Sonic News Network:Requests for User Rights

Requests for adminship (RfA) is the process by which this wiki's community decides who will become administrators (also known as admins or sysops), who are users with access to additional features, most notably the ability to delete pages and to block users. A user either submits his/her own request for adminship (a self-nomination) or is nominated by another user. Please become familiar with the Administrators' how-to guide before submitting your request. This process is modeled around Wikipedia's RfA process, and more information can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship.

Layout
The following layout must by used for all new nominations. Nominators are encouraged to use the following code as a template, added as a new section under the current nominations and customised for the specific nominee.

Word bubbles must not be used as they interfere with numbering, and signatures must contain no line breaks. Signatures must contain a link to the relevant user's user page but no links to the pages of other users.

Username (rank requested)
Username (talk): Contributions Edit Count

Short section describing nominee's suitability for rank requested. Signature of nominator to be included at end of paragraph, along with the date of nomination.


 * For nominations by other users only, a single bulleted paragraph by the nominee accepting the nomination. Signature of nominee to be included at end of paragraph.

Discussion

 * Comments in short, signed, bulleted paragraphs.
 * Responses to specific comments should be offset with an extra asterisk. Responses should also be short, signed, single paragraphs.

Note: Adminship is not taken lightly. Nominators may want to spend time on their requests. The short section should cover reasons why the nominee would be expected to use admin tools appropriately and demonstrate that they are dedicated to the wiki. It should also explain why giving them such tools will further the aims of the wiki.

Discussion
Once a nomination has been made, users will review the nominee and declare their support or opposition by placing a short comments and their signature in the 'Support' or 'Oppose' sections (in the format of a numbered list, i.e. preceded by #). As above, word bubbles must not be used as they interfere with numbering and there must be no line breaks. Signatures must contain a link to the relevant user's user page but no links to the pages of other users. Do not try and include your entire thought process in such comments; only include the key reason or reasons for your vote.

At the same time, users are encouraged to explain their decision in the 'Discussion' section.

The 'Discussion' section can be used for further commentary or for asking the nominee questions in order to clarify your position. Comments must be short, single paragraphs in a bulleted list and include a signature. Again, do not use word bubbles, even if you frequently use one on talk pages.

Direct responses to a bulleted comment (e.g. by the nominee) should be placed directly after the comment and indented with one additional bullet point. (That is, a comment preceded by a single asterisk * would be followed by a comment preceded by two asterisks **. If you have trouble formatting lists in this way, it is recommended that you go to Special:Preferences and deactivate the visual editor under the 'Editing' tab.)

Any user can contribute to the discussion or declare support or oppostion, but opinions have more weight if backed up by reasons and evidence (e.g. occasions in which the nominee has done particularly good or bad work). The opinions of long-standing users, particularly current administrators, will also tend to hold more weight than recently-joined or inexperienced users.

Resolution
Adminship and bureaucrat nominations will last for two weeks; rollback and chat moderator nominations will last for one week. In this time, nominations must have received a sufficient number of participants in order to be valid. For rollback or chat mod requests, 5 users must have participated. For adminship requests, 10 users must have participated. For bureaucrat requests, 15 users must have participated. Nominations that have not reached this quorum level at the end of the relevant period have failed. (Note that participants include those who comment and remain neutral.)

This is not a majority vote. It is an attempt to assess the community's consensus regarding the candidate. The candidate should have the support of most of the community, so if the vote is close, the candidate will probably not be given adminship.

After the two weeks have passed, a bureaucrat (a user who has even more rights than an administrator, and can give other users admin rights) will read through the request, determine the community's consensus about whether the nominee should be made an admin, and close the discussion. The discussion will be removed from this page, but is still accessible through the page's edit history.

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 recognised as good users should be nominated for adminship (those that have not demonstrated this through their work will have their nominations rejected quickly) and they do not need to prove this again during the debate for adminship.
 * Don't expect that the community will be familiar with your work. You must provide evidence. In its simplest form, this may include listing pages (or talk pages) where you have been particularly influential, but preferably you should provide a link to the Diff pages of major edits you make.
 * Don't expect that the community will necessarily be aware of your nomination. You are advised to request comments from regular users, particularly admins (a list of whom can be found here). Note, however, that only asking your own friends to comment is usually transparent and may harm your chances in the long run.
 * If you are an admin on another wiki site, this can provide good evidence of your suitability for adminship, assuming either you have been granted adminship in recognition of the work you have done on the site (as opposed to receiving it because you founded the site or were one of the only users) or you have been an effective admin having received the privileges. You must provide a link to the site in question.
 * Don't lie, as doing so will almost certainly result in a failed nomination.
 * Remember that this is not a talk page. Please keep discussions relevant to the matter at hand and do not start to chat. For instance, try not to thank everybody who votes in your favour.
 * The ideal candidate is one who is being prevented from carrying out work by the limitations of their user rights. If you can demonstrate that you would have used admin rights in the past (e.g. by tagging pages for deletion that were subsequently deleted, or informing an admin about a vandal that was subsequently blocked), provide evidence for this. Don't attempt to influence the discussion by promising to do something or act differently if you are successful, as this is a sign that you are not yet ready.
 * Don't talk about things that you don't do, only things that you do do.
 * Please be civil!

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

SonicTheHedgehogDude (Chat Moderator)
SonicTheHedgehogDude (talk): Contributions Edit Count

I trusted on chat now, my behavor is now better. And most of all, I stopped my habit of mini-modding and somehow me reminds Bullet about Wkmeads1. So really, I'm ready to be chat mod, I know how to kickban, I looked over the rules.

SonicTheHedgehogDude Talk • Edits • Blog 00:27, January 31, 2012 (UTC)

Discussion

 * I'm still on the fence on the matter. I highly suggest you give it more time. Wkmeads1 started out anxious and wanting chat mod, but he got better over time, which is why your patterns remind me of him, which isn't a bad thing. -- 00:50, January 31, 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah. K I can wait for a bit. 00:53, January 31, 2012 (UTC)

Bullet Francisco (Absolute Demotion/Banned Indefinitely)
Bullet Francisco (talk): Contributions Edit Count

Without a question, Bullet Francisco has been one of the greatest contributors to this Wiki. However, there is something that all of you need to know, something that all of you need to be aware of, something that I should have taken care of when I first saw it. Behold, your admin, Bullet Francisco, on ED as User:Imgur giving personal information and insults about a few of our users to a very well-known vandal, and information of or pertaining to the users of SNN. As you can see, this is highly unacceptable. An admin, or any user for that matter, should not be feeding a troll with these shenanigans. Something has to be done about this. I feel that a demotion, at this point, is not enough. This is worthy of a ban, and it can happen so long as your voice is heard. I care what each and every single one of you have to say. Please, express your opinion on this matter. Don’t just stand back in the shadows. You have a voice, and it needs to be heard. I understand that on the chat, Bullet told all that were present that these screenshots were not true. That is an absolute lie. If you would like a direct link to where I took these screenshots, then please, contact me on my talk page, and ask to meet me on the chat. There, I will provide the link to where I took these screenshots. The reason I cannot provide the link here on the demotion, is due to the spam filter. A word in the URL of the link triggers the spam filter, but the link will work fine on the chat. I speak the truth, and nothing but the truth. Bullet Francisco has deceived you all, and he will be punished for that.

Many of you have come to me for help when Bullet isn’t "getting his way". I know many of you have been attacked by him on the chat, and I thank you all for informing me. You have spoken, and I have listened. You know who you are. There is one incident that one user does not mind me sharing with all of you. Now, most of you who have contacted me to inform me of Bullet’s attacks have experienced something similar to this. Once again, unacceptable behavior from an admin. As you can see in the main chat section, Bullet Francisco threatened to post a demotion for Knowall just because Knowall expressed his opinion. Also, the attitude from Bullet in the PM and the constant attacks that he delivered to Knowall, completely unacceptable. And, this wasn’t the first incident that Knowall had with Bullet. Do you all remember when I first nominated myself for admin back in October? Well, Knowall supported my nomination, however, Bullet brought personal matters to him by contacting Knowall on the Knuckles the Echidna Wiki and meatpuppeted Knowall to remove his support on my nomination. To be sneaky with it, Bullet deleted both of their talk pages. And here is yet another screenshot as evidence of his meatpuppeting of Knowall.

You’re probably wondering why I blacked out the top of the images that Bullet used from his iPhone. Well, that contained my real name…Something that I do not wish to expose to the public. Bullet Francisco, I now speak directly to you. Your ambitions have gone on long enough. I will not allow you to attack another user here again. You will suffer the consequences of your actions, right here, right now. I’m done trying to help you with your attitude. You’re just getting worse, and even taking it out on me and other users. I will not stand for this any further. This is the end. You’re the one who orchestrated this.

Everyone, it’s time for a change. I cannot allow this to go on. I need your help, your support, to make this demotion/ban possible. Please, take all of this into consideration. Decide what you think is truly right, and express yourself. The SNN is more than a Wiki, it is a community. A community with proud editors who come here not to be slaughtered, but to be surrounded by fellow Sonic fans. As a fellow user, I want nothing more than to keep a smile on everyone’s faces and to continue expanding the SNN far and beyond. Most of you are uncomfortable with this user. Only you can make the change. EYCEST★R  ★   02:48, January 31, 2012 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) As the poster. EYCEST★R   ★   02:48, January 31, 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) Yes: Per above. 02:51, January 31, 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) Yes: Bullet had seemed like a good user, but a few days ago when I discovered his deceit, this had broke our quick-lasting friendship. Insulting users behind our backs, attacking users (especially Knowall), meatpuppeting, this is altogether highly unacceptable, as DarkFuture has pointed out. In case you happen to be reading this, Bullet, once I was confirmed of your trickery, it came to the conclusion that you lied to me on your very own page defending yourself and on the chat as well. I am highly disappointed with your actions, and it was easy enough avoiding your suspicion when you were PMing me in the chat. A demotion and ban is suitable enough to take some time off and think about why you committed all of these in the first place. 02:58, January 31, 2012 (UTC)
 * 4) Yes: Bullet may be my friend but what he did was not nice. It was immature for an admin.  Blaze Chance  1  03:07, January 31, 2012 (UTC)
 * 5) Yes: Bullet was known and shown to be a good admin but after reading all this and that day that Knowall told me about what Bullet had said to him, I wanted justice for my friend and others. He told me to keep it a secret and to not talk about it but now that this is out in public I thought I should say that. He no longer in my eyes deserves adminship. No matter what, he did something undeserving of adminship and might face the concenquences. Call me Hyper, Call me Hearts   Just don't call me 58, Cuz I'm not that old!  03:12, January 31, 2012 (UTC)
 * 6) Yes: He shall be banned forever CesarTeam Cesar the Hedgehog icon.png HYRO 03:24, January 31, 2012 (UTC)
 * 7) Heck yeah: I TOLD YOU HE WAS A WAZBAG!!! No one beleived me because he was an "Admin". Now who's laughing? This sucker is goin' down! Tyler the Hedgehog  "The ultimate son of a gun Charmcaster!"  03:46, January 31, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose
Please. (Ohmygod123 03:32, January 31, 2012 (UTC))
 * 1) I can deal with the fact that you guys want him demoted, But I don't him banned. Sure, what he did was wrong, but it would be a shame to lose a member of this wiki.

Discussion

 * I get your thought OMG, But what he has done is unnacceptable. Sry if my spelling is wrong. My point is, he's an attacker and a troller and shouldn't be allowed to stay here. His demotion would only flame him more. All of us supporters would be trolled until he DOES get banned. Ya know? Tyler the Hedgehog  "The ultimate son of a gun Charmcaster!"  03:51, January 31, 2012 (UTC)

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

Jake, as you know, I have unbanned you on December26, 2011 for the following reason:

''I believe that the ban was unjustified. He didn't do anything wrong. He just created a blog to say goodbye to the SNN. He didn't intentionally want users to flame the mentioned admin. Jake has always been a user that was dedicated to this Wiki, he may have made a few mistakes, but that is no reason to have him banned, let alone for a year. ''

…and yet you are still choosing not to contribute here to avoid more disputes with Bullet. Many people miss you; I miss having you around here. It’s not the same without you, Jake. You were demoted from your Rollback rights without a consensus from the community. That is unfair. Jake deserves so much more. He never did anything wrong. He was always editing in good faith here. Yes, he defended himself on a few occasions. Yes, he could have handled those occasions much better. But, Jake, I believe that you have all or most of the qualities that an excellent user should have. He fights for what is right, and he cares about the community. Sure, he may joke around a bit, but come on!! Murphyshane was the exact same way! He never had any problems, so why should Jake? Heck, Jake even looked up to Murphyshane. He was like an older brother to Jake. Anyways, the point that I am trying to make is, Jake, I want you back here. Not just as a user, not just as a Rollback, but as a friend too. Friendship comes before any of this, and I apologize for thinking otherwise. EYCEST★R  ★   02:48, January 31, 2012 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) As the poster. EYCEST★R   ★   02:48, January 31, 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) Indeed: Per above. 02:52, January 31, 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) Amen: Jake, we miss you. It's always been a blast having you around, and you were unjustifiably demoted and banned. You deserve your place back here on the Sonic news Network. 03:03, January 31, 2012 (UTC)
 * 4) Yes: I miss Jake. Remember my Sonic Generations blog? I was crying for days but Jake cheered me up. He was a guy I looked up to him after that. But when he left for awhile, I was sad that Jake was gone, when he came back, I was happy but sad at the time since he was leaving. Please Jake, come back.  Blaze Chance  1  03:39, January 31, 2012 (UTC
 * 5) Of course: He and me get along well. He would be a great Admin! Tyler the Hedgehog  "The ultimate son of a gun Charmcaster!"  03:48, January 31, 2012 (UTC)