Forum:Request for bureaucratship

From SmashWiki, the Super Smash Bros. wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Index Watercooler Request for bureaucratship

Hey, Smashwiki team, I'm Charitwo, one of administrators here. I've thought about this a while, and after speaking to one of the semi-active bureaucrats, he suggested that I follow this route to request bureaucrat here on SmashWiki. We currently don't have a set process, as the last bureaucrat was chosen by hand, but due to the increase in the community from the merge, a warrant for consensus is needed.

Let me start of by formally introducing myself; my name is Charitwo if you didn't gather that already :) I started out on Wikia in September 07 when my wiki was moved to Wikia, something you the community can relate to. So I know exactly where you're coming from when you had issues or adjustments to address or get used to after merging, I went through the same thing. Wikia grew on me, and the move was definitely for the best. The wiki in question is FFXIclopedia, of where I'm also a sysop, and I've been a part of that community since November of 06. When I'm not contributing or maintaining FFXI or SmashWiki, I involve myself in anti-vandalism and spam efforts across Wikia, locate/reproduce/report bugs on various wikis, and provide support to the Wikia community through Central Wikia, individual wikis, and IRC on the freenode network, and where I am not able to assist, I relay them in the right direction.

As far as this Wiki, I started out in January prior to the release of Brawl and prior to the wiki merge. [w:User:Angies|Angie] of the Wikia gaming team asked me to help out here and help get this place going for the Brawl release. I ended up going from just helping out to a more active contributor role and was given sysop by Bonko24 for my efforts on the wiki.

Now onto why I think we need another active bureaucrat. Currently, Dtm142 and Kirby King are the two most recent bureaucrats to perform a bureaucratic function on SmashWiki. The other bureaucrat, Bonko24, retired during the merge of the two wikis. And the original bureaucrat, Alexir55 is no longer active here either. Currently, Dtm and Kirby King aren't as active as they used to be, and the other SmashWiki bureaucrats (Gideon and Moreliator) aren't active at all. So I was thinking another more active bureaucrat might help balance that out, especially with the bigger community. Now, I know what you're thinking, "Sysop nominations are closed, why do we need another bureaucrat right now?" The answer is, with another bureaucrat, I can work with the other active bureaucrats and administrators and see where we stand with activity amongst current sysops, and look into re-opening those again if and when necessary, to give those community members who enjoy maintaining the wiki (deleting old images, closing deletion discussions, dealing with vandalism, etc) a chance to better do what they do best. And I will also be more than willing to grant rollback rights to those who either aren't ready for an RfA, or do not wish to be an admin, but would like the ability to rollback vandalism and other bad faith edits. I've noticed a few folks around here who could more than likely benefit from it.

I thank you for your time reading this and look forward to your scrutiny. :)

--CharitwoTalk 00:33, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I dig it. Semicolon (talk) 16:39, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for a n00b question, but how is a bureaucrat different than a Sysop? I'm just wondering is all. Cheezperson (talk) 01:42, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Basically, they gain the power to promote other people to admin status or to demote admins to regular users.–Entrea Sumatae 01:49, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
On Wikia, bureaucrats can give other users admin, bureaucrat, or rollback status. They cannot remove admin or bureaucrat status, however. As a bureaucrat, one would promote to admin based on the RfA process and determine if the community agrees with promotion, not of the bureaucrat's own opinion. --CharitwoTalk 01:56, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm game, you helped me multiple time on other wikia and have helped a lot with this one. - Hatake91 (talk) 20:54, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

I didn't catch this the first time reading it, so I'll ask to make absolutely sure: are you requesting that you be promoted to bureaucrat? --Shadowcrest 05:04, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Umm no I'm not, sorry but my english skills on the internet are equivalent to a first grader - Hatake91 (talk)
It was directed at Charitwo ;)
Your english is fine, I guess it was the odd indent I used. --Shadowcrest 18:33, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
I'd say that's why I wrote this bit up. :) It's only in a forum because we don't have a current process for this. --CharitwoTalk 22:07, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Ah. Well in that case, I don't feel qualified enough to confidently cast a vote. The first time reading through I thought this was a suggestion to create a process of promoting a bureaucrat. I must have been really tired then :P --Shadowcrest 04:23, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

I want to be a bureaucrat here on this site! I've got the skill to fix up the wiki and know alot about SSBB! How do I sign up?? Squallinoa 08 (talk) 22:45, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Bad news on that front. You have to learn how to edit, make lots of edits, prove you're a valuable member of this site, get promoted to sysop, and then work as a sysop for a while, then get promoted to bureaucrat. It's not impossible, but it will take a while. We'd love for you to hang around and share your knowledge of SSBB, though. Any contributions you make will be helpful and appreciated. Semicolon (talk) 23:08, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, since I've realized that this place needs a strong active bcrat (and since nobody would promote me </conceit>), you seem like the best option Smashwiki's got, so here goes. Note: Anyone can comment on these questions if they feel they can.


  1. Familiarity with SmashWiki policy, both literally and intent. Is Charitwo familiar with SmashWiki policy?
  2. Does Charitwo have a questionable record of past disagreements? Does he maintain a high level of maturity when conflicts become heated?
  3. How does Charitwo deal with policy violations? Are this user's actions as a sysop fair, reasonable, and thought-out?
  4. Does the community trust Charitwo? Is he impartial to the best of his abilities, or if he can not remain impartial, does he refrain from aggrivating the situation? Is Charitwo open about his intentions?
  5. Is Charitwo prone to rash actions that may be regretted in the future?
  6. Does Charitwo step in to moderate or resolve conflicts even when not involved or requested? (Also see point 4)
  7. Does Charitwo seek input from the community before making large scale decisions, especially ones that could cause conflict?

Additional beneficial (but not required) traits

  1. Is Charitwo able to successfully compromise?
  2. Does Charitwo have at least basic knowledge in MediaWiki extensions, WikiCode, sitewide CSS and Javascript, and especially Bots?
  3. How does Charitwo work with other editors, sysops and bureaucrats?
  4. Is Charitwo experienced? Does he understand what is required of him?

From what I can tell, Charitwo seems like the best candidate available. If Charitwo thinks he fulfills these criteria then I'd be happy to support him as a bureaucrat. --Shadowcrest 03:50, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I retract my support and strongly oppose Charitwo's request for bureaucratship. This user needs a serious attitude change; this is nothing but unacceptable. Charitwo does not seem to understand that holding a sysop position does not make him any different than other users. "You are an editor, focus on content please." ...What the fuck? So once you're promoted to sysop you're free to ignore contributing to content and edit whatever the hell you please, but normal users are restricted to mainspace? I don't think so. Charitwo also denies the need for consensus and refused to undo his non-consensus-backed edits even when pointed out to him. Again, wtf? If this kind of action is what he deems acceptable when he's a sysop, I shudder to think what kind of tyrannical edits he may make when he's a bureaucrat, especially when this is no more than a non-critical issue. It is, frankly, quite scary. If he deems polite suggestions and requests harassment, then it is very clear Charitwo is unfit to be a bureaucrat of this wiki. --Shadowcrest 02:38, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Finally lost your cool? Well, for the record, I'm impressed. Jolly good show, though. All the best, Semicolon (talk) 04:53, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Who lost their cool? I hope you must be referring to Charitwo; I still haven't lost mine. I even waited a day to make sure I wasn't changing my vote out of anger and/or spite. After all, that's fallacious on two counts, and I wouldn't want to deny a possible candidate (when this wiki needs another) because I was biased. However, I am confidant that I am unbiased, and thus I can honestly say I don't think Chatitwo would make a good bureaucrat. I will admit what Charitwo said made me angry. I started shaking when I read it. That's the truth. Why else do you think I refrained from posting on his page again? I would have lost my temper. However, I refuse to lose my temper on the (or any) wiki, this one in particular because of my current status. Consider my standing. All the users who care enough to remember who I am consider me an upstart firebrand who spreads fiery rhetoric to change things, mirite? (If you don't, let me know. It would honestly amaze me.) Do you really think blowing up would improve my "popularity" and thus my ability to get things done (for the betterment of the wiki)? No, it wouldn't. I backed my post up with logic and reasoning. If you wish to ignore it, I can't force you to heed it, but please do not accuse me of losing my cool. For example, I even talked with Charitwo for a bit on IRC yesterday. I doubt KirbyKing, Sky, or Charitwo would say I said anything even remotely rude to him. We had a friendly conversation, and that was it. I hold nothing against Charitwo personally, only against him as a user wishing to become a bureaucrat. My cool remains intact. (Though I am curious what you mean by "I'm impressed" and "Jolly good show, though.") --Shadowcrest 15:54, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Good for you for sticking to your guns. You're not fooling anyone, though. You hold nothing but contempt for this wiki and its inhabitants. You, Shadowcrest, are not Change We Can Believe In, but you're giving it the best you got. You're a lot of fun to have around, I might add, but I didn't. On purpose. Until next time, then? Semicolon (talk) 17:42, 7 September 2008 (UTC)