GuildWiki:Requests for adminship/Entropy

The following discussion is an archived debate of the nomination of a user for adminship. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

Entropy (talk • contribs)

Note: Entropy was made a sysop on September 22nd 2007

An extremely active User, who is beyond loyal to Guild Wiki. She daily makes helpful/useful contributions, and is always willing to help new Users. I fully support this nomination, and believe that she would be an invaluable addition to the Administrative Team. Bravo Entropy, bravo. You deserve it above all others, in my honest opinion. Readem (talk*contribs) 01:18, 16 September 2007 (CDT)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

I Accept, on the condition that all users read the following before voting.

This nomination has been a long time in the coming, and I don't mean to say that in a presumptious or self-important way. For a long, long time I've said that I would not, could not, and shall not accept a nomination, and that even if I was nominated I would decline because I didn't want to be an admin. I thought I was unworthy of the job, considering what others have followed before. Skuld, Karlos, 84-175, Barek, Fyren, Gares...and more.

But, the longer I've been on GuildWiki, the more hours I've logged here and edits put forth, the more support I've been getting for just this sort of thing...whether publicly or privately, it began to dawn on me that perhaps, just maybe, all of these people couldn't all be wrong. Perhaps there was some grain of truth behind what some have called "the Entropy brigade", or "the Entropy fan club".

I've made a lot of friends on GuildWiki through my time. I know I've also made a lot of enemies. I have had my share of quarrels and bannings or near-bannings, some even requiring admin intervention. I make no claim to be a cool-minded, even-headed leader, or even a person who fully grasps and understands the Wiki policies any more than the typical user would. Quite on the contrary, I have a temper, am easily led into lengthly and heated arguments, am highly opinionated, and don't always treat those with opposing viewpoints very nicely.

As Readem says, I am "beyond loyal" to GuildWiki...I'll be one of the last users here, to the dying hour. It's the least I can do for the community and the content. They have done a great service for me and it's only fair that I do the same back to them. Despite the current "issues" with Wikia and Gravewit, despite all the times I've wanted to just throw up my hands and call it quits with this damnable site and its constant troubles, I always come back. Always. Because no matter how bad things are here, I know they would only get worse if we are to throw in the towel now. It's times like these that we have to stick together: Crises should be the great uniters of us all, not the dividers.

If I am appointed an Admin, I want to make one thing clear. I won't make any promises. Readem, as a member of the "fan club", was probably a bit overzealous in describing me and my exploits. It's true, I am somewhat active, but not nearly as much as I would like due to RealLife(tm) as a college-bound Senior in high school. It's true, I do make some helpful and useful contributions, but at the same time many of my edits are to Talk and other trivial pages. It's true, I sometimes help new users with their troubles and go out of my way to aid people with Wiki-code woes. But, I must be modest: I am no saint of a Wikian. We all have our faults, and at the end of the day I am still an ordinary human being. If you expect things around GuildWiki to magically start shaping up because of one more admin, you'd be wrong. I can only do what I can do, to the best of my ability...No promises, No guarantees. (T/C) 01:45, 16 September 2007 (CDT)

Support

1. Very Strong Support Would help a ton for the wiki to have such a involved contributor as herself as an admin, especially in these dire times.-- (Talk) (Contr.) 01:41, 16 September 2007 (CDT)
2. Words like "I have a temper, am easily led into lengthly and heated arguments, am highly opinionated, and don't always treat those with opposing viewpoints very nicely" do not lead one to support, but user's loyalty is unquestionable. Support only because we can be sure to have someone to turn the lights off when the place shuts down. 193.52.24.125 01:54, 16 September 2007 (CDT)
3. "I have a temper, am easily led into lengthly and heated arguments, am highly opinionated, and don't always treat those with opposing viewpoints very nicely". Remember Karlos? Having an admin who isn't going to jump to the official wiki is going to be useful moving through all this with wikia and gravewit. Lord of all tyria 02:45, 16 September 2007 (CDT)
4. favor, because I can. —ShadyGuy 02:47, 16 September 2007 (CDT)
5. -Auron 04:09, 16 September 2007 (CDT)
6. DKS01 07:29, 16 September 2007 (CDT)
7. If there's anyone on this wiki who deserves to be promoted more, I don't know who it would be. --Wizardboy777 11:01, 16 September 2007 (CDT)
8. -PvEreanor 11:11, 16 September 2007 (CDT)
9. BigAstro 11:57, 16 September 2007 (CDT)
10. ~ Skuld
11. People like you are what we need in times like these... The Imperialist 19:32, 16 September 2007 (CDT)
12. Get cracking!~ GoldDean - 18:09, 19 September 2007 (CDT)
13. Need moar admins. Entropy = obvious choice. --Macros 18:20, 19 September 2007 (CDT)
14. -Lord Belar 21:50, 19 September 2007 (CDT)
15. Super duper insane support Gwiki needs an admin that is dedicated to Gwiki and not official wiki and this is that hopefully future admin. It makes me sad that this is even being considered on PvX, but it is absolutely critical that Gwiki stay atop the game as the best wiki because official wiki is garbage for countless reason. To put it simply, Gwiki needs Entropy as an admin or it might as well just shut down. —ǥrɩɳsɧƿoɲ 08:51, 22 September 2007 (CDT)
16. Hell yes. — Skakid9090 14:03, 22 September 2007 (CDT)

Oppose

1. (your vote here)

Neutral

1. I can't state support or opposition because I don't know enough about her. I just wanted to say a dedicated and active member is exactly what we need. Biscuits 15:48, 16 September 2007 (CDT)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.