Kirby Wiki:Requests for adminship/Iqskirby (3)

Result: Adminship granted.

Iqskirby (talk•contributions•logs)
Third time's a charm I guess. I've still been hanging onto this place, even if my edits go more sparse. A new game is on the horizon (and we've received information of it for the past two months), and I plan on getting this one by its release this time. I'm most certainly excited about it, so my progression on here will probably be more so than it has on other occasions. New game aside, I've still been making constructive edits, fixing problems that need fixing, helping out newcomers who have come as a result of the new game, made my own articles or at least heavily contributed to such, I've made merges, and I'm one of the few people who has a workshop page here. Of course, edit count doesn't mean everything, because quality is still involved, but I can assure that my edits are of quality. When vandalism comes, and I'm around to see it, I make sure to rollback it; we don't need that content here. With the new game coming, pages are going to be an issue. The ability to delete pages that are of subpar quality would be useful (or if we have a naming issue), not that I have to wait for terribly long in order for that to be achieved with a Deletion template, but still. As of relatively recently (I didn't decide to immediately dive in after hearing them), I have received a couple of strong compliments as the product of a particular issue that was dealt with (present on my talk page), both in support of my adminship, but we'll need those to be transferred here (not literally though). I think I've made my case for now.-- Iqskirby Bihm Masheen Gahn!  11:01, May 5, 2016 (UTC)

This will likely take a while, but I think I'm going to have this go on until BNK comes back before we make the decision of whether or not I'm an admin; he was the one who suggested it on my talk page after a dispute. As for some other things, I have learned not to abuse rollback, however, when it comes to something that is blatantly vandalistic, I don't see much a reason to hold back; however, if such occurs, I suppose I'll still issue a warning. As for that wiki thing, I've learned from my mistake and have just decided to let it go; I don't know how I got there, but seeing as how I effectively have to actually know the URL to get back there (Google search doesn't give me actual results), I'm just going to let it be, as it's unlikely to really amount to anything. Iqskirby Bihm Masheen Gahn!  20:28, May 18, 2016 (UTC)

Support
#[Insert reason here]--~ Copy the text in that box and post it below this line.


 * 1) Strong Support - In this case, yes, I do believe that the third time's the charm. I hold to my belief that you're going to make a great admin. You've been very helpful around the wiki and have become and have remained one of the best and most consistent editors currently on the site for a good while now. The vast majority of your projects have been very productive as well. When you last requested, reasons we had for not promoting you were that you needed more time and that we weren't sure if the adminship would help you. I am now confident that your becoming an admin will be greatly helpful to the wiki and that the extra time you spent waiting has paid off. -- Paul2 KTD Bronto Burt artwork.png ➨ KPR Data Cube.png ➨ KPR Bronto Burt.png  You've been... robobotized!  12:36, May 5, 2016 (UTC)


 * 1) Support - Since I commented in favor of neutral back in May, I have seen you grow from my recommendations and criticisms. You're in a better place now than you were when this request was first made. Make us proud, Iqskirby. -- NerdyBoutKirby [[Image:The Eyes!.png|link=wikipedia:The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996 film)|I feel like the transgression in the source material held more weight...]]  the EYES!  21:54, July 11, 2016 (UTC)

Oppose
#[Insert reason here]--~ Copy the text in that box and post it below this line.

Neutral

 * 1) I'm going to leave this decision to the others. I've thought hard about this and I cannot take a side. On one hand, you are clearly extremely passionate about this wiki and you want to do anything in your power to make this site a professional, informative resource. You want to protect our information from harm, stop vandals in their tracks, and keep everything organized and consistent. With about two years of experience under your belt (starting your frequent activity in 2014), you've acquired skills on the job and you learn from your mistakes. These all check out to make you an excellent candidate for the position. At the same time, you have on occasion demonstrated some behaviors unbefitting of an administrator, some more worrying than others. Your passion for vandal punishment often results in a "strike-one-you're-out" mentality, which is less merciful than we encourage. More grievously, you once attempted to underhandedly persuade us to obliterate another wiki--not only is that act appalling in itself, but it also reveals a certain guile in the way you try to achieve some goals. Pros and cons are both incredibly strong, as you can see; may whatever verdict is reached be the right one. Nerdy Bout Kirby  BonKrell.png  Feeble -minded Kirbys!  16:55, May 5, 2016 (UTC)
 * 2) I'm pretty fine either way, I can't really say that I know you enough to put in support for you (we seem to work in completely different areas on the wiki), but I also don't know you well enough to just say no to you being an admin. My opinion thus has been formed by reading the opinions of the others here and I have concluded that I have to agree with NerdyBoutKirby above. I don't feel strongly for or against, and whichever way it goes is okay with me. Good luck. --GiokuAvatar.png G i o k u talkuser 15:13, May 17, 2016 (UTC)