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. :)

(1 bureaucrat + 6 admins + 4 users/1 user/0)
Two week deadline from first request, voting ends 6 September 2007.

Support

 * 1) For his contributions, including the insane number of articles he promoted to FA and GA status, and for the Wookiee-Cast. Sikon 03:21, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) As a regular user, he impressed me with his positive attitude and helpfulness. I will gladly follow Fourdot as an admin. - Graestan  [[Image:Jedi_Order.jpg|20px]] ( This party's over ) 03:42, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) YES! HOORJ!! --  Darth Culator  (Talk) 04:07, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Hell yeah. --Azizlight 04:49, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) I said I would pledge support so here it is. Joker1138 ( Mandalore ) [[Image:MandalorianSymbol.jpg|25px]] 14:50, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Absent schmabsent. Even admins have lives. I've never seen anyone more worthy of my vote! You are a true hero, young Fourdot. Take all the POWAH you want!  Gonk  ( Gonk! ) 14:48, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) We definitely need another absent admin. --Imperialles 14:50, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) I guess my being away for a week due to my wedding and whatnot makes me an absent admin, yay! I will be glad to have you with us as a Admin, 4dot :) Greyman ( Paratus ) 14:52, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Haven't always seen eye-to-eye with him, but I know he'll do a good job. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 15:00, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) Don't hold his attempt at a real life against him. Do hold his love of Phil Collins against him. Green Tentacle (Talk) 16:24, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) *Yeah, the Phil Collins answer almost made me change my vote ;-) --Azizlight 00:59, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) Gotta love the 4dot. --School of Thrawn 101 04:20, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 13) Most interesting answers to the questions yet, in his ever entertaining view of life (I can feel it coming in the air tonight...). The funny man will make a good admin (assuming vandals don't piss him off too much, down Kujo.) but make more Wookiee-Casts dammit! ;) --  Riffsyphon  1024 15:28, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 14) .... definitely deserves it! By the way, Phil Collins is pretty good actually. -- Cato Neimoidia 01:16, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) Absent for quite a bit of the time, we don't need another absent admin like Cull and Imp.  Jediknight19bby  ( Jedi High Council Chambers ) 14:34, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Comments

 * 1) Accepted nomination on IRC. - Sikon 03:21, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Answers

 * 1) Why do you want to become an administrator?
 * 2) *To protect the property and citizenry of...heh, just kidding. I think that first and foremost, I'd like to cut out the middle man. There have been plenty of times where I've had to go to an administrator for something or other, and that's not a criticism of the current Admins, it's just the consequences, or advantage, in this case, of living in a different timezone. The time I'm usually active on the Wiki, I think we could do with another admin who isn't asleep. Also, I really, really like that lime green thing admins have going on in RC.
 * 3) In your opinion, what is the role of an administrator?
 * 4) *To protect the property and citizenry of...actually, yeah, I think it's basically to keep the peace, and represent the community as a whole. I think it is the duty of an administrator to properly welcome and inform new users, moderate discussions, and ban the hell out of offenders. And they should also wade through articles in search of errors. And fix them.
 * 5) In your view, do administrators hold a technical or political position?
 * 6) *Political, with a technical wardrobe. Laypeople are loathe to cross admins. Unless they have a Ban Wish. I'm not saying that's the way it should be, but it's certainly the way it is where I stand.
 * 7) How do you feel admins should use their power/stand in comparison with other users?
 * 8) *Well, they certainly shouldn't lord it over them, and should only fall back on it as a last resort. An admin, I think, shouldn't really assert their authority in lay-people's affair, unless it breaches policy, and should only really do their thing in areas exclusive to them. Whatever that means.
 * 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) *Yes, I have in the past, entered into a variety of conflicts, but since my first failed (and stealthy) RFA, I've decided to live and let live, and occasionally suggest that both participants in a conflict harden the f*** up and get on with it. In retrospect, all of the debates I've entered into with a vengeance have been very, very petty, and oh so trivial. I just don't have time for them anymore.
 * 11) Of your articles or contributions to Wookieepedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * 12) *Hmm...Armand Isard, personally, is my favourite, because I took a lot of cameos and fleeting appearances and forged a full bio from it. Also Tholme, because it meant I had to read a lot of turgid Dark Horse story arcs starring the dreadlocked dumbass. But it turned out alright, I think, and it turned out large. Other than that, Mount Sorrow taught me I could certainly make a mountain out of a molehill. No pun intended.
 * 13) What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with?
 * 14) *Ooh, deleting redundant images, playing Pontius Four Dot on talk pages, banning arse-wipes...I suppose after a while, I'll find a niche for myself and stick to it, though.
 * 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?
 * Ah, I think it is important, but not imperative. It's probably good for publicity to have admins involved in such things, and the obligations would lead to me become a much better rounded user, but I just can't see myself being compelled to work on something like IDrive. I'm more of a lone operator. ;)
 * 1) Do you think admins performing actions (I.e. deletions, blocks, etc.) for reasons not covered on policy should be sanctioned/punished? If so, how?
 * 2) *Hmm. It seems to me that you can't answer that question without context. Policy can be rigid, and extraordinary circumstances might fall outside those set in stone guidelines. It all boils down to common sense, but that's a subjective thing. If the punishment is done without good cause, however, I think that defrocking may well be in order.
 * 3) 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?
 * 4) *I think we should welcome all users who make at least 1 constructive edit, and the same goes for IPs. If the next edit is destructive, we can always follow it up with a nice "Get the hell out of here."
 * 5) 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?
 * 6) *Well, if I had mistakenly speedied it, all power to the restorer. And if the article was of worth, I would certainly not hesitate to restore it, regardless of who deleted it, unless a sufficient reason was provided. As for how I would approach it, I don't know. I haven't got the buttons yet.
 * 7) 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?
 * 8) *I would respond in the same way I would with any other user page vandalism. Warning, then block. It's not an extraordinary circumstance in my opinion, and should be treated like any other similar instance.
 * 9) Under what circumstances would you consider blocking an established user?
 * 10) *Repeated disruption of the peace, flouncy but subtle undermining...and full support from my peers.
 * 11) If you could change any one thing about Wookieepedia, what would it be?
 * 12) *I would take Blizzard 1 out to the street and violently beat it until it was a fine powder. Then I would snort the power, before killing myself by piloting a hang glider into the sun. But seriously, I think we're doing OK. There are a few minor, trivial things that I would probably like to be different, but I accept and respec the consensus.
 * 13) Would you look at a glass to be half-empty or half-full?
 * 14) *That would be dependent upon the contents.
 * 15) Do you feel the current blocking policy is too restrictive, not restrictive enough, or OK as it is?
 * 16) *I have no problems with it at the moment.
 * 17) Have you ever considered becoming a regular visitor to the Wookieepedia IRC chat?
 * 18) *Yeah...about 6 months ago. Stupid question.
 * 19) 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?
 * 20) *As long as they don't try and use that previous influence to prove that the sun shines out of their arse, fine by me.
 * 21) How many clones do you think fought in the Clone Wars? (Note: You are wrong no matter what answer you give.)
 * 22) *Clone Wars? There are no Clone Wars. There never were any Clone Wars. This Clone War you hear of is the foulest lie of the infidel.
 * 23) Who is the most awesome Jedi of all time? (Note: The only correct answer is Kyle Katarn.)
 * 24) *Phil Collins. He's Star Wars' Nostradamus.
 * 25) Are you or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?
 * 26) *No comment.
 * 27) What's more important to you: consensus or policy?
 * 28) *Consensus. Consensus has the power to change policy, but policy can't do a damn thing to consensus.
 * 29) Have you had any previous leadership experience (in your community, on the web, etc.)?
 * 30) *Not to my knowledge. Thefourdotelipsis 04:37, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

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?

Jorrel Fraajic (1 bureaucrat + 5 admins + 6 users/0/0)
Two week deadline from first request, voting ends September 3, 2007.

Support

 * 1) Thefourdotelipsis 09:54, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Like . . . oh, you all know what it's like by now. jSarek 09:56, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Despite never finishing Waru. Green Tentacle (Talk) 10:01, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Imperialles 11:10, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) -- [[Image:AckbarSig.jpg|40px]] dmirableAckbar  ( It's A Trap! ) 11:17, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Jedimca0(Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 11:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Gonk!  Gonk  ( Gonk! ) 12:31, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Darth Culator (Talk) 13:13, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Joker1138 ( Mandalore ) [[Image:MandalorianSymbol.jpg|25px]]19:31, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) POOWWWAAHHHHHHHHHH! [[Image:The Death of Ki-Adi-Mundi.jpg|40px]]  Jediknight19bby  ( Jedi High Council Chambers! ) 16:40, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Lord Hydronium 03:02, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 15:00, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) —Xwing328 (Talk) 16:14, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Jedipilot94 [[Image:fordocw.jpg|25px]] (*Fo-Shizzle*)  01:01, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Comments

 * The man has proven himself to be an active and dedicated member of this community, he's earned his keep with some large contributions, and an FA to boot. I know that's not the reason for giving rollback, but he hasn't, to my knowledge, delved into petty dispute (more than I can say for myself), and has never given anyone any reason to suspect that he is untrustworthy in any way, shape or form. He may not have been active of late, but everyone needs a break sometime. That doesn't seem to me to be a legit reason to hide the candy responsibility. Hell, I would have nominated him for adminship, but I have the sneaking suspicion that age fails to permit. Thus, rollback. Thefourdotelipsis 09:54, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Your sneaking suspicion is correct, although even if I was the correct age I would turn down the offer. At least, I think I would. Sigh. I cave way too easily, methinks. Jorrel [[Image:Wiki-shrinkable.png|20px]] Fraajic 12:39, 20 August 2007 (UTC)