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:RFA

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 also 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. Admin comments will not be taken as having more weight than non-admins, but a nomination is unlikely to succeed if more admins oppose than support.

Examples of responses (only guidelines):

Neutral or Undecided - 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

Howbizr

Active and involved user with over 2500 edits.
- New articles and edits tend to be well written.
- Very good at adding informative edit summaries.
Focuses on contributions that will help many people as opposed to mostly personal interests (okay maybe a bit warrior focused).
Member of Template Engineers.
Experienced WoW player.

--Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 3:47 PM PST 27 May 2009

Acceptance of nomination by Howbizr and additional comments

I appreciate and accept the nomination for adminship. I think my other qualities worth mentioning that most people probably don't know already:

Not just a player, but fairly serious raider and achievement gatherer
Mostly active in achievements & patchnotes projects in the main namespace, somewhat active in the User template space as well
Been active outside of wowwiki regarding wiki training (presentation & contacted Developer Zone about maybe making a refcard)
Computer science background is handy for intuitively understanding some wiki concepts (why transclude, load issues, category inheritance, etc)
This wouldn't be my first leadership role. I've been a section lead in highschool band (~30 students), teaching assistant in college, development lead at work, guild officer in Pacis Nex, volunteer and educator about bird conservation, mostly through the Ohio Bluebird Society

-Howbizr (talk) 21:56, 28 May 2009 (UTC) (ya ya I know, I need a better sig)

Discussion

I nominated Howbizr, because frankly we need more admins and I want to get the good candidates in process as soon as possible. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 3:47 PM PST 27 May 2009

Responses

Support - I nominated, so duh. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 3:47 PM PST 27 May 2009
Undecided --gOurra[T҂C] 22:54, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Support - She's a really good editor and works well with others. Plus I think it's about time the admin team has a token female. I am not sure we need more admins, but Howbizr is a good choice. --PcjWoWWiki admin (T•C44,339 contributions and counting) 22:58, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Support - Active and doing a good job. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! ^{(TDon't hiss at me.•CIf you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.)} 05:48, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

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! --SWM24 48 03:57, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Discussion (2)

(In response to Sky2042) 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.--SWM24 48 00:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

(In response to DuTempete) 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.--SWM24 48 00:59, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not saying you're a bad person, hun, or that it's a bad way to be. It's just a bad way for an admin to be. You've made loads of good impressions around the wiki, and you're a steadfast contributor. I really appreciate that. --DuTempete talk|contr 05:48, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

(In response to Pcj) 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.--SWM24 48 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 --

22:53, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Responses (2)

Support - He has my vote. Mr.X8 Talk Contribs 04:45, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Support - Sure...and Sandwich, you didn't have to clean it up, cause that's how we like you. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! ^{{TDon't hiss at me.•CIf you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.)} 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. --PcjWoWWiki admin (T•C44,339 contributions and counting) 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. Ady _s 02:53, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Oppose - Pretty much seconding everyone elses comments, nothing to add really. --
13:01, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

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)

Support - One of the funniest, friendliest and more experienced editors of the wiki. Ose ^talk/₃₇₂₁ 15:17, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Undecided - Most of the oppose arguments I've seen seem like weak negatives compared to issues with existing admins. SWM, is very close, but I have to give it more thought. As most of the other admins know, I think requiring an admin to be on IRC is complete BS. Of course some of them think, I should be on IRC and want me to be demoted because I pointedly am not. Also, by the way, Wikipedia:Arguments_to_avoid_in_adminship_discussions#Off-wiki_activities. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:41 PM PST 11 Apr 2009
There is not a single oppose referring to his activity. Soapboxing about yourself or other administrators isn't necessary either. From what I can tell, I'm the only one who referred to IRC, but I see the actions which tell me "no" on-wiki also. --Sky (t · c · w) 15:21, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Huh? Your oppose said, "Be more assertive in general, both onwiki and on IRC..." Although this doesn't specifically say admins are required to be on IRC, mentioning implies it is related to admin responsibilities, which it is not. It could be, but it currently isn't, so it probably shouldn't even have been mentioned. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:31 AM PST 5 May 2009

Support - He's a cool guy and know how to resolve many problems. I even remember that, when I joined the wiki, I thought he was an admin because of his way of speaking :). Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 00:58, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

ShandrisForever

I want to become an admin, who will nominate me? -- ShandrisForever talk / contribs 07:39, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Discussion (3)

Responses (3)

Oppose - An admin knows the rule of WW:DNP, and I'm afraid you might think you are above them once you've become admin. Beside, the threat of ban would be one of you're favorite tool, on many occasion before, because your edits were reverted (some were DNP, but not all), you've gone mad when you see you cannot find arguments for too long debates. Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (^talk/_contribz) 09:58, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I was tired of you deleting stuff I've written. And not everything I write is DNP. I think you two are abusing your powers. -- ShandrisForever talk / contribs 10:39, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I said "some were DNP, but not all". Beside, except my bloody bastard spirit, I've no power.

Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (^talk/_contribz) 10:45, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - Not a whole of edits to the wiki (under 1,500 to the main space), constant DNP material appears from him. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! ^{(TDon't hiss at me.•CIf you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.)} 18:00, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - Most of his contributions are datamined and other DNP content. Has an odd habit of showing off his illicit images by filling up talk pages with them, when clicking on a thumbnail works just as well. He is hostile and argumentative. I am no bean counter, and see quality over quantity, but there is no defense for him there. May be the same user as Leviathon.--SWM24 48 18:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I am NOT Leviathon, that's for sure. -- ShandrisForever talk / contribs 21:42, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - Adds DNP contnent, deltes cited information[1], seeing random edits of the user I found out some useless edits[2], and openly curses the admins [3][4]. Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 19:48, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

The reason I removed that content was because it was old, from the beta. There's nothing wrong with that, it's irrelevant. I'm not only adding DNP stuff. Where are you sourcing everything from? Patch notes? -- ShandrisForever talk / contribs 21:45, 2 July 2009 (UTC)