Result: Supermorff (talk) (contributions) was promoted to bureaucrat on 04 November 2009.

Supermorff (bureaucrat)

As I do not know where else to nominate myself for this, I thought I would do it here. I am concerned that we only have two active bureaucrats in an ever-growing wiki, and one is considerably less active than the other. Also, considering my calm and reasonable outlook on most things, I feel I am highly qualified for the position. Even as an admin I try not to throw my weight around, I have never used the term "banhammer", and I am generally amenable to reason. I am confident I will use bureaucrat rights with the same level of maturity. Can I take SLJ's comments at Forum:New Admins and Bureaucrat#Supermorff as a tacit acceptance of the nomination? -- Supermorff 08:11, November 1, 2009 (UTC)

I think so. I definitely support you as a bureaucrat. You are very active and mature and civil. Just what a wikia like this needs. I would, however, like to make this statement to all admins both pending and current. While it is true that an admin's job is to monitor vandals and keep the articles free of vandalism, that's getting focused on too much. We need to also improve the articles and make them longer and better referenced. What we have now is very very bad and it must be improved. All current and future higher-ups need to make this a priority.Fairfieldfencer FFF 11:30, November 1, 2009 (UTC)


13:01, November 1, 2009 (UTC)
THE TROLL Thomas Michael William Patrick Sales Thetalktemplate TTT
While I'm not sure why you are not a bureaucrat already, I'm honestly glad that you aren't. Whilst you would be an excellent bureaucrat, my interactions with you are on the increase, and to be perfectly honest I don't want to have the worry of you desysopping me, given that you mostly edit during the same hours as I do. Unfortunately, I'd imagine the decision would be unanimous amongst Fairfieldfencer (talk) (contributions) and Sonicrox14 (talk) (contributions), and as such I would be outvoted.

Right, so you don't want me as a bureaucrat because you're worried that consensus is already against you being a sysop? The logic of your position escapes me. -- Supermorff 14:04, November 1, 2009 (UTC)
If Supermorff took away your position as an admin just because he doesn't agree with you and your methods and doesn't like you in general, I, or another bureaucrat, would be forced to ban him as he would be abusing his position and since the rank of bureaucrat can't be removed, we'd have no choice but to ban him.Fairfieldfencer FFF 16:15, November 1, 2009 (UTC)
17:23, November 1, 2009 (UTC)
THE TROLL Thomas Michael William Patrick Sales Thetalktemplate TTT
I said I didn't want him to become a bureaucrat because I was worried about being blocked by him, as he consequently would be able to do, and would be likely to do after I inadvertantly ****ed up his family trees (thanks for adding those categories, by the way)

Launchballer, if people were allowed to ban you for stuff like that, I will be quite honest and say that I would have done it already, but that is a different discussion for a different time. Personally, I think Supermorff would make a great bureaucrat, pure and simple. So, my vote is a big fat

-Yes--Kagimizu-Seeya 'round~ 17:38, November 1, 2009 (UTC)

17:50, November 1, 2009 (UTC)
THE TROLL Thomas Michael William Patrick Sales Thetalktemplate TTT
Which is why I quite literally screamed at Fairfieldfencer (talk) (contributions): WHAT THE HELL WERE YOU THINKING MAKING Kagimizu (talk) (contributions) A BUREAUCRAT?!?!?

Like I said, if we were allowed to do such. However, we are not allowed to, so I will not.--Kagimizu-Seeya 'round~ 17:55, November 1, 2009 (UTC)

Kagi is a nice guy and is very civil with little experience and next to no knowledge in regards to wikia formatting. You, LB, are a determined editor who knows a lot about formatting and could probably re-shape this wikia ten times over, but have the manners of a ticked off biker with an attitude problem. Why don't you guys stop bickering and work together to make up for where you are lacking. You might even make a pretty big accomplishment that way. Take on a big project like an article about a main character and do it up. LB can handle working out the kinks and Kagi can keep protesting users at bay while contributing where he can.Fairfieldfencer FFF 18:45, November 1, 2009 (UTC)
............FFF, are you feeling alright? Did you eat a bit too much candy last night?--Kagimizu-Seeya 'round~ 18:51, November 1, 2009 (UTC)
I'm just trying to help you and LB get a little more experience and respect around here. I am perfectly capable of acting civil and, dare I say it, am pretty good at expanding articles and referencing them. You two lack in both these areas respectively, and could easily make up for your lacking by working together. It is purely logical you should do this. And I don't see why you shouldn't. Now, I think I should set the two of you a task to see this gets followed out. I know! You two choose a one-off character in a game you both have and work on its article until it is properly referenced and lengthy. In fact, maybe that should be a sort of test we make for people who want to be administrators. We give them an article on a one-off, and they have to make the article as good as they can to prove themsleves worthy of adminship. But if you two guys really don't want to work together, then you don't have to. I won't force you into it. And, FYI, I don't go trick-or-treating, so no candy for me.Fairfieldfencer FFF 18:59, November 1, 2009 (UTC)
All in all, no thank you. I'm able to accept my limitations and what people think of me. Yes, you are good at both of the areas that LB and I are lacking in, and that's a good thing. However, while LB and I may occasionally have the same goal, I'm not gonna actively work with him on a project. As for the whole one-off article thing, I don't think that's such a good idea, because certain would-be admins might not be great at article stuff, but might be better in other areas. Now, might I suggest BOT?--Kagimizu-Seeya 'round~ 19:14, November 1, 2009 (UTC)
I don't know what BOT means, but I am also against using one-off articles as a test of new admins. -- Supermorff 19:16, November 1, 2009 (UTC)
19:23, November 1, 2009 (UTC)
THE TROLL Thomas Michael William Patrick Sales Thetalktemplate TTT
BOT means back on topic.
Ah, thank you. -- Supermorff 19:49, November 1, 2009 (UTC)
19:54, November 1, 2009 (UTC)
THE TROLL Thomas Michael William Patrick Sales Thetalktemplate TTT
Anyway, as we need more admins and bureaucrats, I'm suggesting Sonictoast (talk) (contributions) and Sunny the Hedgehog (talk) (contributions) as new administrators, and as much as I disagree with the idea, as aforementioned, Supermorff (talk) (contributions) as a new bureaucrat.

Haha, now we're getting somewhere! 3 bureaucrats and 4 or so admins; that should solve the issue of needing active admins around here!--Kagimizu-Seeya 'round~ 19:58, November 1, 2009 (UTC)

21:21, November 1, 2009 (UTC)
THE TROLL Thomas Michael William Patrick Sales Thetalktemplate TTT
There's six. Myself 123 (talk) (contributions), Mystic Monkey (talk) (contributions), Launchballer (talk) (contributions), Kagimizu (talk) (contributions), Sonictoast (talk) (contributions) and Sunny the Hedgehog (talk) (contributions)
19:06, November 3, 2009 (UTC)
THE TROLL Thomas Michael William Patrick Sales Thetalktemplate TTT
I see no-one's regarded the message. So, do we have agreement of the new implementations?

What? If you mean Morff being made a bureaucrat, Sunny being made a Sysop, and Milo being made a Rollback, then yes.--Kagimizu-Seeya 'round~ 19:35, November 3, 2009 (UTC)

20:00, November 3, 2009 (UTC)
THE TROLL Thomas Michael William Patrick Sales Thetalktemplate TTT
Sunny the Hedgehog (talk) (contributions) and Sonictoast (talk) (contributions) being made administrators. A quick check confirms Sonictoast (talk) (contributions) and Sunny the Hedgehog (talk) (contributions) are editing on the same terms.