Denevir (Talk - Contribs - Logs - Block/rights log) (Back to requests for permissions - Grant rights - Edit count)

I just want to purge red links.

When you don't even show up in Category:Active rights requests you gotta wonder if you're either one hell of a shadow agent or your leg is being pulled.


  • Question Question — Although I've seen you work around, it would still be a good idea to write out more than "I want to purge" and such. For example, what have you done here on the wiki to receive Mod status? How would you use your newfound power, and when would you use it? ~ Green Moriyama ;3
    • Ok then, here goes: I want to purge red links because it must be done, and since apparently everyone and their mom is perfectly fine with drowning in turds, I'm offering myself to get my hands dirty and start shoveling shit out. But since I have to bypass locked doors full of user rights requirements, I have no other choice but to request them. I'd rather stay a footman, but you do what you must to answer the call of duty. And since you asked, I've done what's needed. Or is dedication and faithful service not worth two squirts o' piss? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Denevir (talkcontribs)
    • Naw, you've said more than enough, my good sir. Just making sure there is more than one line to show your dedication. I'll wait for more people to come around and offer some more, since I only know you so much. ~ Green Moriyama ;3
  • Question Question — How do you regard the importance of "moderation" with regards to the moderator-level powers? — TehAnonymous Avatar TehAnonymous <3
    • Well then, if this has to do with those wiki users who only fling shit at each other in comment sections instead of doing actually productive stuff (I've seen folks who apparently have been around since 2011 at most and yet their edit count is only 2-3 digits long, but don't get me started with the usual suspects and their opinionated delusions being stated as fact and/or as if it was worth anything other than nothing) I would like to know why they are not warned at the least or suspended at most. And if by chance you're worried about abuse of authority and the like, I would advise not getting overly concerned. After all, if I was able to edit user blogs and comments while being a footman, I wouldn't be requesting anything in the first place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Denevir (talkcontribs)
    • I actually had this in mind, and have been warning, with or without mod powers. One time, someone was offended, but at the least I didn't white knight of slander the person outright. Otherwise nice answer. ~ Green Moriyama ;3



  1. Support Support — Denevir is for sure someone who puts a lot of work into maintaining the LoL Wiki.
    Granting them mod rights will only make their work easier. - Peace Poro Emote Lesdin | Start a fight with me here | 4,507 edits
  2. Support Support — He has improved considerably in his edits since he arrived on the wiki and has become a valuable active editor on the wiki. He has put time and effort into fixing and updating more pages than I can give example of (some of which are almost all of the champion related pages and their content in a much more easy to access way) and is open to communicate with other members in a way which would best benefit the wiki as a whole. He is certainly honest and passionate with the work he puts into his editing and the level of quality has shown as a result of it. I am quite surprised that nobody has even suggested him as a moderator or an administrator by this point. Hard working people like these should be encouraged and given chances to improve (to give them a chance at improving while also giving them more wrights to do their jobs better), not shunned or ignored. --Tesla Effect (talk) 20:25, March 11, 2017 (UTC)
    Shunned and ignored... that'd be an understatement. To think one has to beg (because sound apparently doesn't seem to reach the ivory tower) to be able to do anything other than copypasting and thinking that's an 'update'... heh... I see a marble mansion built on a foundation of twigs that houses all sorts of nasty critters, if all I've unearthed is any indication. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Denevir (talkcontribs)
  3. Support Support — Although Denevir has shown some moments of what is perceived as being impulsive or rude, I personally haven't found that getting in the way of what work he has been able to accomplish. I too haven't interacted with him much, but I would rather let him have more tool to use while checking on him as a fellow mod than deny him the capacity to be more efficient in what can be done. While it may become bothersome if Denevir does go down "the dark path" everyone have mentioned in the Neutral section, but I would like to take care of that when the time comes, not attempt to prevent what may not happen. "The past is the past, and shouldn't hold back the present and future." One vote for Denevir to be a mod (with a bit of watch if people are so concerned). ~ Green Moriyama ;3
  4. Support Support — Since you've implied that you will pass potential arguments to others, I will move this towards support. Fortunately, this is my only concern in the matter. When wild arguments are removed from the equation, you can essentially carry on with what you have normally been doing to this point. The only reason I stated this scenario is so you may recognize when you might get roped into a stupid argument. This is a legitimate concern for becoming a moderator as the job of the moderator is, first and foremost, dealing with the extremes. If you can pass the argument on before something like this happens, then you will be perfectly fine. -- Rocket Grab DoublePower Fist Slap(-My Page-)(-What I did-)  17:27, March 12, 2017 (UTC)
    For context of above vote, see #DiscussionTehAnonymous Avatar TehAnonymous <3
  5. Support Support


  1. Neutral Neutral — I don't really know the user due to my long phase of inactivity on the wiki but there's evidence that's pulling me both ways in regards to this nomination. Stuff that makes me want to go support include: his obvious dedication to improving the wiki, which is obvious in his activity and his edit counts, and his attitude when it comes to actually getting things done. On the other hand his mass deletion of the champion strategy pages when he was a moderator previously, presumably of his own volition, raises quite a few red flags and makes me very skeptical of whether or not he can be trusted to have these rights again. Also, again this could be just because I haven't really interacted with him personally but he seems very rough around the edges when it comes to socializing/conversing which I'm not sure is a trait that really lends itself well to being a moderator here.  NeonSpotlight  Talk  Contribs 
    Wait wait wait hold up, I WAS a moderator? Far as I was concerned Teh simply allowed me to be able to delete stuff. The more you know, I guess. As for the deletion of Strategy pages, that was a systematic plan for wiping the slate clean, but some apparently are allergic to keeping the place clean and the thought of taking out the trash gives them a stroke or something (no offense meant) And like I told GreenMoriyama, this is a means to an end and that's it. Flinging shit at each other like some others tend to do in many a champ's comment section doesn't get the wiki up and running, rather just more shit to shovel out in the long run (and that's saying a lot after all the shoveling I've done so far) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Denevir (talkcontribs)
    Log. And yes, mass unannounced deletion of page content is not acceptable policy. coughNystuscoughTehAnonymous Avatar TehAnonymous <3 04:21, March 14, 2017 (UTC)
    No offense, but I will never understand how taking out the trash no one even gives two fucks to sort is unacceptable policy, yet undoing all the decrypting I did on patch histories with excuses like 'removing information' and 'reducing clarity' (hilarious considering those things were in something akin to Morse code before I stepped in) is totally OK. I might have needed to refine the method, but locking a page from editing because someone got offended for being called out on their temper tantrum is... well... childish. No offense of course, I simply take issue when a finger is stuck up my ass for the lols (has happened more than once) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Denevir (talkcontribs)


  1. Oppose Oppose — As Denevir joined the LoLwiki community in march 2015 things were to change, in a good and a bad way. He did so much for the wiki, the new champion template is the main reason why I don't totally hate him. But he has this obsession with unjustifiably delete stuff, and this bad manner of feeling like a Super Hero that uses expression such as: "shovel the shit out", "shove a finger up my ass", "swim in garbage", "taking out the trash", "drowning in turds", "the call of duty", "I've seen in my travels", "get my hands dirty", "I have a gargantuan road to travel and my shoes are ridden with pebbles", ... And I'm also wondering if he ever heard of "edit summaries", it's a pretty useful thing ... I would be terrified if Denevir was to be a moderator, with the power of deleting stuff (no longer marking stuff with {{delete}}) he would become too destructive. Tylobic (talk) 19:08, March 26, 2017 (UTC)
    Today I learned wanting to take out the trash to keep the house clean is an 'unjustifiable obsession' that is 'destructive' and that doing what it's supposed to be done for the greater good of the wiki is 'feeling like a super hero'. Oh and that objective improvement is a fantasy and that change is the root of all the evils plaguing humankind. But nevermind all that, that's not why I'm replying. The real reason is I come with a gift to appease whom I used to consider a swell colleague. Template:Csd|Here, take it.. And for what it's worth: my deepest apologies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Denevir (talkcontribs)
  2. Oppose Oppose


  • Comment Comment


  1. It's a shame really. I want to support you so you can get your work done better. I also want to oppose you to remove the possibility of ridiculous blocks. If you applied to a position that didn't have power over discussions, I would easily support you. However, truth of that matter is that it is a significant portion bundled alongside this position.
    • You had a history with bad arguments and thus burned all bridges so you've stayed away from arguments in general. Now that's all fine and dandy and has worked amazingly so far, it's just that there are times where magically one gets roped into an argument. Your belief is pretty extreme. Someone being delusional doesn't mean they can be banned. It's not a condition for punishment, it's all the stuff like vandalism and jerkish behavior that merits punishment. I hate to be nitpicky on this regard, but given that you will be gaining power over these kinds of discussions, I am not going to welcome one as a moderator with open arms with a flaw like this.
    • To be fair, I know that it's not this big of a deal. If you can simply pass on arguments to the hands of others, then you'll be perfectly fine. Of course you would need to promise that for me to change my mind. You stand among the glorious formatters, uploaders, and maintenance masters so I know your skills are definitely in the right place. I would support you for the simple fact that I am surprised you aren't a moderator, or even an administrator, if it wasn't for this issue.  Rocket Grab DoublePower Fist Slap(-My Page-)(-What I did-)  21:59, March 10, 2017 (UTC)
    • Technically we do have the content moderator role which doesn't come with block rights, would kind of go against what I tried to do in regards to only using our custom moderator rank if we gave it to him though.  NeonSpotlight  Talk  Contribs  22:17, March 11, 2017 (UTC)
    Let me be crystal clear here: if anyone other than me wants to gets 'magically roped' into worthless arguments that do nothing other than start dick-waving contests while adding up more worthless garbage to an already bloated wiki, fine by me, their choice, their time wasted, their delusional ego getting offended. The FACT of the matter is: wasting time with worthless 'opinions' does not shit done get.
    I have a task to complete, and this is only a means to an end since I've hit more than one brick wall. There are basically two options here: you do useful stuff or you don't. I'll let you guess which one I went with (tip: not using the wiki like a social network) And while at it, don't concern yourself too much with 'ridiculous blocks'. After all, wouldn't want anyone's wiwlle feewings getting hurt (not like any fucks are given on my part, but hey, like I said, a task to complete) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Denevir (talkcontribs)
    I clearly understand your stance on this matter. However, you must consider the scenario when someone is physically becoming a boundary to your progress. It's something commonly referred to as an edit war. Let's say someone is adding junk to the wikia. Then you obviously decide, well gotta remove this junk. When that junk is removed, that person puts it back again saying, "don't remove my stuff." So, then you tell that person that their information is not contributing to the wikia, and delete it again. Then the person adds bloated junk and says, "Okay, I explained why it's not junk." At this point you slap your head, and delete it again saying, "You didn't explain it, you just made it even worse." So this person decides to ask you directly, "Why is this not junk?"
    • If you answer the question, you just got magically roped into an argument. If you don't, this person may very well add a whole bunch of junk to the wiki. Now, you've been fortunate that you haven't yet had to deal with boneheaded people like this. Although, boneheaded people like this do exist. Now, there is a great possibility that in this scenario, you would block this person for adding junk into the wiki as it would spiral out of control otherwise. Fortunately, in this case, it is legitimate since it entered into an edit war. However, the conversation of the appeal that occurs may not go so well, because obviously that person doesn't think his/her stuff is junk.
    Now there is one point in the conversation, where there are blatant disagreements, but it hasn't reached the level of harassment, spamming, or incivility. This person decides to just add junk elsewhere. Instead of fighting back, the person just spreads out and doesn't care about the stuff that you delete. Now this game of whack-a-mole can get very annoying. So, you block this person on grounds of vandalism. Whoops, bad move there. This is an example of a ridiculous block, as it ignites the flame in the argument that the person is not adding junk. It paints the picture that this person is the innocent sheep while you, Denevir are the corrupt editmonger. Kind of ridiculous, but that's usually how it goes.
    • Since you've implied that you will pass potential arguments to others, I will move this towards support. Fortunately, this is my only concern in the matter. When wild arguments are removed from the equation, you can essentially carry on with what you have normally been doing to this point. The only reason I stated this scenario is so you may recognize when you might get roped into a stupid argument. This is a legitimate concern for becoming a moderator as the job of the moderator is, first and foremost, dealing with the extremes. If you can pass the argument on before something like this happens, then you will be perfectly fine. -- Rocket Grab DoublePower Fist Slap(-My Page-)(-What I did-)  17:27, March 12, 2017 (UTC)

Closing Statement

  • Done Done Passes 4-1, with reservations. — TehAnonymous Avatar TehAnonymous <3 20:46, March 26, 2017 (UTC)