Star Wars Fanon:User of the Month

User of the Month is an award given to those users who the community believe they deserve it. A good candidate should be helpful in the community, by participating in the community wide editing war by cleaning up articles, categorizing, sourcing images. A good candidate should also be a trustworthy and a welcoming one, who tries to help and guide new users to follow policies, to become active community members. Of course, a good candidate should be an active writer of their own fanon. The reward of User of the Month is held for one month, after a winner is determined.

There are some simple guidelines all users must follow, when nominating and voting for a user.

• You may nominate as many users as you'd like, however, you may not nominate yourself.
• You must meet the requirements to the Voting policy to vote. All rules of the voting policy apply here. Also, valid oppositions must be given as to why you don't believe a user should be User of the Month, or else your vote will be voided.

• Remember, if you have no valid reason to oppose someone, but don't wish to support them, then don't vote at all.

• You may vote for every nominee, one way or another, but you may not vote for the same nominee twice. You also may not vote for yourself.
• All former Users of the Week will be eligible to become a User of the Month immediately. Once a user wins User of the Month, the user is not eligible to win User of the Month again until six months have passed since their win.

Nominations will be open throughout each month, but a winner is not determined until the end of each month.

Former winners of the User of the Month award can be found in the archives.

Nominations

Gnostic (0)

Support

1. Now THIS is a deserving user for this award. One of the unsung heroes of SWF, Gnostic has been tirelessly cleaning up articles, tagging the bad ones, and alphabetizing and adding categories. All without a peep of grandstanding or "I want attention." He has over 300 maintenance contributions in the last week alone. His selfless efforts deserve some recognition, because anyone who's ever done it knows how much of a pain it is to wade through endless pages of mess and clean them up without saying a thing. I appreciate the thought, Brandon, but there are people far more qualified for this award than me, and Gnostic is certainly one of them. I encourage you all to switch your votes. Atarumaster88 ^{(Talk page)} 18:05, December 10, 2009 (UTC)
   • Nothing says I can't vote for both.--Josh Bender^Talk 18:07, December 10, 2009 (UTC)
2. After some more careful consideration, I've decided to support Gnostic. Really, UOTM is about something major and great you've done to help the community, not whether you're constantly active or not. When you actually take a look at the two users who basically went away after getting this, it's really only Antonstaen and Aiddat. We have no idea why Anton left, and Aiddat was given the award more for veteranship than for the work he did for a week or two. That one was a mistake just across the board. At the end of the day, UOTM is meant to honor something really important and really great you've done for the wiki, not whether you're constantly active and are going to become as active as the people who actually take the time to vote on these nominations. If constantly active is going to be the basis for UOTM, then it's going to be excluding a lot of potential nominees in the future. So here's the fact of this nomination: Gnostic is doing something none of you want to do, care to do, or plan to do. The fact that he'd go through all those inane articles is very impressive. He's doing more than most of the rest of you do. - Brandon Rhea ^(talk) 21:39, December 11, 2009 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Gnostic is very reminiscent of another user that won the award a few months ago, and the person hasn't done the same thing since. For that reason, and for a few other reasons, I have established a policy of NOT voting newer users in as UOTM. I also like users of the month to contribute with their own original work. For me the jury is still out on Gnostic. Btw Josh, are you supporting Ataru and Gnostic?-Chosen One^{So the Prophecy says...} 18:55, December 10, 2009 (UTC)
   • Who was the other guy you refer to? -MPK, Free Man 20:59, December 10, 2009 (UTC)
     • Antonstaen - Brandon Rhea ^(talk) 22:51, December 10, 2009 (UTC)
   • #Giving UOTM to a newer user is historically a curse. They stop doing what they're doing and don't edit anymore. I'm not voting for newer users anymore because of that reason, unless they just do something insanely awesome. - Brandon Rhea ^(talk) 20:44, December 10, 2009 (UTC)
2. Per above. --File:Wylindsig.png ^{(Conference Room)} 21:45, December 10, 2009 (UTC)
3. If things continue for these next few months he'll have my vote. He is doing a great job so far.--Bluethunder213 ^(Talk) 02:51, December 11, 2009 (UTC)
4. Don't let my vote from discouraging you from continuing to do the good work. --Michaeldsuarez ^{(Talk) (Deeds)} 14:53, December 11, 2009 (UTC)
5. Per everyone above. Drewton ^{(Drewton's Holocron)} 18:12, December 11, 2009 (UTC)
6. --Darth tom ^{(Message me) (Contributions)} 13:14, December 19, 2009 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Totally remembered Antonstaen's nomination, so this time, no, I will not approve of this.--Josh Bender^Talk 22:04, December 10, 2009 (UTC)
2. I agree with Nightmare. Kajuur _{(Audience) (Exploits)}
3. Haven't looked at this page in a while. Re-looking at it now, and seeing what's said here, I'd agree with this more than neutrality. --Darth tom ^{(Message me) (Contributions)} 17:20, January 22, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

I have to say, if your reasons for not wanting to vote "Support" here are because of the fact that new users tend to disappear after becoming UOTM, you should really be shifting your support to neutral. Voting "Oppose" considering everything that Gnostic does is simply absurd. - Brandon Rhea ^(talk) 02:47, December 11, 2009 (UTC)

• I'm not saying he's not doing a good thing, I'm just opposing his nomination. If he was to continue this for a couple more months then I would say yes, but for now, this very month, I'm saying nay.--Josh Bender^Talk 07:35, December 11, 2009 (UTC)
  • Then that's really something you should be voting neutral over. "Oppose" suggests he really hasn't done anything to deserve it, which simply isn't true. - Brandon Rhea ^(talk) 17:13, December 11, 2009 (UTC)
    • I have to say that I don't agree. Believing that someone hasn't done anything to deserve the nomination isn't the only reason to oppose, and Josh just feels strongly about the "Antonstaen issue" enough to be actually be against this nomination, not just apathetic towards it, so he did not vote wrong. Anyways, it really doesn't matter right now anyway and more importantly it's Josh's opinion and his own choice. Drewton ^{(Drewton's Holocron)} 18:21, December 11, 2009 (UTC)
      • That doesn't mean there can't be a conversation about it. ;-) - Brandon Rhea ^(talk) 18:36, December 11, 2009 (UTC)