Forum:AR:Adoption request for Downton Abbey Wiki

Forums: Index &rarr; Adoption requests &rarr;

What is your username? KingdomHeartsNerd

Please link to the wiki here: http://downtonabbey.wikia.com/wiki/Downton_Abbey_Wiki

How many edits have you made on that wiki? 632

How many days/months have you been editing there? 6 months fifteen days

Onthe Special Pages -> Special:ListUsers when was the last time an admin edited, and who was it? We have no admin.

Any other information:I add information to the wiki that is known from press-packs, or stated outright in the show. There is always one person who changes everything that I have written, but we are coming to an agreement. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 02:07, September 4, 2012 (UTC)

Who is KingdomHeartsNerd
I'm confused by this adoption request. It was made for username KingdomHeartsNerd, but there appears to be no such user. -- Fandyllic (talk &middot; contr) 21 Sep 2012 11:00 AM Pacific

Reject
I request that you reject this request. This user is unhelp and unwilling to deal with others. The information isn't help to fans of "Downton Abbey" and often either erroneous, needless or speculative. I have tried to deal with this User in disputes over edits, but it is hard when the User's reasoning is based on ignorance or changing sources (if any). I do respect that User's efforts and try to see User's side, but this courtesy isn't shown to me. I also note that another frequent contributor to the DA Wiki has supported me. I could go the reasoning behind each edit, but wouldn't want to bore you more then I might have already. Please see http://downtonabbey.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:Fandyllic#Block CestWhat (talk) 17:42, September 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * This, as you can see above, is being resolved and there was no need to post it here; this is for adption REQUESTS, not reasons AGAINST adoption.HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 21:49, September 4, 2012 (UTC)


 * Actually, if you oppose an adoption, this is the place for that comment. Sorry. -- Fandyllic (talk &middot; contr) 21 Sep 2012 10:57 AM Pacific

Request for Local Admin
What is your username? CestWhat

Please link to the wiki here: http://downtonabbey.wikia.com/wiki/Downton_Abbey_Wiki

How many edits have you made on that wiki? 621

How many days/months have you been editing there? October 11, 2011

On the Special Pages -> Special:ListUsers when was the last time an admin edited, and who was it?

Any other information: I try to be reasonable. I understand I'm neither the author of this Wiki nor am I the creator of this show. I have to understand that others' have differing points of views and not always differ to myself as the authority. I'd just like to have a wiki that's fun to contribute to and informative to either a fresh fan of DA or one who is obsessed with every detail. Also note that another User on DA was the one who asked me to be the admin.CestWhat (talk) 17:51, September 3, 2012 (UTC)

Reject
The editor above, known as CestWhat, would not be a good admin, for he/she (I do not know their gender) keeps removing known canon information that comes from press packs or words from the mouths of the characters themselves. This is not what we want as an admin. HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 21:49, September 4, 2012 (UTC)


 * This thing is that we don't agree on "cannon" and "confirmed" information (i.e. the source of Violet's year of birth is a twitter account that isn't affiliated with anything and Martha Levinson's year of birth is based on "looking around the same age as Violet"). Or just making up stuff like the press package for Series 1 mentioning Robert and Rosamund's father's first name as Patrick when it's nowhere in it. I could go through each and every edit, but don't want to bore you even more with this nonsense. Tried in good faith to explain, (i.e. Violet saying she ran Downton for thirty years is what the character said, but that doesn't indicate when those 30 years were since her husband's predecessor might have been alive when she married nor is it shown what year she married), but these were ignored or reasoning kept changing, so I just ignore User since info was either wrong or speculative. CestWhat (talk) 23:15, September 4, 2012 (UTC)

The wiki was perfectly fine several weeks ago, then you came along and ruined several pages that were fine as they were; now, of course, those pages cannot be restored as you've made edits in between MAJOR edits, to prevent it. Naturally, of course, I do intend to restore those articles to what they were - as an admin, I would be able to do that and would be able to restore the Wiki to it's former ways.HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 15:08, September 10, 2012 (UTC)


 * I am requesting to be admin of this wiki to help it for new Users to it as well making it easily to use and informative for fans, fresh or long-term. I would not be an admin just to punitive to one other User. I would also point out that I've been editing this Downton Abbey wiki long then you have, nor would I deny that you have add some useful information, but there have been information that either you can't or won't show as "cannon." I would get this malice if I were adding complete nonsense or offensive stuff i.e. racial slurs. Yet I've outlined time and time again why I've made edits (i.e. age based on fanfic twitter account or info not in the press package which turns out not to be there at all), but meet with dismissiveness or hostility. Plus why am I a "you" in quotation marks. I don't understand that.CestWhat (talk) 16:47, September 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * You are a you in question marks, becauser the italics didn't show up(The wiki was having issues and made italics appear as Question marks). I have shown, myself, the canon information that shows the information I have added is correct, but TIME AND TIME AGAIN you keep removing them. HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 17:14, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

Response

 * Hi. There seems to be a handful of contributors to that wiki. Please set up a community discussion about your adoption request in case other contributors have opinions about who should be an admin. If the community can come to an agreement on a user or users to promote, we will be happy to grant rights at that time.


 * Give us a link to any discussions that have been started. Rappy 18:40, September 13, 2012 (UTC)


 * To clarify Rappy's response, both of you also need to come to an agreement on working together for the good of the wiki, or supporting another editor from the wiki as admin instead. We can promote any users agreed upon by the community. A blog post is often the most effective way to set up the discussion, and you can both state your cases to the other users there... -- Wendy (talk ) 02:02, September 14, 2012 (UTC)

If you would kindly now hear MY reply; I used canon information (e.g. Violet running Downton for thirty years and Roberta being her sister and the mother of Susan) in the articles, then the above person comes along and changes them all. There were  NO problems like this before he came along. A person like this would be a terrible admin for canon information would be removed from all pages and then constantly removed whenever it was added in.HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 17:08, September 20, 2012 (UTC)
 * Not to rehash this all, but I did try to come to argeement over this, but this wasn't a "agree to disagree" situation. The User was putting info based on false source or just assumption as if it was fact and then unwilling to see my points about it. Also note that other User sided with me and supported me for admin. CestWhat (talk) 02:33, September 14, 2012 (UTC)

Blog on Downton Abbey Wiki for admin discussion
CestWhat has started a blog to discuss hopefully being promoted to admin: w:c:downtonabbey:User_blog:CestWhat/Admin_request

The users in dispute on this wiki need to settle their differences regardless, but as someone who is just a contributor and has been observing various contributions from user mentioned above, I initially supported CestWhat's admin bid, but I can't fully support a user for admin when another prominent contributor has such enmity. I think HarryPotterRules1 is a good contributor, but is equally guilty of reversion and edit warring. From what I've seen, both users could learn to use &lt;ref&gt; more and with a better understanding of what it is for (should refer to 3rd party info sources, not personal interpretations or analysis of a statement).-- Fandyllic (talk &middot; contr) 21 Sep 2012 11:02 AM Pacific