Forum:Adminship Request II - Tezzla Cannon

Okay, this is my second adminship request. I have tried to be better at editing. I sometimes use the pagename template on articles with ugly names, but i'm trying to stop that. For other reasons see my first request Forum:Adminship Request - Tezzla Cannon.

Changes since my last request
I have improved my editing a lot, and my articles are not getting questionable nomore. I have over 2000 main edits, and 1600 other ones. My articles are not getting changed much (apart from those point lookout articles i made this morning but i never knew about the different templates and categories so i'll do that in future). I am also getting articles to the capitalisation standards, and have made the project. I stop vandals and spammers very goodly, and would be good at cleaning up after them with admin powers. I also know what articles should be deleted.

Comments
Yes I'm kind of on the fence with this. On one side, Tezzla's editing has improved considerably, especially in the realm of filling the gaps with creating missing articles. On the other, he does show a certain level of cluelessness when it comes to understanding classic Fallout games and the world. However, I think Tezzla would be a good maintenance guy, responsible for fixing links, deleting gibberish and nonsense. Plus, the closer we get to FNVs release, the more manpower we'll need. My vote is, well, Yes. http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/0/08/Personal_Sig_Image.gif Tagaziel (call!) 17:33, June 22, 2010 (UTC)


 * I am going to get the other fallout games soon. When i see a classic game red link, i don't know much about them, so i find out wht i cna about the article, create it, and then leave the rest of the info to the people who have played it. But hopefully i won't be clueless about the classic game soon cos i might get them. Tezzla blah blah blah 17:35, June 22, 2010 (UTC)

Yes I've seen what this guy has done and I think he deserves adminship; I'm actually surprised that he wasn't already an admin. I've seen his name so many times in the "recent activity" line. He has my vote... not that anyone else cares. StatusQuo 17:57, June 22, 2010 (UTC)

No I don't know. On one hand, I realize Tezzla does a lot of edits and creates articles, which are good for the most part. But I feel like he jumps the gun sometimes. Also making articles and having the descriptions saying stuff like "annoying insects" on the new vegas Mantis page and "this should make Fallout fans happy" on the new vegas Fat Man page, kind of irritate me because then someone else has to edit it and fix it so the wiki doesn't look stupid. Simple changes like writing some things more maturely would get my approval. Also I feel like he rushes sometimes, like with creating the capitalization article/project page and moving the articles. I dunno, I feel like a bitch pointing these things out. I guess I'm on the fence, leaning kind of negative, just because some of the edits don't feel 'admin-like' to me. I'd suggest having some more patience, but other people might not have a problem with that. 18:35, June 22, 2010 (UTC)

No Same reason as above. You are a good editor, but I can't see you as an admin yet. You just need to mature a bit more. --Anon undefined 20:43, June 22, 2010 (UTC)

Yes With regards to the supposed immature things he's written on the new New Vegas pages: Whats the difference? Almost everything written on those articles is pretty much just filler at this point. Most, if not all, will have to be changed anyway. I vote Yes. Knight Captain Ski (radio) 21:26, June 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * The difference is that it shouldn't have to be edited unless there is new information (which is the point you made, that it'll be changed eventually). The part I had a problem with was editing out stuff that has nothing to do with actual information, like the pages I linked to... 23:07, June 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * I look at it this way: If Grizzly, who from what I've seen is one of the most (if not the most) no-nonsense admins on here doesn't have a problem with it, it probably ain't that big a deal. Knight Captain Ski (radio) 23:45, June 22, 2010 (UTC)


 * That being said, just going by Grizzly's opinion defeats the purpose of a vote at all. But that's all I'm going to say on it, it's nothing personal, just my view on it. 23:48, June 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * I was actually refering to the things Tesla put on the pages rather than the question of adminship. But since you're done, whats everyone else's opinion? Knight Captain Ski (radio) 02:13, June 23, 2010 (UTC)

Yes Curse you, Grizzly, for stealing the general opinion of the Vault on Tezzla. I do think Tezzla shows a lot of potential, and we do need the extra eyes for recent changes patrol seeing as Vegas is coming soon, but he just doesn't know enough about the old games to consider him much of a boon. Sure, somebody like Porter doesn't own the old games either, but two things about Tezzla really stick in my mind. He made a page on one of the Hubologists, but screwed up the timeframe and had a lot of links to Fallout's Hub. He also removed the Joseph (Fallout 2) link on Joseph stating that "People are saying that no such character exists."

So, I'm on that uncomfortable fence. If it was further from the release date, I'd say no, he's not handy enough with the older games. If it was closer, I'd say yes, we need more people to watch for vandals and delete duped pages. So, Yes, because we will need him at some point. Eventually. (And for the love of god, SOMEONE gift him the old Fallouts over Steam. :P) Nitty Tok. 03:13, June 23, 2010 (UTC)

No I haven't made up my mind yet. I have one serious reservation. Tezzla often posts antagonistic comments on vandals or suspected vandals' talk pages - feeding the trolls. The combative and antagonistic language sometimes also shows up in his blog posts. When admins act like that, it causes friction among the editors. He has shown marked improvement since the last request, and I've no reason to think he won't continue to improve. But I would like to see his communications become more professional before I weigh in.--Gothemasticator 19:59, June 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * Judging by the post below which appeared on a user's talk page, Tezzla is not ready to be an admin.--Gothemasticator 15:52, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

I really don't know. He does a lot of good stuff, but a some bad stuff too. If he promises to stop being an idiot, then I'm game. Spoon Say Hi! 20:09, June 23, 2010 (UTC)

I also think Tezzla's news posts could use an improvement. Blog posts added to the news categories should be largely objective and informative, without calling bad previews "evil" or adding silly videos like in the last one. Silly stuff is OK (to an extent) in comments, but not in the news itself. Still, in terms of articles, Tezzla is showing lots of improvement, although sometimes his articles still need to be cleaned up. Ausir(talk) 20:14, June 23, 2010 (UTC)

Yes Tezzla Cannon is a good contributor to The Vault, although sometimes it creates unnecessary pages and the wording could be improved. But he seemed to have a good background and want to help The Vault. I think they would therefore be a good addition, so Yes for me. And if you take the old Fallout, take also Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel, which is an excellent game and excellent Fallout =) ! Itachou [~talk~] 20:52, June 23, 2010 (UTC)

Honestly, I have to take a neutral stance, for the time being. I still don't agree with giving you full-fledged administrator privilages. I really do appreciate that you have taken time to expand your editing capabitilies, and it really does show. But your overall lack of maturity when doing even little things (posting blogs, some blog comments, and some talk page comments) is not what is wanted from an administrator; they should express maturity and present professionalism when dealing with the rest of the users on The Vault. I would love to see you work on this as well, and if you show the rest of the administrators you have changed in this aspect, then I will gladly sway my descision. Ghouly89 (Talk) 01:35, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

- As I've seen you change a bit from the last request, I can only say that I can't really say yes or no. 	 – 15:56, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Final verdict
First of all, sorry for taking this long to post this. While there's no doubt that you're very dedicated and a good contributor, we decided that you're still not ready to be an administrator, because of some of the reasons stated above, like feeding the trolls in blog comments, and lack of familiarity with things like categorization (you have improved in this regard, but you still sometimes create pages with wrong categories or no categories at all), so admins still tend to need to correct your articles after you create them. Hopefully, this will not discourage you from further contributions to The Vault and from gaining even more experience in editing a wiki.

Furthermore, me and Porter have decided to amend the adminship request policy. Now one needs to wait for 2 months after your previous request before they start another adminship request thread. Keep up the good work! Ausir(talk) 22:43, July 17, 2010 (UTC)