WoWWiki:Requests for adminship
From WoWWiki
Requests for adminship is the process by which the WoWWiki community decides who will become administrators (also known as admins or sysops), who are users with access to additional technical features that aid in maintenance. A user either submits his/her own request for adminship (a self-nomination) or is nominated by another user.
Shortcut: WW:RFAContents |
About RfA
The community grants administrator status to trusted users, so nominees should have been on WoWWiki long enough for people to determine whether they are trustworthy. Administrators are held to high standards of conduct because other editors often turn to them for help and advice.
- Nomination standards
- The only official prerequisite for adminship is to have an account, have a basic level of trust from other editors, and the ability to show the community how the user will use administrator tools.
- Decision process
- Any user may nominate another user with an account. Self-nominations are permitted. If you are unsure about nominating yourself for adminship, you may wish to speak with one of the other administrators first, so as to get an idea of what the community might think of your request. Nominations will remain posted until a bureaucrat reviews the discussion to see whether there is a consensus for promotion. The purpose of this time is for users to give their opinions, ask questions, and make comments.
- If your nomination fails, please wait a reasonable period of time before renominating yourself or accepting another nomination. Some candidates have tried again and succeeded within a month, but many editors prefer several months before reapplying.
- Expressing opinions
- Any WoWWikian is welcome to comment. The candidate may respond to the comments of others. Certain comments may be discounted if there are suspicions of fraud, such as contributions from very new editors. Please explain your opinion by including a short explanation of your reasoning. Your input will carry more weight if it is accompanied by supporting evidence.
- To add a comment, just edit the page, Always be respectful towards others in your comments. You may wish to review arguments to avoid in adminship discussions.
- Formatting responses
- Generally a comment should begin with a summarized position in bold and admins should identify themselves here. Admin comments should not be taken as having more weight than non-admins, but a nomination cannot succeed if more admins oppose than support.
- Examples of responses (only guidelines):
- Neutral or Undecided «admin» - I have not formed a definitive opinion for or against the candidate, but...
- Support - A great contributor who would make a great admin!
- Oppose - Who is this guy again? He hasn't done enough for WoWWiki to get my support.
Nominating
Nominations must be accepted by the user in question. If you wish to nominate a user, contact them first before making the nomination page. If they accept, create the nomination and ask them to sign their acceptance. To nominate either yourself or another user for adminship, add a new level 3 section underneath the Nominations section.
Nominations
Sandwichman2448
- Active and involved user with over 10000 (usually good) edits.
- Member of the Watchdogs, 'Bookkeeper Acolyte' of the Bookkeepers a self-proclaimed Cleaner, and elected a Crazy Person. Uses IRC too.
- Tries to be helpful where he can, such as answering the questions of new users, and removing vandalism/violations.
Even if I fail, I hope to use your comments for personal wiki-growth.
Let the roast of me begin! --SWM2448 03:57, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Discussion
I was not expecting that. I believe the timidness stems from me being scolded about what was deemed my 'witch hunt'. I bit some noobs, and was finally scolded for it, so I stopped. Perhaps I took it to far. I have added several people to the Violations list.--SWM2448 00:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- I really do not think I am timid. I also do not grovel. I just say sorry… a lot. This is the way I am. Again, even if I fail (Seemingly I am), I hope to use your comments for personal improvement. I do not think my attitude has ever harmed anything (Besides this vote), but it certainly has not helped anything.--SWM2448 00:59, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
- I believe adminship is a big deal, and not just a popularity contest. I get the timid thing. As for my IRC activity, I log on when I have a question and then log off when my computer disconnects me or everyone stops talking.--SWM2448 00:32, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
- Just like to say that you have been improving alot from what i've seen and i'm not suprised --
Responses
- Support - Sure...and Sandwich, you didn't have to clean it up, cause that's how we like you.
{T•C) 02:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose - You're too timid, Sandwich. Every other comment you make (and I'm not trying to be mean with this) is to wonder if you've stepped on any toes by being here or doing this or not doing that. While wondering if you've stepped on too many toes is something that is commendable in an administrator, you will be required to step on toes to deal with trouble users and articles, and you don't seem to have that quality. Be more assertive in general, both onwiki and on IRC and then maybe in some time I would support you. --Sky (t | c | w) 23:13, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose - I think you're a generally positive person, you're active, and you seem to be rather helpful. On the other hand, I don't believe you have the maturity level I would like to see in someone with these responsibilities. This has a lot to do with what Sky mentions; I see you being very easily pushed around, and that's a big bad no-no for an admin. There are a number of people, besides myself, who have experienced the groveling behaviour you present when you are questioned. -- DuTempete talk|contr 04:32, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
- Neutral - If the general consensus on this wiki viewed adminship as just an extended toolset - as on Wikipedia, where the sole question in a RFA is "Can this user be trusted with the administrator tools?" and the general idea is "adminship is no big deal", bearing in mind that admin actions can be undone by another admin - rather than what here seems to be a popularity contest, you'd do fine. However, you are a bit too timid for the current state of WoWWiki adminship. And you could be on IRC a bit more. --Pcj (T•C) 06:26, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose - I think you're a great editor and user to have around; and you're neither (in my opinion) timid nor lacking maturity. But you lack a lot of comprehension and I've seen you mistake situations a lot of times. This is one of the worst things to do as administrator. Adys 02:53, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose - Pretty much seconding everyone elses comments, nothing to add really. --
- Support - Well no one is perfect, least of all me. But I feel his knowledge level is competent. He usually knows who is breaking policies, probably even better than me (it can be argued that I have misinterpreted situations as well). Not showing initiative? Well that could be a fault I have sometimes. I'm not always bold about changing things, because I want to make sure other people agree if the reason is nebulous to begin with. I do agree that "groveling behaviour" as DuTempete mentions could be a weakness, but that's something that can be changed. Especially when someone goes into a position of authority. Some people avoid trying to argue with admins to avoid causing too much of a conflict. This could be seen as "humbleness" which could be seen as a positive, to quote the cliche, "the meek shall inherit the earth"... Being willing to apologize for mistakes doesn't necessarily equate to "groveling", it can be considered a positive trait. I'd perhaps suggest a trial period to see how he fairs. If he makes too many 'mistakes' then he could be reevaluated at that point. So I say give him a chance. —Baggins (talk) 22:14, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
- Support - From what I've seen, I vote in favor of support. I agree with Baggins on this. Xavius, the Satyr Lord (talk) 17:32, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
- Support - A very friendly editor of the wiki, I think you should be a friendly and submissive administrator, Sandwich. Frostworn1822 (talk) 06:40, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
