Wookieepedia:Requests for user rights

This page is for requests for user rights.

Voting will last two weeks, at which time, if the vote is affirmative, the nominee will be granted the requested user rights.

Requests for adminship
Rules:
 * You may nominate another Wookieepedian (please ensure they accept the nomination first)
 * You cannot nominate yourself.

To view past requests, see the RFA archive.

Requirements
There are some basic things to consider when nominating a fellow Wookieepedian for adminship.


 * 1) They have an account under a screenname.
 * 2) They have actively contributed for at least six months to the wiki.
 * 3) They are of adult age (18 years or older).
 * 4) They have demonstrated they are willing to take on additional responsibilities to make the community better.
 * 5) They have had at least some major article creations.
 * 6) They have dealings with other users on a regular basis in a fair, restrained, and constructive manner.
 * 7) They have demonstrated an understanding of the community's methods of operation.
 * 8) Registered users' votes must have a 2/3rds supermajority for adminship to be accepted.
 * 9) Administrators' votes must have a 2/3rds supermajority for adminship to be accepted. (Separated from user votes)
 * 10) Bureaucrats' votes must be unanimous for adminship to be accepted.
 * 11) Additionally, the nominee may be asked a series of questions by users. While it is not required to answer them, it is strongly encouraged since it may affect how others decide and vote on the RFA.

Questions
Here are some general adminship questions. They are 100% optional, so feel free to answer all, some, or none of them. :)

Lord Hydronium (3 bureaucrats + 9 admins + 12 users/0/0)
Two week deadline from first request, voting ends 3 May, 2007.

Support

 * 1) Imp http://images.wikia.com/starwars/images/e/e5/ATATatarismall.png 10:59, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) For a TBT hating slob, he's pretty classy. .  .  .  .  11:00, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Like REALLY EXPENSIVE candy. jSarek 11:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) For the Cowering Ortolan! (and a great Wookieepedian too). --Azizlight 11:55, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Sikon 12:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Green Tentacle (Talk) 15:09, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) SFH 16:09, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 8)  I need a name  ( Complain here ) 16:23, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Absolutely. Havac 19:36, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) Most def support for Lord H3O+. Atarumaster88  22:30, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) Jorrel [[Image:Wiki-shrinkable.png|20px]] Fraajic 22:34, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) Hooray for Lord H3O+. BambookidX 05:30, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 13) I need to be less absent-minded on the IRC. I think this took place right under my nose. Oh and yeah! I know what the chemical formula for hydronium is too! Really! Cull Tremayne 13:47, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 14) --Windu223 16:06, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * :)  Stake black   msg 21:23, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Ozzel 21:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Per 4dot. Adamwankenobi 22:40, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Darth Culator (Talk) 00:21, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Ulicus 00:26, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) So who would be the hydroxide to his hydronium (H+)? --  Riffsyphon  1024 02:29, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) LtNOWIS 03:07, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) --Eyrezer 09:10, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 12:53, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 6)  Gonk  ( Gonk! ) 20:00, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) -- Shaelas (Ahto High Court)[[Image:Czerka Logo.JPG|30px]] 16:44, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 8)  Lord Oblivion Sith holocron[[Image:Oldsith.png|20px]] 19:32, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) By all means. Hobbes15 ( Tiger Headquarters ) 23:19, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Questions

 * 1) Why do you want to become an administrator?
 * 2) *So I can increase the number of things I can do to help the wiki run. I've been getting more involved in the behind-the-scenes stuff recently, branching out into helping archive pages, make navigation templates, and so forth, and I think that admin powers will let me do more things like that. Plus vandal-fighting powers; I won't need to go into IRC or wait until an admin's around before a move vandal can be stopped, or a spam page deleted.
 * 3) In your opinion, what is the role of an administrator?
 * 4) *Administrators are editors, like any Wookieepedian, who can do more things than most when working on the wiki. Like any good superhero, they use their powers to prevent vandalism, delete pages and images that aren't needed, resolve conflicts, close votes that have finished, etc. Basically, their role is to make the wiki run smoother.
 * 5) In your view, do administrators hold a technical or political position?
 * 6) *Is it cliche to say a little of both? Obviously, there's the extra buttons, but administrators do serve as the representatives of the Wookiee and have a certain voice within the community.
 * 7) How do you feel admins should use their power/stand in comparison with other users?
 * 8) *On most things, they're exactly the same as any other user: votes, regular edits, etc. When they bust out the POWAH, that gives them an advantage over regular users that they need to use fairly, and only as the situation warrants.
 * 9) Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
 * 10) *I'd say I've been in one actual "edit conflict" (that is, where myself and another user were both actually editing the page), but after one round of that I took it to the talk page. Generally, I try to take any disagreement over the content of a page to the talk page or the user's talk page. Of course, that discussion itself can be, er, sharp, but it'll get hammered out there, rather than interfere with the article. I've actually had my mind changed by some of these, so it's not a complete bust.
 * 11) Of your articles or contributions to Wookieepedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * 12) *All my FAs, to some extent; Pre-Republic era, as my first, and Ossus, as the one where I compiled a bunch of sources into one cohesive whole, I think I'm most pleased with to some extent.
 * 13) What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with?
 * So, basically thinking about what I've needed to ask admins to do before or thought would be easier as such, deleting spam pages, blocking vandals, and the occasional blasting a redirect for a move. Really, any of the myriad assorted little things that come up and I think, "An admin would be useful here".
 * 1) How important is it for you to be involved in things such as CT, IDrive, FA, and other community-centered items that involve discussion and voting?
 * 2) *FA I've become really involved in since the Inqs, and I try to be quite involved in CT. IDrive, I'm sorry to say I've never been involved in (though I did once expand an article after it failed to reach ID, so that's sorta involved).
 * 3) Do you think admins performing actions (I.e. deletions, blocks, etc.) for reasons not covered on policy should be sanctioned/punished? If so, how?
 * 4) *Policy doesn't cover everything, and that should always be considered. Users don't get a free pass for clinging to the letter of the law while violating the spirit. However, when you're going outside policy you need to be especially careful that you're doing it fairly, which may often mean getting a second opinion. And if an admin is doing improper things, within policy or not, then that should be dealt with.
 * 5) What is your policy, if any, of welcoming new users? Should you welcome a new user, do you look at his/her contributions beforehand? What about anonymous IPs?
 * 6) *The one time I tried welcoming a user, SFH got there first. :P But usually, even if I don't welcome, I check anons' edits to see whether they're contributing or not (and to judge whether a questionable edit should be taken in good faith).
 * 7) How would you react if someone undeleted an article you'd mistakenly speedied? Under what circumstances would you consider it appropriate to undelete an article mistakenly speedied by another administrator, if any, and how would you approach this task?
 * 8) *If it was my mistake, I'd be glad someone caught it. If I felt that it really should be speedied, I'd talk it out with them. Reverse situation, if I thought they had made an actual mistake (that is, not something I just personally disagreed with), I'd undo it and leave a note on their talk page. If I just disagreed with it, I'd talk to them first.
 * 9) How would you react if your user page was vandalized? Under what circumstances would you block the offender? Is there anything else that you would do in this situation?
 * 10) *Warn them, and if they've been making a pattern of it, block them. Same as any other vandalism, except my watchlist would warn me.
 * 11) Under what circumstances would you consider blocking an established user?
 * 12) *Well, the circumstances for blocking would be the same as for any user, though established user violations would be more along the line of 3RR, NPA, and whatnot, rather than vandalism, so generally the blocks would be more of a cooldown nature than a permaban.
 * 13) If you could change any one thing about Wookieepedia, what would it be?
 * 14) *Bring back the borders and drop the rounded corners. :P Policy-wise, I think we might be a bit too lenient on obvious vandals who clearly are just trying to disrupt; when I see somebody replace an article with a bunch of profanity or slurs or whatever, and the only thing on his talk page is "Please use the sandbox to experiment", I have to raise an eyebrow.
 * 15) Would you look at a glass to be half-empty or half-full?
 * 16) *Half full...of air!
 * 17) Do you feel the current blocking policy is too restrictive, not restrictive enough, or OK as it is?
 * 18) *To tell the truth, I've never looked at our block policy until now, but everything on there is stuff I've thought was common sense anyway, so I'm cool with it.
 * 19) Have you ever considered becoming a regular visitor to the Wookieepedia IRC chat?
 * 20) *I am now, though I didn't even know how to use IRC before a few months ago.
 * 21) How do you feel about people who already have some influence on other Star Wars communities (TheForce.Net, StarWars.com) trying to change policies here?
 * 22) *If they're hear as contributing users, then they should have as much say as anybody (no more, though). But Joe Mod sniping about Wookieepedia from his blog is as important as anybody else ranting on the Internet, and frankly, can cram it. If actual official people from LFL had a problem with us (like, people with a say), then of course I'd say we'd need to worry about it.
 * 23) How many clones do you think fought in the Clone Wars? (Note: You are wrong no matter what answer you give.)
 * 24) *19 kilometers.
 * 25) Who is the most awesome Jedi of all time? (Note: The only correct answer is Kyle Katarn.)
 * 26) * Kol Skywalker Kyle Katarn.
 * 27) Are you or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?
 * 28) *Independent here. You can't tell who I'm going to vote for, G-men!
 * 29) What's more important to you: consensus or policy?
 * 30) *Common sense. Maybe a cheap answer, but it's true; if policy leads to something the community feels is nonsensical, then clinging to policy isn't doing the Wookiee any good, and if the community all wants to vote for something completely out of line with our role and purpose, then policy can be an effective way of curbing that. Since consensus can change policy, since ultimately the Wookiee is people, not rules, and since I'd like to think our top contributers tend to be sensible people anyway, I'd say that consensus usually takes the trump card, though.
 * 31) Have you had any previous leadership experience (in your community, on the web, etc.)?
 * 32) *I'm an Inq here. That's sort of like leadership, in the sense that you do things amongst your cabal group that everybody then hates you for.

Havac (1 bureaucrat + 5 admins + 7 users/1 admin + 1 user/0)
Two week deadline from first request, voting ends May 8, 2007.

Support

 * 1) Imp http://images.wikia.com/starwars/images/e/e5/ATATatarismall.png 21:17, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Go man, go! .  .  .  .  23:15, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Yep. Too much personality. -- Darth Culator  (Talk) 00:21, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Ulicus 00:25, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) At one point I thought he was one, actually, and was surprised to find out that wasn't the case. - Lord Hydronium 02:45, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) LtNOWIS 03:07, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Nod. --Azizlight 12:59, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 8)  Gonk  ( Gonk! ) 20:00, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Personality? So what? He's not a bot. I have never encountered this "dark side" of Havac. Chack Jadson 20:01, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 10)  Lord Oblivion Sith holocron[[Image:Oldsith.png|20px]] 02:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) Support. jSarek 06:38, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) Green Tentacle (Talk) 08:53, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 13) Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 11:58, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) Too much personality.-- Lord Oblivion Sith holocron[[Image:Oldsith.png|20px]] 21:20, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Atarumaster88  23:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) *Good point. .  .  .  .  23:55, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Worries more about how this wiki is viewed than the contentness of fanon-writing contributors, which IMO speaks of a lack of ability to hold practical benefits for Wookieepedia over it's image. Also insults fanon-writers. DarthMRN 19:25, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) *Fanon writers do not get insulted. They insult themselves. Thefourdotelipsis 05:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) **Oh, jeez. Not this. If you paid attention to my arguments in Votes for deletion/Breast, you'd know that I don't give a damn how this wiki is viewed. Again, look at my arguments on the other thread. If making general judgments on a general topic based on my experience with fanon and fanon-creating users -- while backing it up with statistics -- makes me insulting and elitist, then anyone to ever judge the merits of anything has been an insulting elitist. Please. Havac 05:25, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) ***You might actually believe that removing fanon would be more of a boon than a loss, I'm not you, I can't know for sure, but this is a direct quote: "[Fanfics/writers are] obnoxious and juvenile and only clutters up the page with stuff no one reads but their friends, who could just as easily read it on the fanon wiki". Insulting is a given. You can't expect everyone to support you. I've had admins before who were a little too opinionated for my own good, and I'm not going to stand idly by as another one is inaugurated. Since you have such a strong support, though, I can only pray you prove me wrong. DarthMRN 07:43, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) ****I'm guessing you're not running for Admin anytime soon, Fourdot? DarthMRN 07:46, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) ****Calling something a "direct quote" and then making part of it up? Tut-tut-tut. Let's see the actual quote: ""The positive effect fanon on userpages has for many users"? Who the heck gets a positive effect from it? It's obnoxious and juvenile..." and it continues as you've said from there. He says the fanon itself is obnoxious and juvenile, and you've somehow left that bit out to make it seem like he's insulting users. That's low. - Lord Hydronium 23:37, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Comments
Accepted nomination on IRC. -- Imp http://images.wikia.com/starwars/images/e/e5/ATATatarismall.png 21:17, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Questions

 * 1) Why do you want to become an administrator?
 * 2) *Because it would allow me to help Wookieepedia more than I can now. I'm a responsible user and I'd be happy to have a bigger toolbox to fight vandalism, maintain the Wookieepedia, etc.
 * 3) In your opinion, what is the role of an administrator?
 * 4) *It depends. They are, fundamentally, people with extra buttons. They get to delete stuff, protect stuff, close consensus track votes, kick people on IRC. They're the people that the community trusts to wield those necessary powers. However, that act of community trust means that they become -- de facto or de iure, it doesn't matter -- community leaders. They're the people that users turn to when they need help doing something -- yes, because the user doesn't have that handy delete button, but also because they're someone the user trusts to solve problems and do what must be done (By which I do not mean killing younglings. Though we are enforcing COPPA now. Hmmm . . . ). So administrators take the lead in the community simply by being more visible.
 * 5) In your view, do administrators hold a technical or political position?
 * 6) * See above -- it's some of both. They hold, by the grant of powers to them, a technical position. They're here to implement policy and keep vandals from changing every page to read "Penis penis penis". However, they also, by default, are people with prominence in the community -- usually something they had before they became an admin. But there's not a whole lot "political" that admins can do, really. I'm not here to seek more funding for Force Commander articles, and if I agitate for a more inclusionist policy, I'm doing that as a user and my admin status doesn't come into it.
 * 7) How do you feel admins should use their power/stand in comparison with other users?
 * 8) *They should use it as they're supposed to. Stock answer, but true. It shouldn't be something to be lorded over other users, especially not as leverage in arguments. But there's nothing to tippy-toe around, either. Be humble and everything should run fine.
 * 9) Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
 * 10) *Not significantly. I've been in discussions over policy before -- stuff like merging Anakin and Vader, stuff which gets heated on all sides with a lot of users drawn in. But nothing of a personal, one-on-one type. When I do get into those kinds of arguments, it's simply a matter of stating and restating and clarifying my position and pointing out flaws in the other side's position. It's not personal, and while I'll argue away, it's not something that I walk off steaming over, and taking a different side from me isn't something I'll hold a grudge over, even if I think you're badly mistaken.
 * 11) Of your articles or contributions to Wookieepedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * 12) *My work on Force Commander has me particularly pleased, since I took what was rather shoddy coverage of the game across multiple articles and improved all of them to the point that I feel the game is better covered than most sources on here. I've also done quite a bit of categorization work, which I think helps make Wookieepedia easy to use, even if it's something that doesn't get a lot of attention. However, I'd have to say I'm most proud of the Featured Articles that I've written. It's very satisfying to take a flawed article and bring it up to be judged one of the best, and it helps improve the quality of Wookieepedia as a resource tremendously.
 * 13) What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with?
 * 14) *Deletion, anti-vandalism, and the regular stuff. What I'd like to do as well is keep an eye on the Consensus Track and VFD, which often don't have votes closed and implemented in a timely fashion.
 * 15) How important is it for you to be involved in things such as CT, IDrive, FA, and other community-centered items that involve discussion and voting?
 * 16) *Very important, insofar as I think the subject is important and I can contribute. I look at every CT thread and VFD and vote on any issue on which I have an opinion one way or the other. If I don't, I'm not going to vote for the sake of voting. FA I'm of course very active in as an Inquisitor. Other stuff, like IDrive, I generally ignore because not much goes on with it for one, and because most of the IDrive articles aren't ones on which I have a specialty. I do my own IDrives, if you will, when editing up whatever articles I'm doing, and I think I do a lot more good that way.
 * 17) Do you think admins performing actions (I.e. deletions, blocks, etc.) for reasons not covered on policy should be sanctioned/punished? If so, how?
 * 18) *How is the question, isn't it? You can't really punish an admin. Ban them and they can unban themselves. Otherwise, you can give them a stern talking to. You can also de-sysop them and then ban them. Those are pretty much your options. So, you give them a stern talking-to if they do something they shouldn't, just like you would any experienced user who violates policy, and if they build up a pattern you take it to a de-sysop vote, which I think we've implemented, because they're clearly not cut out for the powers they have.
 * 19) What is your policy, if any, of welcoming new users? Should you welcome a new user, do you look at his/her contributions beforehand? What about anonymous IPs?
 * 20) *I don't. It's just not something that I generally notice, and usually someone else gets there first. The only exception is if I notice someone doing something he shouldn't and I go to his talkpage to warn him and there's no welcome template. In that case I'll throw one on and leave a "You're new, so just so you know, please don't do X. Thanks a lot, hope you contribute well" type message.
 * 21) How would you react if someone undeleted an article you'd mistakenly speedied? Under what circumstances would you consider it appropriate to undelete an article mistakenly speedied by another administrator, if any, and how would you approach this task?
 * 22) *If it's a clear mistake? I'd restore it and leave a message telling them why. If it's not a clear mistake, but I think it is? I'd talk it over with them first, and come to a consensus over what to do. If we're horribly split, I'd take it outside, through a VFD or to another admin.
 * 23) How would you react if your user page was vandalized? Under what circumstances would you block the offender? Is there anything else that you would do in this situation?
 * 24) *I would treat it just like any other act of vandalism. A warning if it's a first-time, possibly innocent offense, and a short ban if it occurs after a warning to stop or it it's of a clearly malicious, will-never-contribute-positively type.
 * 25) Under what circumstances would you consider blocking an established user?
 * 26) *Under the same circumstances I'd consider blocking an unestablished user, ideally. Being around for a year doesn't make it any better to vandalize, vote-farm, or whatever. However, being a human being, I'd probably be more likely to give them the benefit of the doubt if they've contributed well in the past and this seems to be a one-time slipup. However, if I give them a warning and they do it again, then they haven't learned their lesson and they need a cooldown ban at the least, just like anyone else.
 * 27) If you could change any one thing about Wookieepedia, what would it be?
 * 28) *I would be Wookieepedia dictator for life. It would make deciding policy so much easier. Seriously? I'd implement some more stuff from Wikipedia:NOT, such as not an anarchy and not a bureaucracy.
 * 29) Would you look at a glass to be half-empty or half-full?
 * 30) *Simple probability suggests it will never be exactly half-and-half. But if you want to know pessimistic vs. optimistic, I'm a sick blend of both.
 * 31) Do you feel the current blocking policy is too restrictive, not restrictive enough, or OK as it is?
 * 32) *We don't seem to have too many problems with it.
 * 33) Have you ever considered becoming a regular visitor to the Wookieepedia IRC chat?
 * 34) *How did I accept this nomination, again?
 * 35) How do you feel about people who already have some influence on other Star Wars communities (TheForce.Net, StarWars.com) trying to change policies here?
 * 36) *Vote-farming is bad, mmmkay? Beyond that? If you're a real user, you have just as much right to vote however you feel as does anyone else. But if you're here solely to push an agenda, then you're not contributing and you can get lost. And if you're not even on Wookieepedia but complaining about it from afar? Who cares, then? Talk all you want. You can't change anything unless you're here.
 * 37) How many clones do you think fought in the Clone Wars? (Note: You are wrong no matter what answer you give.)
 * 38) *3 million in the GAR in the first year, with an unknown additional amount outside that. Yeah, didn't think I'd take that one seriously, did you?
 * 39) Who is the most awesome Jedi of all time? (Note: The only correct answer is Kyle Katarn.)
 * 40) *Kyle Katarn. Closely followed by Obi-Wan Kenobi, Pernicar, Jolee Bindo, Kiel Charny, and . . . ah, hell, there are a lot of cool Jedi.
 * 41) Are you or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?
 * 42) *I love capitalism with a deep and passionate love.
 * 43) What's more important to you: consensus or policy?
 * 44) *Policy, because that's what is on the books to be enforced. But consensus is how you get policy. In the end, though, it all comes down to common sense.
 * 45) Have you had any previous leadership experience (in your community, on the web, etc.)?
 * 46) *I'm an Inquisitor here, a channel operator in irc.holonet.org, and I've done a decent amount of leadership stuff in my community.

Requests for bureaucratship
Rules:
 * Admins may be nominated here purely by another admin or bureaucrat. (please ensure they accept the nomination first)
 * You cannot nominate yourself.

To view past requests, see the RFB archive.

Requirements
There are some basic things to consider when nominating an admin for bureaucratship.


 * 1) They are an administrator.
 * 2) They have actively contributed for at least a year to the wiki.
 * 3) They have actively taken on additional responsibilities to make the encyclopedia better.
 * 4) They have dealings with other users on a regular basis in a fair, restrained, and constructive manner.
 * 5) They have have a deep understanding of the community's methods of operation.
 * 6) Registered users' votes must have a 3/4ths supermajority for bureaucratship to be accepted (Only users who have been registered for over a month&mdash;from the day the nomination is put forth&mdash;are counted).
 * 7) Administrators' votes must have a 3/4ths supermajority for bureaucratship to be accepted.
 * 8) Bureaucrats' votes must be unanimous for bureaucratship to be accepted.
 * 9) Additionally, the nominee may be asked a series of questions by users. While it is not required to answer them, it is strongly encouraged since it may affect how others decide and vote on the RFB.

Requests for rollback
Rules:
 * You may nominate another Wookieepedian (please ensure they accept the nomination first)
 * You cannot nominate yourself.

To view past requests, see the RFR archive.

Requirements
There are some basic things to consider when nominating a fellow Wookieepedian for rollback rights.


 * 1) They have an account under a screenname.
 * 2) They have actively contributed for at least six months to the wiki.
 * 3) They have demonstrated a need for the ability through extensive anti-vandalism work.

Questions

 * 1) Why should you be granted rollback rights?