Tag: rte-source |
No edit summary |
||
| (28 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ⚫ | '''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, Content Moderator, Discussions Moderator). 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 [[Help:Administrators' how-to guide|Administrators' how-to guide]] or read [[Help:User rights]] for more information about other rights. |
||
| − | {{CommunityPages}} |
||
| ⚫ | '''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, Content Moderator, Discussions Moderator |
||
==Process== |
==Process== |
||
| + | The requests for User Rights are held on the "[[Board:User Rights Requests |User Rights Requests]]" category on the [[Special:Forum|Discussions]] feature. Any nomination to gain a special right must be filed there, so then the community can cast their votes there freely. The voting system for the nomination post should rely on the Poll feature integrated into the text-type post which one can select from the post-type list on the platform. |
||
| − | ===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|current nominations]] and customized for the specific nominee. |
||
| + | The layout needed for the nomination posts should be as follows: |
||
| − | 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. |
||
| + | * The title of any nomination post must use this syntax: "Proposal: (the right's name) Rights for (the name of the user)". An example of that can be; Proposal: Content Moderator Rights for [[User:Wikia |Wikia]] ("User: Wikia" is a bot account). |
||
| + | * Write a short description containing the reason behind the nomination and provide sources for the nominee's work and how he/she has helped the wiki. |
||
| + | *Then, a poll should be added which must include three options; "Support", "Oppose" and "Neutral". So, that users who would like to vote can declare their position of the nomination. |
||
| + | * It is recommended that at the end of writing a request, to write a small advice encouraging users to review this page so they can get a better understanding of how this process work. |
||
| + | * '''For bureaucrats and administrators''', it is recommended that they make a small statistic about the numbers of supporters, opposers, and those who are neutral at the final day of the nomination on their final comment about the nomination. |
||
| + | Once a nomination post is posted on the category, an administrator should [https://sonic.wikia.com/announcements highlight] the nomination post so that every registered user on the wiki can know about it and vote. Afterward, the nominee has to wait for users to vote on his request. If a user opts for the "Neutral" or the "Oppose" option on the poll, they should comment about what makes them feel uneasy about entrusting that user with the user rights they are requesting. It is also recommended that they simplify their comments as best as possible so that bureaucrats and admins can understand them. The nomination post then will be closed by an administrator once it crosses its final day (see the "promotion system" section below for more information), in which at that time, a bureaucrat or administrator has already read the community's verdict and acted in accordance to them. |
||
| ⚫ | '''Note:''' User Rights are 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 the 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. |
||
| − | <pre> |
||
| − | ===[[User:Username|Username]] (rank requested)=== |
||
| − | <small>[[User:Username|Username]] ([[Message Wall:Username|talk]]): [[Special:Contributions/Username|Contributions]] [[Special:EditCount/Username|Edit Count]]</small><br> |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| − | 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. |
||
| + | === Promotion system === |
||
| − | *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. |
||
| + | Below, are the conditions and notices for how the system of promotion requests works: |
||
| + | * Adminship and bureaucrat nomination posts will last for two weeks. For adminship, at least nine users must have participated in order to gain the right. For bureaucracy, at least twelve users must have participated in order to gain the right. |
||
| + | * Content Moderator or Discussions Moderator requests will last for one week, and at least six users must have participated in order to gain the right. |
||
| + | * For Rollback, users who gets this user right membership are selected by admins (usually as a mean of testing them before nominating them for a broader user right membership). However, should an argument arise against some user getting this membership, a Rollback nomination can be set and it should last for one week. In which at least five users must have participated in order to gain the right. |
||
| + | * If a nomination does not reach the needed number of support at the end of the relevant period, the nomination fails. |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | * After the time frame for the promotion the user is requesting for has passed, a bureaucrat or an administrator (depending on the proposed right) will read through the request, determine the community's consensus about whether the nominee should be promoted, and close the post. The post will then be closed. (For a list of successful nominations, please refer to this page [[:Category:Requests for User Rights]]) |
||
| ⚫ | * If a nominee decides at any time that they do not wish to pursue a promotion post for themselves, they are welcome to remove the nomination post 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 post they have posted (including a demotion request) if no other users have commented yet. |
||
| − | === |
+ | ===Demotion system=== |
| ⚫ | 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. The resolution of the demotion nomination posts requires the same rules as promotion nomination posts about the same rank. Demotion requests ''may not be removed'' once they have started. |
||
| − | # |
||
| + | The syntax for the demotion system is the same as the promotion nomination posts, but the title of the demotion posts should be: "Proposal: Demote (the name of the user) of his/her (the name of the requested right) Rights". An example of that can be; Proposal: Demote [[User:Wikia|Wikia]] of his Content Moderator Rights. |
||
| − | ====Oppose==== |
||
| − | # |
||
| − | === |
+ | ===Renewal system=== |
| ⚫ | 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. The resolution of the renewal nominations can only be made 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. |
||
| − | *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. |
||
| − | </pre> |
||
| − | |||
| ⚫ | '''Note:''' |
||
| − | |||
| − | ===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. |
||
| − | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| − | Adminship and bureaucrat nominations will last for two weeks; rollback, content moderator, discussions 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 or chat moderator requests, at least five users must have participated. For content moderator or discussions moderator requests, at least seven 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.) |
||
| − | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| − | |||
| ⚫ | After the time frame for the promotion the user is requesting for has passed, a bureaucrat |
||
| − | |||
| ⚫ | If a nominee decides at any time that they do not wish to pursue a promotion for themselves, they are welcome to remove the |
||
| − | |||
| − | ===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. |
||
| − | |||
| − | ===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. |
||
==Advice== |
==Advice== |
||
Here are some pieces of advice for nominators and nominees: |
Here are some pieces of advice for nominators and nominees: |
||
*Follow the [[#Process|process]] as described above. Failure to do so will harm your chances of success. |
*Follow the [[#Process|process]] as described above. Failure to do so will harm your chances of success. |
||
| − | *Demonstrate that you understand what being an admin involves. Please |
+ | *Demonstrate that you understand what being an admin or any other user right involves. Please read through [[Help:Administrators' how-to guide]] if you are not familiar with the role or read [[Help:User rights]] for more information about other rights. |
| + | *It is not recommended for users to jump directly to request for adminship or bureaucracy if they are not familiar with the rights that (Content moderation, Discussions moderation, or rollback etc.) offer or with the proposed right itself. As it may cause some queries among the users. |
||
| − | *Being a good user is not sufficient to |
+ | *Being a good user is not sufficient to gain a user right. Also, do not bring up a 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 who have served the wiki widely (on any subject) are recognized as good users should be nominated for higher rights such as moderation or adminship (those that have not demonstrated this through their work will have their nominations rejected quickly). |
| − | * |
+ | *Every nomination needs ''evidence ''to gain community's approval of any proposed rights. 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 [[Sonic News Network:Administrators|here]]). Note, however, that only asking your own friends to comment is usually transparent and may harm your chances in the long run. |
||
| + | *Don't lie, as, without a potent source for your contributions, the request will immediately be rejected. |
||
| − | *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. |
||
| + | *Irrelevant comments (e.g. spamming or making a joke) to the requested rights are not permitted (not counting questions regarding the proposed right). |
||
| − | *Don't lie, as doing so will almost certainly result in a failed nomination. |
||
| + | *Don't attempt to influence the discussion by promising to do something or act differently if you are successful. |
||
| − | *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. |
||
| + | *Be civil and respect other users' opinions. |
||
| − | *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. |
||
| ⚫ | *It is highly recommended before publishing your nomination post, 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 post before submitting it. Ensure that your nomination post sounds proper and is easy for other readers to flow through it without needing to pause at a misspelling or a confusing statement. |
||
| − | *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. |
||
| − | ---- |
||
| − | ===[[User:BlueSpeeder|BlueSpeeder]] (Bureaucrat)=== |
||
| − | <small>[[User:BlueSpeeder|BlueSpeeder]] ([[Message Wall:BlueSpeeder|talk]]): [[Special:Contributions/BlueSpeeder|Contributions]] [[Special:EditCount/BlueSpeeder|Edit Count]]</small> |
||
| − | |||
| − | Man, I honestly don't know how many times I've nominated myself for some sort of user right position, definitely the most out of any user here I imagine. |
||
| − | |||
| − | Jokes aside, today I would like to begin my nomination to become a bureaucrat for the wiki, as I believe that I have dedicated enough time, matured greatly, and have become responsible with my user rights over the course of nearly five years to earn the position as a bureaucrat. Though with years comes experience, it is not the only reason you should consider supporting. Please take your time to read thoroughly on my reasoning in this nomination so you may grasp why I believe I should become a bureaucrat. |
||
| − | |||
| − | First and foremost is my amount of dedication and time I spend on this wiki. Though I am not the fast editor I once was three years ago, I am still an active contributor to the wiki, whether it be adding images or categories or actually taking time to write articles for the wiki. The most obvious point is, I am indeed active and even though I am in college, I am not necessarily inactive at the moment nor do I prophesy I will be in the near future. |
||
| − | |||
| − | Secondly, my maturity and my user rights position. It became apparent a year and a half ago that I was not the best person to trust with user rights but over the course of that year and a half, I have handled my user rights responsibly, never throwing them away over some stupid argument or because of some childish reason. No: I have had administrator rights since July 2015 and I have yet to throw them away, nor will I dispose of them. I've matured over the course of several years, as some of you had problems with me back then, I assure you that these problems (whether it be my maturity or position as an administrator) are now nonexistent. If I caused you any harm or offended you with my hostility back then, I apologize for any mistakes I have made towards you. |
||
| − | |||
| − | Third of all, as you have seen recently, I wish to help the wiki community bond with each other and help new users make new friends. Whether it be [[Thread:410709|igniting the topic of bringing achievements to the wiki]], or whether it be [[Thread:414622|getting the wiki together to show off their ''Sonic'' collection]], to even [[Sonic News Network:Requests for User Rights/DeCool99(Content Moderator)|nominating]] [[Sonic News Network:Requests for User Rights/Axel Badnik (Content Moderator)|two users]] on the wiki, I wish to bring the new community we've seen on this wiki for the past year now come together, and by becoming a bureaucrat, I wish to be a beacon of help and a role model to the new users. |
||
| − | |||
| − | Finally, the current state of the wiki. I am by all means not saying we are a dying wiki, no no no, we are the exact opposite of that. More users join with each passing day, replacing the ones that left the wiki over time. It is a natural cycle. That is how you should look at this nomination: we are in need of a bureaucrat who is active (not saying the current ones are not, but someone who can handle things quickly and someone who is also relatively active within the wiki as well). I want to help take over the mantle of our current bureaucrats and make their job easier for them by handling the situations needed, whether it be promoting users or blocking users or anything else. I am '''not''' saying that by taking over the mantle they have that I am making them useless, no no no, I am saying that, by being an bureaucrat I can handle things they cannot handle at the moment being. |
||
| − | |||
| − | I hope that you all reading this will take the time to think thoroughly about whether or not I should become the next bureaucrat. I advise that everyone who votes lists down a reason why I should (if you supporting) or shouldn't (if you are opposing) become a bureaucrat. It would help me figure out what my weaknesses are and what I can improve on. Until then, please keep the discussion civil and I hope the wiki can decide this decision. - {{User:BlueSpeeder/Signature}} 01:47, August 29, 2016 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | ====Support==== |
||
| − | #I would agree because of your hardwork on the wiki.[[User:Crazy Muzzarino|Muzzarino]] 03:43, August 29, 2016 (UTC) |
||
| − | #I fail to see why not. Most the crats are moving on from the wiki, best to give the most devoted legacy user the rights-PKMN (New editor pls) |
||
| − | #Blue is by far one of the most dedicated users on the wiki. He clearly cares a lot about this place, and is absolutely willing to put a lot of time and effort in it. i trust you wholeheartedly, Blue. -[[User:Time Biter|Time Biter]] |
||
| − | #You have so much dedication towards this wiki. I trust you will do well. -[[User:DeCool99|DC99]] |
||
| − | #Can't hurt to have another bureaucrat to pick up the slack, especially seeing as the community is growing back as you pointed out. [[User:Myself 123|'''<font color="scarlet">Myself </font>''']] [[User talk:Myself 123|'''<font color="Black">123</font>''']] 11:18, August 29, 2016 (UTC) |
||
| − | #In my case, there is no reason for opposition. [[User:Luma.dash|Luma.dash]] ([[User talk:Luma.dash|talk]]) 11:34, August 29, 2016 (UTC) |
||
| − | #<p class="MsoNormal">Aye. After reading your summary paragraph by paragraph, how can I oppose? I'm impressed by your big efforts to change this site for the better, particularly the achievements you’ve brought to this Wiki. That aside, I agree with the supporters above me; you work hard, and you’re one of the most dedicated users on SNN. {{User:Sesn/Signature}}</p> |
||
| − | #I'll throw in my support, I trust your judgement. {{User:Sacorguy79/Signature}} |
||
| − | #I trust you.[[User:Ultrasonic9000|Ultrasonic9000]] ([[User talk:Ultrasonic9000|talk]]) 18:42, August 31, 2016 (UTC) |
||
| − | #The hard work and dedication is very immpressive. You always take the time out to look over, making sure that the articles are what they should be. [[User:ModrenSonic|ModrenSonic]] ([[Message_Wall:ModrenSonic|Wall]]) 23:43, September 1, 2016 (UTC) |
||
| − | #No reason to oppose. Speeder is a excellent and dedicated user of the wiki. {{User:WQCX}} 23:48, September 1, 2016 (UTC) |
||
| − | #Doing representative job as admin can open doors for more demanding tasks. - [[User:Axel Badnik|Axel Badnik]] ([[User talk:Axel Badnik|talk]]) 08:03, September 2, 2016 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | ====Oppose==== |
||
| − | # |
||
| + | {{SitePages}} |
||
| − | ====Discussion==== |
||
| − | * |
||
Revision as of 19:52, 1 September 2019
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, Content Moderator, Discussions Moderator). 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 or read Help:User rights for more information about other rights.
Process
The requests for User Rights are held on the "User Rights Requests" category on the Discussions feature. Any nomination to gain a special right must be filed there, so then the community can cast their votes there freely. The voting system for the nomination post should rely on the Poll feature integrated into the text-type post which one can select from the post-type list on the platform.
The layout needed for the nomination posts should be as follows:
- The title of any nomination post must use this syntax: "Proposal: (the right's name) Rights for (the name of the user)". An example of that can be; Proposal: Content Moderator Rights for Wikia ("User: Wikia" is a bot account).
- Write a short description containing the reason behind the nomination and provide sources for the nominee's work and how he/she has helped the wiki.
- Then, a poll should be added which must include three options; "Support", "Oppose" and "Neutral". So, that users who would like to vote can declare their position of the nomination.
- It is recommended that at the end of writing a request, to write a small advice encouraging users to review this page so they can get a better understanding of how this process work.
- For bureaucrats and administrators, it is recommended that they make a small statistic about the numbers of supporters, opposers, and those who are neutral at the final day of the nomination on their final comment about the nomination.
Once a nomination post is posted on the category, an administrator should highlight the nomination post so that every registered user on the wiki can know about it and vote. Afterward, the nominee has to wait for users to vote on his request. If a user opts for the "Neutral" or the "Oppose" option on the poll, they should comment about what makes them feel uneasy about entrusting that user with the user rights they are requesting. It is also recommended that they simplify their comments as best as possible so that bureaucrats and admins can understand them. The nomination post then will be closed by an administrator once it crosses its final day (see the "promotion system" section below for more information), in which at that time, a bureaucrat or administrator has already read the community's verdict and acted in accordance to them.
Note: User Rights are 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 the 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.
Resolution types
Promotion system
Below, are the conditions and notices for how the system of promotion requests works:
- Adminship and bureaucrat nomination posts will last for two weeks. For adminship, at least nine users must have participated in order to gain the right. For bureaucracy, at least twelve users must have participated in order to gain the right.
- Content Moderator or Discussions Moderator requests will last for one week, and at least six users must have participated in order to gain the right.
- For Rollback, users who gets this user right membership are selected by admins (usually as a mean of testing them before nominating them for a broader user right membership). However, should an argument arise against some user getting this membership, a Rollback nomination can be set and it should last for one week. In which at least five users must have participated in order to gain the right.
- If a nomination does not reach the needed number of support at the end of the relevant period, the nomination fails.
- 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 or an administrator (depending on the proposed right) will read through the request, determine the community's consensus about whether the nominee should be promoted, and close the post. The post will then be closed. (For a list of successful nominations, please refer to this page Category:Requests for User Rights)
- If a nominee decides at any time that they do not wish to pursue a promotion post for themselves, they are welcome to remove the nomination post 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 post they have posted (including a demotion request) if no other users have commented yet.
Demotion system
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. The resolution of the demotion nomination posts requires the same rules as promotion nomination posts about the same rank. Demotion requests may not be removed once they have started.
The syntax for the demotion system is the same as the promotion nomination posts, but the title of the demotion posts should be: "Proposal: Demote (the name of the user) of his/her (the name of the requested right) Rights". An example of that can be; Proposal: Demote Wikia of his Content Moderator Rights.
Renewal system
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. The resolution of the renewal nominations can only be made 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 or any other user right involves. Please read through Help:Administrators' how-to guide if you are not familiar with the role or read Help:User rights for more information about other rights.
- It is not recommended for users to jump directly to request for adminship or bureaucracy if they are not familiar with the rights that (Content moderation, Discussions moderation, or rollback etc.) offer or with the proposed right itself. As it may cause some queries among the users.
- Being a good user is not sufficient to gain a user right. Also, do not bring up a 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 who have served the wiki widely (on any subject) are recognized as good users should be nominated for higher rights such as moderation or adminship (those that have not demonstrated this through their work will have their nominations rejected quickly).
- Every nomination needs evidence to gain community's approval of any proposed rights. 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 lie, as, without a potent source for your contributions, the request will immediately be rejected.
- Irrelevant comments (e.g. spamming or making a joke) to the requested rights are not permitted (not counting questions regarding the proposed right).
- Don't attempt to influence the discussion by promising to do something or act differently if you are successful.
- Be civil and respect other users' opinions.
- It is highly recommended before publishing your nomination post, 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 post before submitting it. Ensure that your nomination post sounds proper and is easy for other readers to flow through it without needing to pause at a misspelling or a confusing statement.
| Policy | Policy (Discussion Board) | Style | Affiliates | Don't feed the trolls | Fan fiction | Wikipedia |
|---|---|
| Community | Community Portal | Administrators | About | Helping Out | Seasonal projects | Userboxes | Editcount |
| Main Page | Featured Article (Nominations) | Poll | 12 Questions With | Featured User |
| Other | Requests for User Rights | Wiki Files | Parent Page | Level Tournament | Character Tournament |