it in a manner that puts us as a community in a bad light. The vote in question was scheduled to end in less than 12 hours in support of the amendment, so Fandom's decision was a fait accompli if anything. Multiple administrators, me included, reached out to Fandom, hoping for a clarification on their Terms of Service, but Fandom did unfortunately not communicate with us before dropping this verdict. We (and many other big Fandom wikis) have had a problematic relationship with Fandom for a long time now due to various issues. This latest decision was just what broke the camel's back for me. Of course, I hope that we can work with Fandom in a productive manner, something that has already been occurring with UCP.

    As for the de-sysoping and global banning of two our of bureaucrats, I cannot really comment as I was not privy to the discussions that occurred over this. If the two bureaucrats violated Fandom's Terms of Use, then Fandom was obviously correct in banning them. I hope that all Wookieepedians - ordinary editors and administrators - are comfortable with bringing up abusive behavior with another administrator or in public on the wiki. A culture of bullying and intimidation is absolutely unacceptable and I - in my role as Wookieepedian and administrator - will continue to work on a positive and accepting atmosphere, whether I am elected bureaucrat or not.

    Your question was very general and if there is a more specific aspect you want my opinion on, I will be glad to answer. 1358 (Talk) 17:01, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
Comments
  • If you have any additional questions, concerns, or complaints, I will be glad to address them here or in private. Thank you to everyone for their participation in this RFB. It means a lot to me. 1358 (Talk) 21:17, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Nomination accepted via IRC. Tommy-Macaroni 11:27, 22 April 2021 (UTC)