Dwarf Fortress Wiki:Request for Adminship/Bombcar

Administrator Candidacy Questionnaire

Why would I be a good Administrator?

I have time, and am very good at minor edits and finding spam. I also have a thorough knowledge of MediaWiki, MySQL, and Linux (though those may not be as useful), and have Mac OS X experience. I spend almost every waking hour near a computer.

Supporting Evidence

• Special:Contributions/Bombcar.
• I changed "buildingdestroyer" to 2 on Scamps.
• I point the following redirect domains:
  • dfwiki.net
  • dfwiki.org
  • dfwiki.info

Public Q&A

• Q: Bombcar, sorry but I'm not going to troll through your contribs to see the good outshining the bad.

Lots of contribs makes you a good editor - not an automatically good admin. where in all that, did you discuss, negotiate, reach agreement with other contributors? Where did you argue points of how a wiki is meant to work to get your change made... or even better, come around and see that the other change made more sense then change the flow of your work to support the newly adopted way that the article/series was headed?

Garrie 09:38, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

• A: My changes are usually minor; I'm much better at finding things like spam and removing them, or fixing spelling errors and things like that. I'm good at boring rote work. Perhaps I would be better simply as an editor. --Bombcar 02:55, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

  Awesome, your contributions show you are extremely helpful here, I wouldn't say "simply an editor". Editors are an integral part of the work on a wiki like this. Mason11987 21:09, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

---

• Q: You made the following claim...

I added "The shoe is making a plaintive gesture." to Scamps. 

Um... not according to the article history - or did you collaborate with "Rusty" when the article was first posted? Could you comment on this apparent contradiction, pls?--Albedo 06:17, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

• A: Aaaah! I have an useless long-term memory. I changed buildingdestroyer. I apologize and will fix the above. It was mainly a joke. --Bombcar 02:55, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Public Discussion

Discuss things here, yay

Votes

Support

1. SUPPORT: Blah blah blah, signature
2. STRONG SUPPORT: blah blah blah
3. SUPPORT: He seems like a nice chap

Oppose

1. OPPOSE: Zero disrespect to Bombcar but I'm going to have to oppose. My argument:
   • Being an administrator isn't a big deal.
   • Administrator's shouldn't be "in charge"
   • Editors who show they would be able to provide more function for the community with Admin tools should be given them.
   • Editors who don't need the tools shouldn't be given them. (But because being an admin isn't a big deal, who cares? These editors are no less then any admin in any kind of discussion or debate.) Mason11987 21:06, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
2. OPPOSE: Zero disrespect to Bombcar, but I'm afraid I haven't seen or read any reason to vote in support, and I have seen something to make me mistrust you (Your joke). --DarthCloakedDwarf 03:42, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
3. OPPOSE: The reason I have decided to oppose is because your submission seemed to lack effort. when I read it, compared to some of the other submissions, it felt as though you were saying "Hey, its me, please vote, I would be good". You might be a good administrator, but i would rather stick with someone i know more about. --Dissimulation 21:59, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Neutral

1. NEUTRAL: Unfortunately, I have not seen enough evidence presented here to make my own mind for a vote either way. --Briess 20:45, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
2. NEUTRAL: I don't know, all the minor edits don't really stand for anything gigantic, the "building destroyer 2" and the redirects aren't all that important (since most users will type it in correctly anyway), I like your ability to be at the computer, but you don't seem to be very active in major wiki editing, and not being an admin does not prevent you from doing what you are already doing correctly. --Tarran 03:28, 3 April 2010 (UTC)