FANDOM


Lucafriz

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of an unsuccessful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.
Nomination

User is paramount to new card pages being created. Though they had some issues in the past as a relative new editor, they have clearly grown since then. I have no reason to believe they would abuse these powers and find they would get some use out of them in the work they're already doing. Cheesedude (talkcontribs) 23:58, July 4, 2016 (UTC)


Thanks for the opportunity, I accept. (Lucafriz (talkcontribs) 02:58, July 5, 2016 (UTC))

Result - unsuccessful 
The candidate was unsuccessful on this occasion. The user has shown unfamiliarity with both procedure and the nature of the work that administrators have to deal with, and it is felt that a greater understanding on these points needs to be demonstrated in order for the user to be entrusted with the rights and responsibility of Sysop.

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve as an administrator. Please answer the following four questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
A: I intend to continue to do what I currently already am doing on the wiki, and that's helping to make new card pages in a timely manner (either when information on the cards becomes available on the Org, or when the card debuts on the anime/manga). Even if I am not involved in the creation of an article, I will endeavor to make it more presentable to those who see it by linking gameplay terms in the card text to the relevant articles, and also adding property entries for the card's effects. I will also strive to move card pages to their official TCG English names and placeholder Org names (if any exist). I cannot totally promise accuracy, given that my grasp of Japanese is still somewhat poor (though I'm making efforts to improve on it), but I can promise speed in getting these articles up quickly and laying the framework so that I and others can come back and get down to making those pages look presentable. I know that the period when V-Jump and other magazines reveal a few new cards in one shot tend to be quite chaotic on the wiki, what with all the mass article creations for those new cards, and I hope to help out there as well.

Another thing I would like to discuss with the admins if it can be implemented, is allowing for Pendulum Scale values on the pages of Pendulum Monsters to link to the corresponding lists of other monsters who share the same Pendulum Scale value. We have such links for Levels, Ranks, ATK, and DEF, and I think Pendulum Scale values should get the same treatment. Of course, that all depends on how much tinkering with the templates for card pages such a proposal entails. I would like to advocate for making the wiki more navigable in ways similar to this though.

2. What do you consider to be your best contributions, and why?
A: I would consider my creation of property entries for card effects to be my best contributions, as I believe they better help users to navigate the card pages, by virtue of categorizing card effects by their unique traits. As someone who is somewhat obsessed with categorization, I'm a stickler for being able to look through these lists and find cards with similar qualities to each other since it helps in both deck building and seeing what other cards there are in archetypes other than the ones you use regularly. I try to look for threads of commonality between card effects and from there, if I find said threads, make a new property entry and sort cards into it.

I'm also somewhat proud of my write-ups for the Playing style sections of the "Aroma", "Burgesstoma", "Triamid", and "Cubic" articles, since those came about after I did some intensive study on the archetypes' inner workings. I hope to make more such write-ups in the future, though that is more a matter of finding enough time for it.

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?
A: I will admit that a cursory glance at my talk page will show that I have gotten into some conflicts in the past (such as with UltimateKuriboh), particularly due to my own lack of knowledge on how the wiki worked at the time. I would like to thank UltimateKuriboh for his patience in dealing with me all that time, especially since I had somewhat of a tendency to not reply often to messages on my talk page. In hindsight, I look upon that period of time on the wiki in the past with disdain at myself and I did strive to improve on that by making myself better available to respond to messages on my talk page quick and promptly. I intend to continue to make myself more available to talk to other users in the future and better engage myself with the community on this wiki. I have on a personal level, never felt stress towards any disputes with others in the past on the wiki and bear no hard feelings whatsoever towards anyone here. I try to put myself in the other person's shoes and reflect upon my past behavior to think about why the person felt inclined to behave in the way he did. That is not something about me that will change.
4. Do you regularly contribute to any other wikis? Are you an administrator or bureaucrat on any of them, or do you have accounts with similar roles on forums, blogs, etc.? Could you provide links, if so?
A: I don't contribute regularly to other wikis, though I have dipped my toe in some from time to time, such as the TARDIS/Doctor Who wiki, the Bioshock wiki, and the Kaijudo wiki, all of whose franchises I am a big fan of. I don't regularly contribute on those wikis though, just an occasional pop in to edit grammar and correct some discrepancies if I see them. I am not an administrator or a bureaucrat on any other wiki. This wiki bears the bulk of my wiki-related activity.


Other editors may post optional questions for the candidate here.

Questions from Deltaneos

-- Deltaneos (talk) 23:37, July 5, 2016 (UTC)

5. Have you been involved in any of the following scenarios that demonstrate you can be trusted with block, delete and protect functions? Please provide examples where possible.
a. Discussing whether or not a page should be deleted.

I haven't personally been involved in such discussions directly, but when I add content which I feel may be controversial, like those lists categorizing Pendulum Monsters by their Pendulum Scales, along with certain Card Tips, I would leave a note in my edit summary telling people to delete the content if they feel that it shouldn't stay on the wiki. I believe that the addition and deletion of content is something that should be discussed and prefaced with notes amply where such moves are likely to be controversial.

b. Discussing what action should be taken during an edit war.

I haven't seen edit warring on any big scale since I've been here, though I would alert an admin to it if I see it. I just brought up an edit war to Cheesedude's attention on his talk page though.

c. Dealing with vandalism.

I've seen a bit of vandalism here and there over the years, though no solid examples come to mind right now. When I see it, I just revert it.

d. Dealing with two or more users who are in conflict with each other.

I'm not privy to any personal conflicts users may have with each other at the moment (though I suppose that would likely change if this request for adminship is successful). I am by nature a peacekeeper, so if I see it, I would try to open a dialogue between the disputing parties to find out the origin of the conflict and from there, determine what needs to be done about it.

e. Dealing with a user who is acting aggressive towards you.

I've never faced aggression from anyone before (at least nothing I can personally detect), and I believe that the community here is generally quite civil with each other. Like I said in my answer for Question 3, I don't hold grudges or get really stressed about such things.

f. Have there been many other scenarios where you would like to have been able to use an administrator function and are sure you would have made the correct call?

Well, at some points when I've accidentally suppressed redirects back when I was a new mover, I did wish I could revert my mistake and bring back the redirect. I have also sometimes prematurely made pages for cards when they already exist because of a mistake in the card name (since preliminary translations tend to shift and be revised quickly, necessitating redirects) and would like to also correct those mistakes on my own if I could.

6. What would do in the following scenarios?
a. Someone asks you for mover permissions.

I would ask that person why he needs those permissions and also check his editing history relating to page moves. If he has a considerable history of making page moves that are constructive, and I feel that he would likely make more of such edits in future, than I would see no issue in granting the mover rights. I would, however, also inform a more experienced admin of what I've done, so he can also evaluate the user's edit history and past behavior. This is a check and balance I would impose on myself in the event I am in error.

b. A user keeps blanking a page, without commenting.

I would leave a message on his talk page mentioning that behavior and ask for an explanation as to why he keeps doing it. If he does not respond, or is recalcitrant, then I would have to consider it to be vandalism and block him. I will, however, once again, leave my actions to review from other admins.

If the user does respond, then I will discuss the matter with him and we can work from there. I would also recommend that he use the edit summaries more often if he makes edits that others may misinterpret as vandalism.

c. You find two articles for the same thing have been created.

If there are no associated page for either article (Card tips, images, trivia, etc.), I would move the article that was created first to the correct name (if such an action is necessary) and then delete the article that was created later. My experience as a mover has informed me that we try to maintain continuity of history in page moves, so I think retaining the older article and deleting the newer one follows that train of thought. If the newer article is more well fleshed out and has associated pages, then I would copy the content of the newer article to the older one, delete the newer article, and move the older article to the correct name, since I think that shows adherence to page history that movers are advised to retain when performing page moves. I understand that others may have different views on this matter though.

d. A user is unhappy with an action taken by an administrator.

I intend to make myself available to others who want to discuss their grievances with other users. I understand that some people may feel intimidated talking to admins, and I've even felt that way myself. I want to be someone that anyone can bring their problems to, and if anyone has an issue with another admin, then I will invite them to come to me with the issue, and then I will talk to the other admin on their behalf. If I am the admin the person has an issue with, then I'll go to another admin myself and invite him to intercede in the matter on our behalf.

e. A page needs to be protected to stop an edit war and you must choose which version to lock the page on.

I will open a dialogue with the disputing parties first, in order to try to come to a compromise so such an action does not need to happen. If such an action is not possible, I will examine the canon material myself and try to determine which version best conveys the intent of Yu-Gi-Oh! canon, then lock the page on that version with my reasoning on the talk page as well as an invitation to contact me or any other admin if someone wants the page edited.

f. An account suspiciously similar to a recently-blocked one edits a page that the blocked user was causing trouble on.

I will examine patterns between the blocked account's editing behavior and that of the new account and if I find similarities in the behavior, I will try to see if the edits from both accounts are coming from IP addresses in the same area (assuming admins have that sort of power, given that IP address blocks can be instituted). I don't believe in profiling people based on IP address alone, or blocking anyone based on suspicions, so I will also bring my suspicions to more senior admins and discuss the matter thoroughly with them. I would in the meantime, leave messages on the new account's talk page citing the behavior and asking the user to cease it. I will not directly confront the user with any "evidence" that he is the same person as the previously blocked account until I can get some consensus from other admins that they are of the opinion such is the case.

g. A user repeatedly uploads images using the wrong file name.

I will rename the images myself to the correct file name and then leave a message to the user to point out his mistakes, what I have done to correct them, and inform him to copy my examples in future. I will also offer to help him if he has any issues with this, or come to me if he uploaded images he thinks may be under the wrong file name again. If he doesn't respond or is recalcitrant, I will contact another admin to discuss the next step forward, since I see these edits as more good faith edits than anything actually malicious.

7. Are there any pages with restricted access you'd like to edit, if this request succeeds?

I would like to try my hand at improving both the appearance and presentation of templates, particularly those used to display card information. As I mentioned in my answer to Question 1, I'd like to also make templates more navigable by linking them to appropriate information, such as the lists of other Pendulum Monsters that share the same Pendulum Scale. I also loved the changes that were done to show the individual releases of a card, and how the property entry lists for card effects were more streamlined on card article templates, and hope to see if I can suggest more such changes.

8. Are there any areas you feel this wiki needs to expand or improve on, but you need admin access before you can help with them?

Not off the top of my head at the moment in terms of deep specifics, but I would advocate for greater and more efficient categorization of articles and generally making the wiki easier to navigate. Apart from this, I feel that the wiki is very well put together, and any frustration on my part is more due to not being able to participate in it any more than I can.

9. When is it appropriate to block someone from editing their own talk page?

I think such an action is appropriate if the user is using their talk page in a clearly disruptive manner, such as using it to air out discriminatory views (racism, sexism, etc.), using it to display NSFW images (pornography, etc.), and/or using it to advocate illegal or immoral activities (soliciting prostitutes, encouraging terrorism, etc.). These things clearly have nothing to do with Yu-Gi-Oh!, and I think if a talk page was being used in such a manner, then it's appropriate to block it. Otherwise, I think locking a talk page should be used as a means of last resort only if the user himself is blocked, because it is something that a user would rely on the communicate with others.

10. When deleting a page, which is not pure vandalism, when do you feel it is appropriate to discuss first and when do you think it can be deleted on the spot?

I feel that it is appropriate to discuss a possible page deletion if the material on the page has some sort of merit to the wiki and cannot be easily redirected or relocated to another page. I also feel that such a discussion is warranted if there is active discussion on the talk page that shows division between users as to whether the page should be retained. I don't think such a discussion is necessary if the page is on a subject already covered by an existing page, as per my answer to Question 6c. Such duplicate pages, I feel, can be deleted without discussion. If a page contains material that is irrelevant to Yu-Gi-Oh!, even if it is not outright vandalism or trolling, then I feel such a page can also be deleted without discussion.

11. When is it okay to block a user, who is not a vandal?

I think it is appropriate to block such a person if he is actively and persistently threatening and harassing other users on and/or off the wiki, be it with harm or by spreading discriminatory views (racism, sexism, etc.) that are attacks on a person for who he is. I also think blocking such a user is appropriate if he is advocating illegal activity and/or in the vein of my answer to Question 9, displaying content that is NSFW or otherwise illegal.

12. Are you worried any actions you will have to take, as an admin, could have a discouraging effect on other users?

Of course that is a pertinent concern of mine should I become an admin. That's why my aim is more to be a peacekeeper and I do not believe in using admin tools or the admin position to intercede in disputes if they cannot be talked out peacefully. This concern is also why I plan on freely allowing other admins to examine and scrutinize my actions, as a check and balance against any mistakes or controversial actions I may make.

Support

  • Lucafriz is a candidate that I have no qualms with supporting. I gave him mover rights way back when because I saw that he would make good use of the tools, and I believe he would also benefit from the other abilities admins have. He also doesn't show any hints of being negatively confrontational to other users. All in all I trust this user and thus offer my support. --Golden Key (talkcontribs) 12:08, July 5, 2016 (UTC)
  • I say yes. He's another case of Snorlax - I'm surprised that he wasn't an admin already. In addition, he's prevalent in the workload and he gets a lot done. Sanokal K-T (talkcontribs) 23:58, July 6, 2016 (UTC)
  • I do like the pages Lucafriz creates about the cards' properties; those are really handy to search for cards, I really thank Lucafriz for those. Lucafriz is also one of the users that bring news to the Yu-Gi-Oh! Wikia as soon as they are available. Since several people might try to create a page about the same article, multiple articles about the same matter may be created at the time, so I think Lucafriz having access to the delete tool may be handy in those situations and I trust on Lucafriz's judgment on what should go and on what should stay. However (and, Lucafriz, you're going to forgive my honesty), in question 6c., you say: "My experience as a mover has informed me that we try to maintain continuity of history in page moves (...)", but you have made this edit recently. If the page was protected and you weren't able to move it away, you should have tagged it for a rename and wait. As an admin (even though you could have just moved it if you had the rights (and I believe the protection tool might be useful for you in cases like this one)), you need to be aware of the right approach, so you can correct cases where users take this incorrect approach. I believe it was just a mistake and mistakes happen to everyone. In any case, I trust Lucafriz and I don't think they would misuse the rights. So I support. Becasita Pendulum (talkcontribs) 11:10, July 7, 2016 (UTC)

Oppose

  • With very few talk page edits and examples of previous actions to back up answers, I find it hard to gauge how you'd react when you'd make use of the additional access.
    From the answers, I get a sense of unfamiliarity with the admin functions. A talk page block is an extra setting when blocking a user, not a form of page protection. Suppressed redirects can't be "brought back". Since March 2015, non-movers/admins can't move pages.
    I also feel you're unfamiliar with potential scenarios you may have to face as an admin. You picked some extreme examples in your answers, like spreading discrimination and encouraging terrorism. There are more likely scenarios like harassment or repeatedly ignoring discussions.
    Overall, your contributions are very good and I can't say you're definitely unfit for the role. But more familiarity with the additional areas you'll have access to and involvement in decisions, like the ones you as an admin would be finalising, are things I'd like to see before saying "Support". -- Deltaneos (talk) 23:36, July 7, 2016 (UTC)
  • I have to concur with Deltaneos here. After reviewing your answers, you appear to be unaware of the methods that standard users have at their disposal to assist with keeping the Wiki in an orderly state (judging from 5a and 5b). Your answers to other questions, like 9 and 11, are very extreme examples, which lends to the opinion that you're unfamiliar with what challenges we really face as administrators.--TwoTailedFox (talk) 07:25, July 18, 2016 (UTC)

Neutral

Other comments

To end this, I would like to extend my thanks to Cheesedude for the nomination. Regardless of its success, I am grateful for the opportunity to lay out what my plans for my activity on the wiki are and I am also happy to be able to tell others about my views and opinions. Also, regardless of the outcome of this nomination, I intend to continue editing on this wiki to the best of my ability.

To address Becasita, I admit that the edit you pointed out was a mistake on my part and one I hope not to repeat again. I will admit that I'm not totally sure what I was thinking when I made the edit and if I could have taken it back, I would. Thanks for your support despite that.
To address Deltaneos, I agree that I am not completely familiar with the full scope of admin tools, but I hope to change that if given the chance. I admit that my answer regarding the suppressed redirects was somewhat due to poor wording on my part. I guess it emerged in part due to a misunderstanding on whether page moves can be undone or not. I will admit that I was not aware that people without a mover right can't move pages, but I received that tool before March 2015, and moved several pages before I was granted mover rights (I suppose my reasoning in Question 6a was the same reasoning Golden Key used when he gave me those rights), so I suppose this was a small case of being out of touch with the news when it comes to the inner workings of wikis. Hence that influenced how I answered Question 6a. I can amend my answer if need be to say that I would grant mover rights if the user can tell me what he wants to use them for (to move pages to official English TCG names or dub names, etc.) and I can foresee that he will be doing a bulk number of moves based on his edits on pages pertaining to the subject of Yu-Gi-Oh! whose pages he wants to move. Regarding extreme examples like terrorism, I'm generally a peaceful person, and believe that blocking a user talk page should be a last resort and only if he is using it to incite hatred or threaten people. I agree that harassment and ignoring discussions are more likely scenarios, which is why I suppose you can take my answers in Questions 9 and 11 (where I highlighted threathening behavior, which can be seen as harassment) as being in the "same vein". If a user engages in harassment towards others, and uses his talk page as a vehicle to spread that harassment, then we should block the talk page. I'm aware that talk page blocks are an extra feature tacked to a block, as I've seen it done to users who are perma-banned, but I think that one shouldn't block a talk page unless a user uses it for behavior that is patently harmful to others. Thanks for the questions, though, they really made me think hard about things here, and that is why I will seek guidance from more experienced admins to better understand what needs to be done here and how I can help accomplish it. (Lucafriz (talkcontribs) 07:37, July 8, 2016 (UTC))
*Disclosure: Some of the links above are affiliate links, meaning, at no additional cost to you, Fandom will earn a commission if you click through and make a purchase. Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+