Guild Wars Wiki talk:Requests for adminship/Silver Edge/Archive 1

Nominated

Wtf Drogo, under which rock have you been hiding? Silver Edge has been nominated and has declined like three days ago, and so this page had been deleted. Nominate someone before you make them a RfA, and I think it would be best if you waited like, more than a week after the last nomination of said person >.> — Why 04:20, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Right, I just read the discussion on gwwt:rfa so disregard the "under which rock have you been hiding" remark, it wasn't appropriate. Still, nominate someone before you make them a RfA. And keep in mind previous nominations especially if those were recent. — Why 04:35, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

We should totally resurrect this thread, Silver Edge has always been present in the war-on-vandals. Chieftain Alex 00:08, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

This aspect of the Wiki is something I am interested to learn more about how it works. Because descriptions are not always clear and I end up asking/commenting, then I just get some asshole just pointing me with "off-topic" without ever explaining the missing pieces. I go and read Guild Wars Wiki:Requests for adminship, but it happens that previous nominations are not listed anywhere, this is a flaw in the page which makes it complicated to follow. The only alternative I have is to backtrack all the page's history to check each particular case which is annoying procedure and I think should be easier to find out. Simple if I catch wind of a particular case to search a single case like this one http://wiki.guildwars.com/index.php?title=Guild_Wars_Wiki%3ARequests_for_adminship&action=historysubmit&diff=1840182&oldid=1839191.

Since nominations are always a step prior former RfAs they won't even get listed with Category:Resolved RFAs. The responses to each were not written in any discussion page and are archived nowhere. Yoshida Keiji (talk) 11:52, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm a strong supporter. SilverEdge has always been the never-resting defender of GWW against spam, bots, and unfortunate edits. He's also the editor most likely to have actually read and' understood policy/process/guideline articles and to apply them consistently. And, perhaps most importantly, he's unfailingly polite and gracious and works well with others.

@Yohsida: This is the page for discussing Silver Edge's RfA — do you have an opinion about it? If you want to discuss how past RfAs are documented, please move your text above to the relevant article. – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 16:56, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

If I am understanding things right. This is not a RfA but a suggestion for Nomination and not even a Nomination by itself yet either. As always I read this discussion from the top to bottom. It is stated above that Silver Edge had once declined a Nomination but the reason was missing, that is why I went through all the history to track down the reason/s which I brought back with the link. Now we know. As per Guild_Wars_Wiki:Requests_for_adminship#Pending_nominations, if Alex wants to appoint Silver Edge, Alex needs to list SE there first, then a RfA would be next. This is not officially a RfA because it once existed but was deleted as it is talked about at the beginning, just check the top left tab and you will find "project page" red linked. Yoshida Keiji (talk) 09:42, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

It's the talk page for the RfA for SilverEdge. It's not the talk page for RfAs in general. Alex is suggesting the RfA be reactivated. I don't disagree with some/all of your points, but, at best, they don't belong here. – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 17:55, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

What I am saying here is that in the past Silver Edge said: "-Not now, maybe later.-" Seeing that the answer was long time ago, Alex could just formally re-Nominate which he didn't. It's after a Nomination or a mainspace RfA page is created that supports, neutral or opposing comments are to be shared. Yoshida Keiji (talk) 03:22, 13 January 2013 (UTC)