Sonic Wiki Zone

Know something we don't about Sonic? Don't hesitate in signing up today! It's fast, free, and easy, and you will get a wealth of new abilities, and it also hides your IP address from public view. We are in need of content, and everyone has something to contribute!

If you have an account, please log in.

READ MORE

Sonic Wiki Zone
Don't have an account?
Register
Advertisement
Register
Sonic Wiki Zone
‎‎‎
20,128
pages

Sonic Wiki Zone:Requests for User Rights

Revision as of 21:24, 29 June 2012 by ColorMeCrazy (Message Wall | contribs) (→‎Support)
Sign in to edit

Requests for adminship (RfA) is the process by which this wiki's community decides who will become administrators (also known as admins or sysops), who are users with access to additional features, most notably the ability to delete pages and to block users. A user either submits his/her own request for adminship (a self-nomination) or is nominated by another user. Please become familiar with the Administrators' how-to guide before submitting your request. This process is modeled around Wikipedia's RfA process, and more information can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship.

Process

Layout

The following layout must by used for all new nominations. Nominators are encouraged to use the following code as a template, added as a new section under the current nominations and customized for the specific nominee.

Word bubbles must not be used as they interfere with numbering, and signatures must contain no line breaks. Signatures must contain a link to the relevant user's user page but no links to the pages of other users. 

=== [[User:Username|Username]] (rank requested) ===
<small>[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]): [[Special:Contributions/Username|Contributions]] [[Special:EditCount/Username|Edit Count]]</small><br>

Short section describing nominee's suitability for rank requested. Signature of nominator to be included at end of paragraph, along with the date of nomination.

*For nominations by other users only, a single bulleted paragraph by the nominee accepting the nomination. Signature of nominee to be included at end of paragraph.

==== Support ====
#

==== Oppose ====
#

==== Discussion ====
*Comments in short, signed, bulleted paragraphs.
**Responses to specific comments should be offset with an extra asterisk. Responses should also be short, signed, single paragraphs.

Note: Adminship is not taken lightly. Nominators may want to spend time on their requests. The short section should cover reasons why the nominee would be expected to use admin tools appropriately and demonstrate that they are dedicated to the wiki. It should also explain why giving them such tools will further the aims of the wiki.

Discussion

Once a nomination has been made, users will review the nominee and declare their support or opposition by placing a short comments and their signature in the 'Support' or 'Oppose' sections (in the format of a numbered list, i.e. preceded by #). As above, word bubbles must not be used as they interfere with numbering and there must be no line breaks. Signatures must contain a link to the relevant user's user page but no links to the pages of other users. Do not try and include your entire thought process in such comments; only include the key reason or reasons for your vote.

At the same time, users are encouraged to explain their decision in the 'Discussion' section.

The 'Discussion' section can be used for further commentary or for asking the nominee questions in order to clarify your position. Comments must be short, single paragraphs in a bulleted list and include a signature. Again, do not use word bubbles, even if you frequently use one on talk pages.

Direct responses to a bulleted comment (e.g. by the nominee) should be placed directly after the comment and indented with one additional bullet point. (That is, a comment preceded by a single asterisk * would be followed by a comment preceded by two asterisks **. If you have trouble formatting lists in this way, it is recommended that you go to Special:Preferences and deactivate the visual editor under the 'Editing' tab.)

Any user can contribute to the discussion or declare support or opposition, but opinions have more weight if backed up by reasons and evidence (e.g. occasions in which the nominee has done particularly good or bad work). The opinions of long-standing users, particularly current administrators, will also tend to hold more weight than recently-joined or inexperienced users.

Resolution

Adminship and bureaucrat nominations will last for two weeks; rollback and chat moderator nominations will last for one week. In this time, nominations must have received a sufficient number of participants in order to be valid. For rollback or chat mod requests, 5 users must have participated. For adminship requests, 10 users must have participated. For bureaucrat requests, 15 users must have participated. Nominations that have not reached this quorum level at the end of the relevant period have failed. (Note that participants include those who comment and remain neutral.)

This is not a majority vote. It is an attempt to assess the community's consensus regarding the candidate. The candidate should have the support of most of the community, so if the vote is close, the candidate will probably not be given adminship.

After the two weeks have passed, a bureaucrat (a user who has even more rights than an administrator, and can give other users admin rights) will read through the request, determine the community's consensus about whether the nominee should be made an admin, and close the discussion. The discussion will be removed from this page, but is still accessible through the page's edit history.

Demotion discussions will last as long and require the same number of participants as promotion discussions about the same rank.

If a nominee decides at any time that they do not wish to pursue a promotion for themselves, they are welcome to remove the discussion entirely before it comes to a conclusion. However, a nominee is not permitted to remove a demotion request.

A nominator is entitled to remove any discussion they have posted (including a demotion request) if no other users have yet commented.

Advice

Here are some pieces of advice for nominators and nominees:

  • Follow the process as described above. Failure to do so will harm your chances of success.
  • Demonstrate that you understand what being an admin involves. Read through Help:Administrators' how-to guide if you are not familiar with the role.
  • Being a good user is not sufficient to be made an admin. Do not bring up number of edits, number of pages created, being nice to other users, not engaging in vandalism, or knowledge of the Sonic series. Only users widely recognized as good users should be nominated for adminship (those that have not demonstrated this through their work will have their nominations rejected quickly) and they do not need to prove this again during the debate for adminship.
  • Don't expect that the community will be familiar with your work. You must provide evidence. In its simplest form, this may include listing pages (or talk pages) where you have been particularly influential, but preferably you should provide a link to the Diff pages of major edits you make.
  • Don't expect that the community will necessarily be aware of your nomination. You are advised to request comments from regular users, particularly admins (a list of whom can be found here). Note, however, that only asking your own friends to comment is usually transparent and may harm your chances in the long run.
  • If you are an admin on another wiki site, this can provide good evidence of your suitability for adminship, assuming either you have been granted adminship in recognition of the work you have done on the site (as opposed to receiving it because you founded the site or were one of the only users) or you have been an effective admin having received the privileges. You must provide a link to the site in question.
  • Don't lie, as doing so will almost certainly result in a failed nomination.
  • Remember that this is not a talk page. Please keep discussions relevant to the matter at hand and do not start to chat. For instance, try not to thank everybody who votes in your favour.
  • The ideal candidate is one who is being prevented from carrying out work by the limitations of their user rights. If you can demonstrate that you would have used admin rights in the past (e.g. by tagging pages for deletion that were subsequently deleted, or informing an admin about a vandal that was subsequently blocked), provide evidence for this. Don't attempt to influence the discussion by promising to do something or act differently if you are successful, as this is a sign that you are not yet ready.
  • Don't talk about things that you don't do, only things that you do do.
  • Please be civil!
  • Don't be biased. In your reasons for voting, do not state such things as because you are "best friends" with a nominee. Your vote will be removed if it is seen as being biased.

Current nominations

Here are the users who are currently nominated for sysop, rollback, bureaucrat, or other privileges. New nominations must be added below this line.

Genesjs (Bureaucrat)

Genesjs (talk) Contributions Edit Count

I nominate Genesjs for the rights of Bureaucrat, under the following reasons: Genesjs has been a very devoted member of the Sonic News Network ever since he's joined back in 2009, which granted him the powers of Administration. I believe Gen is prepared to take on a new rank, as he is a very well-respected member of this community, and such respect should properly lead to greater authority. Genesjs is a very well-thought user, he's handled tough situations and disagreements, he's protected the wiki exuberantly, has made excellent contributions, and even throughout a period of disactivity due to internet problems, he kept himself very devoted to visiting the wiki, and eventually picked back up where he left off when the solution was resolved. Finally, there is the supporting detail of the scare number of Bureaucrats that are active on this wiki. Supermorff has been the only available one thus far, and I feel as though he needs as much assistance as possible to maintain the wiki. Template:Sig/SG79 16:27, June 16, 2012 (UTC)

Support

  1. Yes: As the poster. Template:Sig/SG79 16:27, June 16, 2012 (UTC)
  2. Hecks yea. --Knucklespunch1Im free I do what I wantKnucklespunch1 16:29, June 16, 2012 (UTC)
  3. Without a doubt. Template:DFSig16:31, June 16, 2012 (UTC)
  4. Yes: He is responsible and we need more 'crats. Time Biter "The Rift" 16:32, June 16, 2012 (UTC)
  5. Yes, I think he deserves a promotion. We all have our own styles we won't change 16:33, June 16, 2012 (UTC)
  6. Per everyone above me. (Except Sacor). Template:Signatures/Glitchguy
  7. Well, of course. --Template:BFSig 16:53, June 16, 2012 (UTC)
  8. I defiently agree. You in my not so hmble opionion are one of the best admins on the Wiki. I think you are ready for this promotion. Thunder the Hedgehog 17:14, June 16, 2012 (UTC)
  9. Yes. But I really don't like this nomination, I love it! I agree that some admin should help Morph with this, and Gen is a great person for the job. With him as a crat, this wiki should be 20% cooler. The Shadow Of Darkness 17:44, June 16, 2012 (UTC)
  10. Sure, I was also thinking about this. Pacmansonic138 18:25, June 16, 2012 (UTC)
  11. Gen is an awesometastic admin,and he's on the Wiki Staff thing. So he's more than ready for the big step up.~♥Snegg♥ Nicolewhite
  12. I agree with Bill. Not that my bureaucrat-specific duties are overwhelming (it's just checking this page every so often and closing concluded nominations - everything else can be done by regular admins), but it would be good to have a second active bureaucrat, and Gen's a good choice. -- Supermorff (talk) 19:35, June 16, 2012 (UTC)
  13. Per all. --★Mega Speedy★ 00:59, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
  14. Per all.AMSYo BroWSLet's TalkCSAS 01:26, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
  15. Per everyoneDJ Mikee♪ ♫ ♥ ★ ♫ ♪ 01:30, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
  16. Per all It’s Pink hereSonic is awesome... nuff said. Sonicspining 09:45, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
  17. Totally agree with everyone here.Sorryare you mad? 09:50, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
  18. Everyone else has given the same reasons I would have, so... Yeah, I support this nomination... Holy smokes, that's a lot of signatures...--Akamia(Talk)(Want to see what I've been doing?) 15:06, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
  19. Go for it bro!!! That is all. Template:FreeSig 23:27, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
  20. Seems legit. -CariconCommander 18:19, June 19, 2012 (UTC)
  21. Per all. Sonic'Mariosonic15Here we... GO!Tails 16:06, June 24, 2012 (UTC)
  22. Per all. He really deserves it. ☯ModrenSonic The Ultimate Ninja☯ 16:10, June 24, 2012 (UTC)
  23. Sure. PandaPower!Selena Gomez!!! :3 00:47, June 25, 2012 (UTC)
  24. I think that Gen is a good and professional user and I think the position will fit him well. Myself 123 00:52, June 25, 2012 (UTC)
  25. Genesjs can be rude at time (don't worry bro I'm going somewhere with this) but he's fair, wise and just. I don't think he'd abuse beauracracy, if anything he'd use it only for the right reasons. -- Murphyshane - 熱! Don't click here 09:01, June 25, 2012 (UTC)
  26. Per everyone. Gen is very worthy of a Prrromotion! But seriously, he is a great dude > <---Hyper Sonic ModernHAPPY BIRTHDAY,SONIC! 19:04, June 28, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Would've. Gen is good but not the best and isn't quite at the peak of Bureaucracy. I would've given a supportive vote but someone else (Not calling any names) deserves it more and now than Gen. --FreeMilkShakesHere! 10:53, June 25, 2012 (UTC)

Discussion

  • @Mewkat: "Wikia Staff thing"? What're you talking about? EDIT: If you're talking about the Wikia Tech staff thing, I actually didn't sign up for that. I just got an invitation to join up. Lloyd the Cat"I hog that hedgehate!" 18:55, June 16, 2012 (UTC)
    • Mainspace edits don't count right? Is this more like a helping and handle the situation thing? --FreeMilkShakesHere! 10:45, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
Right. -- Supermorff (talk) 12:17, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
Then I guess Gen is a pretty good fit, but Main Edit wise, He's just Ok. --FreeMilkShakesHere! 15:02, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
  • This is why I wish there were a neutral section. Gen's a good person with a lot of knowledge and skill, but the one thing I have an issue with is that he's not decisive. Most of the discussions involving the site, Gen's mostly content to just remain neutral and let things play out, rather than actively take part in making the decision. A 'crat, while not the final say on the matter, most definitely needs to be involved.--Kagimizu-Seeya 'round 00:47, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
    • ...But he always gives his opinion on every discussion forum he sees, he gives a detailed one, too. He also gives a comment on most requests for rights on here. He also decides on bans and such too, and I believe decisive basically means concluding or deciding on a controversy. I would argue otherwise. Also, I believe it says somewhere in the Voting section that neutral users comment on in the discussion section. --Template:BFSig 01:05, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
  • @Murphy: "Rude"? Pardon me, but how exactly was I being rude and when? I'm curious. Lloyd the Cat"I hog that hedgehate!" 09:28, June 25, 2012 (UTC)
    • Well, uh, I suppose, due to your personality you canget frustrated with vandals and other users, such as yesterday when you told Mtamer to stop making a fool of himself (not critisizing or anything, just makin a point) Not really your fualt though, the guy was pretty annoying, but on the positive side you removed the message -- Murphyshane - 熱! Don't click here 09:40, June 25, 2012 (UTC)
    • Technically I modified it because I realized that I was probably being a bit too harsh with how I was wording things on the Blaze article Talk page, even if I was simply trying to be blunt with him and how he was acting. And in all due fairness he did act rather rude towards you so I was simply trying to sound more stern without going out of my way to be rude back, if possible, and it's not very often I decide to word my criticisms/warnings like that. I'll try to think thrice before posting such messages again, then. Thanks for telling me this, I welcome any just criticism when it's warrented. On a related note, just about most of the Admins here that I socialize with can get annoyed with vandals and Trolls whenever they get really persisent in causing trouble, so I didn't think it'd be a problem if I did too as long as I chose to be subtle about it. Lloyd the Cat"I hog that hedgehate!" 10:03, June 25, 2012 (UTC)
    • In any case, it's a very minor offense -- Murphyshane - 熱! Don't click here 12:11, June 25, 2012 (UTC)


Mewkat14 (Demotion)

Mewkat14 (talk): Contributions Edit Count

The way Mew has been acting is not how a chat moderator should act, such as not respecting opinions, and one time (not calling out names) a user cursed on chat, and she didn't care about it, called a user ignorant, being away most of the time (at least I think a mod should keep alert on chat, but that may just be me), and when I told her to not act that way she just blew it off. Plus she's an underage (most likely 12 now) so she shouldn't have become a mod in the first place. We all have our own styles we won't change 17:36, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Support

  1. As the poster. We all have our own styles we won't change 17:41, June 29, 2012 (UTC)
  2. Underage eh? 'Spose that calls for a demotion. -CariconCommander 17:38, June 29, 2012 (UTC)
  3. Per the reasons above. --Template:BFSig 17:39, June 29, 2012 (UTC)
  4. I'd appreciate confirmation if Mewkat is indeed underage, however I am convinced she needs to be demoted for not being a dependent and responsible moderator. Template:Sig/SG79 17:42, June 29, 2012 (UTC)
  5. Jes:Per above. Template:FreeSig 17:43, June 29, 2012 (UTC)
  6. No offese to Mew but when I go on chat and she's there, she does nothing.Zackery Willson 17:48, June 29, 2012 (UTC)BlueSpeeder-6/29/12-12:47pm
  7. Per Sacor, I wasn't there but I support anyways. Pacmansonic138 17:53, June 29, 2012 (UTC)
  8. I support, mainly because she's always away and she's (apparently) underage. Template:Signatures/Glitchguy
  9. Per all. ★Dont mess with Panda Power!★ 21:24, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose

Discussion

  • Mewkat is underage? Not only would that call for demotion, but would call for a block until she is of age. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Myself 123 (talk • contribs)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.
Advertisement