I'll get straight to the point: this wiki could use another administrator. I've been active in the community since January 2013 and have since earned a reputation for pasta review and scrutiny. As VCROC, I categorize pages, move files, delete articles, block users, and am familiar with the layout of the wiki. The rights associated with adminship are only a step above what I do on a daily basis. I meet all the requirements but edit count, though I've never been a supporter of this prerequisite; it encourages pointsgaming more than anything. Moreover, the caliber of my edits should warrant some lenience in this department.

I'm good with quality control and would like to help out with deletion appeal. Although every admin puts in his or her fair share, it seems Empy is swamped with most of the work; I can help take some of the burden off his shoulders. Additionally, having the ability to close threads would be really nice in the Writer's Workshop, where threads can be quickly derailed by authors who have trouble taking criticism. Other miscellaneous reasons for wanting the right include being able to delete useless comments on articles and delete blog posts without having to add ?action=delete to the end of the URL.

If you don't think I'm fit for the position, I respect your opinion and will not argue with you. Thanks for reading.

Support Support -
Neutral Neutral -
Oppose Oppose -

Please sign your replies!

Support Support -Not to beat a dead horse, but I feel like it is key to stress how much we need active Admins who are on the site on a daily basis. While our current admin group has stepped up our efforts lately, I still feel like we could use a little more coverage. Another admin would help catch stories that slip through unreviewed and will be able to contribute to the Deletion Appeal, Spinoff Appeal, and the false positive appeal. (The latter two, I have been the only reviewing admin for 4 and 3 months respectively. And before that, there were appeals that were months old stagnating on those pages.) Currently the division of labor in the wiki seems a bit unbalanced and another admin might help to lighten the load and distribute the work load.

While Bitter/Likferd may have had some issues in the past (around the time of his initial VCROC application), I haven't seen any issues lately. He even helped mediate with the Nommehzombies issue when we had users crossing over into our wiki (in protest?). I think he would do an admirable job during a time when contributions are needed. I can't really think of any negatives to promoting him. EmpyrealInvective (talk) 19:48, December 25, 2014 (UTC)

Support Support - I was leaning on Neutral purely because of your low edit count, but I understand that this is your third account so far on this wiki and your edits are indeed more centered on quality than quantity. I'd also like to add that I feel (in the time I have been active here, since mid-June) you have admirable etiquette on this site- you are consistently respectful, polite, and helpful to users new and old. As I don't plan to apply for admin for a long time, if ever, and Simba recently closed his own admin app, you seem to be the only viable candidate at the moment and I believe you'll do just fine. A picture is worth a thousand words, but I'd rather write a thousand-word story. (talk) 19:54, December 25, 2014 (UTC)

Support Support - SOMEGUY123 (talk) 21:49, December 25, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose Oppose - It doesn't matter if you have quality on your edits if you don't produce the necessary quantity. Plus, you had problems keeping your rights before -- and was even demoted from chat mod. Admin is like being neraly the boss of the wiki, and I'd not feel comfortable having someone like you in this high position, and so any current VCROC. Call me Mr. Raider, call me Mr. Wrong, call me insane. I'd say "I know what I want and I want it now. I want you, 'cause I'm Mr. J." 22:37, December 25, 2014 (UTC)

As I said before, I'm not going to bloat this page with back-and-forth exchanges that probably won't go anywhere. But there is one serious error that I feel needs to be addressed: I was not demoted from chat moderator. On the contrary, I resigned because of the differences I had with the moderator team at the time. Following the mass demotion, the chat was in need of competent moderators; there were only two or three at the time. I volunteered for the position in case there were a deficit. When the administration determined more moderators were needed, I was reinstated. Likferd (talk) 23:56, December 25, 2014 (UTC)

Support Support - Yup. I believe you're ready. Mystreve (talk) 23:22, December 25, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose Oppose - You've got a humongous history of things that make me incredibly uncomfortable with you having adminship. You're a good VCROC member, and yeah, we all make mistakes. But honestly, I feel as though your general attitude could use improvement, and that you could do better in watching what you say/type. Even this is something that matters in adminship.

Part of the reason I'm opposing is that adminship is only physically a step up, but our duties and responsibilities matter as well. Our attitude matters. Occasionally, I find you to be rude, and I've also seen a few times where you seem to jump ahead to a conclusion and assume something from this or that.

Don't get me wrong; I'm open to you having adminship one day, but I feel as though I need to see improvement in attitude and handling first. Because from what I've seen, it seems as though you have a tendancy to be a little bit of a "Shots-fired" person, so to speak. That One Freaky Producer Person 23:35, December 25, 2014 (UTC)

Support Support -

I think that his contributions as VCROC shows he has the level of activity and ability the wikia requires in a moment like this. He'd be a good addition to the team, I'd say --"You know why he's here? Why he's investigating the broken rules? He's not paid or anything. He likes it. He gets off on it" (talk) 00:35, December 26, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose Oppose - Per Callie and Dinkleburg. Do you hear that? That's the grape roaring 02:40, December 26, 2014 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.