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.

Nominating
To submit a nomination for somebody else, please create a section below the "Current nominations for adminship" line listing the nominee's username as a piped link to his/her userpage. Below that, please include a statement about why you are nominating this person and why you think they will be a good admin. The nominee should then accept (or reject) the nomination, and include a statement about why (s)he wants to become an admin, why (s)he thinks (s)he is a good candidate, and what (s)he plans to do with administrator rights. All users must sign and date their statements.

To submit a self-nomination, please create a section below the "Current nominations for adminship" line listing your username as a piped link to your userpage. Below that, please include a statement about why you want to become an admin, why you think you are a good candidate, and what you plan to do with administrator rights. Please sign and date your statement.

Editorial Note: Adminship is NOT taken lightly. You may actually want to spend some time on your request. A couple sentences is hardly sufficient to show that you won't cause more problems than you solve with admin tools, let alone that you think that there is a good reason why more admins are necessary and that you would be a good candidate for a new admin, that you're willing to put time and effort into this wiki, and that you know how to use admin powers properly and would do so.

Discussion
Once a nomination has been made, users will review the nominee and declare their support or opposition by commenting. Such posts should be bulleted (with asterisks *) and preceded by Yes, No or Neutral. When declaring support or opposition in this way, please refrain from using a talk bubble, even if you frequently use one on talk pages. This is to help bureaucrats to easily determine who is for and who is against the nomination.

In this section, users may also make comments (to be preceded by Comment) or ask the nominee questions (to be preceded by Question) in an attempt to get a better idea of the nominee's strengths and weaknesses. Remember to use colons or asterisks (*) at the beginning of lines when responding to other people's comments.

If you wish to change your opinion at a later date, please strke through your original Yes/No/Neutral declaration (you can do this with the tags as follows: Yes produces Yes ).

This is not a majority vote. It is an attempt to assess the community's consensus regarding the candidate. Moreover, to become an admin, the candidate should have the support of most of the community, so if the vote is split, the candidate will probably not be given adminship. Any user can contribute, 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.

After a reasonable amount of time, 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 you 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:
 * Please read through and follow the nomination guidelines 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.
 * Admins are expected to be good users first, but this is not sufficient to be made an admin. Number of edits, number of pages created, being nice to other users, not engaging in vandalism, knowing about Sonic, etc. are signs of a good user, but they should have no bearing on the discussion for adminship. 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.
 * Similarly, 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.
 * Be patient. This process is not quick. If you cannot wait for the process to conclude at its own pace, you probably aren't ready for adminship anyway.
 * 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.
 * Don't attempt to influence the discussion by promising to do something if you are successful.
 * Don't talk about things that you don't do, only things that you do do.
 * Please be civil!
 * Read User:Sonicrox14's blog: User blog:Sonicrox14/So, You Wanna Be An Admin?! and take a second thought about adminship.

Current Nominations For Adminship
Here are the users who are currently nominated for sysop, rollback, or other privileges.

Murphyshane (Admin)
I nominate Murphyshane for adminship. It is true that he deserves it with his main-space edits, behavior and maturity towards this wiki. He truly does want to improve himself and the wiki and he has. I am proud of him, he has made more edits I have, so why not? Murphyshane and I are the same level. I became an admin so why can't he?--58SlugDrones! 05:30, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

I'll now list some pros and keep the cons to myself. Course, don't know what good adminship'll do me but

-- Murphyshane  I voted Blaze, so you vote Shadow Don't click here 23:01, August 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm nice to other users.
 * I was made Admin on other wikis for my frequent editing.
 * I edit daily
 * I'm quite experienced
 * I use good grammar and do not use words like "ur", "woot", "dis", "r", "u", etc.
 * I've kept a good reputation
 * I'm mature
 * I don't cause trouble


 * Demonstration of use of Admin powers

Well, on WarioWiki I protected the main page because it was vandalised. People started replacing content with text like "Wario farts in Brawl yay" "Ur moms back" etc. A user also renamed it "Maud Page". I deleted unneeded pages like WarioWare: Touched (which was already an article so I turned it into a redirect) WarioWare, Inc. (same situation as Touched) and King Dedede (which had nothing to do with Wario), a vandalised page like Maro Land (it had all kinds of things like Mario getting shot), Plumber outfit, Biker outfit and Captain syrup (which were Spam and marked for deletion), User talk:81.104.126.252. (which contained another user's password)

As for being nice to other users, I like to help new ones learn how wikis work. Like, answer their questions, teach them how to change font traits, etc. I'm nice to them because I don't pick fights or tell them that they're bad users. I'm also polite to vandals, if a vandal were to vandalise a page, instead of telling them something like "Do that again and I will kill you!" I'd say "I'm sorry, but please do not vandalise a page again. Thank you." -- Murphyshane  I voted Blaze, so you vote Shadow Don't click here 10:22, August 18, 2010 (UTC)


 *  No  - I'm really sorry to be blunt, but you are making the same mistakes as last time. This is what your nomination looks like in the context of the advice and guidance at the top of the page:
 * I have the 5th most edits of all users Irrelevant
 * I've uploaded several useful images. Irrelevant
 * I'm nice to other users (except vandals). - Let me know when you're polite to other users, INCLUDING vandals.
 * I was made Admin on other wikis for my frequent editing. - And can you give examples of what you did with admin privileges on these other wikis?
 * Pages I've created Irrelevant
 * You've got a lot of potential, but I really want to see you improve your nomination first. If you can show that you did good admin-related work on those other wikis, that would be sufficient evidence in itself of your qualification. -- Supermorff 09:49, August 18, 2010 (UTC)

I say Yes Murphyshane should become Admin.Murphyshane has created a lot of articles that will help this wiki.He has the 5th most amount of edits and he has 3,000 main edits.He deserves Adminship and I'm not saying this because were good friends I'm saying it because its true and he deserves it! Ultimate Dude  127 19:50, August 19, 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes - Okay, so I finally got round to looking at WarioWiki. I see that the Main Page was indeed vandalised, but that you weren't the one to personally fix that, and when you decided to protect it nobody had vandalised it for 8 months, so I'm not sure that was necessary. You did some good work deleting unneeded pages, although you could have done better on the cleanup - you deleted "Red (Pokemon Trainer)" and the page "Red", but there's still a disambiguation and "Red (Ashley's friend)" could now be moved to "Red", for instance. These are all small things, though, that you can easily improve on - in general, it seems clear that you'll use the privileges responsibly and not go overboard.
 * I also looked at comments you've left on user talk pages, and think you show decent restraint and civility, but I will say that a "block" is not the same as a "ban" - we don't ban people on Wikia. I was quite amused by this edit in which you said "vandalism is against our policy" - that's obviously true, but it would have been better to explain what the user had done that you had identified as vandalism.
 * But all in all, quite promising. -- Supermorff 08:06, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

Maybe - You're a hard working and dedicated user. I think you will do well as an admin. But I'm not sure if we need any more admins, but if others say yes, then I'll change my vote.  Myself 123  02:15, September 12, 2010 (UTC)

I say Yes. This vote is not out of friendship at all, Murphyshane is a responsible;e user, with a large edit count, he's incredibly reasonable and so on. I don't think I've ever seen him have a problem with any of the users here. 14:45, September 18, 2010 (UTC)

I say yes. Murphs been around for a bit now. sure I been out of the loop of things but I say if he is gerenally trusted and hard working then thats what we need right?--Mystic Monkey  sez 21:55, September 20, 2010 (UTC)

Yes-- Okay, really. I have said alot before now haven't I?--58SlugDrones! 12:55, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

Maybe: We already have plenty of admins; Me, Myself (and I; couldn't resist the pun), Morff, Toast, Shelly, Mystic, 58, SSM; I'm not even sure if I'm able to keep track of all the admins! He does have the qualifications, but too many admins could possibly lead to trouble.--Kagi mizu -Seeya 'round 19:51, November 10, 2010 (UTC)

I don't know: I'm a little unsure wether you should be an admin or not. You seem to qualify for the most part. But I can't shake the feeling that something's missing. But like Kagimizu said, he have enough admins already. Sonic &amp; Scrab  Master   Kongosoha!  20:17, November 10, 2010 (UTC)

The guy has been waiting a long time. He is obviously loyal to this wiki and cares for its well being. He's kind of a punk sometimes, but so am I, I have a weakness for picking on Shadow fanboys. Why he wants to be an admin? I don't know. Not like you get payed or anything. But he's a good user to have around and I think he's earned the privilege. yes Sonictoast 04:53, November 12, 2010 (UTC)

True, we have alot of admins here. It can lead to trouble but it is unfair if he has everything worthy to be an admin. He has done alot and has shown a good behavior, there is nothing to disagree with that. Can't we just make him the last admin?--58SlugDrones! 15:28, November 12, 2010 (UTC)

What do ya mean I can be a punk Sonictoast? -- Murphyshane  I voted Blaze, so you vote Shadow Don't click here 16:16, November 12, 2010 (UTC)

@Murphy: Maybe: I admire your loyalty and determination, but if you keep up the list of good behaviors and procedures in handling vandals and Trolls, then you'll definately have my vote. However, I'm going to watch you and see how you do with Administration privleages and see if you can handle such responsiblities, should you recieve it. Try not to do anything that can hurt your relationship with the community, and I think you'll go very far.

@58 & Kagimizu:

58SlugDrones! said: "True, we have alot of admins here. It can lead to trouble but it is unfair if he has everything worthy to be an admin. He has done alot and has shown a good behavior, there is nothing to disagree with that. Can't we just make him the last admin?"

Kagimizu said: "We already have plenty of admins; Me, Myself (and I; couldn't resist the pun), Morff, Toast, Shelly, Mystic, 58, SSM; I'm not even sure if I'm able to keep track of all the admins! He does have the qualifications, but too many admins could possibly lead to trouble."

Not trying to sound rude, but the whole point of this nomination is to determine whether or not Murhpy has the capabilities required to handle a position in which he will need to regularly, if not daily, participate in and be able to handle his privileges responsibly and professionally. Yes, we have many Admins here, but half of them (if not more) are inactive, and some (not all) of the Admins whose status is listed as "Active" probably does very little to handle situations of certain natures when they occur, such as cases of vandalism, harassment, etc, and the regular users have to wait until a lot of the current Admins show themselves before any issues in which they can't solve on their own, are solved by said Admins. Also, it would be great if any newly appointed Administrators continue to contribute to the site's information while also handling their responsibilites as Admins. I myself don't think this would be very difficult to do, but then again I don't know how everyone else completely works.

So here's the point I'm trying to establish: We need people who can be here for a certain amount of time (like about an hour or so at the very least) a day, if at all possible, to patrol the site, while also doing their part to contribute around here other than just handling vandals, and if these Admins have to leave, then at least one Adminstrator can remain and keep watch on things. Will Murphy, along with any future Admins, be able to pull all this off? Who knows, but I think that should be the standard for any Admins on any encyclopedia website such as this one.

And another thing: Just because there is a large number of Admins doesn't mean we shouldn't close any nominations, because (like I just stated) we don't need Admins just as a number count, we need Admins who can prove that they can efficiently do their job and not put aside any responsibilities and tasks they had before hand just because (and if) they acquire Adminship. That's basically saying that we're allowing people to work hard around here for a certain while, and once we give them Administration, they can completely stop doing what they were doing before and keep using their powers as long as they stay active and just use them to stop vandals, delete spam articles, give messages to Users, etc.

We need Admins who can do their jobs efficently and still contribute to the site. That is what makes a good Admin on a website like this. Sorry if it seems like I'm repeating myself, but I felt that these points should be established. And I'm not trying to insult or call anyone out, but (in my opinion) nominations should never be closed because of, well, what I stated above. Also, if we keep getting Admins who fufil the requirements I listed above, then why should it be a bad thing to have a large number of Admins if they all do their duties while still greatly contributing to the website? To be perfectly honest I think all we really need to do is just watch who we give Administration to (if we think they deserve it) and see if they meet our standards and then some, and if they don't, then we can just revoke their privilages and wait until someone else comes around and succeeds where the previous new Admins could not. Numbers shouldn't be a determination as to who is worthy and how many Admins there can be, skills, determination, proffessionalism, mannerisms, and overall contributions should really matter in discussions like this. Phoenix the Cat The flames reborn....  21:53, December 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * That's a bit of an essay, right there. You've actually highlighted quite a lot of problems with the current process. The whole point of the nomination is not to determine if Murphyshane has what it takes to be an admin (technically) - it's to determine whether there is consensus in the community about whether he should be an admin. I've just looked over the above nomination again and I still don't think the consensus is there. The number of existing admins may not be a good reason to just close down a nomination, but it's as valid a reason as any other to vote against a nomination, which is what Kagi has done. The fact is, on any wiki, it will always be harder to get adminship when there are a lot of active administrators. Considering our size, we have a lot of active administrators. -- Supermorff 09:51, December 18, 2010 (UTC)

@ Supermorff:

Supermorff said: "The number of existing admins may not be a good reason to just close down a nomination, but it's as valid a reason as any other to vote against a nomination, which is what Kagi has done. The fact is, on any wiki, it will always be harder to get adminship when there are a lot of active administrators. Considering our size, we have a lot of active administrators."

I agree with you. However, if you really think about it, what is it that will keep the current Admins we do have that are active around for possibly months, if not years? Allow me to elaborate: I believe that having a large number of Admins could be a good thing, especially if this site one day develops to the point where information gathering and activity occurs on a daily basis (such as WoW Wiki, before it moved out of Wikia), I don't necessarily believe that every single User we give Administration privileges to will always continue to display the traits which the entire community found attractive during said User's nomination. What if, say, one Admins who was well liked for his positive, outgoing attitude and willingness to work for the community, along with doing everything he could to contribute to everything which covered, say, the games media for Sonic the Hedgehog, one day suddenly stops displaying these traits and becomes bitter or impatient with other Users, and stop contributing to the site's information altogether, except probably just fix cases of only vandalism?

I'll use myself as an example of a typical User on a Wikia website. Naturally, if I encountered an Admin like that, I would discontinue to support his actions because I believe that he is no longer doing anything to seriously help out our website and is no longer displaying the overall attitude of a User whom I once trusted with special privileges to protect the site and its members, while also serving as a peace keeper for any incidents which were to occur around here. I would voice my concerns to said Administrator, and other members of the community (if said Administrator continues his negative and possibly harmful behaviors), and see if anyone else would agree with me that we should have said Administrator have his privilages revoked, then replace him/her with a User who we believe would better suit the community and the website as a whole.

Another example I can use is the ability of certain Admins to remain active on a regular basis. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think that the maximum amount of days that an Admin cannot show one's self on here is 30 days before being written off as possibly inactive. Some may also question some Admins' ability to stay active if they hardly ever show up around here to contribute, or they do show themselves but don't really contribute at all. Example: We have an Admin or two show up once for about every 2 weeks, and they only edit on the days they show up (the amount that they work on those days can vary, but that's not the point), and then disappear for another 2 weeks before continuously repeating the cycle. I'm going to use myself as an example of a typical User once again. If I were paying attention and noticing this, I would begin to think that maybe this said Admin may have some problems which are making it difficult for him/her to show up and do anything here (although I may quickly throw this possibility out the window if it continues to happen excessively), or that said Admins may have too many other responsibilities elsewhere and, even if I like them personally and think they are great additions to the Admin roaster and to the site overall (when they are around), may hinder their ability to carry out their responsibilities here. That could easily turn into a problem for everyone here because the lacking presence of this said Administrator could do little to nothing on our ability to patrol and manage this site, and may make it difficult for certain problems (such as anonymous IPs that excessively vandalize, editing disputes, cases of harassment between Users, the creation of SPAM articles, etc.) to be taken care of quickly and efficiently.

I would suggest to another Admins or Crats my concerns about the Admin(s) who I think are not appearing and contributing as much as I think they should be, and see whether any of them would agree to ask said Admin if they are too busy to carry out their Administrative responsibilities here at SNN. If said Admin(s) agree, then we can revoke their privileges and have a nomination to see if the community can find a User who can demonstrate the said abilities of the previous Admin, but do so as frequently as we think sounds fair and reasonable, or if said Admins refuse and say they will contribute more but fail to do so each and every time they're asked, then we can revoke their privileges immediately and have an election for a nominee we think would serve as a better replacement.

I know I talk a lot, but bear with me. Anyway, this is the point I'm trying to make overall here: I don't believe that any of the Admins here will always be here to contribute to the SNN all the time for whatever reason(s) (such as what I stated above, or maybe even reasons which none of us would think are logical, or just weren't expecting. I could list those ideas too, but I'm not going to because I think this comment is long enough as it is), and because of that I believe we should never close down any future nominations for Admins and Crats in case we need any replacements for the ones we currently have in the future. It's okay to state that the number of Admins as a way to express one's self as to why they think there should not be anymore Admins, but that statement's influence over the decisions made on future nominations will only last for so long because, like I just said, none of us would be able to stay here forever. We all have to leave sometime, whatever the reason may be. I'm going to stay neutral on Murphy's nomination because I haven't been paying much attention to his contributions as of late, and I will only make my judgments on his abilities once, and if, he aquires Adminship. Phoenix the Cat The flames reborn....  21:47, December 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * Okay, I just have to point this out: it would be really good if, in future, you limited yourself per comment to only the most important few points you wanted to make, and make them succinctly. I'd love to respond to all your points, but by the time I get to the end I've forgotten what the first paragraph was about!
 * Obviously we don't expect admins to stick around forever. The fact that we've had turnover in the past demonstrates that this admins can and do leave. But I'm not sure I agree with - or, honestly, fully understand - your solution. The number of active admins will change over time, so if there are fewer admins in future, there will be fewer barriers to new admins being promoted. So what's the problem? -- Supermorff 22:29, December 18, 2010 (UTC)

I've already established what I didn't agree with, which was closing future nominations just because of the number of active Admins that we have here. I'm sorry if I've irritated anyone with my excessivwly long messages, but I just wanted to point out my reasons for disagreeing with a certain viewpoint in a detailed manner, so I wouldn't have to go through the trouble of saying my opinions and then having to answer question after question as to why I have my opinions if some decide to question me. That's it. I will be sure to limit the amount of text in any of my future comments. Phoenix the Cat The flames reborn....  22:39, December 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm not irritated, I just don't think I can provide a satisfactory response to comments that long. As I said before, if the nomination was closed (it hasn't been yet), it would be because there was no consensus in support of the nomination, not just because we already have too many admins. If some people take the number of active admins into account when casting their vote, that is entirely their own business. (Your own vote is further evidence of the lack of community consensus for the nomination.) Nobody is advocating the position that you are arguing against. -- Supermorff 22:55, December 18, 2010 (UTC)

I never said you were irritated, because I never said any specific names.

"If some people take the number of active admins into account when casting their vote, that is entirely their own business"

I agree. The whole point of my comments were to support my views against the "too many Admins" comments, nothing more. If some people even go against nominations because of personal issues with the nominees, irrevelent arguments in the nomination itself, etc., then that's entriely their choice too. I would not say anything against anyone's opinions unless they say something that I personally disagree with, and in such cases I state why I disagree.

The only reason why I apologized to anyone who was irritated with the idea of reading my long comments (or have read them) is because I'm used to dealing with people who, for some reason, are strongly against other people's opinions besides their own, and I try to establish that I'm not going against anyone's opinions because I have a personal grudge against them or anything while also explaining why I have a different opinion from some other people. Usually, I'm met with people saying to me that I'm an idiot for not agreeing with them, that I'm blind to reality, that I have no knowledge on how life works, that I'm inferior to them, that I'm betraying them for whatever reason, etc., and I deal with this a lot even now. I guess you can call this a bad habit of mine; going into much detail on my opinions. Its just something that I'm used to. Phoenix the Cat The flames reborn....  23:18, December 18, 2010 (UTC)

That dosen't matter Gen. if anything, you're helping out a lot. -- Murphyshane <font color="#00b6ee"> I voted Blaze, so you vote Shadow <font color="#C0C0C0">Don't click here 23:22, December 18, 2010 (UTC)'

@Murphy: Maybe it doesn't, but I only said that because I wanted to make it clear why I made my previous comments as long as they were. I wasn't trying to gain sympathy or anything (Keep in mind that I'm not accusing anyone of saying so). Anyway, I thank you for saying that I actually do help with something, but I think that I shouldn't need to speak anymore on this particular nomination. I already voted a maybe for you, and said that if you seem to fit the description of hard working and dedicated Admin, then I will ultimately be in support of your activities. Just don't stop doing all the great work you are doing around here no matter what the final outcome of this nomination is, because a title is just a title compared to what a person's actions speak out loud to all those who are looking. Phoenix the Cat The flames reborn....  23:31, December 18, 2010 (UTC)

OK -- <font color="Crimson">Murphyshane <font color="#00b6ee"> I voted Blaze, so you vote Shadow <font color="#C0C0C0">Don't click here 23:33, December 18, 2010 (UTC)

Meh, scratch what I've said about shutting up on this nomination for now.

@Jet50:

"Murphyshane is a good WikiKnight, he is a good user, he has more than 11,000 edits, he SHOULD become an admin. If he becomes a admin he will make a good admin"

While I agree that Murphy has potential, your comment doesn't really elaborate on why Murphy would make a good Admins other than saying "he will make a good Admin". Could you please list some specific contributions and accomplishments he made which you think would serve as good evidence that he would be suitable as an Admin? Phoenix the Cat The flames reborn....  23:38, December 18, 2010 (UTC)

Jet made that comment about 13 days ago. I only noticed it now. It was in Lev's section -- <font color="Crimson">Murphyshane <font color="#00b6ee"> I voted Blaze, so you vote Shadow <font color="#C0C0C0">Don't click here 23:44, December 18, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I remembered. But I didn't look at the page's history more thoroughly to see that you put his comment up here. In other words, I embarassed myself just now. I'll get over it, though. Phoenix the Cat The flames reborn....  23:46, December 18, 2010 (UTC)

Right. __ <font color="Crimson">Murphyshane <font color="#00b6ee"> I voted Blaze, so you vote Shadow <font color="#C0C0C0">Don't click here 23:48, December 18, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry guys. I have been away and I have missed alot here. Genesjs, I personally feel that the number of admins don't count. We already have a few admins out of ten that I wouldn't really title them as "administrator" myself, and so I believe that Murphyshane goes in the "useful admin" category. I do want Murphyshane to be nominated, I have been wanting him to be an admin in a really long time. But you see, if he doesn't become an admin, that would be 11 and I do suppose and fear that if he becomes an admin I suppose many other users will want to be an admin simply because he became an admin. Though, I have checked the number of admins at other wikis and there are considerably more than this website. So my point on the amount of admins is neutral, but Murphyshane's nomination is positive.--58SlugDrones! 14:06, December 19, 2010 (UTC)


 * But we don't have to grant eveyone adminship who asks for such, so it shouldn't be a problem how many ask, am I right? Admiral_Signature_Christmas.gif 14:22, December 19, 2010 (UTC)

I suppose -- '<font color="Crimson">Murphyshane - <font color="#00b6ee">Morph! He's alive! <font color="#C0C0C0">Don't click here '14:40, December 19, 2010 (UTC)

You are correct there. But the excessive and useless nominations are disturbing to remove and simply sometimes are not removed son enough and admins start voting instead of simply removing it. Which is not correct. Either we should let anybody nominate themselves even when not acceptable. Or we should do the following: Any questions?--58SlugDrones! 12:10, December 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * We should lock this page and put its limit to admins.
 * So how can a normal user start a nomination? Well, first if a normal user wants to nominate a normal user then that user should ask an admin first.
 * When an admin is requested, that admin should that user up for nomination if he feels it is acceptable enough. But if the admin is unsure then the nomination can be put he should either ask another admin or just put up the nomination anyways. Thus, the admin will not put up any nomination without required reasons from the user.
 * So if the page is locked so only admins vote? No. First I suppose atleast three admins should be gathered for nomination first. When their votes are displayed (note that upto three and above admins) then the page can be unlocked and for the rest to vote.
 * Then the normal voting rule. The nominated user can vote for himself but with permission.

It's a good idea, well thought of but locking and unlocking pages like that seems like a hassle if ya ask me -- '<font color="Crimson">Murphyshane - <font color="#00b6ee"> Morph! He's alive! <font color="#C0C0C0">Don't click here '  21:26, January 17, 2011 (UTC)

Well, does anyone agree with 58's idea? -- '<font color="Crimson">Murphyshane - <font color="#00b6ee"> Morph! He's alive! <font color="#C0C0C0">Don't click here '  12:14, February 12, 2011 (UTC)


 * No, I don't think so. It seems overly complicated. But we do need to clarify the process a bit. After the three nominations on this page get cleared, I think we might locked out further nominations until we get it sorted.
 * Speaking of which, I've gone over the thread again and, well, I could probably be convinced that there's sufficient consensus for adminship. I'm going to leave it for another week in case there are any last minute objections, but then I think we can close the nomination positively. -- Supermorff 21:21, February 12, 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm glad to hear that. This nomination has been going on for over 7 months. I get an A for patience, that's for sure.

Admiral Leviathan for Adminship
I nominate myself for adminship (Again). I feel that I would do a superb (Or as my German Teacher would say, SEHR GUT!) job as such, for these reasons:
 * Most users here already know me, and I know them. Some newer users here often ask me for assistance (If I have left a message), and I'm always happy to help.
 * I've got a good reputation amongst most of the users here.
 * I've very well behaved, and to top it off, very mature. I'm also truthful, I can't lie.
 * Like the above, I'm always happy to help with situations that need resolution, such as an argument against two users.
 * I still help a lot with the vandal situation. Like my nomination for rollback, Adminship would also be the next step up, and greatly help my abilities, I.E. I would be able to delete the phony articles vandals make, ban users who are continuously vandalizing here, etc.
 * I am always on here. The only times I'm not on are during school hours.
 * I check every edit made here, no matter how tedious this job can get, to make sure no vandalism or harassment is going on in articles and Talkpages, respectively.
 * I have a pretty good amount amount of edits for an admin nomination.
 * I have helped contribute to the wikia by creating many much-needed articles, such as articles regarding all of the S3 and S&K bosses and mini-bosses. I then went back and added images and expanding them. You also can't forget my countless hours spell-checking, re-writing, and all out refurbishing articles.
 * I'm also responsible for bringing Userboxes to the wiki, although this is superflous.
 * I have a good gauge on what's wrong and what's not.
 * Good grammar and spelling, I know what is organized in a paragraph and where.
 * Despite odds against me, I can even fix even the worst situations. Just see Here. (October 25)
 * I have recently became a Bureaucrat here, while my experiences as a Bureaucrat there are limited this far, it will be a leap forward, and hopefully will prove my capability to be an administrator here.
 * I can easily balance out extra activities (Ex. My Comic) with my Wikia duty (Ex. Editing, Reverting, etc) witout being overrun, in fact editing, for me, comes first over updating.
 * I have a pretty good knowledge of the wiki's editing tools and style, and most of my edits conform as such.
 * I'm a wiz with computers, I am very talented in several fields, such as creating images, videos, and various other components, even building script code.

Now, I may sound like I'm glamorizing myself here, and in the past I know I've been rude and hot headed, however in the last couple of months, I've been working on improving my attitude towards users, and I've been spending much less times on my comic blogs, in fact I hardly ever update the comic anymore. Lots of users here would agree with me. 19:32, September 11, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, you are really worthy of Adminship, Admiral. I can agree with all of the above, you have a good attitude, mature, you know how to handle situatinos properly, and I thought you were an Administrator when I first came here. I'll have to give myself a 20:53, January 13, 2011 (UTC)Sacorguy79

i agree admiral leviathan should be admin he has the skills and dedication to do it Ediskrad327 23:34, January 13, 2011 (UTC)

I guess I too, support the motion to give the Admiral Adminship. You seem to be here on a regular basis (unlike me who's always absent 'cause he needs a laptop) and you have 3 times as many edits as I do even though I joined half a year before you did. Call me a Batman-type person, but I secretly pay attention to other users' contributions. I watch how they write when they edit or post; whether they have good spelling and grammar, a good attitude, and where they edit. The Admiral fits well in all of those categories, and I consider him one of the more useful users on the SNN (he's not one of those users whose edits are only on blogs, forums, talk pages etc. and have nothing to do with the actual articles). And I didn't know you were so diligent when it came to looking out for vandalism. You're probly the only Wikiknight who still does so. I'm pretty much useless at catching vandals now with this new Wikia skin, so I commend you on that. -- Eh, What's up Doc?   ~  DjWindmaster97  01:08, January 14, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your support, all of you. 02:08, January 14, 2011 (UTC)

I cast my vote FOR the Admiral. But...

HOLD IT!

If you're on so long, how do you sleep?!!-- A k  a  m  i  a ( Talk )( Want to see what I've been doing? ) 02:15, January 14, 2011 (UTC)

Normally, I go to bed around ten, but sometimes I go to bed really late, and wake up really late. Pretty much what your average Teenager does on a daily basis. 02:19, January 14, 2011 (UTC)

I see. Okay. lol-- A k  a  m  i  a ( Talk )( Want to see what I've been doing? ) 02:30, January 14, 2011 (UTC)

YES If Admiral Levithan was not already nominated, I think I would nominate him. He cares about this wiki and protects it well from many annoying vandals. I believe with Admin privileges he can do even more good on this wiki. Sonictoast 03:13, January 14, 2011 (UTC)

I vote yes. AL will be a good admin. He has a good amount of edits, he's helped this place more than once, and he tries to stop vandals. So AL should be admin! Ultimate Dude  127  15:21, January 15, 2011 (UTC)

No - Your mainspace hasn't reached a 1000 yet and only covers 13%. You know, it's great that you are changing your tone alot more calmer than before. But that doesn't mean you can get your nomination early. You just have to keep it up. Everyone believes that they can handle admin abilities, I cannot even imagine a user who can say that he/she does not know how to handle the works of an admin. Okay, really, if you want your vote from me then you can just tell me what are you going to do when you become admin.--58SlugDrones! 14:49, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

No - Your mainspace hasn't reached a 1000 yet and only covers 13%. You are a Braggart and you always expect optisimism from your so-called "Worshipers" (They call you grand Admiral? Seriously, GRAND and if anyone says anything little wrong about you then they attack like an Admiral Army - So you are a braggart).
 * Comments:
 * Most users know huh, So? You got friends, So?, You send messages, So?.
 * Reputation only means friends on your behalf.
 * You are well behaved, maybe??? You are mature, maybe???. Truthful? No one has even asked you the T&L before!
 * When it comes to dealing, you act like the "boss" of everyone!
 * Adminship wouldn't be your next step.
 * Your always on here, So Blue-heck what? Thats just addiction, because this is not a company.
 * I am sure everyone does that.
 * False, only 900 or something, atleast 3000 or 2000.
 * Good enough
 * Good enough
 * That is just praising yourself, I do not remember when anyone gave you a decision.
 * Maybe
 * Anyone can do that. I have, 58 has, Morff has.
 * You became a Bureaucrat in a fanon wiki, anyone can do as much fandom as they want, so that is not a privilege.
 * Not convincing
 * I also have, so it does not matter
 * Me too.

So, In case you have not read it, It is: REQUEST FOR ADMINSHIP! NOT REQUEST FOR GOD OR SOMETHING!! YOU ARE JUST PRAISING YOURSELF!--DiscoDuck

The duck does prove some points here. Though, quite harsh. But, really, if you want my vote you just need to keep this up. What are you going to do when you earn your adminship?--58SlugDrones! 16:00, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

You know, I would respect what you have said (As I'm doing with SlugDrones), but you, Discoduck, don't need to rip apart my adminship nomination and insult me, and pretty much all of what you've said was driven by your immense hatred of me, which I did NO-THING to get you this upset! Remember the rules here; Be Civil, and you are clearly not following such rule.

58, the first thing I will do when I become admin is assist in Morff and other admins in deleting all of the fanon articles that belong to users who have been gone for so long. Doing so will greatly benefit our move by lightening the amount of stuff that we need to move. As time progresses, I will continue my regular duties of reverting edits, although this time I can skip a step in removing spam articles and outright delete it, without having to wait for an admin to do so. The same with vandals who repeatedly vandalize any pages, instead of warnings (Which usually lead to my page getting flamed with 'OMFG I HATEZ YOU!11!!') I can block him/her.

You know, you've also said the same thing about my edits the last time I nominated myself back in September, and my amoung of MS edits has grown quite a bit. And, to be bland, the amount of MS edits didn't stop Sooooomeone from getting Bureaucracy (No insult intended). -- 16:26, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

You've got a lot of potential Lev. I'm not going to make my decision just yet. I will, however, give you some friendly advice. It may be a good idea to do things in an official manner. For example when you tagged a Fanon page (A Wild Win) for deletion recently, you claimed your reason was "TL:DR" which i can only presume was "Too Long: Didn't Read". Not only was that not a very good reason (no offense man) it was also internet slang. That of which is not quite common in articles, is it? It may be better to say "Spam" or "Fanon", I really hope this helps -- '<font color="Crimson">Murphyshane - <font color="#00b6ee"> Morph! He's alive! <font color="#C0C0C0">Don't click here '  16:54, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Lev, I see what you are going through here. You really are dedicated, I know. But, for an advice, just keep this up, not now, alright? As for Sonicrox14, you know she doesn't deserve adminship, right? Just because she earned bureaucracy with barely contributing mainspace to this site does not mean you have to do that as well because here is the story: She never nominated herself and neither was she or anybody else ready for her to earn it. But, SLJ and FFF were leaving the site and because they were admins (and very important ones) there would be very few admins in the site as before, 4 admins had already left the website before they left. SLJ was concerned and had to give adminship to atleast someone. Unfortunately, I don't think he actually had any other choice but to choose Launchballer, Sonicrox14 and Kagimizu. And guess who voted? They voted for themselves and each other, but Launchballer couldn't earn adminship. After a very short discussion, adminship was given to them. Kagi is fine but not her.

Now this site is alot more complex so we now understand what it takes to be admin. Before it was just a give and take thing but now it's alot more complex and the challenge will be harder as good admins here keep up their work. As for you, I still suggest you keep this up and contribute more of those mainspace edits.--58SlugDrones! 17:14, January 22, 2011 (UTC)


 * I see your point, but I'm not trying to do the same. Also, it's kinda hard to do anything on here if Someoooooooone thinks everything I do is just me apprasing myself and induging my ecomania! AdmiralLevi.Signiture_B.gifAdmiralLevi._Salute_B.gif 17:20, January 22, 2011 (UTC)


 * I know how ya feel buddy. Criticism is tough for everyone to put up with -- <font color="Crimson">Murphyshane - <font color="#00b6ee"> Morph! He's alive! <font color="#C0C0C0">Don't click here   17:22, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Uh, Lev. Seriously, are you that annoyed with him? He does talk weird but really, has he ever said anything to you? And, Murph I think you can give a proper vote. Is it yes or no?--58SlugDrones! 17:25, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

"Another Average comic"

"Meh"

"Meh, (BIG MEH)"

"Ah, Give me a freaking break"

"Who here is in love with my avatar"

"Good luck Tikal" (Posted Sarcastically)

"Why do you people love Tikal411 so very fat sonamysux much!"

"Sala Sucks, who is up with that

Salacomandar: I dont Suck you****

58SlugDrones!: (Eats Sala)

DiscoDuck: The drawings are ugly, true, they are stupid, true but they mean alot

Salacomander:Sorry"

"It will fail"

"..Sadly I have the perfect mascot"

"Dear Fello PPLZ: New Contest: http://sonic.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:DiscoDuck/Best_of_the_Best_Contest" (Advertising on various blogs)

"Hello. As I cut the talk short, DiscoDuck makes comics, which one is the best"

"So N/A is perhaps the Duck?"

"¬_¬"

"I never really Liked your comic Lev, But this one is veRy good (I LUV TO USER AK47 IN COD4)"

"...Your'e stupid. Fat blog (No offence), because we cannot do anything about it! Take SEGA's fat number 0306785212! Thus, you are only crying cuz you want to play Sonic Colors!"

Do I need to quote his post above, even? I would go on, but it seems the list goes on quite a bit. 17:35, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

I ate Sala? Wasn't I supposed to eat Salad?! Anyways, your point was that you are sick of him, right? I can see that he acts like a "troll". I still do not find him annoying though, he is just being weird. But I can discuss with other admins if you want him banned. Now back to the topic of your Adminship!--58SlugDrones! 06:29, January 23, 2011 (UTC)

I really, really don't remember the conversation above that I was alegedly apart of, let alone being eaten by 58. Anyways, matter at hand, I have huge respect for the Admiral, and I don't see any real problems keeping him away from adminship.

-<font color="#000000">SalaComMander 21:50, January 26, 2011 (UTC)

The problems are:


 * Mainspace is quite low. Mainspace matter most to be an admin.
 * I do not see him discussing on important matters.
 * He is asking too early.
 * I believe he is just in the stage of becoming an admin.
 * I think someone deserves adminship more than he does.
 * He is just better than the normal users. Not enough to be an admin.
 * I do not see him dealing with vandals.
 * He thinks coming here everyday and knowing whatever is going on is going to lead him to adminship. Though it does, but that doesn't count as I am pretty much sure normal users know that too.--58SlugDrones! 07:07, January 28, 2011 (UTC)

Well, while I haven't been active very much as of late, if my vote still counts....

First and foremost, edit numbers don't count. Experience, reputation, personality, and relationship with the rest of the Users are the most important aspects of an admin. In response to what 58 said, a lot of Users rarely actually discuss important matters; it stinks, but is quite true. Admiral has been around for roughly a year, which is more than enough time. I asked back when I had only been around a few months, and after quite some time got my adminship. And 58, if you kow someone who you believe deserves it more, by all means, nominate that person.

Now, in my personal opinion, Lev has as of late shown good behaviour, especially dealing with Donald's comments (who should've been reprimanded by now >>). He has experience, and knows what he's doing. Dealing with vandalism also can't be a dealbreaker in certain cases; my main reason for being an admin was to take care of vandalism, and when others did that more often and took care of it before me, I was left with little to do. To be quite honest, we have a good few admins around here, but some of us aren't very active, especially when it comes to talking to and dealing with the other Users, something Lev does quite often.

In the end, my vote will have to be..... Yes. I think Lev deserves this adminship, especially after improving himself so much.--<font color="#0000FF">Kagi <font color="#FF0000">mizu -<font color="#008000">Seeya <font color="#FFA500">'round 07:44, January 28, 2011 (UTC)

If there is anybody that deserves adminship now, it's Murphyshane. I have voted for him several times, Kagi. I do know that experience, reputation, personality, and relationship matter. But, edit counts do matter alot. Because of our contributions to articles, many fans come here. Personality is with the people who want to contribute or deal with someone here. But the majority of Sonic fans just come here for information and don't even know who we are. Thus, the users I respect are not usually with personality - if they contribute pretty good then I give them attention. Lev's contributions are fine for a rollback which is why I respect him, but not enough for an admin. He doesn't exactly discuss on important matters. Sorry, but I think he should co-operate more. I do not see much skill. I know he is trying, I know he is a good person, a faithful one too but I cannot accept his adminship.--58SlugDrones! 13:26, January 28, 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for the slap in the face, Drones. AdmiralLevi.Signiture_B.gifAdmiralLevi._Salute_B.gif 15:46, January 28, 2011 (UTC)


 * Don't take this personally but that is one of your faults Lev, you need to understand why users decide not to vote for you and respect it -- <font color="Crimson">Murphyshane - <font color="#00b6ee"> Morph! He's alive! <font color="#C0C0C0">Don't click here   16:29, January 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, my comment was taken out of context. I wasn't talking about 58 voting no (She already did, and I was fine with it) rather 58 saying on my adminship nomination that another user was better, and literally convincing a person that voted yes that I wasn't qualified. Regardless or not if s/he those were his/her intentions, it's still kind of an insult to me. AdmiralLevi.Signiture_B.gifAdmiralLevi._Salute_B.gif 16:43, January 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * True I suppose -- <font color="Crimson">Murphyshane - <font color="#00b6ee"> Morph! He's alive! <font color="#C0C0C0">Don't click here   20:14, January 28, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, so let's all pretend I didn't say, "I know he is trying, I know he is a good person, a faithful one too..." and "Lev's contributions are fine for a rollback which is why I respect him.", alright? Let me just vote no and give no reasons. You can call me "biased" and "gone worse after adminship" behind my back but I can't express to a voter why I vote no?

You do know that Kagi's message was half-directed at me, right? So, I replied. If Sala can tell me that there is nothing wrong with you being an admin then why can't I express? Forget it. My vote was no and that was the only criticism you could handle. I will be ignoring you. Many months before and after my adminship, I never showed any anger. Now I am fed up.--58SlugDrones! 17:37, January 28, 2011 (UTC)


 * Look, don't get mad at me. I didn't look like Kagi's comment was directed half at you, but if it was, I apologize. Simple as that. AdmiralLevi.Signiture_B.gifAdmiralLevi._Salute_B.gif 18:00, January 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * Neither Drones or Lev were being rude just misunderstood, am I right? -- <font color="Crimson">Murphyshane - <font color="#00b6ee"> Morph! He's alive! <font color="#C0C0C0">Don't click here   20:15, January 28, 2011 (UTC)

Well 58, plenty of our admins don't a lot of mainspace contributions. And I made a point about that, saying we need more admins to deal with the actual Users. Here's how it goes: Content Users kept happy and out of trouble --->> More actual contributions, less trolling and flaming --->> Better SNN overall.--<font color="#0000FF">Kagi <font color="#FF0000">mizu -<font color="#008000">Seeya <font color="#FFA500">'round 18:08, January 28, 2011 (UTC)

Murphyshane & AdmiralLevithan: Yes! I think both of them are more than qualified for the job. They both have worked hard to protect and improve this Wiki and could do even greater jobs as admins. For example: The Admiral has created the majority of the userboxes that exist and Murph has created amazing talk bubbles upon request for anyone. Why am i saying yes to both? Lets's think about this... HALF OF THE CURRENT ADMINS HAVE LEFT US! For most of the current admins including the wiki's creator have not been here for years so what's the point of even keeping their names on the list of admins? I mean only about 1/2 of the admins are ever here. So, i say yes to both of them and hope you consider my statment. JaketheHedgehog 03:56, January 29, 2011 (UTC)

Which admins have left "us"?--58SlugDrones! 04:48, January 29, 2011 (UTC)

In order on the list of admins:

Almafeta, Fairfieldfencer, FerralMoonrender, Guess Who (the founder himself), Milotheechidna, Molten Scandium, Navij11, Sacre Fi, SLJCAAATR 1, and Sunny the Hedgehog. JaketheHedgehog 05:02, January 29, 2011 (UTC)

YES! I don't know if my earlier post here counts as a vote, but I'm gonna give it another go, anyway. I have a lot of respect for the Admiral. I've watched him do things here. Here are the results from my assessment:


 * He is what he says he is, and there are a few witnesses that can testify towards that.


 * I admit, there are a few times he flies off the handle, but for the majority of his actions and behavior, he's quite friendly and helpful. Also quite calm. (For the record, the calm ones usually blast bigger. I am living proof of this, but you have to know me in person)


 * He is most certainly NOT a braggart. I talk to him often (usually here, these days, but I sometimes catch him on Xbox LIVE) and he doesn't brag at all.


 * The evidence shows that Adm. Leviathan is quite capable of dealing with vandals. I feel he could do better with some new tools on his tool-belt.


 * Edit-count? Irrelevant to the case. We get a good amount of mainspace edits as it stands. But the big picture is n00bs that ruin people's days. (n00b is not always a newbie. There is a difference)

So there. The irrefutable evidence that Mr. Leviathan is qualified for Adminship.-- A k  a  m  i  a ( Talk )( Want to see what I've been doing? ) 15:46, January 29, 2011 (UTC)

Yes, the Admiral IS Great!!!!

Bullet Francisco 02:38, February 10, 2011 (UTC)

=== <font color="#0000FF">Kagi <font color="#FF0000">mizu -<font color="#008000">Seeya <font color="#FFA500">'round (Bureaucracy) === Whoo boy; when I first went for adminship on SNN over a year ago, I couldn't believe I was seriously trying for it. Now, I'm going a step further, and can't believe it. Anyways, I've been on SNN for almost two years, though my activity in the last few months has been down. I'm experienced in the working of this wiki, know most of the more experienced Users, and know how to work most of the aspects of this wiki. I get along with most of the Users, have a good reputation on this wiki and others, and as I've proven many times, can handle myself in various situations. I hope to get bureaucracy so that I might have more to do on the wiki, in that I can help manage the wiki more, and handle fights involving or between admins. I can also help promote and (hopefully on extremely rare occasions) demote admins. I've also been told by Fairfieldfencer, one of the most experienced Users around, that I'm a very good judge of character (seen here), so I can hopefully deal with Users properly as a bureaucrat. So, please vote on whether or not you think I deserve bureaucracy. For a long time I've believed I didn't, but with bureaucracy I hope to be of more use to this wiki, so I hope you all do think I deserve it.--<font color="#0000FF">Kagi <font color="#FF0000">mizu -<font color="#008000">Seeya <font color="#FFA500">'round 05:32, January 29, 2011 (UTC)

YES! I think you deserve this position. Here is my testimony.

I've known you for almost two years. And the work you've done in those years was simply splendid.

What Fairfieldfencer says is true. You are a very good judge of character. However, keep in mind that you aren't perfect. That's the stuff of fiction. xD

And you are quite experienced. In fact, I think you sped past my experience level. (I blame me going AWOL)

On top of that, you are very good at serving justice where it's due. I'd have you be the judge of my cases anyday, if it was up to me. lol

And there you have it. That's my testimony. Any NOs that are willing to destroy it?-- A k  a  m  i  a ( Talk )( Want to see what I've been doing? ) 08:45, January 30, 2011 (UTC)

Yes: Well, a blind man could see that you're qualified enough. You have wikia experience, you have been made admin on several sites, you've kept a good record (except for a few events that i witnessed with my own eyes), you've given alot to this wiki, so I think it's time you got something back. I rest my case. -- '<font color="Crimson">Murphyshane - <font color="#00b6ee"> Morph! He's alive! <font color="#C0C0C0">Don't click here '  11:15, January 30, 2011 (UTC)


 * No: I'm afraid I don't think this is appropriate. You're a good admin, absolutely, but I don't think you're a good fit for bureaucracy. You say you want to be a bureaucrat so that you have more to do - considering your contributions lately have been slipping (as you yourself attest), this is a poor reason. Whatever is the reason for your slipping contributions, it certainly isn't because you're not a bureaucrat, so I fail to see why giving you these extra privileges is going to make you work harder.
 * Possibly you think that some important bureaucracy work is not being adequately performed - in which case, first of all, you should tell the current bureaucrats so they can improve their own performance and, second of all, you should say that here so that it improves your chances.
 * Lastly, while you might be a good judge of character (incidentally, I can't find FFF saying that anywhere on the page you linked to), I don't think you are particularly adept at investigating incidents before handing down judgement. On several occasions I have seen you hand out blocks that seemed incredibly excessive, then when I looked into the matter I could find no real reason behind them - in one memorable case, you had blocked the individual that was actually being bullied. Now I'm not saying this is common, but I've seen it enough to think that it might happen in the future, and there's a bigger risk if you have the bureaucrat powers. -- Supermorff

No: I'm with Supermorff on this one. I also do not see Fairfieldfencer saying that in the link, but that shouldn't matter. I do not think you are a good judge of character at all. You block excessively for no good reason and you set the ban pretty long. I do not see you being responsible for anything. You have given many delays for the work you had to handle. You are a good admin, one of the best in this site. You are experienced as well and you do not talk any nonsense at all. But, I am not certain for your bureaucracy, I do not think you are fit for a rank like that.
 * Personally I did dislike one thing of yours - Bunnyboo50 asked you to make an image of her character into 3D, I was quite surprised on the reply you had given to her, you replied that you do not take requests from strangers. First of all, for an admin noone is a stranger in this site because an admin has to know about everyone, but that's not the reason why I was surprised. You are an admin, Kagi. You have to try to help anyone and give your best especially when a new user is asking you something when it comes to help. That reply was quite rude. Even though it had nothing to do with this site, it was still more of an anti-admin to me. You need to help anyone.
 * You can give the reason on why do you want to be a bureaucrat. What will you do when you earn bureaucracy?
 * There was a time in which Multiverseman asked you to block Sonic & Scrab Master (I am not sure about the reason though) and you directly swore and flamed at him. There are the many times your decision appear to be rash and you flame out anger at people who say a little negative about your friends. I am not sure you can stand up for a person who is not your friend. It seems alot like you just wish to help your friends and listen to no-one else.--58SlugDrones! 15:24, January 30, 2011 (UTC)


 * @Supermorff: The reason I believe bureaucracy will help me improve my contributions is that I'll have more responsibility when it comes to the wiki. In addition, I know I can occasionally be rash, but I'm only human. I don't recall ever blocking someone who was the one being bullied, but if that happened then I apologize. I'll be more careful with banning people in the future. And also Morff, there are only two 'crats on here.
 * @58SlugDrones!: 1: Alright 58, get the whole freaking story before you talk about this stuff. First and foremost, Bunnyboo's request has absolutely nothing to do with my adminship. When I said I don't do requests for strangers, I was referring to the fact that I don't know Bunnyboo in the least; I don't even know whether they're a he or a she! Regardless of being an admin or not, I'm not going to just accept a request for a picture that comes out of nowhere from a complete stranger. Wouldn't have mattered if they asked me here, SFW, DA, or anywhere else. Accepting art requests has absolutely NO bearing on my status as an admin, so I'm rather upset you think that has anything to do with this. The only responsibility I have is to keep this wiki safe and organized, and keep other Users out of trouble; what I do beyond that (so long as it doesn't break any rules) has nothing to do with my adminship. 2: I'm hoping that the additional responsibility will be enough for me to be more active on the wiki. 3: As I said, get the whole freaking story. Mult wanted SSM banned over something that involved a seperate wiki; a person can't be banned for something that occurs on a different wiki, because it has no bearing on the other wiki. Mult obviously dislikes SSM and wants him gone, so when he saw the opportunity, he ran right to me in order to get him banned. I saw the blatant bias in this, and I was furious that Mult attempted to pull such an obvious, idiotic stunt. Second, I do not let my friends get away with breaking rules; that's one of the aspects that got me nominated to be a 'crat here. However, regardless of adminship or anything else, I will stand up for my friends if I have to, just like any other person would.--<font color="#0000FF">Kagi <font color="#FF0000">mizu -<font color="#008000">Seeya <font color="#FFA500">'round 20:07, January 30, 2011 (UTC)


 * Maybe: Look Kags, I like you, you like me, we're both good friends. While I can say I can tell you've been a good admin, I feel that you should wait a while to, well, mature. While your edits and contributions may say you're qualified, your actions here and on SFW make me say otherwise. Also, your method of advertising your nomination has been. . . sketchy. While I don't agree with Genesjs on the count of using your own blogs to advertise this (Which I honestly believe is fine as long as you don't put any bias into it), however you asked me in recent times to advertise your nomination, which is something I believe is kind of rude to do considering my current nomination. Also, your responses to the above 'No' votes have been. . . well, kindof harsh. All I'm saying is that you should probably wait, and try again later with a bit more civility. AdmiralLevi.Signiture_B.gifAdmiralLevi._Salute_B.gif 15:44, February 3, 2011 (UTC)

I apologize for the implied rudeness then; I just figured I could rely on you to help me out, that's all. And the only person I was anywhere near harsh to was 58, who used instances that have nothing to do with adminship at all and small parts of the whole story as reasons I shouldn't be a 'crat. 58's talked about me behind my back and criticized me behind my back, rather than coming to me directly, and now claims that I'm being rude, lazy, and biased, while using above incidents. Obviously I would be rather ticked off about that.--<font color="#0000FF">Kagi <font color="#FF0000">mizu -<font color="#008000">Seeya <font color="#FFA500">'round 16:02, February 3, 2011 (UTC)

OBJECTION!

While I agree that the "advertisement" move wasn't the best move, and that his response to 58SD was a bit harsh, there's not enough evidence that makes him not qualified enough for Bureaucracy. However, if there is, I'd very much like to see it.-- A k  a  m  i  a ( Talk )( Want to see what I've been doing? ) 01:10, February 4, 2011 (UTC)I'm fairly confident that there's not enough evidence. My vote stays "YES".


 * Akamia, I think you're confused about where the burden of proof lies in this case. We don't have to prove he's not qualified, Kagi has to prove that he is qualified. He hasn't.
 * Kagi, I agree with you that art requests aren't relevant to bureaucracy nominations, but the argument that you'll become more active when you have more responsibility doesn't hold any weight. The wiki is a volunteer organisation - the only responsibilities you have are ones you create yourself by doing particular jobs. If an admin takes on the job of, say, monitoring recent changes for vandalism, then that becomes their responsibility until they decide to stop doing that. Giving you extra powers won't necessarily give you extra responsibility unless you choose to accept it, and therefore it won't give you any incentive to stick around.
 * As to the 'Mult v SSM' incident (which I have no prior knowledge of so this is an honest question), do you think your response was measured and reasonable? Was it necessary to snap at Mult or would a simple "No, we don't block people for their actions on other wikis" have sufficed?
 * And yes, I know exactly how many bureaucrats we've got, thank you. Can you identify any instances in which two bureaucrats have not been sufficient to keep the wiki running smoothly, or any instances in which it would have been useful to have an extra bureaucrat because one of the existing ones wasn't helping or wasn't available? I can't, but if there are any I'd love to know about them. -- Supermorff 17:58, February 5, 2011 (UTC)


 * The fact is that I do fully plan on taking the extra responsibility.
 * If it had been someone who had had no negative history with SSM and thought they were honestly doing the right thing, I would've explained the rules to them, since it would be an honest mistake. However, both Mult and SSM have been very antagonistic to each other, and Mult was clearly only doing something about said actions on a seperate wiki as an excuse to have SSM demoted and banned. For all we know, Mult could have been fully aware about the rule "actions on a different wiki do not effect one's status on this wiki". The fact that Mult attempted to pull such a thing, actually thought I would be dump enough to do it, and took such actions against a friend of mine, all as an excuse to spite said friend, made me furious.
 * Well on SFW, there have been occasions where the number of admins and 'crats have been insufficient. At one point SFW had up to 3 'crats, but they weren't always on to handle things. Two of those admins have left SFW, and with the remaining one living in Australia, he's rarely on during most incidents, especially concerning ones between admins. Now, Shelly is unable to be on very often due to schoolwork and other reasons, and to be honest, I don't always see you on often during the day. While I personally think we have enough admins, when it comes to bureaucracy I figure "best to be overprepared for incidents, rather than underprepared".--<font color="#0000FF">Kagi <font color="#FF0000">mizu -<font color="#008000">Seeya <font color="#FFA500">'round 18:25, February 5, 2011 (UTC)


 * You plan on taking extra responsibility, but why can't you do this right now? What do you plan to take responsibility for that requires bureaucrat privileges?
 * As for your other point, frankly I just disagree. Bureaucracy isn't a day-to-day thing, and the abilities only need to be used rarely. If we haven't had problems in the past I see no reason to think that we'll have problems in the future, and I see no reason to hand out irrevocable powers "just in case". -- Supermorff 19:04, February 5, 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, if there are fights involving or between admins, I'd be able to step in and get them to stop before something happens, like someone trying to block the other person. If an admin goes out of hand, I'd be able to ste them straight and undo whatever they did. I'd also be able to promote people who have gotten the majority votes needed to be promoted to admin/crat, so they don't end up waiting for months like I did. And if an admin abuses their privelages, I'd be able to demote them. Making sure that nothing happens concerning the admins in addition to my current responsibilities as an admin would be more reason to be on often. The reason I haven't is because as of late is because the other admins have been able to take care of anything that comes around before I have a chance to. Since the only real way I can contribute is by undoing vandalism and whatnot, that leaves me with little to do on the wiki. On top of that, most of the time when I'm checkin on SNN, it seems that absolutely nothing is happening. So, I usually ended up spending time on other sites that seemed to have more activity and/or needed more help.
 * shrugs* As time goes on, new admins and Users will come around, and some of said admins may end up needing to be taken care of.--<font color="#0000FF">Kagi <font color="#FF0000">mizu -<font color="#008000">Seeya <font color="#FFA500">'round 19:18, February 5, 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, funnily enough I already know exactly what you'll be able to do with bureaucrat powers. That's exactly why I don't feel it's appropriate to give them to you. And the argument that there may possibly be issues in future that will require your attention doesn't convince me in the slightest. -- Supermorff 21:16, February 12, 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, it's disappointing you feel I don't deserve them. And bureaucrat powers are revocable, BTW.--<font color="#0000FF">Kagi <font color="#FF0000">mizu -<font color="#008000">Seeya <font color="#FFA500">'round 21:48, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

Anyone else gonna vote? I've got 2 yes, 2 no, and 1 maybe.--<font color="#0000FF">Kagi <font color="#FF0000">mizu -<font color="#008000">Seeya <font color="#FFA500">'round 02:56, February 10, 2011 (UTC)


 * You gotta love lemons. AdmiralLevi.Signiture_B.gifAdmiralLevi._Salute_B.gif 03:13, February 10, 2011 (UTC)

What?--<font color="#0000FF">Kagi <font color="#FF0000">mizu -<font color="#008000">Seeya <font color="#FFA500">'round 03:20, February 10, 2011 (UTC)


 * You know? The Lemon? Odd one out? Black Sheep? You got two Yes' and two No's, so my one 'Maybe' is the odd one out. A 'lemon'. AdmiralLevi.Signiture_B.gifAdmiralLevi._Salute_B.gif 03:26, February 10, 2011 (UTC)

Ah. Thought you meant... something else.--<font color="#0000FF">Kagi <font color="#FF0000">mizu -<font color="#008000">Seeya <font color="#FFA500">'round 03:30, February 10, 2011 (UTC)

Jet50 for Adminship
I nominate myself for adminship for the following reasons: No. I'm sorry, but you're just not experienced enough. 1,000 edits is not enough to consider adminship. The other things you listed are trivial, stuff like never swearing is insufficient. Also, the fact that you didn't list any links to the other wikis you edit on makes me raise an eyebrow. Gain more edits (At least 3,000 in mainspace), and try again later. -- 02:13, February 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * I use proper grammar and capitals
 * I'm nice to users
 * I never sweared on the wiki before
 * I do favors for other user(ex. make talkbubble)
 * I don't offend users and I never have
 * Lot of edits
 * I'M ONE OF THE BEST ADMINS ON OTHER WIKIS -- Unknown User. 02:03, February 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm truthful
 * I help new users (sometimes, most new users don't need my help.)

No: Edit number means little when dealing with adminship, and grammar means only a bit more than that. Swearing is irrelevent so long as one hasn't broken the boundaries concerning swearing. Doing favors for other Users only gets you so far. You've been banned once before due to uploading a graphic picture, and I had to delete a blog of yours dedicated to your hate of Multiverseman; you wanted to start a freaking club about it! Such actions put into doubt whether or not you can use your adminship responsibly, without showing favor or disfavor to certain Users. What's more, I don't think you've been here long enough, nor done enough that says "I'm a responsible User who will not abuse my adminship against people I dislike", while other actions of yours say you could very well do just that.--<font color="#0000FF">Kagi <font color="#FF0000">mizu -<font color="#008000">Seeya <font color="#FFA500">'round 02:14, February 13, 2011 (UTC)