RuneScape:Requests for adminship/Lil diriz 77

Lil diriz 77

Lil diriz 77 ^{Talk • Contribs • Last 20 Forum - Main - User talk edits • Edit count}

Hello! I'd like to nominate myself for adminship because I feel that the tools would help me in my editing experience greatly, in such ways that I don't have to ask an admin for help, then wait for a reply, etc. I consider myself a decent contributor, giving my opinion in discussions, reverting vandalism when I see it (or watch for it), and inputting content to help make our wiki the best of the best (little by little of course!). I know the responsibilities and requirements needed for a user to effectively be an admin, and plan to follow them. Of course, I am not perfect, and at least try to learn from my mistakes. I promise to never fully go inactive from the wiki (unless under extreme conditions), as I check the wiki almost everyday. I hope the community thinks I'm ready for this responsibility, and thus, I hope you'll post your opinions here . User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 02:29, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

I, Lil diriz 77, accept this nomination for adminship. I have read the policies concerning administrators. I realise that this nomination may fail. If I do get community consensus, I promise not to abuse my powers because I realise that this is a serious offence and if the community finds that I have done so, my powers will be revoked and in extreme cases I could be given a community ban. Signed, User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures. 03:06, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

Questions for the nominee

1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?

I'm sure I'll enjoy reverting vandalism. I plan on creating a system which will help give registered users and unregistered users a voice and opinion on the changes us more active users make to the wiki (I have proposed this here). I'd like to use my tools to help when categorizing, moving/renaming, and deleting images (they are my self-proclaimed specialty ). Of course, I'd also like to participate in general sysop duties such as maintenance edits.

2. What are your best contributions to the RuneScape Wiki, and why?
Myself, I favor my revamps to the Summoning familiars and Summoning obelisk articles:

I had spent days in my POH in HD fullscreen, summoning familiars and running across my grass in order to get a properly angled screenshot (this was before the wonderful and easy days of the orb of oculus ). I then spent 10+ minutes editing each familiar, uploading it to the wiki, and properly categorizing all of them.
I had spend 3 straight hours scrolling over the in-game World Map, delving into each dungeon, counting all of the obelisks and noting their locations.Then, I added any missing obelisks to the article, while recreating the article in a new format which uses location names right from the World Map. The Table of Contents on the article works wonders here.

Of course, I am mostly proud of my image maintenance. It's one of my favorite things to do; running around Gielinor taking screenshots, then exploring Photofiltre and Gimp for the most effective way to clean up the image.

3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?

I haven't been in any major fights or arguments directed towards other users, but I have been in some heated discussions on the Yew Grove and elsewhere. Maybe they weren't heated, and I was just getting very stressed over them, which I wouldn't be surprised by. To list a few, see:

I've also had a small, small conflict with Iggytoad in which I accidentally edited his Christmas Greetings template. His template consisted of a section within itself, so when I clicked the big [edit] link on someone's talk page, it brought me to the edit page of Iggytoad's template instead of the talk page section. Without noticing it, I added my comment to the template (instead of the talk page), which somehow angered him enough to report me to the CVU... not a real conflict, just a misunderstanding.

Additional questions (asked by the community if necessary)

Discussion

Support - It seems you are a major contributor with files, and I'd imagine administrative tools would be immensely helpful to you. Cook Me Plox ^Talk 06:34, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

Support - You are a great user, and would do well with admin tools.

REDIRECT User:Matt is Me/Signature 07:24, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Sup Drizzl3, you're focused, you understand how to improve, and you're a great contributor to the Wiki. You're a good all-rounder, and I'm sure you'll make a great admin, the only problem I see is your lack of anti vandalism work, also I think we've gotten to the point where there's almost too many admins, but hopefully this won't get in the way for you.

REDIRECT User:Swizzl3d/Sig 13:50, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - In my opinion, as long as someone can use the sysop tools effectively for the betterment of the wiki, there can never be too many admins

. Of course, this doesn't mean we should just give out the tools to anyone, obviously, they'd have to be trusted in general by the community. I mean, 5 years after opening the wiki, we have 70 admins. In the next 5 years, I'd be glad to see 70 more. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 16:18, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

Pending - Until you can demonstrate that you have a legitimate need for sysop tools. "I want to be an admin because I don't want to wait for admins to help me" is not a reason to become an admin. Andrew ^talk 16:26, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - What I meant by that was explained in the first question,: I'd like to use my tools to help when categorizing, moving/renaming, and deleting images. If you look at my deleted contributions in the File: namespace, you'll see that I've recently speedy d'ed a few images due to them being duplicates of [[:File:Novite.png]] or [[:File:Argonite-cx.png]]. By duplicate, I meant that they contain, for example, 2/5 novite or argonite armor pieces than said images. Said images are multipurpose (can be used on 5 pages), while the speedy d'ed images could only be used on 2 pages. Multipurpose is better, and takes up less space on the wiki.

So, if I had admin tools, I could fix a number of problems here, with ease:

Delete 'duplicate' or 'non-multipurpose' images. (Where I would then upload a multipurpose that I created myself)
Rename (move) badly named images (e.g. 'File:Rsking390_rswiki_image.png' which contains the pixels of a quest cape)
Delete .jpg images, so I could then upload a .png in which someone could update

All of these things would just make this process a whole lot easier for me. With the release of the Dungeoneering skill, I've got a [[Template:Dungeoneering Melee|whole lot of images]] to move around, delete, and reupload. It's a long and complicated process that would just make things so much easier and faster if I had the tools. Might I add that there's few, few people who would be willing to do this work?

If this is too long of a reply to post on an RfA... apologies

. At least now everyone can see my reasoning here. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 16:39, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

Support, per above - ily <3

Elijah ^talk

21:52, April 18, 2010 (UTC) ~~User does not have 50 required edits. Halo^Talk 22:01, April 18, 2010 (UTC)~~

Restored. His old account was User:InstantWinston, but he ditched it because he had an online stalker. He's a forum admin. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 22:06, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

I see. Halo^Talk 22:10, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 22:12, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

It wouldn't matter anyway, as any registered user may comment on a rfa, there is no 50 edit barrier. YUQMDMX^rwojy 22:18, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

True >_> That's for UOTM. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 22:20, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I have never supported a candidate that I do not feel has a need for sysop tools. (Incidentally, that includes Stelercus. I'm starting to regret opposing his RfA <.<) I've taken a look at your edit report. It seems that you have edited the CVU fewer than 25 times, since it does not show up in your most commonly edited pages. Also, you have not warned vandals sufficiently for the warnings to show up in your most common edit summaries list. The only one that I saw was GEMW 1, which you handed out only 15 times. Since you have mentioned anti-vandalism as a major part of your adminship, I cannot support this as I do not see enough evidence that you will be a strong anti-vandal. Furthermore, I recall seeing not a long time ago a semi-retired message on your userpage. Who's to say it won't happen again? --Liquid^Talk 00:13, April 19, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I know for a fact that I am not a fantastic anti-vandal. I think you've misunderstood. Maybe I didn't express enough that being an anti-vandal won't be a major part in my future work, but I have expressed that the File: namespace will be. In my answer to the first question, I was just listing the things that I would do with adminship over time. I did not mean to say that I plan to be a major anti-vandal, because I know I will not be.

I know I've not edited the CVU many times, but this is just because I have not yet found a use for it. By this I mean that after I do warn a vandal, 5 minutes later, they've stopped. The CVU is meant to be used when a contributor needs to be blocked. I've either yet to come across a situation like this, or minutes after I warned the vandal an admin came along and blocked them already. Sure, I will when I'm an admin, it will be partially my duty to block and remove posted vandals on there. But right now, as a regular user, I really can't add much to it. Maybe I'm just very lenient and I like to give people chances; I'm not the type of person to see a negative bad faith edit and think "FINAL WARNING OR ELSE BLOCK!". If you look at the anti-vandalism I have done, you'll see that I give 1, 2 or even 3 warnings before I have to report to the CVU, and as I've said, it usually doesn't become this serious. I know that some admins are much more strict, giving out blocks right away, but I just can't bring myself to be that strict. I don't want to be like that.

I hope you don't oppose me just because of my lack in anti-vandalism. I'll make much more use out of the tools in other areas, as I have explained, but I just can't be someone who watchs the RC for hours upon time every single day. I patrol the RC when I'm surfing around the wiki with not much else to do. It's surely not something I'll just think of randomly in my head to do.

Regarding my semi-retired message on my user page, I really wonder what the problem with this is? If I do become an admin, does this mean I'm not allowed my freedom? Am I not allowed to go inactive or something? Maybe I have bipolar depression, maybe I'll get a job, maybe I'll have a lot of school work, maybe I'll have to constantly train for track and field. I don't see the problem with inactivity, especially since we have 70 administrators with 26 of them being inactive. I'm sorry if I sounded rude in this paragraph, but I truly don't see the problem with inactivity.

And something I'd like everyone to know:

We have enough anti-vandal admins, in my opinion. I'd like it if future responses to this RfA don't grill me for my low anti-vandalism count. I'll make much more use out of the tools than what everybody expects to be constant anti-vandalism. Even today I see people leaving messages on each others' talk pages saying they got an edit conflict when trying to rollback. As I've said, anti-vandalism will be part of my duties, but it won't be major. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 01:00, April 19, 2010 (UTC)

I'd just like to say that I personally would rather users warn the vandals themselves, than go straight to the CVU. Most of the vandals give up after 1 warning. It actually pisses me off when I go to the CVU and find users posting reports for vandals who have 1 offense of adding a few zeros to a GEMW page or something. Chicken7 ^>talk 06:32, April 20, 2010 (UTC)

I think I might follow that from now on. I'll give one warning if it's obvious vandalism, two if the first isn't so obvious, then after that, it's off to the CVU.

Thanks for that Chicken. Now I know I'm not the only one who sees that most vandals don't persist or keep vandalising. After one edit, it's not like I can edit the CVU much. I haven't had any opportunities to. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 06:42, April 20, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - It doesn't appear to me that you've shown any great need for admin tools. Because you have indicated that you wont be performing anti vandal work as much as image maintenance, I looked through your deleted contributions and saw only a few (20-30) times where you tagged images for deletion. I could see the need for admin tools if you were always tagging images for deletion, but it seems to me unnecessary if we have more than enough admins to handle the occasional speedy-d. As for moving images to new names, this does not need to be done very often, and when it is required it is as easy as leaving a quick message on RS:AR, or downloading and then uploading the image under a different name. As for categorizing images and creating that feedback system, neither of those need sysop tools. I just don't see how you would use the tools if given them. --Aburnett ^(Talk) 01:40, April 19, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I'm afraid those deleted contributions were the past. My request for these tools has to do with what I will do in the future. I requested these tools because if this is the first time I've wanted to do such a huge project like organizing and uploading high quality images for each and every Dungeoneering weapon and armor. You'll see that I've already started this, mostly completing the Novite and Argonite armors, but then as I considered starting Mamaros, I thought that to myself that this job would be much easier with admin tools. They would really be less weight on my shoulders, and would save me much time in doing this. As for moving images, you'd be surprised when a new skill comes out; [[:File:Helmtoplegs.jpg]], [[:File:Capture16.jpg]], [[:File:1234.png]], and [[:File:Pro 2h.png]] are all perfect examples of this. As for categorizing images, I didn't mean using the Category: namespace, I meant organizing them in general (see the "multipurpose images" and "non-multipurpose" images theory up at the top of this page and on File talk:Dragon boots detail.png). This 'organizing' consists of both renaming, redirecting, and deleting images that need to be. Sorry for that misunderstanding. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 02:17, April 19, 2010 (UTC)

Thought I should mention that you don't add move requests to RS:AR, you use {{M}}. User:Stelercus/Signature 18:50, April 19, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Stelercus, I'll be sure to use that from now on

. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 19:10, April 19, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral - While I do think you are a great contributor to this wiki, I fail to see why you would need the admin tools. Lil cloud 9 02:21, April 19, 2010 (UTC)

They would make my tasks alot quicker and less painless. Simply put. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 05:29, April 19, 2010 (UTC)

support - per all ablove Ppi802 12:54, April 19, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Going straight to the point, above in the first question about administrative work, you mentioned that you would participate in anti-vandalism, however, I find that you are too soft on vandals. In a reply to a user's oppose above, you explained that you would give up to 3 warnings for a single vandal, which in my opinion, far too excessive and really stretching RS:AGF. I understand that some administrators lean more towards assuming good faith, and generally give more warnings than blocks, however, giving 3 warnings (or in other words, chances) is really pushing it, and not altogether reasonable. This leaves me questioning your effectiveness when it comes to anti-vandalism, and I am unsure as to whether you would know how to use them well.

On a side note, you said We have enough anti-vandal admins, in my opinion. I'd like it if future responses to this RfA don't grill me for my low anti-vandalism count. In response, expect to get grilled. If you have read the guide to Requests for adminship, you should be aware that the process can be very harsh, and the community will analyse your contributions thoroughly, so I would advise against requesting that users not "grill you for your low anti-vandalism count". C.Chiam^Talk 13:21, April 19, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Thanks for that Caleb. It's very rare that I would give out 3 warnings. I usually give out 2 only if they are obviously trying to disrupt the wiki. Things such as "alskdjjkme" may be a test edit, and I would treat it as so.

I understand that an RfA is supposed to be harsh, but I really just didn't want this RfA to turn into an anti-vandalism RfA. By grilled I meant constantly asking me about my anti-vandal work when that's obviously not the main purpose of me requesting this RfA. The "block" tool is one of the many tools a sysop can use; why is it so important? I can use the other tools well. I'm mostly requesting the tools so I can use them to help make my work with the File: namespace alot easier, quicker, and painless; not just for the sole purpose of reverting vandalism.

It seems as if the only reason a person should become an admin now is to be an anti-vandal. I don't get that. If I can use the tools elsewhere, then wouldn't it be for the good of the wiki? Most of the real feedback I'm getting here from everybody is about anti-vandalism, however, no one has considered that I might do great work in other areas. I understand that anti-vandalism is important in being an admin, but I've clearly expressed that it will not be my main priority. We have about 44 other active admins for that, and they do a pretty good job of it too. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 16:10, April 19, 2010 (UTC)

You seem to have an inability to take any criticism, the RfA process is for the community to assess you and see whether you have what it takes to be an administrator. So far, just about every oppose has you jumping in to defend yourself. We have already read your reasons for wanting to become an administrator and we don't need you to constantly debate every oppose we make.

In my opinion, if you want the mop and the bucket, show us that you understand fully how to use all the tools you are given. You repeat over and over again that you want the tools for some file work, fine, your anti-vandalism doesn't have to be excellent or anything, you just need to show that you have a good grasp of the rules concerning vandalism, because inevitably, you will use the block tool (and not just the block tool, but many of the other tools) and we need to see that you will know how to use it properly. So, even if your main reason for requesting sysop tools are for file work, anti-vandalism will still play an important part when we decide whether to support or oppose. C.Chiam^Talk 08:40, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

I've only been defending myself because just about almost everybody here has accused me for something irrelevant to my request. If I have a reason for doing something or not doing something, I would think it's my place to share it. I'm not trying to let people give their feedback, then just knock them down, I'm only trying to explain why such things happen or don't happen. Maybe I wasn't clear enough in my first post, my request. I think people are reacting to the first sentence "I'm sure I'll enjoy reverting vandalism" as if that's the main reason I'm requesting the tools. That's simply the way I typed it. If I were to move that to the back of the paragraph or the middle, I'm sure everyone wouldn't be so harsh, but that only proves my point that RfAs are too anti-vandalism focused.

I don't know how you can ask me to show you I understand fully how to use all of the tools I am given when I don't have them yet. I can't study something I don't have access to. Right now when I try to go to Special:Block, for example, it tells me the following:

The action you have requested is limited to users in one of the groups: Administrators, Wikia staff, Helpers, VSTF.

I am not any of those, therefore I can not look at the page to learn how to use it. You're asking me to study a textbook that is locked away in the teacher's cabinet.

Fortunately, I am an admin on the War of Legends Wiki, and so I can study the pages there. So, I am an exception in this case and can study the tools and learn how to use them.

But what about the other 70 admins? Did you request that they somehow must know how to use tools they don't have access to? I doubt that all of them were admins on other wikis, so there's no way they could have learned how to use the tools.

Anyway, you've asked that I have a good grasp on vandalism, so I'll give you all I've got:

I have use of the [rollback] tool, and I know it should only be used in obvious cases of vandalism. Otherwise, I should assume good faith and use the (undo) tool which allows me to give a custom summary to tell the previous editor what they did wrong.

{{Template:Test2}}, {{Template:Test3}}, Template:Test4, {{Template:gemw2}}, {{Template:Charm log 2}}, {{Template:error2}}, {{Template:deu}}, and {{Template:No Vandal}} are talk page messages that can be used to warn editors of their obvious vandalism.

{{Template:Test1}}, {{Template:gemw1}}, {Template:Charm log 1}}, {{Template:error1}}, {{Template:pov1}}, and {{Template:pov2}} are talk page messages that can be used for less obvious cases of vandalism, and are more like advisement on how an editor can improve their editing to comply with our policies and directions when editing pages.

{{Template:Block}} and {{[[Template:Vandal]]}} should be used to notify an editor on their talk page that they have been blocked.

The block log, Special:DeletedContributions, and Special:Contributions are all useful when looking at a user's history and their edits.

Special:RecentChanges is a very useful tool used to see almost automatically the changes made to every page on the wiki. It can filter out minor edits, my own edits, among others. The #cvn-wikia-runescape channel on our freenode IRC channel is even quicker than the RC (which gives updates every minute), giving updates maybe a few seconds after an edit is made.

The "diff" and history options in the RC allow myself to quickly see the differences recently made to any page.

Special:Block is the tool used to block a user, giving the options to choose how long they are blocked, if they can create an account during the time they are blocked, if they can send e-mail, if they can edit their talk page, and if they can edit from their IP or any future IPs they try to use. It should be used wisely and with careful thought, not a tool to joke around with.

Special:Protectsite (info) can be used to protect the entire wiki from editing, only to be used in extreme cases of vandalism such as a vandal bot actively running. The community should be notified that whoever enabled it did so and why.

My contributions and my edit report will show you the anti-vandalism I have done.

I hope that satisfies. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 19:12, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

That's nice, but it seems that you've only started being a heavy anti-vandal after several users opposed due to your lack of anti-vandalism. --Liquid^Talk 19:21, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

In all honesty, I already knew all of that stuff before I even started this RfA. I just didn't want to post it until someone asked for it as it's kind of a mouth full. Is it not my duty to try and improve on what others say I'm weak in? I'm trying to improve so I can pass overall and be able to use other tools elsewhere. I can't pass this test without making changes in my mind with how I anti-vandalize, and now that I already have made those changes, I feel like it would be a shame to have this RfA closed and then have me open up another RfA. If I've made the changes right now, then why wait until later to show you all that? I realize that I've made the changes halfway through the RfA, but I'm unsure if this is the right thing to do; am I supposed to wait until after the RfA to make changes? I don't see why they can't be made right now. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 20:13, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

Neurtal, leaning towards oppose - Per other opposers, I don't think you need sysop tools. bad_fetus^talk 16:17, April 19, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I'd like to see a real need for sysop powers. Plus...correct me if I'm wrong, but I've looked through your edits, and I can only find 1 edit to the CVU, which shocks me...I've checked multiple places and I just can't find anymore. Halo^Talk 22:47, April 19, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Read this carefully - Pft, why should I even request admin tools when I can just ask another admin to help me? I don't need admin tools, we already have enough people with them! </sarcasm>

I hope you see my point though. Only one of the users on this wiki needs admin tools. All of the other users could just ask that admin to do things for them. We only need one admin to block vandals, one admin to manage the interfaces, one admin to close threads, one admin to delete and move images. Etc.

But that would be hectic and unbalanced, not to mention a load of work for that admin, and thus, we need more admins.

Alright, we're up to 71. They've all given their reasons for wanting admin tools, mostly being to help the first admin and the rest of the wiki with anti-vandalism, with the various other reasons such as wanting them to make tasks quicker or easier.

Ok, so I've given my reason for wanting admin tools, but no one here seems to realize it after I've said it five times. I would like to have tools so they can quicken and ease my work with the file namespace, currently including the Dungeoneering armors and weapons.

But no, something totally irrelevant to my request interferes with this: anti-vandalism.

I understand that this is an important aspect in the wiki, but we have 71 admins to deal with it (not to mention the other hundreds of editors who revert/rollback and warn). I already do it casually and occasionally, why must I be some kind of master at it? I don't understand why everyone is so stuck on the fact that I've barely edited the CVU (which, again, I've already explained), or why I'm not a very, very active anti-vandal in general. Could someone please explain to me? Why?

If I can use the tools to drastically help me in my work, then that should be reason enough for the people who request it. I'd appreciate it if someone could tell me why I need to be a very active anti-vandal when that's not even what I'd be using the tools for (most of the time). User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 00:05, April 20, 2010 (UTC)

I would like to see quite a bit more anti-vandal if you are going to state that you browse it, and use that as one of your main reasons that you should be a sysop. "(I consider myself a decent contributor, giving my opinion in discussions, reverting vandalism when I see it (or watch for it), and inputting content to help make our wiki the best of the best (little by little of course!).)" If you want to remove that, I will let it go. And, I didn't say much of what you put there, thus I would appreciate it if you didn't put words in my mouth. Like Andrew said, I see no real reason for you to be a sysop. We need sysops who can be on around the clock (thereby invalidating your argument of we just need 1), but everyone obviously can't be a sysop. Not even every responsible, helpful, friendly person can be a sysop. People have to have a real need for it, and I'm not seeing that with you. Halo^Talk 02:40, April 20, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Haloolah, it was not my intention to put words in your mouth. I was simply replying to everyone on this thread, not just you. If you see something that doesn't look like you said, chances are, you didn't say it

. I tried to reply to everyone in one post, giving feedback and my opinion to everyone without their names.

In regards to the sentence you quote, yeah, I think it might be best if I take out the reverting vandalism bit. Maybe it might stop the obsession of anti-vandalism almost everyone one here has. I would like to participate in it, but it will not be my main priority. It seems all you're focused on is what I'd be doing on the side. Why not ask me about what I've said will be the main part of my work, for now? Does no one have any criticism or feedback about that?

I think you misunderstood my # of admins analogy. The point I was trying to make is that the people on this RfA have told me that such File: namespace things can be done by another admin, here, and thus, they say I don't need the tools. Ok, what about the other 71 admins? Why couldn't they just use RS:AR or the CVU or another admin's talkpage? Why didn't they need the tools? They didn't need the tools just as much as I do. I'm being treated unfairly here.

I'll end this here with a final question: what would you say is a real need for sysop tools? User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 03:27, April 20, 2010 (UTC)

I would say a real need means someone would use them a lot, and they would be beneficial. (I mean, I could use sysop tools occasionally, but I just don't find that I need them to be a contributing member of the community.) Maybe you would use them more than I think, but I can't say I've seen your name in the recent changes all that much. Anti-vandal isn't all being an admin is about, but I would like anyone requesting to be a sysop to have quite a bit of experience there, even if they don't plan on doing that as a main part of their agenda as a sysop. Halo^Talk 20:39, April 20, 2010 (UTC)

... I think that fits in with my reasoning for requesting these tools. I'll say it again; I will be using them a lot to help me in my work in the File namespace, and they will be beneficial to myself and the wiki's overall state in that I'll be able to do things faster and without much confusion or difficulty as opposed to if I didn't have sysop tools. It's not like I'll stop using the tools after completing [[Template:Dungeoneering_Melee|all of these]], I'll continue to use them effectively in other areas. I don't find that I need them either. No one does, however, they do help us greatly in our work, and so, why not request them? As I was going through the Novite armours, I realized how confused I was getting, what with the 10 tabs open in my browser, the need to keep clicking the game applet every 2 minutes so I don't log out of my solo dungeon, speedy deleting other inferior images, adding my uploads to their correct pages... and so, I thought, why not request for admin tools to help me out? This isn't a simple job.

TL;DR - None of us need sysop tools. We'd all do just fine with our {{D}} templates, our [undo] buttons, our {{M}} templates, etc. However, sysop tools make things alot easier.

Tbh, I don't think you've looked through my contribs for anti-vandalism enough. You say you'd like to see a little experience in anti-vandalim, but hey, that's what I've given you! I know for a fact I've watched the RC and reverted for at least an hour 10 times now. I know all of the anti-vandalism templates, I know when to warn and when to report to the CVU (based mostly on my own standards, as I'm allowed), and I even know the basics of blocking and it's interfaces (as I am an admin on the War of Legends Wiki). I don't know how much more 'experience in anti-vandalism' I can give you. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 21:58, April 20, 2010 (UTC)

I'm confused. Up there, you say you should probably take out the anti-vandalism sentence, now you are telling me you are an amazing anti-vandal. Which is it? (And if you had patrolled 10 hours...I believe you would have reported more than 1 person to the CVU...considering I've done no where near that and reported over 25 people to be blocked.) Something isn't adding up here. Halo^Talk 22:07, April 20, 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to make myself sound like an amazing anti-vandal at all. You asked for experience, and I gave you experience. I gave you the experience that I do have, even though it's not so much. You said: "Anti-vandal isn't all being an admin is about, but I would like anyone requesting to be a sysop to have quite a bit of experience there,".

I've already explained my reasoning for not reporting to the CVU, so your best bet there is to re-read what I said at the top. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 22:34, April 20, 2010 (UTC)

By the way, I don't think 10 hours is "amazing" in any way. I actually find that kind of novice. Over the 2 years I've been here, I've watched the RC for about 10 hours, roughly. That's not hardcore at all, that's just loosely watching over it and doing what needs to be done with it as I do other things, like listen to music, play RuneScape, edit other areas, etc etc. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 22:58, April 20, 2010 (UTC)

I gladly support anyone that shows a need for sysop tools, regardless of the number of sysops that we have. However, I have seen little indication from you that having sysop tools will really help you. None of the activities that you do require sysop tools, and there is insufficient evidence that you will be interested in anything that does require sysop tools in the future. (Sorry if that sounds a bit harsh, I'm in a hurry, and can't think of any better way to word it.) --Liquid^Talk 22:38, April 20, 2010 (UTC)

I honestly don't know how much more indication that I can give you people before I start repeating myself. If you haven't seen my post to Haloolah talking about how confusing and vast my current goal is, I politely suggest you read it. Maybe you and others would understand it more if you were the ones doing it. If need be I'll list all of the reasons why my current goal in Files is so confusing and challenging, and why sysop tools would help me stop this difficulty.

I'll say it again, NONE of the activities that any regular user does need sysop tools. Things like anti-vandalism, moving articles, creating templates can be done solo. Things that require sysop tools don't mean that regular users need sysop tools, they can just request help from another admin, no? No one needs the tools, we can all do things without them just fine and dandy. I know I don't need the tools, but neither have the past insert number here self-nominated admins.^{(I don't know how many admins self-nominated, can't be bothered to count them, I've made my point)}. We all want the tools to help us in our work. We are volunteering to edit this website, nobody needs anything. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 22:58, April 20, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral - "RFA's are becoming a weekly event and those that are shown are not always given full reasons to support their support vote, even though votes don't really exist on this, or any, Wiki (remember Forum:'Per' votes do not help?)." While I stated this on Liquidhelium's RFA, I still believe it to hold true. I do not oppose you on the grounds for the lack of anti-vandal work, however I do not support or oppose based upon this recent fetish with these requests. However I neither like nor dislike the increasing number of administrators on this wiki.

"An overwhelming reason I nominate people is to try to keep our sysop level constantly mixed with fresh insights and fresh ideas, and to prevent stagnation and to avoid a power group type thing (I have heard this has happened on other wikis to their extreme detriment, although I do not personally know of any since this is my only wiki)." I feel I most quote Degenret01 here to help my point. We do have an abnormal amount that will continue to grow, but I hope it's not out of longing for just tools, and use them as you intend to. To help your, and the community's, project(s).

I can agree with you that many files are uploaded without a decent name. I am aware only administrators can move files and this would help any user (I still lack in-sight on why it's more precious than a article move). To me, this isn't enough but I'm biased. I cannot offer any advice as I see none to give, however I must add that (just as others previously mentioned) these requests are supposed to be brutal and instead they have been on a lax trend. Ryan PM 02:35, April 20, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Thanks for a post that I actually understand and see where you're coming from. In reply to your second paragraph, I assure you this RfA is not out of the longing for tools or the feel to conform with the other's recent actions and create it. It is out of using them for the ease and convenience in my editing, which leads to the betterment of the wiki.

As for files, I agree. I don't see why a file move is more precious than an article move. It's a shame, in my opinion.

I really wish the others would look at something other than my anti-vandal record. It is a lax trend. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 03:26, April 20, 2010 (UTC)

Comment I would just like to say that despite that fact your not receiving a lot of support in your request for tools, I feel certain that all of our regular users recognize the valuable contributions you make to this wiki. Please do not take these opposes as slights against your efforts and contributions. It may be hard to separate one from the other in your mind, but I assure you that many people notice your a top editor here man.--Degenret01 08:29, April 20, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I agree. I think you're a fantastic editor and a great contribution to this wiki. I'm only not supporting due to views I have about all RfAs. Chicken7 ^>talk 08:33, April 20, 2010 (UTC)

Crying - Sadly, I'll have to stick to Neutral. I'm sorry, but I think the opposers' arguments are at least as strong as the supporters', so I cannot fully support this. However, this does not mean that I don't appreciate your work - you have done a lot and will probably do much more good things for the wiki. We need more people like you. Oil4 ^Talk 16:05, April 20, 2010 (UTC)

To Degen, Chicken, and Oli - Thanks guys. That means alot to me. Thanks for brightening my day . I assure you the same goes out to you. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 18:56, April 20, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral - You're a great contributor, I just don't think that you are the right choice for adminship. Because I can't really give a good reason for this, I'll go neutral. Ajraddatz _Talk 22:48, April 21, 2010 (UTC)

Support - I don't get the direction the opposers are coming from. I agree, antivandalism is overrated when it comes to RfAs, and I think you've demonstrated a perfectly good reason for adminship. Telos 09:21, April 23, 2010 (UTC)

It is important for sysops to have anti-vandal experience, which he seems to lack. Halo^Talk 19:16, April 24, 2010 (UTC)

Really, what do you mean by lack? Do you mean I have no anti-vandalism experience at all? Or do you mean that I simply don't have enough? If the former, then I'd suggest you open your eyes a tiny bit more. If the latter, then that does satisfy your request. I do have anti-vandalism experience, even though it's not one of my daily activities, but it is still some. For now, I don't plan on being some kind of anti-vandal master, and so you shouldn't request such experience from me. You have not replied to my reply a bit further up, and it seems all you're doing is throwing the same arguments back at me with no input on what I'm giving back in the first place. I try to explain and give my arguments, but you just keep bringing up the same points. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 02:50, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

I mean that you don't have enough. Want proof? See this page. Use ctrl+f and search "counter vandalism unit", you will find only 6 edits, 5 of which were made in the past 3 days. This concerns me. I don't want you to be an anti-vandal master, I want you to be someone who contributes to it a lot more however. I have only been around since 2010 started basically, and I haven't been trying for anything, I've just reported random vandalism that I have seen, and I think I'm over 50 CVU edits now? There is no way you have browsed the recent changes for over 10 hours and only saw 1 instance of vandalism (as seen in your response above.) So, basically...I feel like you are lying to me. I think you are a great editor, I just can't say I see that you are ready for sysop yet. Halo^Talk 19:22, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry you feel like I'm lying to you, but I'm being completely honest. I feel like you're more misunderstanding me. The reason why you have so many more CVU edits than I do is that you are probably more strict than I. When I spot vandalism, I give out a warning first, and then if they persist, I would report to the CVU. However, most of the time, the vandals give up after my first warning. There have only been 5 instances so far where someone has crossed the line and I've had to edit the CVU, as you can see. I've been trying to be more strict recently thanks to yours and others advice, as some edits to pages just simply and easily show that a person is trying to harm the wiki. Now, in my head, anyone trying to harm the wiki = CVU report. If their edit is minor or obscured, then I'll give a warning first.

It seems like you think the only thing vandalism consists of is the CVU! I feel like you're only judging me on my CVU edits, but that's truly not all I've done to prevent and stop vandalism. When you judge me on my CVU edits, you're only judging me on a very very small percentage of my anti-vandalism work. I have given out many warnings. I have reverted many edits. However, as I've said, it usually does not have to become any harsher than this. I don't always have to report to the CVU because, for me, most people stop after their warning. I don't want you to think that I'm lying to you, but I think the only reason you're feeling that way is because my CVU edits don't show much activity.

As for 10 hours of RC-patrol and 1 instance of vandalism... hmm??? If that' what it sounded like I said, I'm terribly sorry, but I think you mixed up some numbers or something. I meant that over time, like, months, I've patrolled for a 'total of 10 hours. Not 10 hours all at once. In these 10 hours I've reverted many edits, but each vandal only seemed to have 1 or 2 offenses. I would give a warning for each of these offenses, but in my eyes, it never seemed serious enough to report to the CVU. Now I've changed my ways to be a bit more strict, but based on my previous CVU edits, that's the way it was. I was lenient.

I think you're a great editor too, but I think we're just not thinking alike. The only difference between us is that we have different ways of practicing anti-vandalism. You like you report to the CVU right away, while I like to give a warning or advice then wait for a next offense. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 20:35, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

I don't immediately report anyone to the CVU, my first reaction is to decide whether it was a good faith edit or not. Second I post either a no vandal warning, or a test warning, or a non-template message in a few cases. Third is when I report to the CVU if it needs to be done. I am NOT just looking at CVU, I'm looking at your edits and what you bring to the community as yourself. All your valuable edits in other fields (as in not CVU) are why I even bother. I feel like I was being lied to reading this, when you tell me that you spend all this time looking through recent changes, and yet when you opened this RfA, you only had 1 edit to the CVU. The other 5 have turned up in the past few days as more and more people have brought up this lack, and I feel as if you are only doing it to try and ram this through. I think sysops need quite a few more, I'm thinking at least 50+ good, solid edits, to even be considered. No, that's not a requirement, but maybe I hold people to higher standards than others. Maybe I'm asking to much. If you could get a good 50-100 CVU edits, you would have my full support for sysop. Until then, I'm afraid I will have to oppose you. Halo^Talk 20:44, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

Maybe "immediately" wasn't the best word. I know you give it thought and time before reporting to the CVU, what I meant to say is that I've given out more than one warning to a person, as opposed to you who only gives out one.

I don't see how you feel lied to. You still think 10 hours is alot?? I think that's very, very little. That's over the course of MONTHS. It's not alot. You immediately think that 10 hours should = a load of CVU edits when in reality, that's not how it works with my anti-vandalism system. I've changed my anti-vandlism system to be a bit more like yours, a quick "Warning! Eh, still wanna keep vandalising? CVU report!" type-strategy if the vandalism is minor. Major vandalism such as replacing words with potential curse words or profanities or copy-pasting 100 @@@'s would result in an immediate CVU report, as they are obviously trying to cause harm.

I'm not trying to ram this through, I just think you're too focused on something that's not under my control. I can't make edits to the CVU unless a vandal ignores my first warning, or unless they majorly vandalise. Since this strategy is new to me, give it some time for some CVU edits to pop up. I don't patrol the RC 24/7, and when I do, you can't expect 3+ CVU reports every night.

I'll do my best to try and get more CVU reports in, and I'll try to be more harsh as I realize I was being to lenient before. Thanks for your oppose. I think this RfA might be coming to a close now... User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 22:12, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

I would say to let it run it's course. I could definitely see you becoming a sysop in the future, but I don't think now is the time. You still have 6 days up there, and who knows, you may get it. I don't think it will be bad either way, but I think you might benefit more by just letting it run. And whether you get it or not, just remember that your edits are worth the same either way. Either way you are still a VERY valuable contributor to this wiki, but hey, not everyone can be a sysop. Halo^Talk 22:24, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

Then I'll let it run it's course. Thanks for your insight, I'll be sure to keep it in mind

. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 00:45, April 26, 2010 (UTC)

I have not seen you warn anyone of vandalism. Furthermore, your edit report does not show that you have used any of the vandalism templates over 14 times, save for GEMW 1, which you have used 15 times. I don't think that doing so little warnings prepares you to judge what deserves a block and what doesn't. That knowledge comes with experience. --Liquid^Talk 20:41, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

Liquidhelium, I advise you stop relying on the edit report as I use User:Quarenon's Template Toolbar script which didn't always input the summaries it does now. You can't rely on summaries. Maybe if you actually looked through my contributions you'd see that I HAVE warned alot of people. You're either half-blind or too lazy to look through my contributions, sir. I have no idea how you've never seen any of my warnings:

[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29]

And that's not including the test edit warnings I've given out, as they aren't really used for obvious vandalism.User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 21:37, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

Alright, if you say so. 29 is too few, in my opinion. If you continued, then I'd support your next RfA. 141.156.252.134 21:40, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

Then I'll continue with what I'm doing. Thanks. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 00:39, April 26, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral/Not Yet - While I can see that you would use the delete and file move rights well, the issue of your judgment arises. Giving vandals three chances is overkill. If they vandalize after a warning, it's clear as day that they are trying to cause trouble, and thus should be blocked. If you run again, I would like to see you take a more aggressive approach dealing vandals. I want you to have the ability to move and delete files, and I think that you have the potential to be trusted with the other rights, though I would like more time to observe you before we go ahead and give them to you. Keep up the good work.

As a side note, what is with all the hype surrounding admins? It is just a series of user rights added to ones account, and even the founder of wikipedia made it clear that it's not a big deal. The only aspects of it that needs to be taken seriously is the fact that your actions are considered an example to others and that you have the power to do a lot of damage, but your trusted to do a lot of good. Such a person should not be one in a group of elitists. User:Stelercus/Signature 22:53, April 24, 2010 (UTC)

I suppose it's too late in the RfA to say that I've changed my judgment with anti-vandals? If you look at the anti-vandalism work I did yesterday, I hope you'll notice that I've changed my ways to give a test edit warning (optional if that seems to be the case), then a warning. If the vandal still pursues, I report to the CVU. I agree that three warnings is overkill, but I don't think that I expressed this enough that this would be very, very rare, and would only happen in cases of extreme obscurity in their editing. In fact, I haven't even given out three warnings to a certain vandal! When I first mentioned three warnings, I was only giving a disclaimer that simply put, stuff happens, and that with each vandal that comes along, there will be the obvious and the not so obvious vandals. Three warnings would be given to the farthest "not so obvious" side of the spectrum.

I am not telling you that I've changed my ways COZ I WANTZ BE AMIN L0L. As I've said, anti-vandalism will be a side job, and I'm just trying to perfect it so that I can be given the tools for use with my main job, images. I can't pass my driving test if I'm still hitting cones, ya know? I hope it's not too late for you all to notice that I can change my ways if needed, and I am reasonable when it comes to being critiqued. I think it would be a shame to open up another RfA in the comings weeks/months when I have already made the changes that have been requested (with my anti-vandalism work).

But of course, if you need more time to observe me, then I'll wait. I'll start doing more anti-vandal work as it seems what I've already done isn't enough. However, it would be a shame to have to wait and make a new RfA as I'll probably be done with my current project which greatly screams for tools by then. I'm sure I'll be able to use them after I finish my project, but they would help a lot right now. Ah well.

On a side note, your paragraph about admins confuses me. I'm having trouble seeing what point you are trying to make with said paragraph as no one was really even discussing that. Who are you directing this paragraph to? I don't think anyone here including myself was trying to make a big argument about administrators. The only thing I've said about them are that it's obvious we already have a bunch of anti-vandal admins who can work around the clock, and thus I shouldn't keep getting harassed with the same arguments that "Diriz wouldn't be such an effective anti-vandal admin". I've made it clear at least 10 times that the main reason I've requested the tools at this time are for help with my work in files. I don't think adminship is a big deal, and I'm only requesting it for use of the tools. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 02:50, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

I thought it was a good time to say that, as I think there are multiple people across the wiki, if not the wiki as a whole, who tend to feel that way. I did not have any particular users in mind when I said it. User:Stelercus/Signature 16:27, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

And I forgot to hit on another thing you said. I understand that you will mainly be using the tools for moving and deleting files. Cops are always given all the tools needed to catch anyone for any crime, even if the city they live in only has trouble with murder. If you want to be an admin, like a policeman, you need to be "trained" in such a way that you know how to use all the tools, not just two, or I can see several issues arising. User:Stelercus/Signature 16:31, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

Well, I agree it was a good time to say it, too. Thanks.

I understand that. I know I need to learn how to use all the tools, but is this the place for that? Hell, I don't think we even have a "place" for admins to learn how to use their tools except for the Help: namespace and the message from a b'crat they get on their talk page if they're successful. It would probably be beneficial if we created some kind of tutorial system for future admins, but that's another Yew Grove thread for another day...

I know the basic tools of an admin (as I've mentioned, I'm an admin on the WoL Wiki), but I would be grateful if someone taught me how to use the rest. In touch with our anti-vandalism conversation here, I've already looked over Special:Block and it seems pretty simple to use. I know that blocked vandals should be notified of it on their talk page, and infinitely blocked vandals get {{t|Banned}} on their user page. If there's anything I'm missing here considering blocking, well, hey, I'm learning, no? User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 17:44, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

I've expanded on my anti-vandalism knowledge above, in a reply to Caleb. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 20:35, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

The reason that people are looking for past anti-vandalism experience is because that's how you learn to combat vandalism as an administrator and use your tools effectively. If you're always reporting or warning vandals, you'll get a feel for when other admins decide that a specific offense warrants a waring or a block. Once an user gets admin tools, they may not know all of the specific technical elements of blocking etc., but they know what they should be doing because of their experience. That's why I feel prior experience is necessary. --Aburnett ^(Talk) 22:23, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

I guess my main problem with this prior experience stuff is that no one is being specific enough on what I should be doing to have prior experience. Should I be patrolling the RC every day? Should I have 100 CVU edits? Should I have given out 100 warnings? What? I consider what I've already done to be prior experience, but it's obviously been rejected multiple times, so I ask everyone,

Comment - What would you think is enough prior anti-vandalism experience? User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 00:42, April 26, 2010 (UTC)

First of all, I disagree with everyone who is opposing per not enough counter-vandalism experience. If you look at exactly what goes into the administrator user group, counter-vandalism tools only make up for around 10-20%. For you, enough counter-vandalism would most likely be reverting a few edits per day, and reporting users to the CVU/admins on the IRC. Ajraddatz _Talk 00:49, April 26, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose- I just don't think you are ready because you only have 1,250 mainspace edits and then have 1,150 user talk edits, you are active on the yg but as a lot of people have said you also have almost never used the CVU. Also your reason that " I don't have to ask an admin for help, then wait for a reply, etc" is just really snobby. Sentra246 08:59, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

Poor reasoning. I opened an RFA with less than 500 mainspace edits and it passed. User:Stelercus/Signature 16:27, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, maybe if you tried doing my job you'd know how damn frustrating it is. I'm still up for listing all of the reasons why it's so confusing and stressful if you'd like me to. I know RfAs are supposed to be harsh, but there is no need to be rude. I'm obviously active in the mainspace and I'm obviously an easy guy to talk to. I have said why I don't edit the CVU, and looking through my contributions for the last few days you'll see I've become more strict in anti-vandalism and I've started to edit it when a vandal needs to be blocked. I doubt you've even read that much into the discussion and my contributions, as other users have passed their RfAs with much less than I've done (as Stelercus said). Calling me a snob isn't helping anything. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 17:44, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

I would argue that you are being rude in some of your responses. We are not trying to be overly harsh, but admin powers should only be giving to the most deserving members of our community. Sure, if you accept a nomination then you obviously feel tat you fulfill that requirement, but it's important to remember that others may not feel the same way. You don't have to agree with them, but you should accept their opinions, even if it's different from yours. --Aburnett ^(Talk) 22:23, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

Then I apologize. It's not my intention to be rude. If I seem too much like I'm rejecting everyone's opinions, or if I'm being rude, I'd expect them to tell me. I thought I was having friendly, but harsh arguments with the people here. If someone thought otherwise, well, it's not my job to read minds, but I still apologize. I am taking everyone's opinions into consideration so I can become a better contributor in the future. Sorry if I'm defending myself too much, but I guess that's just my nature; if I have alot to say, then I'll surely say it. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 00:39, April 26, 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't try to be rude and sorry if i was but that was just how i saw it, also i could think of any other words to use, and Sterclus yes but you had about the same amount on the forum and other namespaces and also all your work with the wiki post.

Sentra246

10:50, April 28, 2010 (UTC)

(2)

If anyone has as much lag as me on a regular basis, then they will require a new section to continue discussing. Please do not remove this section. User:Stelercus/Signature 16:27, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Lil diriz is always helpful and a contributer, not a vandal fighter. As he stated, "So, if I had admin tools, I could fix a number of problems here, with ease: Delete 'duplicate' or 'non-multipurpose' images. (Where I would then upload a multipurpose that I created myself) Rename (move) badly named images (e.g. 'File:Rsking390_rswiki_image.png' which contains the pixels of a quest cape) Delete .jpg images, so I could then upload a .png in which someone could update" He clearly states he needs the tools for easier editing on the Wiki. He is helping the sole cause of bettering the site. I support that. http://i1016.photobucket.com/albums/af290/porp109/sig1.png Spam me w/ lolcats Is <insert name here> awesome? I don't know, let me check... 10:37, April 28, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral - I'm going to be brave, bold and a bit mad, but I'll make my comment from the heart, first of all We have more than enough admins in fact, we have the highest admin-to-article ratio in the entire solar system of wikias, and we have most of them from one or two time zones and not much admins who reside in the other time zones, I'd seen (when I was unable to edit) a vandal edit on a notable page which survived without being scrutinised by admins because most were asleep, and often when it's vandal season on the admin's time zones, they compete with each other to catch someone, one would give a warning while another gave a ban to the same person within the timescape of a few seconds.

On the other hand, I also find it strange to see oppose edits concerning Anti-vandals, as far as I'm aware, adminship was never just about being a robotic vandal-killing-drone, admins are also about protecting pages, reverting a vandalbot's megaspam and answering reports. As someone above put it, we have enough anti-vandal admins, and most arn't even online, with a ever-growing administrator population, a admin's focus on fixing articles isn't going to ruin the majority's efforts in having vandals blocked, is it?

Then there's people opposing for "not having enough edits" when I first came here, most people who were sysopped had less than 2k mainspace edits, and 1k of mainspace edit was the benchmark for people supporting, then some, like Soldier 1033 (Andrew) managed to become sysops without having 1k edits during their RFA, when Andrew had his RFA, what he said was "quality over quantity", most don't know the quality of Lil Diriz's edits. Stelercus passed his RFA dispite having only so much edits, Lil Diriz's edits are more or less three times that of Stelercus's, what makes the difference between their qualifications for being an administrator? Lil Diriz has been here for quite a long time, and he has a relatively high amount of edits. I'm not going to support or oppose since the two sides of the arguement balance each other out. That's all I'm going to say, it's more than enough Btzkillerv has entered the building! 15:22, April 28, 2010 (UTC)

I should mention that number of admins should never play a roll in an RFA decision. While that is a fully valid reason to keep the number of B'Crats low, adminship is something that should be given to any and all trusted users who we believe can do some good with them. User:Stelercus/Signature 20:54, April 28, 2010 (UTC)

Per Steler, you are putting waaay too much emphasis on the sysop tools. All editors are equal, and if a user can make use of the tools then they should be granted to them. Ajraddatz _Talk 21:04, April 28, 2010 (UTC)

I concur. A large number or the recent RfAs have been centered on the idea that we have "too many admins". I think this is a poor assumption. As has been stated earlier in this thread, sysop tools should be bestowed on all users who are trusted, regardless of the number or admins. ʞo oɔ 16:59, April 29, 2010 (UTC)

Please, do read all of what I've said before making your comments.

Btzkillerv has entered the building!

14:50, April 30, 2010

(UTC)

I did, though I don't see how the rest of your comments diminishes any of the points above. User:Stelercus/Signature 01:13, May 1, 2010 (UTC)

Support - I personally believe that there is a much greater amount of people who help work in the CVU area of the wikia, in comparison to the amount of people who work in the image area of the wikia. I believe that he will make great use of the tools to help replace old outdated and JPEG images and replace them with better replacements. I guarantee you, that there are probably a few admins who user their tools mostly on the CVU area of the website, therefore rendering the image and technical areas a little less observed. He is willing to fill the boots of these areas, and whilst he won't be doing 24/7 CVU work, he will be occasionally checking for vandalism when he feels it may be needed. I know plenty of people are going to comment on this and start ranting to me about the policies, but in all honesty, he deserves and can make great use of the admin tools. Rhys ^Talk 17:17, April 30, 2010 (UTC) Edit: Woops, Failed to sign

Support - Diriz has expressed a good need for the tools, and looking over his contributions, I can see that he would make a fine sysop. Ruud ^{(talk)(Suggest me naems)} 11:53, May 1, 2010 (UTC)

Pre-closure comment - I realize this RfA will be closed today, May 2nd. I'd just like to say, sorry if I argued a bit too much, but I had a lot to say I guess I'm naturally defensive. I apologize if it seemed like I shut down people's opinions; all of them were great and reflective for me. Whether this RfA is successful or not, I've taken your negative feedback, and I plan on making necessary changes where I feel are needed. Thanks for everyone's input. Don't take this post the wrong way; although the RfA closes today, comments are obviously still allowed until then, so if you have something to say, say it. I just wanted to say this before I didn't have a chance to. --Lil diriz 77 04:00, May 2, 2010 (UTC)

Rfas can be very harsh, but as long as you realize that most are just trying to help, then no harm done. UUWC^rwojy 04:07, May 2, 2010 (UTC)

I would personally like to add that I think you're a great editor, I'm just not sure if you're ready for adminship yet. Even at that, perhaps that is just me being dumb. Ajraddatz _Talk 04:09, May 2, 2010 (UTC)

Closed - As consensus was not reached, Lil diriz 77 will not be sysopped at this time. Laser Dragon 04:50, May 2, 2010 (UTC)