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 customised 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 oppostion, 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.

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 recognised 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!

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

Ohmygod123 (Chat Mod)
I want to become a chat mod, because I've been editing on this wiki for 2 years, and I feel like I've really made some friends here. I have some strategies that people can use for when trolls come, and there's no chat mod around. Also, I'm very kind, and I believe we can all negotiate with under 100 edit users peacefully. Also, since Wkmeads1 left unexpectedly, some one has to take over.

Oppose
VOTING IS NOW CLOSED
 * 1) You do understand I'm officially pissed off my your idioticness here, right? Cut it out, it ain't gonna happen, especially when you don't even set up the request correctly. "Also, since Wkmeads1 left unexpectedly, some one has to take over." Who are you? If Wkmeads1 leaves, big deal. We've got a ton of chat mods. You're not becoming one. Period. Have a nice day. --Rainbowroad6w, the researcher. ( Talk )( Recent finds and updates. ) 23:44, December 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * Uh, that was kind of harsh RR, but I have to agree. Especially since 2 users reported me that you were feeding a troll when there were no chat moderators around, I really think you should give this a month or two, especially since I believe there are better candidates. -- 23:46, December 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) No: I've seen your behaviour on chat, and what was on a few days like Bullet said is totally not gonna get you Chat Mod position. Mature more, and we might consider it. Crystal the Raccoon  "The controller of ice!"  23:51, December 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) No: I think you might end up fighting with the Trolls and Under-Edited-Users,instead of Kick-banning them or telling them to leave..... Mewkat14Chat.GIF 13:25, December 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) No: I agree with basically everyone else on here. I remember You telling a user (or troll, spammer, I forget) something like "You're gonna get banned!!!!" or something like that. I don't think you're ready for Chat Mod if you acted like that not too long ago. And you seem to act really immature on the Chat, telling us (repeatedly) that you're bored, which can get extremely annoying. And I don't think how long you've been on the wiki has anything to do with becoming a Chat Mod, since you're not Modding the wiki, but the Chat. And we have plenty of Chat Mods already who come to the Chat everyday, plus Admins come on there sometimes. I think that we don't need someone to take Wk's place at the moment. Just wait a couple more months, improve on your behavior, and you might have a chance at becoming one. So, sorry. Lightning   the   Hedgehog

Conclusion

 * No - Sorry, but consensus is still against you, so you have not been made a chat mod at this time. Feel free to nominate yourself again when you have worked at your areas for improvement. This discussion will be removed shortly. -- Supermorff 10:06, December 11, 2011 (UTC)

Mariosonic15 (Chat Mod)
Mariosonic15 (talk): Contributions Edit Count

I Nominate myself for Chat Mod because I am well aware of users mainspace edits, I have reported several users to Chat Mods, and I am on the chat most of the time. 'Mariosonic15 Time to speed, keed! 23:30, December 4, 2011 (UTC)

Support
VOTING IS NOW CLOSED
 * 1) Yes: He has a keen eye for users without 30 mainspace edits. 23:32, December 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) Sure: Considering the fact Wkmeads1 left unexpectedly, and some of our chat mods aren't on as much as they used to be, I think you would make a fine chat moderator. -- 23:34, December 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) Coitainly: MarioSonic is pretty much always on the chat and has a great eye on everything that goes on there. I think he'll make up well for WKmead's disactivity. Serious   Sam  [[File:Minigun icon.png]] Heavy 23:45, December 4, 2011 (UTC)Sacorguy79
 * 4) Whatever: I'm not completely sure about this one, because we have enough, but I'm hearing many aren't on as much and Wkmeads1 sort left unexpectedly (weird, really), so whatever, yeah. You wouldn't be a bad one. --Rainbowroad6w, the researcher. ( Talk )( Recent finds and updates. ) 23:46, December 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) Sure: I don't see any problem with it. Like the others are saying, you wouldn't do a bad job. Plus, he's pretty good on chat. Noticing the not-edited-much users. Crystal the Raccoon  "The controller of ice!"  23:55, December 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6) sure!: I say: What the heck? LOL. Sure ting mon! Tyler the Hedgehog  "The ultimate son of a gun Charmcaster!"  19:24, December 5, 2011 (UTC)
 * 7) Yeah: I think you're ready for this. Like they said above, you have a good eye for noticing users with low amounts of edits (I remember you warned me about those users a couple of times! Heh.). And you're on the Chat a lot, too. I think you know the ropes. Go for it, dude! Lightning   the   Hedgehog

Oppose
VOTING IS NOW CLOSED

Conclusion

 * Yes - Congratulations! Consensus is in your favour, so you are now a chat mod! This discussion will be removed shortly. -- Supermorff 10:06, December 11, 2011 (UTC)

Mewkat14 (Chat mod)
Mewkat14 (talk): Contributions Edit Count

I know,I know, everybody's asking. I think I could do it. I'm on chat allot, and of course I'm trusted. And I'll understand any reason why not.

Oppose

 * 1) Aside from not really signing using your signature, and using poor reasoning, I don't think you are ready to be a chat mod. You handle some situations immaturely, and while you do handle issues maturely sometimes, you are not ready to be a chat mod. I also think that Mariosonic15 deserves it more than you quite frankly. -- 19:22, December 10, 2011 (UTC)

Sacorguy79 (Rollback)
Sacorguy79 (Talk): Contributions Edit Count

I nominate myself for the position of Rollback. I am pretty kind, I've achieved many mainspace edits over the while and currently have over 5,000 edits, and I've reported a few vandals before. Serious  Sam   Heavy 15:42, December 11, 2011 (UTC)Sacorguy79

Support

 * 1) Yes. I seen you many time on this wiki working hard. You deserve it.  SonicTheHedgehogDude  talk    contribs    blog   16:32, December 11, 2011 (UTC)

Discussion

 * I direct you to the third bullet point in the Advice section of this page. Might want to tweak the nomination a bit. -- Supermorff 16:30, December 11, 2011 (UTC)