Sonic News Network:Requests for User Rights

Requests for User Rights is the process by which this wiki's community decides who will be promoted to a new user right (Administrator, Bureaucrat, Chat Moderator or Rollback). A user either submits his/her own request for a promotion (a self-nomination) or is nominated by another user (if you decide to nominate another user, it is recommended that you check with him/her before making a nomination). Please become familiar with the Administrators' how-to guide before submitting your request (if you are requesting adminship). This process is modeled around Wikipedia's RfA process, and more information can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship.

Layout
The following layout must be 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.

Username (rank requested)
Username (talk): Contributions Edit Count

Short section describing nominee's suitability for rank requested. Signature of nominator to be included at end of the 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.

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 comment 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 the 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 thoughts process in such comments; only include the key reason or reasons for your vote.

Simultaneously, 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, please 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 ** in source mode. 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/or evidence (e.g. occasions in which the nominee has done particularly excellent or malicious 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, at least 5 users must have participated. For adminship requests, at least 10 users must have participated. For bureaucrat requests, at least 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 in the discussion section of a nomination.) Demotion nominations will last as long and require the same number of participants as promotion nominations about the same rank.

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 the user rights.

After the time frame for the promotion the user is requesting for has passed, a bureaucrat (a user who has more rights than an administrator, and can give other users user rights) will read through the request, determine the community's consensus about whether the nominee should be promoted, and close the discussion. The discussion will be removed from this page, and will be archived into a separate page in Category:Requests for User Rights if successful. All successful nominations in which the majority of the discussion regarding the nomination took place on this page will be archived.

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 commented yet.

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. Please 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 etc. 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 discussion 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 a variety of other 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 an indication 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 the nominee. Your vote will not weigh greatly in your claim if others view it as biased.
 * It is highly recommended that before publishing your nomination, you should preview often to ensure the links that you provide as well as the required links of the layout are formatted correctly and will successfully transmit your voters to the desired source. Grammar and spelling errors are not wise to leave in your request either. Again, preview often and proofread your nomination before submitting it. Ensure that your nomination sounds proper and is easy for other readers to flow through it without needing to pause at a misspelling or a confusing statement.

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.

Toxice (Chat Moderator)
Toxice (talk): Contributions Edit Count

Hey guys. So, as of today, I demoted myself from the chat mod status because I'm not interested in taking the responsibility anymore. Basically, I got the the chat mod rights because there was never a mod logged on at midnight, and the time I am logged on is when not a single chat-moderator is on, besides me. At this time, we have a good 8-4 users logged on the chat, mainly new users and those with little reputation, and time-by-time, issues arise. So in short: We have no mod logged on during midnight anymore, and there should be one.

However, amongst the new users, I feel like Toxice has what it takes to fill in a good replacement of mine, as she's active during midnight. There's isn't much science to it, basically the mod should be mature, experienced, helpful, understanding and has gained enough trust to use these tools, and amongst users logged on that this time, she's the only one on the chat capable, which is why I believe she should have these rights.


 * I approve. -- 17:50, July 12, 2014 (UTC)

Support
VOTING IS NOW CLOSED
 * 1) As the poser
 * 2) She deserves those rights.
 * 3) Toxice is fair, mature and well experienced. She'd be a great asset to the chat mods. -- Murphyshane -  熱! Don't click here   18:54, July 12, 2014 (UTC)
 * 4) http://i1134.photobucket.com/albums/m609/Sacorguy79/Approved.png 00:03, July 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * 5) Definitly seems to be a good idea for when most of us are asleep. BlueFlametheAman Emperor of Chaos ( talk ) 02:47, July 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * 6) Sure 03:08, July 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * 7) Considering she was just nominated and promoted as rollback, I'm borderline on this one. But granted, Disco is correct, and I believe Toxice would help protect the chat while the majority of us sleep. I approve. - 03:54, July 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * 8) It goes against The Rule of Pac, but she seems experienced. Pacmansonic138 (talk) 03:57, July 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * 9) She does go the extra mile on keeping the chat cool, even with most of America sleeping. 5:50 PM, July 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * 10) Strong reasons set up for why a chat mod is needed and a user like her can do it good. --Krazy Company (talk) 17:54, July 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * 11) She is usually online/on chat when most users here are asleep, so it would be a good move to promote her. Uxiea  "Let's just say screw it."  21:24, July 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * 12) --MeanieToes (talk) 09:54, July 14, 2014 (UTC)
 * 13)  Myself  123  21:19, July 15, 2014 (UTC)
 * 14) Lloyd the Cat  "I don't die. I just go on adventures."  20:22, July 17, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose
VOTING IS NOW CLOSED

Discussion

 * Before I support, I want to confirm what policy the Rule of Pac belongs to. --MeanieToes (talk) 21:03, July 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * Not making a judgment by saying this but, Pac often makes a comment when Toxice is nominated for rights joking about Toxice's popularity. This "Rule of Pac" is irrelevant here, because it should go without saying that nomination pages should be completely free of opinions and jokes, because they are arguably the most serious pages on the wiki. I mean, the nomination page is where we decide who gets the tools to help run the wiki. Users should uphold their integrity here. -- Murphyshane -  熱! Don't click here   21:45, July 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * Rule of Pac literally means nothing. Pacmansonic138 (talk) 01:40, July 14, 2014 (UTC)
 * First off, why are you even back lashing Pac for saying something that he admitted means nothing, even though he clearly supported? Second, Murph, the majority of your assumption is actually false; Pac made this rule after Free was promoted to bureaucrat, and unofficially, and jokingly, said "I ain't voting for nominations no more, partner." And yes, while this should be a page where joking is put to the side, Pac wasn't even making a joke (and yes, I am a hypocrite for making a joke, and I'm sure we've all been hypocrites here before). Also, if you're back lashing Pac for making jokes, you clearly haven't seen Sacor's support comment.- 02:35, July 14, 2014 (UTC)
 * What have I sta-ha-ha-arted!? D: . Well, I'm sorry, I felt that Pacman was talking about an actual rule. Silly me . Instead of bashing each other, hug it out and and tie both knots on to maintain a serious attitude during nominations, since most of this is just a misunderstanding. --MeanieToes (talk) 09:51, July 14, 2014 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Glad we can come together and unite without arguing with each other consistently. - 11:07, July 15, 2014 (UTC)

Conclusion
SUCCESS! Congratulations, Toxice. Because with the amount of support you have received, the community is in favor for you being a chat moderator. This nomination will be closed shortly. - 05:13, July 20, 2014 (UTC)

Sesn (Rollback)
Sesn (talk): Contributions Edit Count

In the dark time period between when Ultra edits and when I/Orb edits, there is one user who edits and keeps the wiki safe from vandalize: Sesn. One of the most active users on the wiki, I nominate Sesn for rollback rights simply because for obvious reasons; he edits, he reverts vandal edits, and he's mature enough to handle these rights. What more is there to be said for an active editor with those traits? I'm sorry if this comes off short, but there is hardly anything else to say about this; he deserves them. - 20:53, July 15, 2014 (UTC)


 * I accept.

Support

 * 1) As the poser. - 20:53, July 15, 2014 (UTC)
 * 2) Per the poser. Pacmansonic138 (talk) 20:54, July 15, 2014 (UTC)
 * 3) I do agree with Blue, and I do believe that Sesn is really a really good editor towards not only fixing articles and making it more sense, but also pretty much how he also prevents vandals. In this point, I think Sesn should be ready to go the extra mile on how he keeps this wiki for prefect and in good condition. 8:59 PM, July 15, 2014 (UTC)
 * 4) With Sesn editing frequently, Rollback rights could be of use to him and I think they'd be quite beneficial. -- Murphyshane -  熱! Don't click here   21:13, July 15, 2014 (UTC)
 * 5) Don't see why not. -- 09:45, July 16, 2014 (UTC)
 * 6) Good editor. Knows how to do it. Can use the tools, and, Fun fact: This makes Sesn the first Scottish user to earn Rollback rights on a sonic-related wikia website. --Krazy Company (talk) 13:39, July 16, 2014 (UTC)
 * 17:01, July 17, 2014 (UTC) <--- well, close enough

BlueFlametheAman (Chat Moderator)
BlueFlametheAman (talk): Contributions Edit Count

So BlueflametheAman has been apart of this Wiki since October of 2013 and his actions have hada huge inpact on this Wiki. He has proven himself mod worthy with helping users and mods and admins on their desisions with users getting warnings kicks and bans. Their are very few faults with him and they are not even a huge deal. An Example of his actions are helping with the chat's Chaos and he is a very active user. He has proven himself to be a fantastic mod and I would like to Nominate BlueFlametheAman for Chat Mod. --HiddenChaos (talk) 19:37, July 17, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) I think this nomination was made prematurely. Flame is one of the best runners-up for chat moderator rights, so there's hardly anything bad about him. My only complaint about him is that he'll say some silly things about stopping arguments (i.e. opening a Flame Shield to ignore the argument, or something near-similar). By the end of this week, if he doesn't do that, then I'll change my mind. Other than that, he's almost ready. - 19:54, July 17, 2014 (UTC)
 * 2) I'm sorry, but I have to agree with Blue, seeing as how he summed up pretty much everything I would say. Flame isn't ready, but he almost is.
 * 3) He isn't even a Rollback. Personally I would like to see and hear of him doing good things with Rollback rights before I show any support for him being a Chat moderator. Lloyd the Cat  "I don't die. I just go on adventures."  20:25, July 17, 2014 (UTC)
 * 4) You have potential, but I would work on your behavior during arguments. Pacmansonic138 (talk) 21:09, July 17, 2014 (UTC)

Discussion

 * I'll wait for a bit to see if I do approve of this or not. I really want to hear what the majority of the community thinks first, since I know I can trust them to be firm and fair. Either I will earn my rights and finally be able to serve the community like I always wanted, or I'll go back to training until I really am ready to earn it. In the mean time, I'll just keep doing what I'm always doing, since I feel like I am definitely on the right track. Just don't be afraid of being honest. I can take it. I will better myself. BlueFlametheAman Emperor of Chaos ( talk ) 20:28, July 17, 2014 (UTC)


 * Gen, I'd like to ask you a question, if I may. You mentioned you would like to see Flame using Rollback rights before he could become a Chat Mod. How do Rollback rights tie in with Chat Moderating? They're completely separate subjects. -- Murphyshane -  熱! Don't click here   20:30, July 17, 2014 (UTC)