The Elder Scrolls Wiki:Administrators/Rights Removal Requests/Xell Khaar

 The following is the request of the removal of user rights from Xell Khaar. The result of the discussion was: No, he should not be removed.

Xell Khaar
Although I elected him and elevated him to his present rank, I now regret it. Xell is a Loose cannon. He's quick to anger and threats he lacks the ability to work well with others, and he takes trivia issues too personally. All in all, he lacks wisdom. It doesn't take wisdom to copy templates from Wookieepedia; anyone can do that. Also, the only reason is attempting to remove me is due to petty disagreements. Whatever happened to Freedom of speech? Aren't people allow to disagree? Why should people be punished for voicing their opinion? If you give in to Xell's demand, you'll create a wiki where Xell has total and unmarked power. Is that the future you want? If you believe in morals and rationality, you won't allow Xell to do this; we must fight back. KAJ, Xell isn't acting objectively; he's doing it because it's personal to him. --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 17:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

For

 * 1) --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 17:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * So, Arandil, Xell's been good for this Wiki but Michael hasn't? Right. From the messages I've seen, I see no reason why he should be an Admin. --Thomas Rattim (talk)
 * 1) -- supergeeky1 18:03, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) I don't know what your deal is. I saw that you blocked RamblinWreck90 for NO reason at all. Just that he was a "Suspected" sock puppet of me. I can tell you now that he IS NOT a scock puppet of me. He is A friend of mine and I helped him get started on wookieepedia. Heck, I dont even know his password. The Bible tells us to forgive and forget. For some reason you can not do that. And about you saying that I need to admit to my sins, I dont know what sins I have done. I have had my parents, friends, and family all look at what you said that was "Sins" and they dont see anything wrong. I have figured you out. You are an Evil man who does not care about onthers. You are unreasonable.I am starting to doubt that you are a Christian. And If I didnt know any better I'd say you were a sock puppet of the Devil. I am glad that you will eventually have to pay for what you have done. Whether its in Hell or when you face God on Judgement day. \

And If you really are a Christian you need to think about something: As brothers in Christ we need to put aside our differences and stand together and make it our goal to set a good example for others so they might see the light of Jesus in us.

I rest my case. Have a good night. --Prince Xizor
 * 1) B.A.D.P.E.R.S.O.N. -- 4-LOM
 * 2) He reminds me of my father... I hated my father. - Mr. Joker
 * 3) - Billy Arrowsmith (Talk), 18:48, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 4) Yeh! U kik his azze anywayz!  Hea iz a heeatheen und shud b takken oat ov powah!   20:44, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) Xell has worked damm hard on this site, trying to turn around the mess you created. Unmarked power? Freedom of speech? Aren't you taking this a little too seriously. This wiki needs a single, determined, knowledgeble Admin, and thats Xell. Also you call him petty? The only reason your nominating him is becuase he nominated you. Enough! Arandil 17:29, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) It is completely unfair for you to nominate to disband him. He has done way more for this wiki's improvement than you have in just the short while he's been here. Before he changed it, your Manual of Style was ripped off WoWwiki with no changes done to conform it to this one. And you complain that he's using Wookieepedia as a guide? The pages are complete messes, nothing is done professionaly and there havn't even been any decent articles written until Xell came. Just clicking the random article button, more than half the time you get a page that's completely laughable. This wiki has been around 3 years with extremely little to no improvement. Getting rid of Xell would be sending this site back to it's pathetic sickened state rather than the healthy wiki this series of video games deserves.--JonusAngelus 19:55, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) GR Groe 20:26, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 4) –K.A.J•T•C•E• 20:33, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 5) If we're allowed to oppose our own, then of course I'm going to... -- Xell Khaar 21:05, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 6) *This right I won't deny to you. --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 23:42, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Comments

 * This isn't true. Xell has a habit of acting unreasonably (click on the links I provided above). I have acted honorably and reasonably on all the wikis I've served. --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 17:32, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Really, what type of user gets anger just because I told him the copyright of the wiki? --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 17:36, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * In the examples you gave Xell was reacting to your constant reverting of his work, hardly unreasonable. Also, if I read the voting requirements correctly, you may not vote against the removal of your own staus. Arandil 17:59, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I revert any edit that isn't in our best interests. Also, Xell is the one who overrides my edits and my original templates so the wiki could appear more like Wookieepdia. Where's this wiki's individuality? I will not doom this wiki into being a copy of Wookieepedia. --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 18:09, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Were hardly in danger of that. One site deals with Star Wars, the other with Elder Scrolls. I fail to see a problem. Arandil 18:23, 1 July 2009 (UTC) Just a heads up, if you can't find viable reasons for MDS to lose his Admin rights, and you succeed in RFRA'ing him, I will go to Wikia. Seeing as he's a Central Wiki Admin and we're both trusted users, I'm fairly sure they will reinstate him almost immediately. What I do suggest is that both sides ignore each other if needs be, and one side grow up and get on with improving the Wiki, not causing strife. --Thomas Rattim (talk)
 * How about we stop the act? You and I both know that I can't sway you. Every time I advance my agreement, you just come up with another excuse. Let's move on and stop waiting each others' time. I already knew that you were going to vote against me due to offhanded comments you left on my talk page. --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 18:40, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

That would be ideal, but i'm afraid it may not be possible. I also Wikia may not consent given the sockpuppetry that people are employing to rig the vote. Arandil 18:48, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, this whole thing is shit! It should end now. It's a complete waist of time. Tom is right: Michael should not WILL NOT loose his rights. Wikia simply won't allow some guy/girl to come in, take over a wiki, and demote a trusted, long-time user. --Wylind (Talk) 18:54 1 July 2009 (UTC)


 * 1) A cheerful heart is good medicine, but a crushed spirit dries up the bones. (Proverbs 17:22) -- The Dark Prince
 * This isn't sockpuppetry, Arandil. We're just informing other people of the vote. It's called the IRC. :) Wikia have tools to check for sockpuppets, so we're fine if they want to take a look. --Thomas Rattim (talk)

It doesn't matter either way. The requirements say that a user must have edited the mainspace a week before the vote. None of your votes are going to count. Arandil 19:08, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Which is pointless. Wikia's staff is going to look at this, see how many people are against Michael losing his admin rights and see how many people want him to stay. This "voting block", if you will, is just holding up the process. They aren't going to remove Michael's admin rights because they'll see the majority of the users want him to stay. Wylind (Talk)
 * Is there any point to this nomination against me? I already said if Michaelsuarez doesn't get removed I'll resign, nominating me is pointless. -- Xell Khaar 19:15, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Xell: Yes, there is. You can't just nominate to remove somebody just because they "nitpick" at you and "hurt your pride". Even if he has done the above-mentioned, Michael has done nothing against this wiki, not you. --Wylind (Talk)
 * You are a very bad person and if I didn't know any better I'd think you were the sockpuppet of the DEVIL. -- The Dark Price
 * Firstly, who the hell are you people? I'd really like to know. -- Xell Khaar 19:23, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * They're from Wookieepedia, Darthipedia, and Star Wars Fanon. --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 19:25, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


 * We're from another Wiki. Firstly, if you think we're socks, that's more laughable than I first thought. Secondly, is the place to meet us. --Thomas Rattim (talk)
 * Okay.. so why are you voting on the Elder Scrolls wiki..? -- Xell Khaar 19:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Because it is our right to do so. Find a Wikia policy that proves me wrong. --Wylind (Talk)

See my above comments. Also, if any of our visitors from those other wikis have an interest in Elder Scrolls, I encourage you to browse around, see if there are any edits you'd be interested in making. GR Groe 20:28, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I cannot justifiy removing the status of someone who works as hard as Xell Khaar. –K.A.J•T•C•E• 20:33, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * (Response to JonusAngelus) Are you blaming me for all those three years? I've only been administrator since the April of 2009. --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 20:15, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * No, but I believe if you're to be an admin you should be working hard to fix what's wrong with the site. You've been here for 4 months and this wiki is still sadly pathetic. Xell has been here only a few weeks and has improved this wiki much more than you have in your time here. --JonusAngelus 20:43, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I was busy; I had to edit over 3,000 images during those months. --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 20:51, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * For another wiki. Are you saying you don't have the time for this wiki? It appears that way. --JonusAngelus 21:16, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm just saying that I had to sacrifice my time in order to make every wiki better. --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 23:43, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * So.. you don't have enough time to focus on this wiki because you're busy with others and you're wanting to remove an admin who DOES have this time and has been actively using it when you have not. --JonusAngelus 00:15, 2 July 2009 (UTC)