User:Dillonn241/RfA

This is an archive of past UESPWiki:Administrator Noticeboard discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page, except for maintenance such as updating links.

Request for Adminship: Dillonn241

Dillonn241 (talk⁺ • contribs • edit count • logs • email)

This may come as a bit of a surprise considering that no RfA has happened in nearly four years. I first became an active editor here at the end of 2016, though I've been part of UESP in some form since around 2011. I became a patroller in April 2017 and gained blocker rights not long after.

Throughout this time I have worked on many projects, most notably the Redguard namespace. The majority of the content there was added or rewritten by me. With the help of Lost in Hyrule, I've documented a large portion of Skyrim Very Special Edition. I've made contributions to all other major namespaces, with more notable additions in Daggerfall (region maps), Battlespire (maps), Oblivion (house images), Skyrim (Creation Club), and Online (NPCs). I expect once Redguard has reached the point where I can't think of anything else to add, I'll switch fully to completing the Battlespire namespace with Echo.

More relevant to adminship, I've used my patroller rights consistently and blocker rights when the need arises, in particular for a recent wave of spam. As a patroller, I can also edit the MediaWiki namespace, something I've done on several occasions to edit gadgets, change the sidebar, and fulfill a request on the Administrator Noticeboard. I'm very active on Discord and always reply to emails and posts on my talk page.

As an administrator, I wish to improve my ability to edit the wiki, help keep the Marked for Deletion category to a minimum, and assist with the publishing of featured articles, featured images, and news. —Dillonn241 (talk) 21:02, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Questions

Obligatory questions section. Please post any you might have below.

Q1: Are there any challenges or issues that you think UESP may face in the near future? Are there any changes that you think need to be implemented?

A: Blades is coming out soon and it will be a challenge to balance three games—that, ESO, and Legends—at the same time. Not to mention that Creation Club has been revived and may continue for many years. I think even now with the consistent DLC and Chapters for ESO, there are not enough editors to match the amount of content being produced.

If there is a solution to this problem, I believe it involves making it easier for new editors to start contributing. For example, an Online NPC Project could be made to lay out a standard for how those pages should be edited.

Q2: How do you interpret the balance between enforcing policies and being innovative when policies prove to be problematic?

A: Our current policies regarding blocking, deletion, and protection leave some room for special cases, so I doubt these will need to be changed anytime soon because they are problematic. If any policy is causing problems though, it should be changed by consensus. Policies other than the ones I mentioned above do not handle emergency situations, so until they are changed they should be enforced.

Q3: What action will you take if you see another administrator perform an action that you completely disagree with? Do you believe it is ever necessary or permissible to revert the actions of another administrator?

A: It depends on the action. For deletions, I would certainly revert if it was a critical page on the wiki deleted without any discussion beforehand. This kind of action can only be done non-maliciously by accident, so the sooner it's reverted the better. For other deletions, I would trust that the administrator did so with good reasoning and speak to them directly. If a consensus cannot be reached that way, I would bring in a third administrator to decide who is right, or perhaps create a post on the community portal if it's not urgent.

For blocks, protections, and changing user rights, I wouldn't immediately revert any of these unless it was very clear that the admin's account was hacked or they were not in their right mind (this applies to deletions as well). Otherwise I would do as I said above and talk to them or bring in a third admin.

Unless I'm missing something, any other administrative actions—deciding consensus especially—I would leave up to the other administrator, and go along with their decision. In these cases, the community can bring up the discussion again to change the consensus. Non-administrative actions, which I don't think this question is asking about, I would treat roughly the same as any other user.

Q4: With Blades on the horizon, as well as a just teased at TESVI eventually on the horizon, I feel like we can expect a large surge in activity on the wiki if Skyrim's release is any indication to go by. When VI comes out, if we can expect such an exponential growth in traffic and active users, what could you do or be willing to do that you can't already do with your current rights with so many users needing quality checks on edits, new pages that need to be created, and if there are disputes with new users, what are some examples of how you would handle issues associated with administrating a site as large as ours in a more active way than as a regular patroller/blocker.

To me, administration is more than maintenance edits when we're dealing with a major release and I just want some ideas of what you would do and are like as a person and editor since I personally don't know you well and the actions an administrator will or will not make can affect the outward appearance of the community as a whole, and the past winter's Discord discussion on the AN brought to light, whether that's on the Discord or on the wiki itself. — Copied from Discord at the request of Damon

A: Perhaps not with Blades, but definitely with TES VI, the number of new users will necessitate new administrators, as large releases tend to do. By the time TES VI releases, it's quite possible some of the current admins will be inactive. When this surge in activity does happen, it will be better to have an extra admin or two with years of experience rather than a handful of temp admins (though that may be necessary as well). With administrative rights, I would be able to help rather than hinder the other admins in the various maintenance tasks that exist: deleting, blocking, protecting, etc. I expect I will be most likely to fulfill deletion requests, as I have a lot of experience with making them.

As you say though, being an administrator is more than just a set of maintenance tools. They are expected to handle problems involving users, and block if necessary. They also decide consensus in some discussions, and are expected to for featured content. I'm willing to do all of these things, as I hope any admin would. An example I was given recently was what I might do in the case of a long time editor who now acts in a way that requires blocking or admin intervention. If it's true that they in fact broke the blocking policy, I wouldn't hesitate to block and give the reason. If the user instead stays just within the "legal" range but is still causing issues for other users, I don't believe a block should be given without some discussion first, even if it's just between admins. In these situations, I would only indefinitely block if the user already had a long temp block and showed little promise in stopping their disruptive behavior, or if their actions while "legal" were causing noticeable damage to the community. I am open to changing this ideology if need be, but this seems the most fair to me.

Votes

All registered users are welcome to vote Support, Neutral, or Opposed. Comments are also welcome.

• Support: So let me be the first to support your nomination. I know there will be some more questions in the coming days, but from what I've seen of your work on the wiki, I think you are a great candidate for being an administrator. You always seem to have the best interested of the site in mind and fix problems in a logical and efficient way. The only thing I am not sure about is how well you can interact with troublemakers, because you sometimes made up your mind about something and then have a bit of a hard time of seeing the other side. Well, maybe that kind of stubbornness could actually be positive in some ways. All in all I am confident you'll do a fine job. --Ilaro (talk) 15:57, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

• Comment: Thank you Ilaro! I admit that I can be stubborn at times, though the only examples I can think of concern the content or appearance of a page. In any case, I will do my best to be more vigilant of this sort of outlook in the future. —Dillonn241 (talk) 18:08, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

• Support: It's obvious Dillon has put a lot of thought into this RfA and I believe he has very clearly outlined his reasons for requesting same. Personally, I have had the extended pleasure to work with Dillon on many different areas of the site, which really shows his dedication to the wiki project as a whole. He is a fantastic wiki editor; quick to learn and quick to add immense value to any area he puts his hand to. The Redguard namespace is a prime example of this. I started the SSCP in part because of my realisation that our decades-old coverage of that game was very much incomplete, and that which was documented was subpar in the extreme. Today, Redguard may be the most complete namespace on the wiki.

In addition to his content edits, Dillon has a particular ardour for maintenance edits. This is evidenced by his routine deletion requests as well as his recent cleanup of our userboxes. I think it's fair to say we are lacking in admins to carry out certain maintenance functions and I think Dillon will certainly put the tools to good use! As for dealing with user disputes, Dillon has always struck me as fair-minded, and as mentioned above he has already been trusted with Blocker rights for over a year now. I don't have any problem with him joining the admin team. —Legoless (talk) 21:54, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

• Support: You've done fantastic work as an editor, patroller, and blocker. It's clear from your statements above and answers to the questions that you are interested in the day-to-day maintenance of the wiki as well as striving to be an objective, fair administrator. --FioFioFio (talk) 22:57, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

• Support: Active, motivated, accurate, thorough, and with a great editing record. An obvious choice. --Vordur Steel-Hammer (TINV1K) 22:33, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

• Support: Dillon has done fantastic work on the wiki, clearly knows the standards, and is active and engaged with other editors. I believe he’d make a great admin. Echo (talk) 00:18, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

• Support: Dillon is an excellent all-around editor who's shown good judgement when it comes to blocks and page deletions as a patroller, things he'll be able to do even better as an admin. His responses to the questions so far are exactly what I would expect of an admin, and show that he's aware of what's likely to affect the wiki in the future. I look forward to having him as part of the admin team. – Robin Hood  ^(talk) 06:31, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

• Support: What they said. -damon  ^{talk ♥ contribs} 20:52, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

• Support: Of course, full support. Dillon has done fantastic work, the RfA and his answers are very convincing. I'm sure he'll make a great admin. --Holomay (talk) 21:54, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

• Support: It's hard to add anything that hasn't already been said. You are a very dedicated editor - to be honest, perhaps the most dedicated one to come to UESP during these past years. You edit a lot across the namespaces, and can handle many different tasks. From what I have seen, you are quite serious and also neutral when participating in discussions, whatever the topic might be. I'd agree with Ilaro that you might seem a little stubborn or sticking to your opinion, but I suspect this has more to do with that you want solid facts before being convinced about something. Following this, I also believe you are somebody who rarely acts on emotions, which I see as something positive. You already communicate with other admins, sometimes it seems almost on a daily basis, so I think there should be no big problems admitting you to the admin group. --Tib (talk) 22:11, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

• Support: Dillon has shown familiarity with multiple areas of the sites, the ability to adopt and complete multiple difficult projects, and a high level of activity besides. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 19:01, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

• Support: Dillon has done, and continues to do, excellent work on the wiki. He's made good use of his patroller and blocker abilities, and I'm sure he'll do the same as an admin. ~ Alarra ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:13, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Consensus: Support. – Robin Hood  ^(talk) 00:04, 13 September 2018 (UTC)