Sonic News Network:Requests for User Rights

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.

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.

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 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 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.

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. -- 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. 17:42, June 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * 5) Jes:Per above. 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.
 * 9) Per all. ★Dont mess with   Panda Power!★  21:24, June 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * 10) Per Sacor. Willaca (talk)  22:29, June 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * 11) Per the reasons above. [[File:SonicRunPeace.gif]] Sonic is awesome  Eevee's are adorable [[File:Th_Eevee.gif]] 23:48, June 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * 12) Absolutely. 02:26, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * 13) Judging by the behavior described above, I would have to agree that Mew is, unfortunately, not quite mature enough to handle the responsibility. Also, giant COPPA violation. But, aside from that, the responsibilities of a moderator are numerous, and a moderator needs to maintain a certain decorum within the chat, as well as keep their own behavior in check. Now, this is not to say that I am an expert on such things or that I'm a saint of an admin (elsewhere), as I have unleashed my own fair share of snark. However, I do atone for such behavior, as it is unbecoming of a person in a position of power. Mew, being underage, has other responsibilities to concern herself with. School, being a kid, homework, etc. At twelve years of age, not only is she violating COPPA, but she is also not mature enough to handle the responsibility.
 * 14) *Think of it this way; the chat room is a house full of kids and Mew needs to babysit these children. At times, there can be more than five or six children (that I've seen). An ideal caregiver-to-child ratio is one-to-one. Mew cannot be expected to maintain civility in such an environment when she herself is only learning how to become a responsible adult. I haven't gotten the time to get to know Mew, but I was asked to add my thoughts. I have nothing against Mew, but from my own observations over the years, 12 is far too young to expect someone to be able to handle the responsibility of a chat moderator.  Trak Nar  Ramble on 03:04, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * 15) Per all. -- ★Mega http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20111019081044/kirby/en/images/d/d5/Kirbymassiveattack.png  Speedy★  17:07, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * 16) I say she should be demoted. Tyler the Hedgehog  "The ultimate son of a gun Charmcaster!"  19:00, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * 17) Per all above.---[[File:Hyper_Sonic_Modern.gif]] Fly the Fox ,Rainbow Dash  19:02, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * 18) Dear God, she's not even 13? She shouldn't even be on here. Absolutely supporting demotion. --Rainbowroad6w, the researcher. ( Talk )( Recent finds and updates. ) 21:49, July 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * 1) Per all. [[File:Stephen coop-1-.gif]] ★Cant stop me  from rockin out★ [[File:Scott coop-1-.gif]] 22:57, July 3, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) I have passed this message to Sacorguy before this demotion was made that most of the time she is Away on chat. However such treatment shouldn't be given to such a humble user, I never saw her ruse actions on chat and as Spyro is saying that she has done mistakes once. And the fact that she is underage shouldn't matter that much. She is underage but that doesn't change the fact that she is a humble user with many friends here, she contributes well and constantly entertains users with blogs, We should be proud on how one of our top current users here is only 12. Also this demotion was made without informing her, bad move Spyro. --FreeMilkShakesHere! 16:03, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Mewkat is underage? Not only would that call for demotion, but would call for a block until she is of age.
 * True, though it hasn't been confirmed if this is also the case. 17:55, June 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * Mew basically said it for herself that she's underage. We all  have our own   styles we   won't change  17:58, June 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * @Spyro Screencap? Pacmansonic138 18:00, June 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * Didn't think to take it, sadly. We all  have our own   styles we   won't change  18:04, June 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * K, and I remember there was this blog were Mew revealed her age, but I don't remember which one. Pacmansonic138 18:05, June 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * I can vouch for Spyro. I've seen Mewkat mention her being underaged on the chat, and a user say something along the lines of "you're underaged AND you're a chat mod?? Wow, congrats on fighting the system!" I won't name the user that I quoted that from. A years ban should definitely be implemented after this demotion request is closed. 02:26, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * A block should be implemented now if this is true, not only is it against wikia policy, but the law. Whether this block would null any objection to the demotion or not is up to the community.  Myself  123  14:11, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * I haven't seen most of the behaviors mentioned (all I know for sure is her tendency is be silent for long periods of time while on the chat, which in turn make me wonder if she's really watching or just not bothering to glance at the Chat tab once in a while), so I'm afraid I'm gonna have to remain neutral. As for her being underage... This is the first I've heard of it, but if some of you are indeed telling the truth then, as per Wikia's rules, I'm also afraid to say that a year's ban will need to be issued as well. I'm sorry Mew, but should that pass then please keep in mind that we're only doing our jobs as Administrators... Lloyd the Cat  "I hog that hedgehate!"  02:38, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * Important. Can we establish immediately whether Mew is actually underage? If so, this isn't a matter for this discussion page. She would be in violation of Wikia's Terms of Use, which complies with various international laws about child protection, and she must be blocked until she turns 13. -- Supermorff (talk) 14:21, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * User Blog: Mewkat14/Best Anti/Hero Compatition! LAWLZ, in a comment, Mew more or less confirms it.  Myself  123  15:52, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * Just when you wished there was a neutral button. --FreeMilkShakesHere! 16:06, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * @Disco It does matter if she is underage, as it is against the rules.
 * @Myself So that was the blog that I was looking for, I could of sworn it was one of 'Sonic's' or Chormia's Blogs, anyways, we block her now? Pacmansonic138 18:12, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * "Tut-tut PKMN, I'm no san I'm a chan I'm no teen. I'm two years younger than you,sir." ~Mewkat14 to me. She basically just said she's 12. Tyler the Hedgehog  "The ultimate son of a gun Charmcaster!"  19:08, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm about to have my birthday. So my ban should last until my b-day. And I'd like to say,I'm Sorry I decieved you all. And I'm sorry I said they were ignorant. And I should've cared when CC broke the rule. I really regret that stuff I did. And hope you guys still trust. And I'll accept the demotion,I don't really deserve Mod after this stuff I did. ~♥Snegg♥  Nicolewhite.PNG
 * Her birthday is on July 30th. We all  have our own   styles we   won't change  19:42, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * If that is indeed her Birthday, then I shall her until then.  Myself  123  19:47, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * It is, she said it herself. We all  have our own   styles we   won't change  19:58, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * Does this mean she gets demoted immediately? Or are we going to let this discussion run through for a week? -- 23:29, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * I say we close this now, but this demotion I believe is only for Demoting her from Chat Mod powers, since Spyro never said anything about her Rollback powers. Pacmansonic138 01:32, July 1, 2012 (UTC)
 * True, but she is banned. Should her rollback be removed? -- 01:34, July 1, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure, since she never abused her Rollback, only Chat Mod, kinda like with Metal. Pacmansonic138 01:35, July 1, 2012 (UTC)
 * The block ain't that long, so I don't think she should lose rollback powers. We all  have our own   styles we   won't change  01:37, July 1, 2012 (UTC)
 * I do agree with DiscoDuck's sentiment that mistakes happen. I know I've made more than a few of my own&mdash;glaring ones. And while I have not gotten to know her as well as most of you, from what I've seen, she seems nice. However, her being underage is a matter of concern. I direct you to the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, the COPPA that I have mentioned. Mew, being twelve years old, is in violation of this law. Us knowing that she is underage is in violation of this law, as that is personal information. As I do not see a privacy policy mentioned, Mew would require the consent of a parent or legal guardian (Knuckles is not a legal guardian) prior to becoming active on this wiki. This is to protect children from online predators and solicitors. Until Mew is thirteen years old, she cannot release any personal information (that includes real name, age, birth date, home state, city, etc) without informed consent. With this wiki allowing Mew to continue her responsibilities as a chat mod here, they are in violation of COPPA. Therefore, to protect Mew and the SNN's best interest, Mew should be removed as chat mod and blocked until she is thirteen years of age. This is for Mew's safety in mind. Please do take this into consideration.  Trak Nar  Ramble on 03:49, July 1, 2012 (UTC)
 * Mewkat shouldn't be a rollback either, though, guys. She is in violation of COPPA and should be demoted from both rights ASAP. -- 02:50, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
 * I read the blog and I'm finding it funny that she got away with announcing her age and not being blocked. --Rainbowroad6w, the researcher. ( Talk )( Recent finds and updates. ) 21:52, July 3, 2012 (UTC)

Pinkolol16 (Demotion)
Pinkolol16 (talk) Contributions EditCount

I nominate Pinkolol16 for demotion from her Rollback status. The way Pinkolol16 has been acting is not the way a rollback should act. Just recently, two users (Me and Fly the Fox) were talking about an idea (in a joking way) on chat. We were not talking about her or to her in any fashion until she addressed us. She then raged, and then edited her userpage, calling me and Fly "FREAKING IDIOTS". As seen here. She did it not once, but twice. See the edit before that. There was no need to act this way, and this is not how a Rollback should act. They should be role models to users, and not... this. She also came on chat the next day, and continued to try to provide reasons, saying her getting "angry" about us talking about a subject is reason for her to do such things. This is unacceptable. This is also not the first time Pinkolol16 has done this. She has raged on and off the wiki more than once. I've been told she's raged before simply because someone was changing their avatar a few times, and I've witnessed her rage like this on the wiki. Things like this not only break SNN policy, but are a disgrace to the wiki. This is not at all how a rollback should act, let alone a user. -- 02:50, July 3, 2012 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) As the poster. -- 02:50, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) Sorry Pink, but this is not how a rollback should act. I support. We all  have our own   styles we   won't change  02:56, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) Well it was immature. I was also offended. I don't know if i'm willing to forgive, let alone forget.---[[File:Hyper_Sonic_Modern.gif]] Fly the Fox ,Rainbow Dash  02:57, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
 * 4) Since Bullet informed me on a few more behaviors of hers that relate to what's already been addressed so far in both the main demotion body and the discussion section, and since I have no reason to believe that he'd lie to me about it, I believe that I now have enough information to make a clear vote. I choose to support her demotion. I'm sorry Pink, but showing such levels of immaturity over people trying to talk about things that don't even involve you most of the time and acting rude towards those who ask you honest questions is simply not acceptable in my eyes. Regardless of other peoples' interests you need to be respectful towards others. Lloyd the Cat  "I hog that hedgehate!"  03:44, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
 * 5) Now that I am aware of a recurrent pattern of such behavior, the decision no longer seems as knee-jerk to me. Without naming names, we've had users such as this on both Wookieepedia and Star Wars Fanon, who were demoted due to either abusive behavior or simply abusing their rights and responsibilities (such as threatening to give good-faith editors "cool-down blocks" for no real reason). There are certain users that we simply will not allow to have rollback, mainly due to their behavior. With great power comes great responsibility, an axiom we should all be familiar with as it applies to our lives in many ways. Rollback is a power and with it is the responsibility to present oneself as an upstanding and model user. Sysop is another great power, and with it comes the responsibility of representing oneself and the userbase, as a position of power reflects on the whole community. If a rollback user is acting in conduct unbecoming to any user, then that reflects poorly on them and the veteran users. If a sysop acts with conduct unbecoming of a user in their position, that reflects poorly on the entire site. I admit that on Wookieepedia, we have come to be known by our strict admins.
 * 6) *Nothing against Pink, but a continued pattern of vindictive behavior is not something that I would like to see coming from a person in even a minor position of authority. Granted, I call refer to rollback rights as "candy," but even then... One usually doesn't give candy to a person who is calling them an "idiot."  Trak Nar  Ramble on 04:06, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
 * 7) Sorry Pink but I know were friends, but that doesn't inflict on my decisision. Iam going to have to support Per my Life Motto and you can't get Raged that much. Sorry Pink but Iam supporting. Willaca (talk)  06:54, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
 * 8) I must support. Not liking something is one thing, but this is a whole other thing. It reflects badly on our community.-- 06:57, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
 * 9) Sorry but I support this, like what Gen said you have to respect other people's interests and opinions.
 * 10) Basically what everyone else has said can be summed up in these few words. Pink, you are a great user here, and I have plenty of respect for you, however, this behavior is simply unacceptable. If you cannot find ways to express your dislike of a subject, then I suggest you simply walk away from the computer for a bit to calm down, expressing your emotions here has caused a conflict between you and other users. 09:15, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
 * 11) After reading that description and looking at the proof behind it, my mind is made up. Qualities of a Rollback include understanding, maturity and respect. Pinklol16 did not show understanding by getting angry at the joke. She did not show maturity by "I'm never going on chat again" and did not show respect by calling Fly and Bullet "stupid freaking idiots". My mind is made up. Demotion. -- Murphyshane -  熱! Don't click here   21:28, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
 * 12) I support now, thanks to Pink's YT channel comments. Pacmansonic138 21:47, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
 * 13) Although I am viewed as a huge d**k on this site, I will admit I don't think I've ever actually publicly (to everyone) said specific users were "FREAKING IDIOTS". I don't think there are any good reason why I should oppose demotion here. --Rainbowroad6w, the researcher. ( Talk )( Recent finds and updates. ) 21:56, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
 * 14) Per all [[File:Stephen coop-1-.gif]] ★Cant stop me  from rockin out★ [[File:Scott coop-1-.gif]] 22:58, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
 * 15) I've seen her rages over people who change their avatar, and combined with the imature actions she has made according to this blog, I indeed think she should be demoted.

Discussion

 * While I do agree that such behavior is very unbecoming, I feel I need to remain neutral. I am not aware if you have an NPA policy here, but on Wookieepedia, we have such a policy. We usually start off with a warning, and in this case, I feel that may be warranted prior to a demotion. Figure out the problem and resolve it in a civil manner. Users on Wookieepedia, even ones with rollback, have engaged in personal attacks, and they still retain their rollback rights. However, when they do violate the policy, they are warned about it and the matter resolved. We do recognize the fact that people lose their cool. It happens. many of us have difficulty maintaining a clear head in certain situations, and with practice, can we get better at it. But, a knee-jerk reaction to demote someone based on two incidences of NPA violation is a bit much.
 * I think what needs to be taken into account prior to the decision to move forward is Pink's overall history. Has she done this before? Is there a repeat pattern of NPA violation? Or, is this an isolated incident? If it is the latter, a warning and discussion may be warranted more than a straight-up demotion.  Trak Nar  Ramble on 03:18, July 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * She has been warned as far as I am concerned. I told her awhile back on chat to stop getting so mad over ponies. I'm not sure how much of a warning that is, but this is constant. She's insulted users and raged multiple times over opinions. She gets mad when someone simply mentions ponies. -- 03:26, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
 * @Bullet Not when somebody mentions ponies, but when somebody combines ponies with something she like or get her to like them. Pacmansonic138 03:34, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah yeah, that's what I meant. However, this is constant, and it isn't just two recent offenses, I'd say much more than that. This happens constantly, almost every night when I'm on chat. She often gets angry at this, and it gets annoying, fast. A rollback should accept and respect opinions, not rage at them when someone isn't even talking to her. -- 03:35, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'd like to point out that I have nothing against Pink. I think she's great as a person, I just don't appreciate her actions. -- 06:48, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
 * Guys, something important. Read Pink's YouTube channel comments see here. -- 21:14, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
 * She pretty much said rude things about the wiki and us. [[File:AnimatedBlaze.gif]] Blaze the Cat is awesome!!!  Fear the power of the flames!! [[File:AnimatedBlaze.gif]] 21:19, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
 * If you read some comments she made on her | own YouTube channel. She happend to call SNN a "Troll-fest". Willaca (talk)  23:19, July 3, 2012 (UTC)