Sonic News Network:Requests for User Rights

Requests for User Rights is the process by which this wiki's community decides who will be promoted to a new user right (Administrator, Bureaucrat, Chat Moderator, Moderator, or Rollback). A user either submits his/her own request for a promotion (a self-nomination), or is nominated by another user (if you decide to nominate another user, it is recommended that you check with him/her before making a nomination). Please become familiar with the Administrators' how-to guide before submitting your request (if you are requesting adminship). This process is modeled around Wikipedia's RfA process, and more information can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship.

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

Word bubbles can 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 the paragraph, along with the date of nomination.


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

Discussion

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

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

Discussion
Once a nomination has been made, users will review the nominee and declare their support or opposition by placing a short comment and their signature in the 'Support' or 'Oppose' sections (in the format of a numbered list, i.e. preceded by #). As above, word bubbles must not be used as they interfere with the 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.

Simultaneously, 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, please 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 ** in source mode. If you have trouble formatting lists in this way, it is recommended that you go to Special:Preferences and deactivate the visual editor under the 'Editing' tab.)

Any user can contribute to the discussion or declare support or opposition, but opinions have more weight if backed up by reasons and/or evidence (e.g. occasions in which the nominee has done particularly excellent or malicious 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, moderator 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, moderator or chat moderator requests, at least five users must have participated. For adminship requests, at least ten users must have participated. For bureaucrat requests, at least fifteen users must have participated. Nominations that have not reached this quorum level at the end of the relevant period have failed. (Note that participants include those who comment in the discussion section of a nomination.)

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

After the time frame for the promotion the user is requesting for has passed, a bureaucrat (a user who has more rights than an administrator, and can give other users user rights) will read through the request, determine the community's consensus about whether the nominee should be promoted, and close the discussion. The discussion will be removed from this page, and will be archived into a separate page in Category:Requests for User Rights if successful. All successful nominations in which the majority of the discussion regarding the nomination took place on this page will be archived.

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 commented yet.

Demotions
Demotion requests are made by users who feel that a user with user rights is no longer capable or responsible enough to keep their rights. Demotion nominations will last as long and require the same number of participants as promotion nominations about the same rank. Demotion requests may not be removed once they have started.

Renewals
If a user with user rights concludes the community needs to take a revoting to decide if he'll or she'll keep the current rights, the user would create an "Renewal" nomination. It'll operate the same as a promotion and a demotion but a renewal nomination is neutral; it lets the community re-decide. A renewal nomination is only to be set up by a user with user rights who wants the community to reassess if they should keep their user rights or remove them. Renewals differ from demotions in that they are set up by the user with user rights for community reassessment as opposed to someone else.

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. Please 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 etc. Only users widely recognized as good users should be nominated for adminship (those that have not demonstrated this through their work will have their nominations rejected quickly) and they do not need to prove this again during the discussion 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 a variety of other 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 favor.
 * 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 an indication that you are not yet ready.
 * Don't talk about things that you don't do, only things that you do do.
 * Please be civil!
 * Don't be biased. In your reasons for voting, do not state such things as because you are "best friends" with the nominee. Your vote will not weigh greatly in your claim if others view it as biased.
 * It is highly recommended before publishing your nomination, you should preview often to ensure the links that you provide as well as the required links of the layout are formatted correctly and will successfully transmit your voters to the desired source. Grammar and spelling errors are not wise to leave in your request either. Again, preview often and proofread your nomination before submitting it. Ensure that your nomination sounds proper and is easy for other readers to flow through it without needing to pause at a misspelling or a confusing statement.

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

Ultrasonic9000 (Administrator)
Ultrasonic9000 (talk): Contributions Edit Count

Hello good users of Sonic News Network. My name is Ultrasonic9000. This is my first time nominating myself for user rights, so I hope this request can live up to the standards that are set.

I have been here on Sonic News Network for quite some time, and I am often working on the articles. For a long time, I have upheld the structures of the articles, helping shape a system of headliner sections specific for objects, levels, characters etc., which is now used in multiple places. I have thus become quite familiar with how this wikia works and its many aspects. I am also capable of following and upholding rules, and never leave anything undone. While I have my weaknesses (being that I am not very flexible), and though I have been thick-headed towards different people in the past in regards to their points-of-view, I am nonetheless willing to learn from others and understand their viewpoints to improve myself. I just love Sonic's universe and I want do my part here to tell others about him.

My reasons for seeking to be an admin is because I keep a look-out on this wiki for vandals when the administrators are not here, but I am restricted from doing much because of my user rights. spammers and trolls are in these days popping up when admins are not there, leaving it to other users to spent their time containing them. Also, when the administrators finally arrive, there is often much to fix. Since I am often there when vandals acts, I can stop them earlier than usual if I become an administrator.Ultrasonic9000 (talk) 15:08, October 25, 2015 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) Considering you do 90% of the actual wiki work in editing, I fully support. 16:10, October 25, 2015 (UTC)
 * 2) We all know that Ultra contributes the wiki every single day and we all know how fantastic his work is. That we can all agree on. However, what I find here is potential waiting to burst. He has been limited to what he can do due to his rollback-exclusive rights. If he were to obtain administrator rights, he could essentially take care of the entire wiki in general, sans for giving user rights to users. He has worked on his behavior and social skills over the past few months, and I believe he has improved in both social and editing abilities greatly. Without him, the wiki would be a graveyard of broken links and vandalism. These rights will help him achieve his ultimate goal: to make Sonic News Network the best source of Sonic information. Therefore, I support. - 17:39, October 25, 2015 (UTC)
 * 3) I agree with Speeder.

Oppose

 * 1) --Dr. Livsi (talk) 11:23, October 26, 2015 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Work on sustaining your emotions/aggression like here, as an example. --Dr. Livsi (talk) 15:42, October 25, 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree that was not the finest moment I had here. This is a user that has been coming for months, mess things up, gets blocked, returns the next day and does it all over again. I have made multiple attempts to talk to this user, hoping to reach him, only to get nonsense in return. With all my attempts to be tactful being practically ignored, I was nearly desperate for a coherent responds and dared say this. I supposed at that moment I was just tired of this cycle.Ultrasonic9000 (talk) 15:52, October 25, 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, this was a recent example on how I think you can get hasty with users easily in other cases too, like the past you mentioned in your nomination. --Dr. Livsi (talk) 15:58, October 25, 2015 (UTC)
 * I wont cover that up. In its essence, I tried experimenting here, trying to get a point across by appealing to strong emotions when reasoning failed to reach him, and that clearly went not well. I thus try to learn from that, and people like you and Slug-Drones (indirectly) make me understand that there is no excuse for doing that (believe it or not, I just realized that a few hours ago).Ultrasonic9000 (talk) 16:06, October 25, 2015 (UTC)
 * Will be staying neutral, and per Livsi's comment. 11:52, October 26, 2015 (UTC)