User:ImperialBattlespire/RfA

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.

Request for Adminship: Imperialbattlespire

Our Request for Adminship (RfA) process is based on Wikipedia's policy. An editor, when nominated, accepts and answers questions, which can be asked by any registered editor. Votes and comments can also be left by any registered editor. Daveh makes the call, based upon the community's consensus, after about a week.

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

Imperialbattlespire, known also as ImpBat and Proventus, is a frequent UESP editor and an asset to the community. He's available through Discord and is always easy to collaborate with. His focus on obscure or less-worked-on facets of the site, in both the lorespace and gamespaces, have planted him firmly as a respectable, hard-working editor. From personal experience, his help with Blades quest walkthroughs has been instrumental to making the Blades gamespace feel like a usable collection of webpages. In the lorespace, he doesn't just create pages in line with what exists already, but actively widens the scope of what the lorespace can be about. The lorespace ought to be like Wikipedia if it existed in Tamriel, and methods of transportation, foods (WIP), and minerals are all things that deserve pages and love. In conclusion, Imperialbattlespire is creative, hard-working, and not afraid to do new things, qualities that make him a clear choice for an administrator.

I wholeheartedly accept this nomination. Imperialbattlespire (talk) 20:38, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Questions

Q1: What are your long-term ambitions regarding your wiki edits?

My long-term ambitions regarding my wiki edits are primarily linked to the general community and fixing a lot of our missing coverage, some good examples of my work relating to this is the overhaul of Shadowkey pages, especially NPC dialogue, which we had basically none of before I added it, I also worked with SarthesArai on documenting Battlespire multiplayer. In terms of future projects, I am currently working on a series of lore pages for food, Stros M'Kai, and High Rock, I also actively work on Blades quest pages, and set up the new event pages when new events are released and will continue to do so. I wouldn't mind writing the news section and also updating the feature article/image as sometimes it sits around not being changed for quite a while.

Q2: What, if anything, would you like to see change regarding the ways users view the site?

I would like for users to be able to approach the site easier, especially when it comes to dialogue, we have gained somewhat of a negative reputation when it comes to Skyrim NPC pages and the layout of them due to the walls of words that are common and the amount of editor prose that has been haphazardly strewn in, with the editors own thoughts being presented as fact when people just want to read the dialogue and not some random editors views on how an NPC feels. I have made an effort to fix this, and intend to continue doing so, there have actually been a few mentions on /r/teslore about the fact that the UESP has been improving in regards to Skyrim NPC dialogue as both me and MolagBallet have gone through a lot of the pages.

Q3: What, if anything, would you like to see change regarding the ways editors view the site?

I think that editors view the site in a good light, however, I do think we need more community outreach and I think we should ask the community itself how we as editors could improve the site, otherwise, it will continue to create a loop of the UESP becoming more for editors and not the average viewer.

Q4: What is your strategy for handling disagreements with editors and other admins?

I tend to talk to them on Discord, due to the quick nature of it, however in regards to UESP-specific disagreements I will take it to a talk page or to the Community Portal.

Q5: What makes the UESP your wiki of choice? How do you hope to instill that passion into other would-be users and editors?

The long-standing reputation of the UESP and its non-intrusive nature compared to the Fandom with adverts being thrown in your face. I would hope to install this passion onto others by helping them access information and continuous community outreach so that people don't think their voices don't matter.

Q6: I would like to support, but I'm kind of concerned by some of the prior policy changes you've proposed in the past, particularly the suggestion to split IG and OOG sources like Wookiepedia does. Has your opinion on this evolved since? Jacksol (talk) 20:26, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Due to the lack of support for it, I won't pursue that suggestion anymore, as its obviously an unpopular idea, so yes my opinion on it has changed. Imperialbattlespire (talk) 20:43, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Q7: Does this nomination relate in any way to your membership of a private Discord server used by wiki editors and community members who for one reason or another disagree with how the UESP Discord server is run? Do you share any of those views on the practices of current site staff? If so, do you think this would have an impact on your working relationship with existing wiki admins, and what changes would you look to make?

The reason I ask this is because I see many similarly-minded editors supporting this RfA, and I am concerned that the purposes of this request may be a purely political action rather than one representing on-wiki needs. I think it is important to discuss this openly if this RfA is to be seriously considered. —⁠Legoless (talk) 20:27, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

I like to think that I have a good working relationship with other staff members of the UESP, I regularly talk to them and help them with projects, for example just recently I helped MolagBallet with the overhaul of the Breton page, me and her are also working together on the food page and NPC pages, I've also worked closely with DCSG, Jeancey, and Ilaro for the Blades gamespace. Even if I disagree with other members sometimes, I don't let that get in the way of working with others and improving pages together on the UESP as at the end of the day, that's why we all edit because we want the UESP to be the best it possibly can be, and the wishes of our userbase are integral to this common goal as ultimately they are who we provide information for. My membership in the ESO datamining server, has not affected my relationship with any admins thus far and I strongly believe it will continue to not have any negative effects on how I interact with other members of staff and of the community.

I also regularly attempt to find concept art that we are missing but need an admin to ask permission from the artists as that is our current policy. I would also like to contact CVH who now works as the Blades community manager, but again an admin is needed to speak on behalf of the UESP. In these cases, I haven't been able to do these things myself and have instead had to pester and wait for other admins. These show some of the community outreach problems that I have mentioned which could be solved if I am granted the role of admin as I could then solve these issues myself without having to rely on others, as it would greatly benefit us to have more documentation for concept art and Blades.

While some community members in that ESO datamining server have disagreements with parts of how the UESP function, that has not motivated my decision to become an admin in the slightest. I want to be an admin for reasons of further improving the UESP. If I ever have disagreements with the administration and how things should be done, I wouldn’t use my powers or influence as an admin to sway anyone, I'd solve it by consensus. Imperialbattlespire (talk) 00:03, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Q8: When voting for a potential admin, I'd like to have a look at the Wikipedia's RFA guide. Although they differ at some points with our policies, they have a great overview of qualities we can look for. You are no doubt a really great editor, but looking at the list, I do have some concerns here. Could you elaborate a bit more about some chores, like maintenance edits, you performed? I get you don't have blocking rights, so it is understandable you don't have a track record on that. I also noticed that you almost never use any edit summaries, even though it is something small, users should look at admins for good practices in general. What are your thoughts about this? And what kind of qualities do you think can be improved? --Ilaro (talk) 21:20, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Some maintenance edits I have performed consist of:

• Maintaining Blades Event pages in regards to if they are active or not and regularly setting up new event pages whenever they are released for Blades
• Setting up Blades creature pages and helping to create the graphs on the general creature pages
• Reporting and warning vandalism (the patrolling channel on discord is evidence of this)
• Creating redirects and disambiguation pages such as https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Horsemen
• I fixed all instances of "Walkthough" to "Walkthrough" on the UESP
• I also upload Crown Store images from ESO.
• Added IDs to nearly every Blades item, armor, weapon, and decoration pages.
• Helped create a lot of the General: UOL books.
• I have also used prod and speed many times on candidates for deletion, for example when the OB mods were moved onto the UESP, I used speed to remove duplicate icon images.
• I made all the religion navboxes for the lore pages.
• I have also moved pages such as Battlespire images, which had incorrect name formats due to the age of the images.

In regards to edit summaries, you are correct, I often do not use them and I realise that I need to improve upon this as I am aware it makes things easier for other editors looking at the history of a page, I would say its the biggest flaw I have as an editor. Imperialbattlespire (talk) 21:32, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Statement: Regarding the last few votes, I can understand concerns about edit summaries and the role model that an admin is meant to act as, I have changed my settings as Robinhood showed me so that it reminds me to do an edit summary, which I have been doing lately now. If dave doesn't decide to make me an admin and there isn't a clear consensus I will follow the advice of members here and post an application in the future as I can improve upon my skills in ways that people have brought up here such as more maintenance work. I am sorry for the lateish reply, as most of you are aware, university work has been killing me the last couple of weeks due to Easter upcoming.

Votes

• Support: As nominator. -Dcsg (talk) 19:52, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

• Comment: Honestly, I think it might be a little too soon for ImpBat. I also question the need. Historically, Admin isn't simply a reward for good editing, it usually is done in response to a need. In my case, I became admin directly in response to ESO's launch, and thus the need for an admin was increased. In the most recent case, MolagBallet does a lot of maintenance of images and pages, resulting in large numbers of moves, which then required an admin to clean things up. Things were made significantly easier when she became admin, because she could do the cleanup herself. I do question what abilities of an admin ImpBat requests on a regular basis that he could otherwise be doing himself. I'm not full oppose, as I would like to hear other people's comments on the matter, but I do have some concerns. Jeancey (talk) 22:08, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

It isn't just wiki tasks that are limited by UESP roles. Based on Imperialbattlespire's response to the questions, it seems like community outreach is something he finds important. A wiki editor cannot speak on behalf of the site, but an admin can. -Dcsg (talk) 22:40, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

While I had concerns it would be "too soon" I must say he's one of the fastest learners I've ever seen, he knows just about everything a proper editor would need to by this point. This alleviated my concerns to the point where I'm mainly just impressed, he has enough experience and such a time gap is not unprecedented (ie Dillon editing in 2017 and becoming admin in 2018). To say that he should be admin as a "reward" for good editing is a simplified way of putting it, there's far more reasons for it than that. You became admin over 6 years ago and during the launch of a whole triple A game, times have certainly changed much since then; only 3 admins have been elected since, and the previous admins have naturally not been putting as much time or interest into the wiki (not their fault, life goes on and people get busy), most of them are semi-active at best and some have been removed. If there needs to be a big need, the Blades launch, multiple eso DLCs, etc have a lot of the time been added thanks to ImpBat's expertise in the matter, which more than justifies why he's a good fit. MolagBallet's promotion is a great step forward but the way you're phrasing it, it sounds like she must take on the burden that the lack of activity from staff has been adding on. I see no reason why ImpBat can't help too; he could more than handle a lot of the maintenance and cleanup that only admins can do and he's incredibly capable for the job. Because of the low of activity of most admins and ImpBat's highly refined editing skills and good judgement I think he's a prime candidate to help out as admin. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 07:07, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

• Support:Imp provides a fresh perspective on how to handle the wiki's problems. He is an advocate for improving some of the older things things that the wiki mistepped on, like the horrid Skyrim dialogue formatting which encourages readers to instead look up dialogue on our rival's wiki.Zebendal (talk) 22:50, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
• Support: One of the best of the best, this is a long time coming. I absolutely endorse this. Dcking20 (talk) 23:39, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
• Support: Prov is a fantastic editor and brings a fresh perspective to the wiki. I am particularly grateful for him picking up the slack documenting Shadowkey, and I think his work on fixing up the NPC dialogue around the site speaks for itself. I can wholeheartedly endorse his adminship after working with him on collaborations on several lore pages, and his work in the Shadowkey gamespace. Thal-J (talk) 02:44, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose: I have no doubt that Prov, is a excellent editor, his work is impressive, but Jeancey is correct, a good editor isn't the best way we should be determining if they are an admin. I do have my concerns about this, and this is why I can't in good faith support it. Like me I think Proventus might like to rush ahead sometimes, another concern I have? Is can he get along with other Admins I remember Jeancey got so upset with him, that I think he was willing to suspend Proventus going by that tense convo about the Morrowind npcs on the discord. For an Admin I expect more then I do of any other person. Like to not undo fixes to some of the worst blunders and actually spot such blunders and take care of the issue.

This is an example, Legoless and Akb stepped in and undid his undo of my edit when it came to the Wood Elf Concept art being used to say Redcaps are goblins, as when the concept art was portraying male bosmer as satyr's goblins, bug bears and doing more of a fey thing which never happened as they canned the idea. That along with other things, I just have legit concerns, I don't want to get him out of something because of a mistake. But I just don't know if he's the material needed for the job and for that reason I have to oppose this. Molag Ballet I supported because I felt she was the right person. I just don't know about Proventus, now its possible I can be wrong and I could change my mind later. But for right now, I'm not willing to commit to supporting this nomination. He will have to convince me but I am keeping my mind open and just note my vote can still change. TheVampKnight (talk) 04:08, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

As I stated above there are more grounds for his promotion than just good editing. The npc pages discussion was unanimously agreed upon at the time; to blame Proventus alone for wanting to fasttrack the proposal is wrong and incorrect, there were multiple users supporting go-ahead for it as well (this is not uncommon, the ON:Mounts project would likely have been finished by now but I wanted to take some more time adjusting final changes). The circumstances of this altercation which you seem to barely recall are also skewed in a very biased regard and exaggerated. You're making it sound like he's constantly at risk of being expelled for fighting with admins but that's not at all the case; Proventus has consistently showed respect for the wiki process, and he's very respectful to all staff members. All of these concerns sound like you projecting your own issues that others have with you. While this is not about you, you have constantly, time and time again shown blatant disregard for wiki process and gone against consensus, with repeated instances of invalid edits that others have had to clean up after and revert; your behavior on the discord and on the wiki has often been met with numerous warnings for being inappropriate, I question if your opinion on this matter should even be counted due to inaccurate evidence and baseless accusations.

Your point about the redcap Goblin edit is also completely and utterly false. Proventus had nothing to do with that initial inclusion. In fact, ImperialBattlespire never even added that info, I did. He did re-add it as he was doing a lot of cleanup of the article at the time and I assume was just adding info he thought was mistakenly taken off, and he didn't dispute it being removed again; he made a good faith edit and didn't argue with the consensus. Your entire point is based off a one-off change that he ultimately didn't keep and kept in line with wiki policy. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 07:07, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

I was pushing for those changes on the discord as well during that time. Jumping the gun I can see being a flaw, as that is something I've been known to do and have done myself. So like something like that would be the reason why I would oppose my own nomination if someone was to give one to me. As for the other thing I rather there be no bad blood, given the other admin hasn't agreed to this exactly. I don't know if he's supporting it and it looks like he's leaning no. Then I also agreed with him, on the edit thing and what he said there. I'm up for it, if other admins feel he's good. Like I said above, my opinion can be changed.

But the main reason was actually what I saw with the goblin thing, which was the biggest blunder I've seen so far on the Wiki, other then the Greymarch thing and the Hagraven's being compared to Werevultures. He didn't see the flaw in that sourcing I know he didn't do that but he didn't see the problem as to why I had to fix it. That makes me concerned he may not be the best at spotting obvious blunders other community members can make, other admins had to undo his undo of my edit when I actually fixed that blunder. I understand making mistakes, we all do it even admins. However I expect more of admins then I do editors or even patrollers in being able to fix blunders when they are spotted. Now that is where my main concern about it actually is and the main reason I actually opposed this If you can't tell the early concept art for the Bosmer which Mk's Idea was to make the males ugly and appear like Satyrs, and redcaps, bugbears and forest goblins how can I expect you to be good at being an Admin and if you can't see the issue even with a patroller role how can you be a Admin? I don't oppose without reason, and I would like to support him and if he can address those concerns I will change my vote.

Also rim I was being nice and I already knew, that you did that as I looked into it that is why I didn't mention it directly. However the issue is for an Admin I expect them to see such blunders for what they are even for a patroller and fix those instead of reverting the fixes. All I know is I have some concerns, as Admin is a very big responsibility and I want our community to benefit, from the most he can contribute to it. While being the one that addresses issues amongst community members and also, help make sure we are not messing things up. Its a lot of responsibility and a burden. TheVampKnight (talk) 10:38, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

TheVampKnight, I have to say I find your reasoning here to be ludicrous. I would not consider any of the above to be disqualifying for the purposes of an RfA. —⁠Legoless (talk) 20:27, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Vamp, I have no idea what disqualifiers you perceive here, but it does seem that you aren't considering qualities that are directly pertinent to an RFA or, indeed, the RFA itself. I'll not bother parroting Legoless and the Rim of the Sky, but I would advise you consider their words. — J. J. Fullerton _﴾talk﴿ 20:54, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

• Support: I've been watching Proventus ever since he arrived and first started editing and it amazes me how far he's come in just a few years. He's a pillar of the community and is always incredibly helpful to other users, he's very involved with settling matters in a civil way and furthering the cause of the wiki. His dedication is not to be understated, the amount of tasks and projects he's taken on is not to be understated. When addressing problems he always does it with a very reasonable approach and a clear head. He's a very fast learner and has much experience already thanks to his quick-thinking skills. He is noticeably mature and always very decent in his demeanor, as an admin and higher representative of the wiki he would be very useful in outreach, and his high interest and constant activity helps a lot.

Proventus is knowledgeable about many different namespaces, which is a big asset to his skills: His incredible work on Blades, his constant large content edits in every department of Online, his dialogue overhauls for Skyrim, work in General, his invaluable additions to Shadowkey that no one else could've done, his incredibly well-informed knowledge and overhauls in Lore, his additions to concept art everywhere, and his various projects past and forthcoming in all pre-Oblivion games speak for themselves. If there were a test on all aspects of the gamespaces he'd get the highest score out of everybody. No other user has the same talents as he does, and his great understanding of Blades could be very well-suited as he'd be one of the few to be able to manage it knowing everything. This I find very important; while the other admins have good judgement skills they are not always well-versed in certain deletion requests/moves/etc as they haven't played said games and would need to look into it a lot, while Proventus' constantly up-to-date knowledge would solve these issues and pick up the pace much quicker.

The wiki would benefit greatly from taking him on, I can think of no one finer to help out the wiki as administrator. He's the ideal candidate in every regard. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 07:18, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

• Support: Proventus was one of the first editors I ran into when I started editing and was helpful ever since. I'm sure he'll make a good addition to the admin team. --TheynT (talk) 13:27, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose: While Proventus is a highly skilled editor, I do not see a compelling reason to promote him to administrator. As Jeancey stated above, administrators are generally promoted when the need arises. For example, MolagBallet required administrative powers because of the specific type of work she was doing. However, judging by the work he is currently doing, I do not believe that Proventus needs that power at the moment. Furthermore, I believe that it is somewhat hasty to appoint another administrator only a week after one was appointed (Molag), and I would have preferred that his nomination be deferred to a later date. Finally, as expressed by his supporters, the main reason for making Proventus an administrator appears to be his talent for community outreach. However, I have concerns over the influence the community exerts over his thought process. While it is always good to listen to new ideas, I have received the impression that Proventus can sometimes be too receptive to the opinions of the general community or the practices of other websites. While this is simply my personal impression, this concern makes it impossible for me to support Proventus' nomination because administrators serve an important role as the wiki's representatives.--Rook (talk) 13:56, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Comment: I'm somewhat baffled by the idea that there are "turns" to become administrator, as if we're inhabiting a Yes Minister sketch or the minds of the candidates for United Nations Secretary General, but I do not see why we have to have a fixed number of active administrators—sure it is better to have more administrators capable of handling day-to-day administration than to desperately need one and have to hurriedly promote more candidates. This "needs-based" thinking, in my reckoning, will lead only to an admin shortage precisely when we do (need, that is).

Second, I'm a little confused by the idea that Proventus is too affected by the community. While I see Legoless has asked a much more pertinent version of this question, I am forced to conclude from your remarks that you believe it to be a bad thing if the community's (i.e. the people who use the UESP, if I read you correctly?) opinions are taken into account in the operation of the wiki. — J. J. Fullerton _﴾talk﴿ 20:54, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Comment: Firstly, while a future shortage of administrators could potentially occur, I do not think the possibility of this hypothetical scenario is great enough to justify the hasty appointment of administrators, especially considering the importance of the role. Secondly, as I stated in my opposition, I think that it is important to listen to the community and be willing to adopt new ideas so that the wiki can better serve its readership. However, not all ideas should be adopted. If we are influenced too much by online comments, the wiki could lose what makes it truly unique and attractive to the current base of users (both old and new). For additional clarification, by my use of the term "community", I was talking about TES fans in general, including those who use this wiki or others. I have seen a lot of discussion over how to attract more users, but I think it is best to take a conservative approach to any changes meant to accomplish this goal. Rook (talk) 21:21, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Comment: I agree with Fuller's notion that the idea of it being hasty to appoint admins so soon after another, as if to wait their turn, is a very incorrect way of viewing it. If you look at past requests you'll see that for years now admins have been appointed not within very short gaps of each other before. The shortage of admins isn't really a hypothetical scenario, its lowkey already happening, as one can observe from the acivity status of current admins (note that this is in no way critical of any of the listed users, and I'm not going to go into specifics about their specialties): MolagBallet and Jeancey are very active and engaged, Legoless, Ilaro, and Robin are partially active but not on at all times, Robin said he hasn't been following the wiki closely as of late. Dillonn and Dwarfmp edit occasionally but are largely inactive, AlphaKennyBuddy was dismissed recently, Lurlock was editing but has been on an indeterminate break for over a year. His contributions to furnishings/patch notes have not been continued by anybody else up until partial work on it this month, resulting in a lotta missing furnishings and patch redlinks due to the "we have enough admins to get the job done" mentality and a shortage in his expertise, etc. AKB was also previously handling many connections dependent on him specifically that have since been limited to social media since his removal and no one has filled in the gap.

The point is for the most part, most admins are simply not as involved as they initially were because they were appointed years ago, and its hard for anybody to keep a high interest in editing for years on end. On many other wikis administrators are removed by other staff after inactivity, but uesp is one of the cases where they hold the position indefinitely, and for whatever reason this seems to instill the idea that the admin quota is always met. I consider it a shortage of sorts as there's long wait times for admins to fill out requests to use their abilities and a lot of tasks ares left on the backlog. The notion that "oh we have so-and-so doing this already so they have it covered, no one else is needed" is detrimental as if even one of them went inactive the backlog would pile up considerably. Proventus is fresh and very dedicated, I know he could put in a great amount of effort and hard work as admin and to say its too soon and unneeded is unjust; the wiki truly could benefit from another admin even now, I think a number of people just gloss over this due to the lack of activity from the absence of AAA game releases, despite many developments in spin-offs otherwise. Proventus' specialties and departmental knowledge has already been listed, and I need to emphasize why the high amount of years since admins have been enstated is important, as a lot of developments in games have occurred since then that Prov is incredibly educated/informed in that not all the other admins are, and therefore his judgement would be key in ie cases of deletion in Blades or eso pages. In terms of what you mean by the community's effect, I don't fully know what you mean but I thinl I follow, and Proventus isn't one to give into doing what the majority wants just for the sake of it if that's what you mean. His activity in the community is a keypoint because he listens to all users and tries to come up with the best solution, and he's not a people pleaser if that's the concern. He's also constantly on the hunt for information through the community elsewhere, particularly when he helped the Imperial Library locate important archived developer posts, and much more in various other areas that would take me far too long to list. He's always putting in 110% and that hard work deserves to be utilized to its fullest potential as admin. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 20:14, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

• Support: There is no doubt in my mind that ImpBat/Proventus is qualified for this position; I have worked with him on many occasions, with over half of my edits being done in collaboration with, or in support of his projects, mostly in the Blades gamespace. He boasts a strong editing history and a strong understanding of wiki policy. Since my early editing days, as well as through the present, he has been on my shortlist on individuals to seek out when I have a question or am in need of help regarding the wiki. He works on the wiki with passion, all of his edits and proposals are done with the goal to better the wiki, whether it be focusing on adding to neglected topics, or making proposals that target some of the things the wiki struggles with.

A few others in this discussion have voiced a few minor concerns regarding the nomination; however, I believe that some of these concerns actually support why he would make an ideal admin. In particular, Jack brought up a past policy proposal put forth by the nominated that many disagreed with. After the negative reaction, instead of continuing to be bitter over the matter, he was able to respect the views and points of the consensus and drop the idea.

This example bolsters his nomination, as it shows that, not only does he attempt to seek out new methods in an attempt to improve the wiki, but he is able to respect dissenting views from other editors and accept that not all of his ideas are gonna be great ones.

As for whether it's too soon for a new admin, I feel that that question should really have no grounds in this conversation. I see nothing on "if it's too soon" in the RfA. If Daveh does, in fact, come to the conclusion there isn't room for another admin, that's up to his discretion as he wields the power to make that decision. Thus, that potential decision should have no weight on whether one should support the nomination or not. Naga007 (talk) 07:31, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose: Proventus is an excellent and collaborative editor and has contributed hugely to the wiki per the above. However, I believe this nomination is premature as I don't yet think Prov is ready for the responsibilities of adminship. I would hope that this vote to oppose will not discourage any future RfA should the current one not pass. I have had nearly two weeks to ponder my position on this but I can't in good conscience support this nomination at this time. —⁠Legoless (talk) 09:26, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose: I've been thinking about this nomination for quite a bit and can't really put my finger on the reason why Proventus needs admin rights. Yes, he is a great editor and his community outreach is a pre, but neither of those are necessarily performed by admins. In fact, many patrollers/mods that were not an admin on any UESP platform have made contact with devs (be they from Call to Arms, Pinball, Legends, interviews for ESO, etc.). Furthermore, I'm not really interested in arguments of other users why Proventus makes a great admin. I would like to hear more from Proventus why he believes the other opposing votes are of no concern to his nomination. I believe Proventus is a motivated editor and a fast learner, so if this one doesn't pass, I will be looking forward to another RfA in the future after a bit more growth. --Ilaro (talk) 15:07, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

• Comment: This nomination has been open for quite while, even past the time we usually close them. However, as there have been two quick opposing votes in a row at the last second, I'd like to petition for this nomination to stay open a bit longer. That would give Proventus the time to respond to these oppositions and try to sway some votes, or for other users to evaluate their own votes in light of the new oppositions. --Ilaro (talk) 15:07, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose: I like Proventus, and he's a fantastic editor. However, I feel like if I voted to support his RfA at this point in time, I'd just be voting in favor of him because I like him and he's a good editor, and that's not necessarily what makes a good admin. He does upload Crown Store images, which is helpful (and he generally uploads them at the highest resolution so they don't need to be replaced), but he's also uploaded a good deal of Crown Store images that have never made it onto a page. This is an issue for a few reasons. Namely if these images are orphaned, people can and will upload lower quality duplicates that do get put on pages. I concur with what Ilaro and Legoless have said today: I would be willing to vote for an RfA for Proventus at a later date. Anyone can say they'll start using edit summaries, but I'd like some time to see these improvements come to fruition before I make a hasty decision soaked in my own bias and appreciation for his work in lorespace. It is very, very easy to say "I like what he's done in lorespace, he deserves to be an admin", but I'd be doing Proventus a disservice if I just up and supported this RfA without putting the brainwork into why I have doubts. -MolagBallet (talk) 16:50, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose: As per the above oppositions, I just think it is too soon for ImpBat. One day he could make a great admin, but I just don't think he's ready yet. I don't see any of the reasoning in the above discussion as enough to change my mind. There are some things that can allow an editor to become an admin when they aren't quite ready for it, such as the release of a new game, due purely to the need of the wiki at that time, but I don't believe we are at that point. As I've said, becoming an admin isn't supposed to simply be a reward for good work, there has to be evidence that the editor needs those tools to better do things they already try and do, like moves, renaming images, behind the scenes cleanup of stuff, and I just don't see that sort of editing in ImpBat's edit history. That's not to say he couldn't get there, but I don't think that time is now. Jeancey (talk) 17:31, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

• Support: Contrary to Rook's idea that there is no administrator shortage, Rim of the Sky's convinced me that we're amid one whose full effects may well soon be noticeable. I've already voiced how the idea that it isn't his turn or there isn't a need has failed to convince me, but I can see how there could be concerns about his readiness. As for that, I'm confident Proventus can 'learn on the job', as it were, but I understand concerns to the contrary. — J. J. Fullerton _﴾talk﴿ 00:13, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Completed

Welcome to our newest admin, Imperialbattlespire! While this could have gone either way there were more support votes than oppose and I felt the contributions/attributes of Imperialbattlespire were more than enough to warrant the promotion to admin. -- Daveh ^(talk) 13:06, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Consensus: Support. Supported 8:6, final decision made by Dave. – Robin Hood ^(talk) 23:21, 4 April 2021 (UTC)