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 line.

Ohmygod123 (Chat Moderator)
Ohmygod123 (talk) Contributions Edit Count

I have been a member on this wiki for two years, and I feel like I've made friends here. If you make me a chat moderator, I promise I will do my best to try and get Under 100 edit users to get out in a peaceful manner.

Oppose

 * 1) Nope: First off, you didn't even set this up right, and you didn't put your request at the bottom of the page. I fixed it for you. That is enough right there to oppose. Second, I don't believe you'd be a good chat mod at all. I just don't think you could be one. --Rainbowroad6w, the researcher. [[File:SportySmallRightAnimation2.gif]]( Talk )( Recent finds and updates. ) 23:31, November 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) No: We don't need any more, and your request was just a fail. You need more experience, more edits, etc. before you become one. 'Wkmeads1 GET OVER HERE! 23:35, November 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) No: Your not experienced enough and we don't need anymore mods. 'Mariosonic15 Time to speed, keed! 23:38, November 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) No: Per Rainbow. -- 23:46, November 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) No: I'm with Rainbow on this one. Oooooh you not gonna believe this! 04:58, November 13, 2011 (UTC)

DarkFuture (Adminship)
DarkFuture (talk): Contributions Edit Count

I nominate myself for adminship for the following reasons:

Vandalism: Throughout my time here on SNN, I have faced many vandals who come here with the intention of vandalizing our articles and creating pages with vulgar titles "for the lulz". Many vandals are not dealt with right away. They are free to vandalize until an admin blocks them. Here, I have a few examples of such vandals who have vandalized and spammed our articles and were taken care of by me: User talk:Chickkkkkennn dipppersss, 174.57.209.80, 75.75.65.18, Template:Character, Template:Nihongo. These are but a few of the many vandals that I have dealt with. Do we really want people to see such material on this site while simply browsing? This is very embarrassing. If I was an admin at the time they were vandalizing, I could have blocked these users right away, giving a proper duration for their banishment.

Rollback: A few months ago, I nominated myself for Rollback rights. I have used this tool numerously to revert the edits of vandals and spammers many times. Here are a few examples of my usage of the Rollback tool: Chaos, Big the Cat, Cosmo the Seedrian.

Thank you for your time. 00:36, November 11, 2011 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) Yes: 'Wkmeads1 GET OVER HERE! 00:40, November 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes: I REALLY think you deserve adminship. Lightning   the  Hedgehog
 * 1) YES: Despite your inactivity (due to understandable reasons), you deserve adminship! You have been working very hard. -- 00:40, November 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) Yes: Go for it Alter. You will be a great admin :) CesarTeam Cesar the Hedgehog icon.png HYRO 00:47, November 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) Yes: I believe you are fairly qualified to be an admin. You help edit the wiki all the time, and revert many of the edits a vandal makes when admins are unavailable. You even help some people when they need some. you are a helpful person, and I think you should be an admin. You have my vote. Just dont start slacking off. >:) Phantom The Shadow Plasma  00:59, November 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) Yeah: Per Bullet. --Rainbowroad6w, the researcher. [[File:SportySmallRightAnimation2.gif]]( Talk )( Recent finds and updates. ) 02:22, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) Yes: You'll make a great admin.ModrenSonic 02:45, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6) This is quite a step for you isn't it? Well, if you think you're ready for it then so do I. You've always been an excellent user. And also, Francisco supports it so I might as well support it as well.  Jake the Hedgehog   The Ultimate Apprentice  02:44, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * 7) Yes: As said in nomination paragraph you have done a lot of work with your rollback rights as I have done the appropriate research, you definitely deserve this right. Call me Hyper, Call me Hearts   Just don't call me 58, Cuz I'm not that old!  03:41, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * 8) Yup: you deserve it dude X3 Mikee the Echidna   Emeralds Power   04:00, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * 9) FUDGE YES!: Thought it over and you do deserve it.

Oppose

 * 1) I oppose. The reasons you have mentioned are not exactly good enough for an admin. I am not sure if you get involved in discussions nor contribute here much. I have never exactly seen you make a proper suggestion in any discussion. You seem to be adding categories to images for a very long time and that seems to be the only thing I see you doing around here. Thus, I honestly think a chat mod status is enough for you right now. I just got be a chat mod, why are suddenly rolling for adminship?
 * I also personally think we have enough admins. Unless there is any admin work that is not done, I don't see a reason for any more admins.--58SlugDrones • (Contact) 06:33, November 13, 2011 (UTC)

Discussion

 * I would like to point out that only your friends have commented, you may want to get some admins to comment (only 2 have). "Note, however, that only asking your own friends to comment is usually transparent and may harm your chances in the long run." Which you did on chat, but I would suggest getting more admins to comment. -- 23:30, November 23, 2011 (UTC)

Rainbowroad6w (Rollback)
Rainbowroad6w (talk): Contributions Edit Count

Alright. I tried to go for this a while back, but got opposed, mainly because people thought I didn't have enough edits. I had about 300 (maybe 350) then. I now have over 700 edits, more than 100 more edits than Mystic Monkey. I believe I should have this right, because not just MS, but many other vandals, have come across this site. Undoing revisions isn't easy, especially when the vandals do it quickly. I just want this little right so it'll be easier for me to get rid of vandal edits and make everything a little easier for everyone here.

--Rainbowroad6w, the researcher. ( Talk )( Recent finds and updates. ) 02:27, November 12, 2011 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) Sure: You supported me, so I return the favor. Have a nice day. 'Wkmeads1 GET OVER HERE! 02:30, November 12, 2011 (UTC) 
 * 2) Yes: You do have enough edits. ModrenSonic 02:43, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) Sure: You've been working hard, and have been editing a lot lately, that includes reverting edits. You deserve this. -- 02:45, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) Yes: You work hard. You edit normally. I don't see why not. Jake the Hedgehog   The Ultimate Apprentice  16:00, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) Sure: You've been rather active lately, and we're not exactly overflown with Rollbacks.-CariconCommander 01:29, November 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6) Yes: You seem to be good for this. Oooooh you not gonna believe this! 04:33, November 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * 7) Yep: I think you'd make a good Rollback. Lightning   the   Hedgehog
 * 8) Great idea: That maybe a good one because you are a good user. You are likely to have these.--TricklesTest 05:23, November 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * 9) Yup: You'd do a fine job!--[[File:BlazeMewkat1417506925616300.gif]] 01:52, November 17, 2011 (UTC)