Yu-Gi-Oh! Wiki
Register
Advertisement
Yu-Gi-Oh! Wiki

Dark-Shimy

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

Seems to be online quite a lot, contributes quite a bit too, seen to be undoing vandalism quite a fair bit, occasionally asks for page locks which I too agree on but tends to be unseen by admins as he asks in the summary. Although he doesn't seem to be contributing much at Forum:Yu-Gi-Oh! Wiki Community Discussion, he does help out in discussions on his talk page. -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 23:39, January 7, 2011 (UTC)


I accept. Dark-Shimy (talkcontribs) 06:46, January 8, 2011 (UTC)

Result - unsuccessful 
Adminship not granted. Good editor. Just a few things need working on. -- Deltaneos (talk) 02:18, January 26, 2011 (UTC)

Questions

Questions from Dinoguy1000

Please answer directly under each question. ダイノガイ千?!? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 04:29, January 8, 2011 (UTC)

1: What work do you plan to do that requires administrator tools?
Dark Shimy: Well sometimes I find an official English name of a card or the English dub name of a card and I move that card article to it's new name, but due to their Card Trivia/Gallery/Appearances/etc pages, and being a regular editor, might take more than 8 minutes. Being an administrator would help me to do those things faster. Also, I see a lot of vandalism on a day. But knowing when I have to block the article/user (?) yet I need to know.
2: What do you consider to be your best contributions to the site, aside from vandalism reversions or general cleanup?
Dark Shimy: Well I add Spanish stuff to the card articles, and sometimes in other pages like characters, like Crow article, due to his name in the Latin American dub (Cuervo). And by Spanish stuff I mean Spanish names, Spanish card lores, and Spanish card images.
3: What conflicts or trouble have you been in in the past on this wiki? What did you learn from these conflicts, and how did you change your behavior or outlook as a result?
Dark Shimy: From what I remember, only cursing in Summaries. The vandalism I saw those days made me rage (lol) but now I'm more calm about that.
4: Less than half of your total edits across Wikia are to this wiki. What are some other wikis you currently or have previously contributed significantly to (including non-Wikia wikis)? Have you ever gotten in trouble on these wikis?
Dark Shimy: I'm currently working on the Spanish version of Yu-Gi-Oh! Wikia, adding stuff, since that Wikia has like 80% less of articles than the English one, and I'm adding everything I find about Spanish stuff and also come with the same info here.
5: Are there any sites on which you have privileges akin to the administrator role on wikis? If so, what sites?
Dark Shimy: Yes, the Spanish Yu-Gi-Oh! Wikia. I'm an admin and current bureaucrat of the Wiki, that I had to revive because it almost didn't have active users for a while. Now that Wiki is becoming a Community.
Questions from Deltaneos

Some more questions. -- Deltaneos (talk) 17:17, January 8, 2011 (UTC)

1: If you log in and find you have been asked to block an anonymous user who has vandalised 12 pages within the space of a few minutes, but hasn't made any edits in a few hours, what would you do?
Dark Shimy: I would ignore the request. But I think I should block him/her (the anonymous user) if he repeats a wave of vandalism in less than a hour.
2: What is a community consensus and what are the advantages of trying to achieve one?
Dark Shimy: To be honest, I don't know. But I got the idea that it goes to a conclusion of a community that it would affect an article whose full data is not known, but part of it. At least that's my idea.
3: Have you been involved in any community discussions before?
Dark Shimy: Yes, about the part of Spells and Traps being part of the archetype, the Life Stream Dragon, Black-Winged Dragon, and currently about Morphtronic Lighton's effects.
4: You've made a number of reverts, where you didn't provide any explanation: From just a few hours ago, there's the following: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 (not in order). When should and shouldn't an edit summary be provided when reverting an edit. What potential positive and negative consequences are there for providing and not providing an edit summary in a revert?
Dark Shimy: Well the edit summary should be provided when it needs an explanation about a revert. When it shouldn't be provided is when it's something obvious like vandalism. If I didn't give a summary was by different reasons but I felt that many other editors would agree on reverting those kind of edits.

Support

  • I support, is definitely a good user, do the best for the wiki and is very responsible. But, just look :D What is your policy not to block users?--ダーク・クルセイダー 20:59, January 8, 2011 (UTC)
  • Though the block log had me wary at first, I support. I believe Dark-Shimy is level-headed and intelligent enough to not do the same thing here now that he knows it is undesired. Other than that, I see no issues. It's worth noting that I was surprised when his name appeared on this page - I thought he was already an admin. Cheesedude (talkcontribs) 19:05, January 19, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose

  • 2.91.177.63 (talk) 02:19, January 8, 2011 (UTC) This user never deserves to be admin because whenever he/she sees a contribution, he/she deletes it, thus never letting a person do a contribution except for him or herself and that is just so rude.
Unless I missed something, within the last 50 edits, the undo edits were undoing vandalism, speculation and er... 'trashy edits' (edits which mess up the page). Perhaps, link to some of these edits that should not have been removed. -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 02:28, January 8, 2011 (UTC)
  • 2.91.177.63 (talk) 03:23, January 8, 2011 (UTC) In my opinion, vandalism can be repaired by editting not by deleting the whole contribution of a user. This user respects no one because of repeatedly deleting contributions of several users. I bet many pages will be locked once this user becomes admin and I could sware on that. So do not let this user become an admin until at least after learning how to behave. People like that are not welcomed to this wikia.
  • Sorry, I take this since of your answer to D-Neos' fourth question. --FredCat Ta.P.F.P.J.R.W.S.Th.P.S.C. 18:07, January 8, 2011 (UTC)
  • Overall, this editor is fairly solid, but their block log on the Spanish Yu-Gi-Oh! Wikia makes me question whether they really understand how blocks should be handed out. Just from a brief look, I'm seeing several dozen blocks of IPs for 6 months or without expiration, with no comment on any of them. I wouldn't feel comfortable supporting a nomination until this editor demonstrates much better judgement in blocking on that wiki. ダイノガイ千?!? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 04:27, January 9, 2011 (UTC)
    I can answer to that. The Spanish Yu-Gi-Oh! Wikia is a very little community that it's growing slowly and yet we haven't stated what to do with users that do vandalism like many others blocked there. While I was an admin I had to find a temporary way for that and a helper told me that at least block some users by 6 months. I had a talk with Wikia helpers about that and told me that as much it should be 6 months of blocking, but we don't have yet a full policy of editions. We are yet at how an editor's contribution is good and is allowed in our Wikia. We are also making the rules for files and articles about characters, cards, sets, etc. and the Wikia's look. I will be contacting with some Helpers for more info. I will talk to the community about the creation of our Wikia's policy. Dark-Shimy (talkcontribs) 05:19, January 9, 2011 (UTC)
    If those blocks had been made to named accounts, I'd have much less reservations about them. There are a number of reasons IPs should not be blocked for lengthy periods of time unless absolutely necessary, not least of which is that most internet users have dynamic IP addresses (so when you block an IP for six months, you may only be stopping the vandal for a few hours (or minutes, if they're smart enough to disconnect for long enough to get assigned a new IP), and for the rest of that time, you could be blocking some random, innocent person who might otherwise make a constructive edit or two). Your explanation assuages my concerns somewhat, but I think I'm still going to have to oppose for now. ダイノガイ千?!? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 17:35, January 17, 2011 (UTC)
  • Reverts without explanation are fine for vandalism, but when a user believes what they are doing is right, an explanation should be given. Even if you are confident that other editors will agree with the revert, the person who made the edit should be able to see why it was rejected. Otherwise it may discourage them from editing or make them angry and resort to insults or vandalism. -- Deltaneos (talk) 13:31, January 10, 2011 (UTC)

Neutral

Other comments

Dark-Shimy is capable. The Spanish wiki block log may look worrying, but as you can see in his answer to my first question, he has a good idea of when anonymous users should and shouldn't be blocked. His revert summaries also seem to have improved since people have commented here: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. -- Deltaneos (talk) 14:38, January 10, 2011 (UTC)

Advertisement