Wookieepedia:Requests for user rights

This page is for requests for user rights.

Voting will last two weeks from the date of nomination, ending at 0:00 UTC of the fourteenth day, at which time, if the vote is affirmative, the nominee will be granted the requested user rights.

Requests for rollback
Rules:
 * You may nominate another Wookieepedian (please ensure they accept the nomination first)
 * You cannot nominate yourself.
 * Self-votes will not be counted in the vote totals.

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.
 * 4) Registered users' votes must have a 2/3rds supermajority for the request to be accepted.
 * 5) Administrators' votes must have a 2/3rds supermajority for the request to be accepted. (Separated from user votes)

Questions

 * 1) Why should you be granted rollback rights?

Requests for adminship
Rules:
 * You may nominate another Wookieepedian (please ensure they accept the nomination first)
 * You cannot nominate yourself.
 * Self-votes will not be counted in the vote totals.

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 either are of adult age (18 years or older) or have two years' worth of solid contribution to the site.
 * 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 contributions.
 * 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) 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.

Grand Moff Tranner (5 admins + 5 users/0/0)
Two week deadline from first request, voting ends 30 March 2010.

Support

 * 1) Grand Moff Tranner is an excellent user. Even though he's under 18, he is eligible, as he has been contributing to Wookieepedia for over two years. He is a prolific writer and reviewer, belonging to both the AgriCorps and the Inquisitors. He's also friendly, helpful, and dedicated. In addition, Tranner is very mature (except when making jokes about me :P ) and cares about this site. He frequently patrols recent changes; giving him adminship will allow us to delete nonsense and block vandals quicker, instead of Tranner having to wait for an admin to come along. A former Wookieepedia of the Month, Tranner is a real asset to Wookieepedia, and most definitely deserves to be an admin.  Chack Jadson  (Talk) 21:05, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Definitely. Long overdue.  JangFett  (Talk) 22:35, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3)  IFYLOFD  ( Floyd's crib ) 23:05, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) Now we're talking. Graestan ( Talk ) 23:14, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * 5) I was wondering why he wasn't an admin already, but I didn't know he was under 18. :) &mdash;Master Jonathan(Jedi Council Chambers) 23:42, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * 6) Completely per Chack. Tranner definitely is deserving. Jonjedigrandmaster  Jedi symbol.svg ( We seed the stars ) 23:54, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * 7) --Eyrezer 01:04, March 17, 2010 (UTC)
 * 8) Odd...I thought he was one already. Well, he's been enormously helpful, so I vote yes. Dr. Kermit ( Complain. ) 01:10, March 17, 2010 (UTC)
 * 9) Here daily, good user. I'm all for it. -- SFH 01:16, March 17, 2010 (UTC)
 * 10) Grunny  ( talk ) 01:51, March 17, 2010 (UTC)

Optional Q+A

 * 1) Why do you want to become an administrator?
 * 2) *Well, ever since I joined, I've always been dedicated to improving the site in whatever ways possible - including as a member of both the Inquisitorius and the AgriCorps, and through the use of the rollback function. I feel that, as an administrator, I would be in a better position to fulfill my goal. I also wish to be in a position where I could provide assistance to anyone who needs it.
 * 3) In your opinion, what is the role of an administrator?
 * 4) *As I see it, the administration is the face of the site, and the administrators are ready to perform whatever actions are required. They should help new users, mediate conflicts, enforce policy, and generally ensure that everything works properly.
 * 5) In your view, do administrators hold a technical or political position?
 * 6) *I believe they hold both. Obviously administrators hold a technical position, having the ability to delete articles and block unruly users, but they also have a political position as leaders, being the face of the site and such.
 * 7) How do you feel admins should use their power/stand in comparison with other users?
 * 8) *Because administrators have powers that ordinary users do not, it's clear that they will be higher up on the chain of command, if you will, enforcing policy and maintaining the quality of the site. That being said, administrators should use their authority and powers to help regular users.
 * 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've been involved in a few conflicts in the past, many of which I do regret. I think that it's difficult to avoid such encounters on a site with so many users, each with their own opinions and views. I've learned to take a step back, analyze all sides of the conflict, and then make a judgment - if I find myself to be in error, I admit my fault and apologize; if I believe that another user involved is at fault, I try my best to respectfully inform him/her and resolve the dispute.
 * 11) Of your articles or contributions to Wookieepedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * 12) *Over my two years of editing Wookieepedia, I've managed to assemble a resume of many Featured and Good Articles. I'd be lying if I didn't say that I wasn't pleased with all of my Featured Articles, because of all the hard work I put into them.
 * 13) What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with?
 * 14) *As many as possible, I suppose. I've always been a recent changes patroller, and I tend to watch out for newly-created articles to make sure they're in compliance with all of the Wook's guidelines. Additionally, I often take part in Trash Compactor and Consensus Track threads, so I suppose I'd take part in related chores.
 * 15) How important is it for you to be involved in things such as CT, FA, GA, and other community-centered items that involve discussion and voting?
 * 16) *I think the community factor is a big part of Wookieepedia. As both a member of the Inquisitorius and AgriCorps and an occassional writer/nominator of articles, I'm involved often on both the FAN page and GAN page. Additionally, I usually participate in CT threads and the like.
 * 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) *I believe that each case would have to be analyzed individually. The administrator involved would obviously have to explain the intent behind his or her action before any judgment could be passed on the matter.
 * 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 often welcome new users, as others usually beat me to it. I admit, I often look at some of the user's contributions as a precaution, just to ensure that there are no policies being broken. If there are, I will usually warn them appropriately. I suppose the same applies to IPs.
 * 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 I mistakenly speedied an article that was not fanon or vandalism, I'd be at fault, so I wouldn't do anything to the user who recreated the article. If I saw the need to recreate a mistakenly-deleted article, I suppose that I would first notify the admin who deleted the article and inform him/her why I was going to recreate the article before actually restoring the page.
 * 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) *Well, my userpage has already been vandalized, and now it's semi-protected, so I suppose I don't have much to worry about with that. :p But in all seriousness, I would check to see if that was the user's first offense, and if so, I would warn him/her accordingly. If he/she ignored that warning and continued vandalizing, I would block him/her for the appropriate amount of time. If the user's vandalism to my page was not the first offense, but rather a second, third, etc. and had already been warned, then I would block him/her, again for an appropriate length.
 * 25) Under what circumstances would you consider blocking an established user?
 * 26) *If an established user continually violated policy, even after a warning, I would block them for the appropriate amount of time as if they were any other user.
 * 27) If you could change any one thing about Wookieepedia, what would it be?
 * 28) *I'd purge all TCW-related material from the site without hesitation. :p Actually, I think that Wookieepedia is operating rather well these days, so I don't know if I would change anything.
 * 29) Would you look at a glass to be half-empty or half-full?
 * 30) *Either way, if I keep drinking whatever is in it, I'd need a refill.
 * 31) Do you feel the current blocking policy is too restrictive, not restrictive enough, or OK as it is?
 * 32) *I think it's pretty good - after all, it works.
 * 33) Have you ever considered becoming a regular visitor to the Wookieepedia IRC chat?
 * 34) *I already am - I'm in there daily, for various amounts of time.
 * 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) *In the past, I've been unhappy when relatively new users come on to the site and attempt to change policy. I suppose this wouldn't change if the new user just so happened to be an established member of another online Star Wars community. If they want to be a part of Wookieepedia, they'd have to become familiar with our policies, just as any of us would have to do if we decided to join some other community.
 * 37) How many clones do you think fought in the Clone Wars? (Note: You are wrong no matter what answer you give.)
 * 38) *None. The Clone Wars is just a myth, created by Palpatine to show how stupid the period from 22-19 BBY has become.
 * 39) Who is the most awesome Jedi of all time? (Note: The only correct answer is Kyle Katarn.)
 * 40) *The most awesome Jedi of all time is obviously someone with the initials "KK." Yep, that's right - Kith Kark.
 * 41) What's more important to you: consensus or policy?
 * 42) *The way I see it, policy is more important, as it's been established and usually works well. However, in the case of a policy that needs to be changed, or a new policy that needs to be implemented, consensus is equally important.
 * 43) Have you had any previous leadership experience (in your community, on the web, etc.)?
 * 44) *Right here on the Wook, I've been a member of the AgriCorps and the Inquisitorius for a good amount of time. Off the Wook, I've had some leadership roles, including being a student teacher at summer music camps.
 * 45) What is your attitude towards users who have quit the site or have been banned, but still continue to attempt to influence the site in any way?
 * 46) *Only active users should be able to influence the site. If a user was blocked, he or she obviously can't follow policy, and therefore have no rights to change or influence anything. Likewise, if someone quit the site, they shouldn't be attempting to influence anything, unless they intend to return to the site and contribute.
 * 47) What is your wiki philosophy?
 * 48) *I've always believed that following established policy is key to being a member of any wiki, and I'm not a big fan of new users who come onto the site and attempt to change a policy just because they don't like it.

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.
 * Self-votes will not be counted in the vote totals.

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 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) 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.