Forum:The State of the Wiki

Alright, for all you wannabe admins, this is my essay for you to improve this site. The following is what I observed from my time as an admin, I am trying to keep it as unbiased as possible. I'm not an admin anymore (wewt!) so I have a much looser leash so I don't need to be afraid to speak my mind.

First, let's build some background information on the current active admins. Zerouh, is a good person at heart but can sometimes put his union first, as you can see the majority of his edits are talk page edits and edits on his union, he eagerly updates his union page every so often, he can easily be contacted through his talk page, he is usually quick to respond. Zerouh usually likes to work alone on templates and other things, you shouldn't be nosey and try to fix up things that he messed up on, just leave him a message and he should fix it promptly. Now to Soldier 1033, he too is good at heart but can seem to bear the role of 'dictator' but that's only because he is the only active veteran admin on this site and he has a lot more experience with the policies and other admin related stuff.

Secondly, I'll take you through the basics of adminship. At first you feel so good to be an admin, you get like 2 new tools! The new tools are the ability to protect pages and block users, neither of which should be abused. Later you notice that not all of the admins will agree 100% of the time, don't jump the gun and say you have the best ideas and that everyone should listen to you, that's not how it works, you should discuss with all the active admins and come up with a compromise (that didn't happen when I was admin). Also, being an admin does not make you the god of this wiki, you're only the janitor of the wiki, you clean up all the crap here. If you enjoy cleaning up the crap of the wiki, then admin is the job for you!

Finally, these are, in my opinion, ways to improve the wiki in the future. I have started a poll on the main page asking whether you are willing to vote in an RfA/R/B. Also on a side-note, how you vote on an RfA should not be based on if he's your friend or enemy, it should be based on whether the person will be a good admin or a bad one. Also, everyone who got admin or rollback rights from Soldier should re-do their request because the community can be less biased and more understanding than a sole person.

Comment please. ʇןoʌǝɹ pǝɹ 20:55, September 20, 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment- Well spoken, what you have said is well presented and thoroughly un-biased and the poll on the main page is a clever idea. Im glad that people see Soldier in the same way and I have also looked at Zerouh's edits and what you say is true. PS: Have I commented in the right place? ;D 21:14, September 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * Lol, yeah you commented in the right place but from now on you should put 'Comment' preceding your comment on a forum. I did it for you this time, and thanks for the support, I appreciate it. ʇןoʌǝɹ pǝɹ  21:21, September 20, 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment: While I do thank you a great deal for pointing out my many advantages as an administrator, I would like to say that I can, and must, edit my own union as well as assist the community. Editing the union I am from's pages is necessary, though as pointed out I also assist the community, it is not bad to do both. Once again though, the many thanks for your quite generous description of myself. I absolutely agree that how you vote on any formal matter on this wiki should be as least biased as you can be. However, the last point where you point out that sysop or rollback powers from Soldier should be redone I do disagree with for a few reasons. First, I am currently the only active administrator that I am aware of who received such status from Soldier, but you did point out many advantages of myself as an admin and I have always stood for the wiki sites best interests so it does not apply as critically and as I will point out in my second point that since powers have not been abused by any current admins or bureaucrats, that it is probably safe. second, there are a lot of people with rollback powers, and since none have been abused, it is not necessary to re-do any of those. Rollback abilities do not need to be decided by the community in my opinion, if a bureaucrat feels that someone deserves such, then it is fitting. You also pointed out that now you are no longer an administrator, you can speak your mind, I feel that regardless of if you are an administrator, member, or even bureaucrat, you should always be able to speak your mind; it is a necessary part of any well laid out foundation and system. I am absolutely for bringing back the Request for Administrator and Request for Bureaucrat and having the community decide in whatever may occur in our future on this wiki. Quite well done. ゼロウ  Talk __UT  22:22, September 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I tried to be unbiased so I looked hard at both good and bad qualities of both the active admins. ʇןoʌǝɹ pǝɹ  22:28, September 20, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Mind explaining what the point of this is? Offering your personal opinion about this wiki's admins? Falsely claiming that admins are on a "tight leash"? You are sadly mistaken. 22:39, September 20, 2010 (UTC)


 * Maybe if you took the time to actually read it, and not use your selective sight, maybe you would understand why this is here. If you haven't noticed, the supporters are The Excel, I Ranger I, Zerouh, and I. Some of the most prominent editors on this wiki. Your not even active, all you know about the wiki in present is what has been said on your talk page, even you said that you only check this wiki if there is a message on your talk page, it's like what the British did to the Colonists, salutary neglect, you enforce restrictions without knowing the true extent of the damage on the wiki. ʇןoʌǝɹ pǝɹ  22:49, September 20, 2010 (UTC)