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. 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 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 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 in the discussion section of a nomination.)

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 time frame for the promotion the user is asking for has 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 promoted, and close the discussion. The discussion will be removed from this page, and will be archived by an administrator in Category:Requests for User Rights. All successful nominations in which the majority of the discussion regarding the nomination took place on this page will be archived.

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 not weigh greatly in your claim if others view it as biased.
 * Forgetting to provide any of the above requested information in the layout of your nomination will weigh heavily on your request. 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.

Edsta (Edsta) Edsta (talk): Contributions Edit Count

I'd like to nominate myself because,Let's face it,That certain "election" was a disaster but I feel like I have matured since then.This time it's not over "User Popularity" and all that jazz because I genuinely believe there is a lack of rollbacks.I have good knowledge on how to undo false facts and whatnot.I would much appreciate for you to nominate me. Thank You!

Discussion
SpyroSonic2000 (Administrator) SpyroSonic2000 (talk): Contributions Edit Count

Please thoroughly read through my nomination reasons before casting your vote.

I nominate SpyroSonic2000 for administrator. His contributions to the wiki have been constructive ever since he joined. He's been a major part of our chat moderator team for almost a year now. He has made great use of his rollback tool (just look through his contributions), and is constantly reverting vandalism, speculation, etc. He gives appropriate warnings to said rule breakers, and also keeps a good eye on blogs. You may be questioning his experience and need for the tools here, and I can provide answers to both. As a chat moderator, Spyro has exceeded all of my expectations. He is arguably the most experienced moderator of the bunch and is part of all discussions regarding banning unruly users. He provides me with administrative feedback if I ever need it. This experience as a moderator will transition well as an administrator. His need for the tools is also fairly high. His constant reverting of unconstructive edits will help him deal with such users more efficiently. He is also very active in site discussions to help improve the wiki.

I also believe that even though we have a very decent number of active administrator, we could use all the help we can get. It's always a good thing to have a high number of administrators. The more we have, the safer the wiki will be. We could also use more at such a time when new games are being announced and more traffic is being directed at the wiki. Spyro is also on for a large portion of the day keeping watch over the wiki and chat. I would like to remind everyone that editcount isn't the main focus here. His mainspace contributions have been significant enough to show he is an active editor of this wiki. You are free to oppose for a lack of "need" for administrators or "low" edits, but please consider otherwise. This user is capable, trustworthy, and will make an excellent administrator. This is why I am honored to nominate SpyroSonic2000 for administrator. -- 20:31, May 17, 2013 (UTC)


 * I feel that I am ready to become and admin, I have my user rights to the best of my ability and I feel that admin rights will be helpful in the future. 20:51, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) As the poster. -- 20:31, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * 2) He seems fit for the role, and is very mature. No reason to oppose. --- 20:36, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * 3) I've seen nothing to make me truly feel that he wouldn't be capable of handling Administrative powers. Plus I also trust Bullet's words on this nomination. If he feels that SpyroSonic2000 is indeed capable enough to handle the role competently, then (assuming community consensus is in favor of his promotion) I'll give him the rights myself and see if he can prove everyones hopes right.  Lloyd the Cat  "I don't die. I just go on adventures."  20:49, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * 4) Spyro is an amazing editor. I'm quite surprised that he isn't already an administrator, really. I didn't really pay attention to the list of admins, because I haven't really needed to yet. Ironically this coincides with Spyro's birthday, but this would be fit any day of the year. I support. PhysAnimation.gif]] PhysTheEchidna  ( talk ) [[File:PhysTheEchidnaSprite.png 20:52, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, Spyro has been a good asset to the wiki. He is sensible and hard-working, and I'm confident he can handle the responsibility and the new abilities he would gain. Good luck, Spyro. 21:17, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Spyro is a very hard worker both on the wiki and in chat, and it is very clear he has used his tools correctly and thoroughly. He is very mature, and honestly, I can't think of a reason to oppose. 17 May 2013 22:17 (UTC)
 * 2) Spyro is to be appreciated for his edits. I support.  23:01, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * 3) SpyroSonic has been guy, that have done his job well as chat moderator and I wanna see, how well it goes as admin. Go on! - MarioSonic (talk) 23:34, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * 4) I see no reason to oppose Spyro's promotion, he is a great editor and keeps check on many blogs. Plus I trust Bullet's judgement, if he thinks that Spyro should be an admin then he's probably right. -- Psyche  the Hedgehog  23:40, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * 5) Spyro is a fantastic user here on SNN. He has done quality edits and is already a great chat mod. I also trust Bullet's judgement with this nomination. Sandra the Porcupine  "Either you do or you don't."  17:55, May 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * 6) Per ALL the people. 03:42, May 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * 7) Spyro has definitely had his share of experience. I've no doubt that he is more than ready for this promotion. 16:28, May 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * 8) At first I was like Blue: believing Spyro was a "good user" but knowing something was keeping me from supporting. I now realize that I was thinking of Spyro's lack of mainspace editing. If what Bullet has said is true, Spyro knows his stuff, and if I believe what I have seen, Spyro can use these powers well. He doesn't even have to edit mainspace all that often to be a good administrator. Thus, after coming to this realization, I cannot find any major reasons to oppose, but I have many reasons to support. -- Shadowunleashed13 (talk) 16:25, May 29, 2013 (UTC)

VOTING IS NOW CLOSED

Oppose

 * 1) I'm gonna oppose, I'm kinda unsure about you having admin rights yet. Pacmansonic138 (talk) 22:50, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * 2) per pac. 22:54, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

VOTING IS NOW CLOSED

Discussion

 * I'm considering on this nomination. I believe Spyro is a great user, but there's something that doesn't want to make me support this nomination. :S 16:21, May 20, 2013 (UTC)

Conclusion
Yes - Consensus is clearly in favor of SpyroSonic's promotion to administrator. Congratulations! This discussion will be removed shortly. 17:54, May 30, 2013 (UTC)

Shadowunleashed13 (Administrator) Shadowunleashed13 (talk): Contributions Edit Count

Please thoroughly read through my nomination reasons before casting your vote.

I nominate Shadowunleashed13 for administrator. Out of all our current users, he could arguably benefit from the rights the most. He is always on constant watch over the wiki. He operates a bot that could be put to good use for administrative work. He patrols the wiki, and makes good use of his rollback tool. While he isn't a chat moderator, I feel he doesn't need to be. He has proven himself more than capable of the position multiple times. His contributions to the wiki are very significant, and he is always offering his feedback and assistance on site discussions, whether it be just by giving his opinion, or helping make such change to the wiki. He is mature and competent, and he has grown a lot as a user on the Sonic News Network.

I also believe that even though we have a very decent number of active administrator, we could use all the help we can get. It's always a good thing to have a high number of administrators. The more we have, the safer the wiki will be. We could also use more at such a time when new games are being announced and more traffic is being directed at the wiki. Shadowunleashed would help with the current administrative work and use the administrative rights to help him do everything he couldn't before. I am pleased to nominate this user for administrator. -- 20:31, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * I accept this nomination. I believe I am ready, but it's your opinions that matter here. -- Shadowunleashed13 (talk) 21:45, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) As the poster. -- 20:31, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * 2) YES! He is a very excellent user. He deserves these rights.  20:45, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * 3) Shadow is an amazing editor. As with Spyro, I'm quite shocked that he isn't already an administrator. There always seems to be a Shadowunleashed13 in the recent edits list, and with the extra administrative tools this mature user could really kick this wiki into shape. I support. PhysAnimation.gif]] PhysTheEchidna  ( talk ) [[File:PhysTheEchidnaSprite.png 20:52, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * 4) YES!!! For the reasons I stated in his previous nomination. I'm ashamed to have ever opposed before; my ability to think for myself was underdeveloped. You all think I'm a good candidate for adminship? Screw me. Unleashed is the best candidate at the moment. He could well be one of the greatest administrators we ever had. Good luck!! 21:17, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * 5) Shadow needs to be an admin more than anyone else right now. 22:49, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * 6) Of course! He's a very active editor and I think he is worthy of it.  22:58, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * 7) This man has every trait of an admin. I've nothing more to say than "let him have it" -- Murphyshane -  熱! Don't click here   23:26, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * 8) I will give a try, as being good consultative person during some modified operations. - MarioSonic (talk) 23:34, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * 9) Even though he is not yet a Chat Mod, he is making excellent use of that rollback tool and I beleive that he deserves the rights of Adminship. -- Psyche  the Hedgehog  23:48, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * 10)  21:25, May 18, 2013 (UTC)
 * 11)  17:22, May 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * 12)  22:06, May 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * 13) Per ALL the people. 03:42, May 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * 14) He has matured much since his last administration request. I am sure that he will greatly benefit from having the rights of an admin. With these new Sonic games coming soon, we're going to need all the help we can get, and I wouldn't know anyone more fitting for the role. 16:28, May 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * 15) While I did oppose at first, I think I forgot how mature and how much Unleashed has contributed to this wiki. So, I'm changing my vote to support. 21 May 2013 15:18 (UTC)

VOTING IS NOW CLOSED

Oppose

 * 1) While I have no doubts that Shadowunleashed is indeed a good User, I'm afraid that I'm gonna have to place my opposition for his promotion for the following reason: Like some, I strongly believe that if a User hasn't shown that they're capable of being "half-Admins" (using Chat Mod as an example) first, then they shouldn't be made full-Admins. I'd personally need to see/hear Shadowunleashed properly handle being a Chat Mod for at least a few months before I can even consider giving him my support for an Administrative role on this Wiki. I'm sorry, but I stand by my position.  Lloyd the Cat  "I don't die. I just go on adventures."  20:53, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * 2) Per Gen. Pacmansonic138 (talk) 22:50, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

VOTING IS NOW CLOSED

Discussion
By the way, if I may veer a little... I just wanted to say that if you wanted to see me become an administrator, you can all forget it. I'm no longer endeavoring to become one. My attitude to this wiki isn't suitable enough. 21:30, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * Wow. WOW. I can't believe it. The same user who once considered Unleashed to be too immature for this position, the same user who thought promoting him would end in disaster, is nominating him for administrator. It was one of my lowest expectations... 21:17, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * To be fair, things have changed. xD I've noticed a substantial difference in his behavior recently. -- 21:18, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * That's great to know. This is all so refreshing! I'm so happy! ^_^
 * Confidence, my friend. I still see you as a future administrator prospect. Maybe you'll get nominated one day, too. --
 * Oh, the irony behind this statement. Like this deleted scene from Spider Man 2 Lloyd the Cat  "I don't die. I just go on adventures."  21:26, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * Haha. Let's all get back on topic, though. -- 21:37, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

Conclusion
Yes - Consensus is clearly in favor of ShadowUnleashed's promotion to administrator. Congratulations! This discussion will be removed shortly. 17:54, May 30, 2013 (UTC)