Meta:Requests for adminship/Cqm
Cqm Talk • Contribs • Last 20 Forum - Main - User talk edits • Edit count
Hi, I'd like admin tools to be able to maintain the Less gadget at both wikis use. I originally wrote it and have been maintaining it before and after the fork. I also have some experience with regex, so I can help out with the global spam/title blacklist and abusefilters where needed too. On the RS3 wiki I'm a bureaucrat and have been working on the site CSS and JS for a few years. I also pioneered the use of LESS to make site CSS more maintainable.
I, Cqm, accept this nomination for adminship. I have read the policies concerning administrators. I realise that this nomination may fail. If I do get community consensus, I promise not to abuse my tools because I realise that this is a serious offence. If the community finds that I have done so, my tools will be revoked, and in extreme cases I could be given a community ban. Signed, cqm talk 10:26, 30 December 2018 (UTC).
Questions for the nominee
1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
Primarily maintaining the single global gadget. If more gadgets get added in the future, I'm sure I'd be capable of maintaining those as well. I'd also like to close threads where applicable to ensure that discussions get implemented properly and for the benefit of both wikis.
2. What have been your most helpful contributions to the Weird Gloop Wikis, and why?
Way back when I started editing the RS3 wiki, I started the practice of transcribing in game text onto the wiki with the intention of it being used to better reference lore based articles on the wiki. In more recent years, I've been working with Lua modules, site scripts and CSS and general technical issues, including migrating exchange pages to modules. Going forward, I'm working in improving exchange pages again with a new extension that both wikis will hopefully benefit from.
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?
By and large, I've avoided conflict in my time editing. I'm sure I've made some decisions that people disagreed with at times, but I can't recall any major complaints about them. I was recently involved in a dispute with JaydenKieran (the first I can remember for many years) over the removal admin tools on this wiki. At the time I felt it was arbitrary and unnecessary, but on relfection I could see his reasoning. Overall, I felt there was somewhat of a policy vacuum on meta, so I proposed the RfA process here to solve the issue and clarify who is responsible for various things on meta wiki.
Additional questions (asked by the community if necessary)
Question - When you said "for the benefit of both wikis", how can you be sure that the OSRS Wiki side will see it as a benefit? Kate msg 22:24, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
- Lets imagine a policy was proposed that only benefitted one wiki and negatively impacted the other. At this point in time our goals are pretty much aligned and there's some overlap between the communities, so it's unlikely such a thing would come to pass. However, if consensus for the policy was widely supported by one community and vehemently opposed by the other, I think it's the responsibility of the admins on Meta to take such things into account when determining consensus. As such, I would expect it to be not implemented as it clearly didn't benefit everyone it was aimed at.
- The easiest examples to use are the many unilateral feature decisions made by Wikia before we forked. Things like Message Walls were rolled out everywhere and only became optional when communities such as the RS wiki complained (at this point OSRS did not exist). Looking back, it's clear that some wikis on Wikia find it beneficial, while others still see it as a step backwards. To avoid becoming another Wikia, I think it's important to bring balance to consensus and find ways to make things work for everyone, not just one wiki. Otherwise we haven't really gained anything by forking. cqm talk 10:51, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
Support InvalidCards (talk) 10:38, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
Support - Demonstrates useful technical knowledge and is level-headed. Fully trust Cqm with using admin tools on this wiki and the global tools that will become available as a result. Has also already been helping with behind the scenes tech stuff, including working on new extensions for the network. Template:Signatures/JaydenKieran 15:42, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
Support — What Jayden said. Granted, I don't spend a lot of time in the RSW (as in not OSRSW) community but from what I've seen, Cqm is a great nominee for the tools. --laagone talk 22:42, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
Support - 02:37, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
Support - I trust Cqm to make good use of these tools. --Scuzzy Meta 11:00, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
Support - All questions have been answered. Kate msg 12:39, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
Support - TylerJarret (Talketh) 17:38, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
Support - Meeeeerds msg 13:47, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Closed - Cqm will be made an administrator. Gaz (talk) 01:11, 8 January 2019 (UTC)