Halopedia talk:Halopedian of the Month/06 2010

June 2010

• Rusty-112 (10) (talk) (contribs)
• Durandal-217 (4) (talk) (contribs)

Votes

• Rusty-112 - Though he has been a little inactive in the past, Rusty has made up for it by creating numerous articles, cleaning up, and undoing vandalism like a crazy maniac in the past few weeks. Which is, IMO, enough to be Halopedian of the Month. --  General5 7    talk    contribs    email   20:42, May 2, 2010 (UTC)
• Rusty-112 - As per General5 7. SPARTAN-125 Cally99117
• Rusty-112 - Likewise. Rusty has made some excellent contributions to Evolutions related pages, he's deserved this for a while now. - Halo-343 (Talk) (Contribs) (Edits) 22:22, May 2, 2010 (UTC)

As per my statement in the comment section below. User:CommanderTony/Sig

• Rusty-112 - I'm surprised he hasn't got it yet, he's made many good edits. El Ammo Bandito, "¿Sería tan amable?" 03:50, May 3, 2010 (UTC)
• Durandal-217 - Again, Durandal's contributions are unnoticed. Just like during the pasts few months, he is forgotten. His amazing contributions already proves that he is worthy of becoming an HOTM. --(_)LTR/-\ F( )RCE 04:15, May 3, 2010 (UTC) Due to reading Halo-343's comment, I am changing me vote to Rusty-112.
• Durandal-217 - I probably almost never see his edits because I'm asleep. But whenever I do they are always helpful to the articles, --"Why am I here and what the hell are you?"The guy who hates his username. 04:39, May 3, 2010 (UTC)
• Rusty-112 - He's been extremely productive lately, creating and improving tons of Evolutions-related articles. His contributions are great not only in quantity, but in quality as well. Like most of the time, it's not an easy decision. Durandal's contributions are equally good, but Rusty's simply been a lot more active recently. --Jugus (Talk | Contribs) 07:04, May 3, 2010 (UTC)
• Durandal-217 - As per Ultra Force. User:CommanderTony/Sig
• Durandal-217 - As per his nomination last month. - Nìcmávr ^(Tálk) 11:59, May 7, 2010 (UTC)
• Durandal-217 - As per nomination last month.- 5əb'7aŋk^{(Σάπτανκ)} 13:54, May 7, 2010 (UTC)
• Rusty-112 - As per Jugus. - JEA13 ^[iTalk] 15:32, May 7, 2010 (UTC)
• Rusty-112 - He hasn't gotten it yet? - S.B.44 ^[Talk] 02:39, May 10, 2010 (UTC)
• Rusty-112 - Halo-343 convinced me to vote for Rusty-112. --(_)LTR/-\ F( )RCE 02:29, May 11, 2010 (UTC)
• Rusty-112 - As per my postscript below. Kougermasters (Talk) (Contribs) (Edits) 23:27, May 11, 2010 (UTC)
• Rusty-112 - I've long thought he has deserved it, and still think so, his edits are usually of great quality. DarkbelowHGR CommbandD 01:46, May 13, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

I'm going to reserve judgment, knowing what it feels like to lose. I am kinda going for Rusty, as I believe over 2,000 edits means you're pretty devoted. But I believe in quality over quantity, and I cannot pick which one is better. But if Durandal truly loves contributing to the wikia, he'll get his chance some day. I think he is, as of now, a little too unqualified. This is merely my opinion, so don't base you're votes off of this. --Fluffball Gato 04:29, May 5, 2010 (UTC)

That's fine and you're entitled to your opinion. Though I'm a bit concerned your what it feels like to lose part. There's no winner or loser for HOTM, you don't win it. You earn it. - Nìcmávr ^(Tálk) 08:01, May 9, 2010 (UTC)

@Nicmavr-Well, it's earned based off the users' opinions. I don't know if that's considered "earning." An extremely nice but not-so-good editor would probably win over an extremely unpleasant fantastic editor. I am not one to say that this is bad, as there is probably more to a "Halopedian" than the edits they make. All I'm saying is that I believe "earning" may not be such a good word.--Fluffball Gato 22:27, May 12, 2010 (UTC)

(Note: The following statement is an opinion, and is in no way a "campaign", nor an order of any kind.) I honestly cannot see why so many people are voting for Durandal over Rusty. No offense to Durandal when I say this, but I every one that voted for him said "his contributions are being ignored". I looked over his contributions to see what they meant, and I cannot for the life of me see how he deserves this over Rusty. Durandal has been pretty inactive over the last two months, and most of the edits he made were generally minor, sans a few. Rusty on the other hand, has been extremely active over the past month, and has made outstanding contributions to Evolutions related pages, and often creating and writing out in full several pages a day. Not only does he have quantity, he has the more important quality on his side as well. And in comparison, I just don't think Durandal is a worthy candidate. I do acknowledge his contributions in the past, but people, that was the past, and this is Halopedian of the Month, not "Halopedian of Generally Recent Times With Exception to the Past Few Weeks". - Halo-343 (Talk) (Contribs) (Edits) 17:45, May 9, 2010 (UTC)

Completely agree with this. Rusty-112 has been editing like a maniac in the past weeks, while Durandal has been less active than the average Halopedian in the same time. - JEA13 ^[iTalk] 17:57, May 9, 2010 (UTC)

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. ;) - 5əb'7aŋk^{(Σάπτανκ)} 17:59, May 9, 2010 (UTC)

Well, can you enlighten us as to why you hold your opinion? Our reasons for nominating Rusty is his continuing and outstanding contributions to Evolutions related material and his high activity. So what are your reasons for voting for Durandal? - Halo-343 (Talk) (Contribs) (Edits) 18:10, May 9, 2010 (UTC)

I'm removing your vote for this month. You have NO right telling others how one candidate is more superior than the other. This is not an aggressive election campaign, this is a friendly vote to see who has give some great contributions. Get that right or your ability to vote in the future will be denied. User:CommanderTony/Sig

Perhaps I should I reiterate on this matter, I was not in any way "campaigning" for or against any candidate, nor telling people what to do. I was merely stating an opinion based on some facts, and was actually trying to open myself to the opinions of those voting for Durandal. Maybe you should have considered that before you aggressively removed my vote and made me look like some sort of scheming, obnoxious ass. Perhaps I should have been more clear that that statement was an opinion, albeit based on some facts for expression. Maybe it is you who needs to realise that this is a friendly, non-aggressive vote, and not jump to such ludicrous conclusions. - Halo-343 (Talk) (Contribs) (Edits) 15:58, May 11, 2010 (UTC)

I am really surprised. I apologise for not replying to your request. :(

Vote reinstated.- 5əb'7aŋk^{(Σάπτανκ)} 16:06, May 11, 2010 (UTC)

People, before this gets too hot, please chill. Everyone has a right to hold their opinion/vote and both sides have their points, but a debate of this such is just too much. I'd also like to say how disrespectful I find it to both the candidates. Its not a competition. - Nìcmávr ^(Tálk) 16:20, May 11, 2010 (UTC)

Even though this debate is technically over, I just thought I'd put my word in for consideration, late though it may seem. I love how HotM always turns into some freaky over-dramatic soap opera, usually whenever a normal, hard-working user states an opinion that the admins don't like or agree with. I must also remind the admins that Halopedia may not be a democracy, but it isn't a dictatorship either. I also love how I am simply making observations, and that I'll probably get in trouble for this when someone like Ghost sangheili would be perfectly fine (either that or I'm just paranoid). Halopedia is an American site, a certain admin claims (whether in jest or not is not relevant). That being said, everyone must remember that in America there are things called "freedom of speech" and "freedom of opinion". Campaigns may be disallowed in HotM voting, but if opinions themselves are disallowed, we might as well make it a private "admin-only" event. Halo-343 was simply stating his opinion, and I don't care what Tony has against him; that's not my business. When someone in power restricts the rights of someone under them for a good reason, that's fine. When the person in power does so influenced by a grudge or any other external factor not relating to the vote, that is not fine. I'm not saying there is, but this is a good reminder to some people that the line between right and wrong are very blurry when dealing with topics such as voting. HotM is technically a democracy, though it is a vote to see who deserves an award, rather than a leadership position. If this comment gets deleted, and/or I get banned, or this is censored in any way the people up at Central Wikia will know something is rotten in the core of this wiki's leadership. Not only that, it will also prove that even on the internet, democracy fails when applied practically, and that leaders must resort to force in order to control their subjects. Admins are supposed to be users with extra buttons, not terrifying all-powerful overlords. They say religion is the number one cause of warfare, and that may be, but politics are not far behind. And this, good sirs and ma'ams, from the first vote cast to the last, is politics. I hope you all have a great day.

P.S. Rusty, you've made some amazing contributions to this wiki. I hope you'll be pleased to know that I will, of course, be voting for you.

P.P.S. In Soviet Russia, admionz liekz u!

Cheers! Kougermasters (Talk) (Contribs) (Edits) 23:26, May 11, 2010 (UTC)

I agree with everything Kouger has said, and if he gets banned I would like to be right there with him. - S.B.44 ^[Talk] 00:37, May 14, 2010 (UTC)

Heck, if he got banned for saying his opinion, I'd quit the internet. I've seen (and experienced) unjust bans in my life, but for stating a non-hate-inducing opinion, that would be sick. Kouger, Shadow, I'm with you.--Fluffball Gato 00:42, May 14, 2010 (UTC)

Please can someone update the fricken page by tomorrow or I am going to do it my self. Cally991UserWiki:Cally99117|1]]7 17:55, June 1, 2010 (UTC)