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. :)

Thefourdotelipsis (1 bureaucrat + 2 admins + 1 user/1 bureaucrat + 3 users + 2 admins/0)
Two week deadline from first request, voting ends 15 March 2007.

Support

 * 1) Because. - Sikon 19:19, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Kuralyov 20:44, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) I like contradicting people... Karohalva 22:08, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) YES! In the name of the Beard, the Briar, and the Holy Crow, 4dot must be an admin! The power of Mount Sorrow compels you! -- Darth Culator  (Talk)(Kills) 22:14, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) I'm going with the "do we need more" mentality displayed by such users as Jaymach.-- Lord Oblivion Sith holocron[[Image:Oldsith.png|20px]] 19:26, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Uh...yeah...what he said. &mdash;Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 19:28, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Chack Jadson 20:59, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) No. Basically violates every precept of Requirement 6. Highly opinionated, including what could be construed as bashing of VIPs, and gets in frequent edit wars and arguments. Left a personal attack template on a user's page that also implied negative connotations to a Wookieepedia organization. Fourdot is an avid contributor, but an administrator, he should not be. Just because he made a Wookiee-Cast (which isn't official and is pretty much a joke anyway if I heard it properly) does not make him good grounds for an admin. Atarumaster88  [[Image:Jedi_Order.jpg|20px]] ( Audience Chamber ) 21:44, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Keep doing the Wookiee-Cast but sorry. --  Riffsyphon  1024 21:48, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Per AM88. -- Yoshi  626 [[Image:Yoshiegg.jpg|20px]] 22:01, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) As much as I like Fourdot, six is a rule for a reason. Havac 22:43, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Comments

 * Has he accepted this nomination?-- Lord Oblivion Sith holocron[[Image:Oldsith.png|20px]] 19:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Nevermind.-- Lord Oblivion Sith holocron[[Image:Oldsith.png|20px]] 19:56, 1 March 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.

Questions

 * 1) Why do you think we need another bureaucrat?
 * 2) How do you see the difference between an admin and a bureaucrat?
 * 3) What will you use your new status for if your nomination succeeds?
 * 4) How many admins do you think we need?
 * 5) How many bureaucrats do you think we need?
 * 6) How often do you think bureaucrats should use their veto power on RFA?

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?

I need a name (1 bureaucrat+4 admins+4 users/0/0)
Two week deadline from first request, voting ends March 15, 2007.

Support

 * 1) As I told him on his talk page, he seems to have either reported or reverted a large proportion of the vandals I've blocked recently. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 22:00, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Per Silly Dan. -- Yoshi  626 [[Image:Yoshiegg.jpg|20px]] 22:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Imp 22:04, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Green Tentacle (Talk) 22:04, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Double edit-conflicted strong support. G .He (Talk!) 22:05, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) As long as its only for reverting vandals. --  Riffsyphon  1024 22:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) As much as I pretend that the feature doesn't exist, I'm not opposed to Ineedaname having it. &mdash;Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 22:13, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 8)  Lord Oblivion Sith holocron[[Image:Oldsith.png|20px]] 22:15, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Since it doesn't affect me, I refuse to acknowledge that this "giverollback" tool exists. But I wouldn't be opposed to giving INAN the rollback power if such a tool did exist. -- Darth Culator  (Talk)(Kills) 22:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)