User:Rpeh/RfA 2

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.

Rpeh

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

This nomination is overdue by several months, but better late than never. We are facing the UESP’s biggest challenge ever and we need all the help and expertise we can get, so this nomination should not come as no surprise. We all know Rpeh as one of the most prolific editors on the UESP; not only because of his unbeatable and incredible amount of edits, his hard-working and very convenient bot and his extensive knowledge on nearly all Elder Scrolls games in existence. Additionally, he is the most active patroller on the Wiki and the one people turn to for advice. He knows templates and complex wiki-markup better than anyone, and he is familiar with all aspects of administrative duties, even the ones I don’t know about. Finally, he enjoys huge respect within the community and with the number 11.11.11 in mind I see absolutely no reason not to provide him with the administrative buttons once again.

Questions

Q1: What do you hope to accomplish as an administrator?

Doing things without having to bother the other admins! There have been many cases where I've spotted a problem that only an admin can fix, from text tweaks on the Oblivion:Roleplaying page to adjustments to the MediaWiki:Uespnamespacelist. 21 of the last 25 news stories were writen by me too, but I've always had to send a begging email to Krusty or GK to get them on the front page. This has meant that some things I want to do weren't practical. I want to update some of our CSS / Javascript settings to include some of the innovations used on other wikis such as collapsible tables, but it would be too risky to start changing those without the ability to change back if something went wrong, and asking an admin to wait around while I test isn't sensible.

Other than that, I intend to keep editing and improving the site as much as I can, in preparation for...

Q2: What do you see as the UESP's main challenges in the near future?

Skyrim. From the online buzz I think it's already clear that this will be Bethesda's biggest game so far, which obviously means that it's going to be our biggest game so far too. There have already been some discussions behind the scenes about how to handle this, and a lot is still up in the air for now, but no matter what happens there's going to be a lot of work for the admins.

The challenge is clear enough but worth describing anyway. We have to get a huge amount of information onto the site as quickly as possible while reviewing the contributions of what will be a greater number of editors than any of us has ever seen. It's also important to remember that the new game isn't a job of work - it's a game. We want to allow people to play it instead of having to monitor the wiki all the time. We might end up having to close the wiki to comments for a short time, or close it just to new users. We might need to set up a rota so that there are always people around to keep an eye on the site but leaving enough time for everyone to play the game. We might need to promote several patrollers to admin status for a while to keep an eye on the rush. As I say, there's a lot that might change between now and then but at least we have options.

Q3: How do you interpret the balance between enforcing policies and being innovative when policies prove to be problematic?

This is going to be a frequently-asked question after Skyrim's release. There will probably be dozens of users who break the rules and technically end up deserving a block. It's going to be important to consider what's best for the site in all cases: will blocking the user be better in the long run than posting an explanation on a talk page, for instance.

Wikipedia has a very useful, though potentially dangerous, rule: Ignore All Rules, which states that "If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it." I think this rule allows policy to be relaxed sometimes if it's sensible. It should never be invoked to punish a user that otherwise didn't deserve a punishment, but reducing or removing a punishment seems like a sensible use. This kind of thing has been used before on acceptable usernames, for instance. I usually advocate ignoring all but the most serious infringements of the username policy to avoid the kind of drama the user wanted to create.

In general, if an admin feels that he or she has pushed the edge of a policy, all it takes is a quick post to the Admin Noticeboard explaining the decision. If the others disagree, things can be turned around easily enough.

Q4: What other wiki-related activities do you perform that people might not know about?

(I added this question after a Real Life friend suggested it - I think it's worth including)

I've spent dozens of hours on our interactive maps. This started with a program to remove the blocks of colour that the construction set adds when it exports the maps, and most recently saw me colouring the water on our maps blue, to replace the ugly, dust-coloured tiles that existed before. Even with the help received from Killfetzer, this was a long job but a really rewarding one.

I keep a regular check on several other TES-related wikis to make sure our content isn't being taken without attribution. This happens more often than you might think, and I feel it's important to keep tabs on such activities to ensure our editors get the credit they deserve.

I also perform regular checks on our maintenance pages, making sure we don't get too many missing categories, templates, images, and pages.

These days I seem to be the only editor on the UESP blog. This isn't a critical part of the UESP site, but some articles get quite a few views and it's part of introducing UESP to a wider community.

Answering UESP-related email. This isn't a huge job, and I only get about an email a week (or less), but they often come in groups when an editor wants help on a specific problem. This isn't constrained to inexperienced users: I've had email requests from admins asking for data sets that they can't generate themselves!

RoBoT doesn't write itself, and I've spent quite a bit of time writing and rewriting it. I'm currently writing a whole new version to lose dependence on the rather outdated DotNetWiki framework. It's looking good at the moment!

There are probably other things I do, but that's a good enough selection for now.

Votes

Cast votes with Support, Oppose, or Neutral. Comments are also welcome.

• Support: As nominator. --Krusty 15:53, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
• Support: Rpeh is one of the best editors around. Not really anything else to say here, he simply is. As he is one of our most active users with past administrator experience, and the admiration of many of the sites users it seems foolish of us not to give him admin powers. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 16:01, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
• Support: Rpeh knows his stuff, and has definitely earned an admin position through his diligence and hard work on the wiki.--Pwnageincarnate 16:27, 10 April 2011 (UTC)Pwnageincarnate
• Support: The amount of work he does on the wiki is phenomenal. He is often one to make decisive judgement on tricky matters, and his opinions are always sound. And, as AKB said, he had past adminship so there's not much chance of him being unqualified. This request seems like a no-brainer to me. Legoless 16:29, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
• Support: He's done more work on this wiki than I can possibly imagine doing. Good Luck.--^Corevette₇₈₉ 16:34, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
• Support: Rpeh is one of the most qualified editors around and he knows his stuff better than almost anyone. He's worked his ass off so much for this site I can't see why he shouldn't be given the extra buttons he is best placed to tinker about with. But most importantly, he was my trust and respect; it's a definite "support" from me :) --SerCenKing ^Talk 19:01, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose: Rpeh was previously an admin. He was de-admined (or rather he voluntarily gave up his admin position just a step ahead of having it removed from him) because he engaged in sock-puppetry. --Wrye 21:19, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Alleged, never proven and always inaccurate. Good to see you again after your long break, Wrye. rpeh •T•C•E• 21:35, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
    • Proven. See Nephele's excellent summary in the block starting with "The evidence that Calliope and rpeh were simultaneously editing from the same location is, unfortunately, unambiguous." And, although I found it very surprising that rpeh had done something so extreme, I unfortunately did not find it out of character.
      Given such a gross violation of wiki standards, I find it unfortunate that rpeh is a noted editor here. Be that as it may, he absolutely should not be given admin status again. (Is he prolific? Absolutely. But thats not enough -- an admin has to be trustworthy and follow community standards as well.)
      Since I'm retired from the ES community, I probably won't have much further to say on the issue. The past evidence is clear and was well aired in the original De-Admin Request. One can also look at the Sock puppetry page on Wikipedia for a review of why sock puppets are forbidden. --Wrye 22:36, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Question: Can any one vote here? 94.76.208.5 21:46, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Answer: Unfortunately, no. You will have to make an account for the vote to count. See this section. --Krusty 21:55, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
    • You're free to speak your mind, and your opinion will be respected, of course. This just means that your vote won't be included in the final tally. --Michaeldsuarez ^{(Talk) (Deeds)} 03:47, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
• Support: Rpeh has done alot of good things on this site much more than any one else. He should defiantly be an admin. Deanna 22:07, 10 April 2011 (UTC) (I was the user who asked the question I remembered my password)
• Support: I'm disappointed in the suggestion that any activity, alleged or proven (even activity serious enough to be banned and/or de-adminned for), should result in an automatic "oppose" vote over a year and a half later. Even if you just assume that rpeh was responsible for the actions he was accused of in the incident noted by Wrye, that's not what this RfA is about. Rpeh is knowledgeable about various administrative duties that no other active admins are. He maintains areas of the wiki that would be easier to maintain (and therefore better maintained) if he had access to admin tools. From every angle that I can see, granting him Administrator rights could only benefit the wiki. --GK^talk2me 03:11, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Yes there are actions which should result in a permanent ban from adminship, and sock puppetry is one of them. It's not just the action itself, but also the general attitude that it demonstrates. Wikis are built on respectful, fair, honest, civil discussions. Sockpuppetry is the opposite of all that. That's why it's forbidden.
  • Again this is beyond alleged -- the proof is very conclusive. See the De-Admin Request for the discussion/review of it. And, although the extremity of sock puppetry was a bit stunning, it did not seem out of character for rpeh, who seemed to have had run ins with all of the other admins at the time.
  • Keeping active admins is important, but more important is having admins who support the core civilty of the wiki. As wikipedia puts it Administrators are expected to lead by example and to behave in a respectful, civil manner in their interactions with others. I would hope that we would have some good candidates available, however things do tend to fall into a lull between games, so perhaps UESP will need to be a bit thin for a while. (And yes, UESP has been through periods with very little adminship going on.) --Wrye 05:30, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
    • Look, Wrye, this is painful to watch. You haven’t made a single edit in a year, yet you make a heroic return in an attempt to provoke Rpeh and change the general opinion of the ACTIVE editors on the site. The UESP has changed a lot in your absence and while I expected the return of bitter, “retired” editors for this nomination, this is going nowhere fast. Please stop this unconvincing argument and the endless wave of redundant links to old discussions and WP-policies. That type of behavior belongs in a different era, and that era is long gone. --Krusty 06:50, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
      • "Era is long gone." Sadly, that may be true. Reasonable arguments in a discussion such as this should be treated as such -- and not as personal attacks. Part of the point of an Rfa is bring up possible objections; i.e. to allow people to vote oppose as well as support, and to state the reasons for that. A previous de-adminship is obviously germane; bringing it up does not require a "heroic" effort, nor should it be "painful to watch"; nor does it indicate "bitterness" nor an attempt to "provoke". Charactering reasonable and relevant arguments as an emotional attack was not previously the norm. If it is now the norm, then yes, things have changed. --Wrye 03:40, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
        • Of course you are allowed to voice your opinion, and are allowed to vote however you choose. However it is almost impossible to say this isn't emotional or an attempt to provoke an argument considering this is you first edit in over a year. Once again there is no problem with an editor going inactive, though it is sad. But it makes it seem like you are trying to start a fight when this is how you come out of retirement(Besides a reply to your talk page). Whether the allegations of Rpeh's sockpuppetry are true are not, they simply are not relevant after so long and thousands of edits without any warnings or bans. His record has been perfect since then and pretty much all active editors have an extremely high opinion of him. It borders the ridiculous to say that you can't trust an editor with more privileges after so long and so much effort.
        • To quote you Is he prolific? Absolutely. But thats not enough -- an admin has to be trustworthy and follow community standards as well.
        • If anything he has raised the communities standards after all his effort and quality edits, and he has many editors absolute trust. His regular activity is just the icing on the cake. Simply put Rpeh is a great editor with the communities trust. All we are doing by giving him Admin abilities is by allowing him to help maintain the site, and do tasks that he has been doing by proxy of the current admins. In my opinion when it reaches the point when we are making less work for everyone involved by giving an editor more powers than they deserve them. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 04:27, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
• Support: Rpeh has no doubtable made his mark on the wiki. He has helped me on several occasions, as well as so many other users, and does so much to help the wiki, such as the ONPCRP and the recently completed MQRP. To be honest, I was surprised when I found out rpeh wasn't an admin already. Being an admin, rpeh will be more of a help than he is already. Needless to say, thanks rpeh and keep it up! - Emoboy64 21:53, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
• Support: Nothing to add that hasn't been said, but I've been waiting a long time to cast this vote.  VIROCONIUM  01:09, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose: While his content editing is excellent, Rpeh is simply not someone I feel has the temperament to be an Administrator, nor is he someone I feel I could ever trust with the rights that Administrators and CheckUsers have. In addition to the reasons cited by Wrye, rpeh has been single-handedly responsible for the departure of the four most prolific users on the site other than himself (yes, I'm including myself in that) as well as several other less-prolific users due to his incivility and bullying (e.g., A Little Less Conversation, a Little More Action). The fact that the current set of Administrators not only look the other way when he is uncivil, but actively make excuses for him because of how prolific he is, only makes the situation worse. Like Wrye, I feel the atmosphere here has changed significantly since I first joined, particularly when people who vote Oppose are asked to stop making a fuss. – Robin Hood↝talk 08:54, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
  • The idea that I'm personally responsible for people leaving is one of UESP's own PRATTs - a Point Refuted A Thousand Times. If you left because of me, then that's obviously your right, but don't presume to assign motives to other people.
  • I didn't say anything uncivil or bullying in that thread, and the only time I can remember being less than polite was to one particular user, where there was deep mutual hostility. I'm sure you know who I mean. Personally, the way you kept bringing up cases on the Admin Noticeboard for every perceived infraction on my part was far closer to bullying than anything I've done.
  • As for the changed atmosphere caused by "people who vote Oppose are asked to stop making a fuss" point, it's demonstrably wrong. One of Nephele's specific points against Aristeo in Feb 2007 was "Opposing Lurlock's nomination to be admin".
  • I don't mind people voting against me, but I do find it distinctly odd that a self-confessed "retired" user and someone claims to have left the site both feel the need to come back purely to make a vote. If you've left, leave. Coming back to stir up trouble isn't appreciated. That's the point being made here, and one with which I fully concur. rpeh •T•C•E• 13:50, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
• Support: Rpeh is by far one of the best , and due to Skyrim coming out , he will be needed more than ever. JackTurbo95 09:08, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
• Neutral: I feel as a fellow Patroller I should put in my voice. In my time on the wiki I have never seen Rpeh act in a way that I feel is inappropriate. He has been overall helpful to me and to other uses to whom he has assisted. He has also done much to help the site overall, as seen by the many projects he has started and/or participated in. That said, the past does have a way of coming back. Looking through some of the links, it is very clear that he has made some definite enemies over the years. Personally, I found any evidence to be too subjective to play entirely into the decision here, but doubt is a powerful feeling. I feel that as I had not been part of the community during the earlier conflicts that I can not give a full opinion. I just ask everyone to consider this: If the roles were reversed, would you want your past actions to decide your entire future? Please be civil and respectful. Hate and assault is a vicious circle of defeat. --DKong27 ^{Talk Cont} 15:14, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
  • I've spent some time wondering whether I should reply to this and eventually decided "yes". "Enemies" is a very, very strong word, and having thought about it, I don't believe I have any here - from my point of view. If people want to regard me as their personal nemesis, that's entirely down to them. There aren't even that many people who I would never want to see on the site again. The only examples that spring to mind are User:Dagoth Ur, Mad God, User:Xbox and User:Benny220. I'm not going to re-hash the stories for those three now but feel free to look through their contributions for the reasons why. Have I had disputes with other people? Yes. Several. But they were entirely necessary. Take this, for instance, where I refrained from argument and let three other admins exhibit what a later one called "laziness". Take the dispute over Lore sources, where I was later described as the only person who came out of the debate with a coherent position.
  • People have accused me of being divisive. Maybe. But when I have an idea, I ask people about it before going ahead and implementing it. Where is the discussion that Wrye held before deciding to host documentation for his personal mods on this site? Where is the discussion that Lurlock initiated before introducing icons to the Morrowind NPC template, an action that was widely hated at the time, but which was kept quiet because nobody wanted trouble? There are several people who have attempted to re-mould UESP to their own vision without consulting the community, and I have always fought that. I WILL ALWAYS fight that.
  • In my first RfA I described one of UESP's biggest challenges to be keeping the community we had. I have done my bit. Let anybody stand here and tell me otherwise. I've given praise to new editors while guiding their efforts to improve them. I've chased after previously-active editors who have disappeared. I've started new projects so people can easily find things to do, and helped them along when they've started to take part.
  • What - and this is a serious challenge - what have my so-called enemies done in comparison? rpeh •T•C•E• 21:38, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
• Support: Rpeh is in my opinion, probably the best editor on this website. He has done ​​nearly 70,000 edits on the wiki, which is far more than anyone else. If we give him adminship he will just be able to get even more work done. I've not been here for to long, but from what I've seen, he's more than a worthy administrator. So i clearly support! --Archain 20:24, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
• Support: I've been gone for some time now, and I hope my vote shows a more respectful and less vindictive tone. It is obvious that rpeh and myself have not gotten along for quite some time. We ha(d|ve) differing views on how a wiki should run: I wished for a fast paced wiki where it can evolve faster, where decisions can be quick when necessary, and where votes were thrown out the window. Rpeh always wished for the old style consensus gathering. People may attack either of our personalities as reasons to hate us, but we both wanted to better the wiki, no doubt. I think rpeh got frustrated too easily, while I got impatient too easily. I typically understood where rpeh came from, but there are some things I stood firm on, which caused friction. Rpeh is notorious for lambasting editors, and it is something that I don't expect to change. It's who he is; however, I've come to understand that he means well. Rpeh, if you do become an administrator, I hope you do see that it is faith instilled in you not only by newer people who barely know you, but by people who know exactly who you are and how you think (we also know how the AWOL administrators think). I am willing to take that gamble because the wiki can get more out of you as an administrator. We can all believe what we want to about the fiasco that happened well over a year ago, but it doesn't really mean much now. You shouldn't be forced to wear that as some scarlet letter. Elliot (talk) 04:04, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
• Support: GK and Krusty both voiced my own thoughts on the issue. What happened a while back really is a long while back; almost the entire userbase has changed. Back then rpeh had also raised his own regret at involving himself too much with administrative duties relative to "normal" editing, something he is himself fully aware of, which I now believe won't happen again.
  Admittely, I have been editing less frequent this year, something I do intend to correct with the approaching release of Skyrim! Yes rpeh tends to be less diplomatic at times than I would prefer myself (in which he wouldn't be the only admin) but on the other hand he does document most what he is doing. In other words, every administrator has its stronger and weaker qualities. --Timenn-<talk> 14:25, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
• Support: I've read some interesting things here. I was at first surprised Rpeh wasn't an admin, but I didn't know he was one before. In any case, as many other have said, Rpeh has done a LOT of work, and he's still going at it like it's nothing. However, despite not being here for so long, I've seen some strange disputes with Rpeh and other users. I won't bother looking for an example, I don't really need to prove anything I'm sure. My conclusion, as to what I've seen on the site and read here, is simply that Rpeh has a short fuse and has the urge to critisize other users, as if he's feeling he's more important than the other editors. I've asked for his help several times during my own work, like the Golden Saint page, but I was always a bit scared to, because I didn't know if he was going to give an angry response (though he never did and helped out well). I've never had a dispute with him anyhow, and I'm not planning on having disputes at all, with anyone. I just wanted to say that, the past is the past, and we should give Rpeh another chance, especially because he does a lot of work. But I would advise, with all due respect, try to stay calm, whatever the situation. What you contribute is appreciated, that goes to all editors, how small the contribution is, but the atmosphere is at least just as important. Also, you sound as if you are forced to work on the site, while you should choose to do so, you're not responsible for the site, if you keep that in mind I think you'll be fine :) ~ Dwarfmp 15:57, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
• Support – I've been waiting for this. I recommend reading all of the fancier comments above mine. --Michaeldsuarez ^{(Talk) (Deeds)} 03:40, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
• Support; rpeh seems like a highly responsible candidate, regardless of some past misdemeanours. Besides, shouldn't everyone be given a second chance? And with the approach of Skyrim, and the nightmare that will be Radiant Story, we're going to need all the help we can get. Beyond that, everything's already been said. Apollo Quinn 09:44, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
• Support: A formality at this point, but what the hey :) I have felt that rpeh deserved his admin buttons back since he regained Patroller status, and given the impending storm that we'll see in the near future, I can think of no one better to give them to now. Dlarsh^(T,C) 17:09, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

---

Done...Congrats! -- Daveh 23:46, 18 April 2011 (UTC)