SmashWiki:Requests for adminship

This page documents an official SmashWiki policy, a widely accepted standard that all users should follow. When editing this page, please ensure that your revision reflects consensus. If in doubt, consider discussing changes on the talk page.

This is the page for requesting adminship for SmashWiki.

Rules & Regulations

• Only self-nominations are allowed. If you think that another member would make a good sysop, then you can convince them to nominate themselves. You cannot, however, make a nomination on behalf of another user.
• After sufficient time has passed to allow all users who wish to express an opinion the chance to do so, a decision will be made based on community consensus as to whether or not the request will succeed. Once a decision has been made, the discussion will be archived and moved to an appropriate subpage.
• Selections of sysops are not a simple vote count, or majority opinion. Users who wish to be promoted should demonstrate a steady commitment to this wiki, and be able to point to reasons that the sysop tools would allow them to do better editing.
• Candidates should describe why the wiki should want them to be sysops, not why they want to be sysops on the wiki.
• When supporting or opposing a candidate, give good reasons. Comments that describe in detail why the candidate should/should not become a sysop carry far more weight than simple support/oppose. Also, support comments that reference only edit count carry almost no weight in the selection process.
• Rollback status is not required for a successful RfA, but is highly encouraged. However, users who only want sysop tools for quick reverts of vandalism will be refused and directed towards the appropriate request.
• Upon request, a prospective sysop may be given a scenario and asked his/her opinion on how s/he would handle it.
• If a user has been blocked for any reason (except an IP auto-block or a wrong button click), s/he must wait a period of at least four months from the expiry of his/her ban until s/he may even be considered for adminship. Even after this time period has passed, the user should be prepared to answer questions about his/her block.
• For users that have had previous unsuccessful RfAs and are planning to open a new one, consider the reasons that the previous nominations failed. Has anything changed about you that would make a new nomination successful?

Past nominations

• For a list of all previous requests for adminship, please see this category.
  • For a list of all previous requests for adminship that ended with the candidate's promotion, please see this category.
  • For a list of all previous requests for adminship wherein the candidate was not promoted, please see this category.

How to nominate

If you have not had a request for adminship page before, follow this 2 step process.

1. Go to the end of the requests section below, and add the following text:
   {{{{subst:FULLPAGENAME}}/Username}} Where "Username" is the name of the user being nominated.
2. Click on the created red link, and add:
   {{subst:rfa|Username|reason for nomination}}

However, if you have had a previous request for adminship, follow this process instead.

1. Go to the end of the requests section below, and add the following text:
   {{{{subst:FULLPAGENAME}}/Username (#)}}
   Where "Username" is the name of the user being nominated, and where # is 2 for the second RfA, 3 for the third, and so on.
2. Click on the created red link, and add:
   {{subst:rfa|Username|reason for nomination}}

Current requests

The following discussion is an archived debate of the nomination of a user for adminship. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

	This RfA was closed as successful.
	Reason:	Good candidate with good amount of community support Shadowcrest 15:37, March 14, 2010 (UTC)

Toomai (talk • contribs • edit count • RFA page)

Candidate, please summarize why you are running for adminship below.
Alright, let's give this another go. My previous attempt at adminship died was struck down was rejected was eaten by Void failed almost a year ago, and I think it's time I exact revenge have another try. So I guess I'll start out with a list of my strong points:

• I'm on here a lot. Like, never-misses-a-single-edit a lot. On some days, I can be online almost the entire day (in terms of my schedule being open).
• I know stuff about Smash Bros. And if I don't know it, I do the research. (Okay, so I've done no testing in a while. Learning C, finite automatons, linear algebra, and calculus all at the same time will do that to you. But I intend to get back into it sooner than later.)
• I have never trolled or flamed. Go ahead, look it up.
• I care for this wiki so much that I designed a new logo for it. (Yuck, that was cheesy.)
• I stick to the facts and use srsbsns when necessary.
• Not a single regular contributor has any issues with me. (If you do, then let me know. Also give me your address so I can send you a certificate confirming you do not exist cookie. Disclaimer: May be eaten by Mailyoshis en route.)

However, in the interest of fair play, I will also provide a list of my downfalls.

• I'm in the Eastern timezone just like most of the other admins.
• On some days, I have almost seven straight hours of class.
• I am bad at user disputes, mostly because I am unable to puzzle out when the best time to enter a conversation is. (Note: At least one user believes this point to be false.)
• I sometimes try too hard to introduce nomenclature. (Examples include Quark Mines and amaranthine gas, as well as the Final Smash categories.)
• I often try too hard to be neutral. (Example: This list.)

So, users, do your thing. Toomai Glittershine eXemplary Logic · The Stats Guy · The Table Designer 02:46, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support

1. Support - Good faith and constructive edits, you've made improvements to articles such as the tier list, and you've introduced very organized templates and styles of editing. You have my full support. Blue Ninjakoopa 02:56, February 28, 2010 (UTC)
2. Supportz. Pretty darn good contributor, A TON of overwhelming power a few extra buttons won't hurt when doing more template projects in the future, especially when SBB4 come out. HavocReaper48 03:08, February 28, 2010 (UTC)
3. Support. If nothing else, Toomai would be an excellent janitorial mod (I've seen many a spam article tagged for deletion). Even if he doesn't specifically help with user issues, he'd stay out of the way. That's one positive and one neutral factor in my decision, hence the resolution of my thoughts being support. Miles (talk) 03:54, February 28, 2010 (UTC)
4. Support Now that I understand why you want adminship, I pledge support. However, I think it would be a good idea if you pasted those reasons so others will understand. 98.117.158.220 05:08, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

   Um, where are you getting this from? If it's from my previous RfA, it's probably irrelevant. Toomai Glittershine The Stats Guy 15:18, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

   You said that you wanted adminship to help fight vandalism by blocking vandals. Is that not why you are running this time? 98.117.158.220 19:38, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

   Yeah, I guess that's part of it. But a bigger part is that I think I can do a better job than the average user. Toomai Glittershine The Table Designer 21:27, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

5. Support. A good contributor who really does put a lot into this wiki. ☆The Solar Dragon ^(Talk)☆ 06:53, February 28, 2010 (UTC)
6. Support - Very active contributor who knows policies very well and keeps his cool. Enigmatic Mr. L 19:48, February 28, 2010 (UTC)
7. 5|_|PP0|27-Active, good contributor, has admin-level logic/wiki know-how.L33t Silvie ^{I see wat u did thar...}
8. Sapōto What Miles said. PenguinofDeath 20:37, March 1, 2010 (UTC)
9. Support I don't really see the need for another admin, but I also don't see a reason for not giving you adminship. You've been a good contributor throughout your time here and you've not really caused any problems that I can think of. The fact that you conclude your name with 'Glittershine' still confuses me though. Semicolon (talk) 04:43, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

   "Glittershine" is kind of a pseudo-surname. It's quite useful on other sites where "Toomai" by itself is already taken. I use it in Wikia sigs because it's a nice user/usertalk divider. Toomai Glittershine eXemplary Logic 14:03, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

10. Support. You seem to be a good member. Also, I find the response to the neutral position good. I find the same sort of "issues." Just to wonder, are you on often, or you will only be able to use your admin duties every so often. --KoRoBeNiKi (talk) 16:03, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

    Mmm...mind giving any reasons, or even just an "as per x"? Toomai Glittershine The Stats Guy 20:03, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

    These days, Toomai's around more than most of the "active" Admins, myself included. PenguinofDeath 23:19, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

11. You seem like a good guy so what the heck. What's the worst that can happen?--Megatron1 (talk) 03:38, March 12, 2010 (UTC)

    We generally don't do "why not" promotions. Toomai Glittershine eXemplary Logic 04:36, March 12, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Toomai is very brave and doesn't afraid of anything, and so I oppose. --Warwick 22:21, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

   Will this one actually count when the request is being decided? 98.117.158.220 00:24, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

   RfR/RfA/RfBs aren't done on a vote basis. The comments are just so that the community can let the Bureaucrats know what they think of the user to help the Bureaucrats make the final decision. The only way that the comment could affect the decision ("get counted", figuratively speaking) would be if Shadowcrest or Clarinet Hawk felt that the fact that Toomai is brave and doesn't afraid of anything was any sort of indication of how he would handle being an Admin. Short answer: No. PenguinofDeath 00:49, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Neutral leaning to support: As many people have said, I really can't point to any specific points that disqualify you, although I could just ban you now and that would ;-). However, I have two reservations about supporting you. First, that fact that you don't have any negatives isn't enough for me to just give you adminship. In your RfA you present a good list of your positive traits (that I completely agree with), but I don't see you presenting any reason why you need adminship or explaining why you being a sysop would improve this site. Second, if the only reason is for you to be a "janitorial" sysop, then I can't really support you as I 1) disagree with that in principal, and 2) don't think we really need another sysop if all s/he can contribute is delete/ban. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 18:01, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

   Well, one of the main reasons I'm trying for admin right now is because I think I can do a better job at it than some of the current admins. (This isn't an insult, it's a sort of motivation.) Toomai Glittershine The Stats Guy 20:03, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

   He isn't backed solely by a lack of negatives - his positives include tagging lots of pages for deletion, which demonstrates that Adminship would help him improve the wiki. Also, Joeyaa recently used Special:ProtectSite because the wiki was under attack and there were no sysops around for an hour, which kinda suggests that we do actually need more, and even if we don't need another one at the moment, there's no harm giving him the tools in case of emergency, especially seeing as he's otherwise a strong candidate. PenguinofDeath 23:19, March 4, 2010 (UTC)