SmashWiki talk:Requests for adminship: Difference between revisions
From SmashWiki, the Super Smash Bros. wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Shadowcrest (talk | contribs) m (→Waiting) |
|||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
:I concur. [[User:Miles.oppenheimer|<font color="mediumslateblue"><span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS;">'''Miles''']] <font color="mediumslateblue">([[User talk:Miles.oppenheimer|<font color="mediumslateblue">talk]])</font></font></span></font> 03:38, 11 January 2009 (UTC) | :I concur. [[User:Miles.oppenheimer|<font color="mediumslateblue"><span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS;">'''Miles''']] <font color="mediumslateblue">([[User talk:Miles.oppenheimer|<font color="mediumslateblue">talk]])</font></font></span></font> 03:38, 11 January 2009 (UTC) | ||
::I concur, except that it's only been 2 months. :P --<span style="font-family:vivaldi; font-size:12pt">[[User:Shadowcrest|<span style="color:#4682b4">Shadow</span>]][[User talk:Shadowcrest|<span style="color:#4682b4;">crest</span>]]</span> 03:41, 11 January 2009 (UTC) | ::I concur, except that it's only been 2 months. :P --<span style="font-family:vivaldi; font-size:12pt">[[User:Shadowcrest|<span style="color:#4682b4">Shadow</span>]][[User talk:Shadowcrest|<span style="color:#4682b4;">crest</span>]]</span> 03:41, 11 January 2009 (UTC) | ||
:::Sorry, been out of town. Decisions or exact reasons and parameters for continuation will be up within 24 hours. [[User:Clarinet Hawk|Clarinet Hawk]] <small>([[User talk:Clarinet Hawk|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Clarinet Hawk|contributions]])</small> 20:52, 13 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 16:52, January 13, 2009
 |
When?
So...when's the big day? Is there a time table? --Oxico (talk) 00:45, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
- No, there is not a set time for any of the RfA's here. It is entirely up to Clarinet Hawk as to when they will close and how they will close. --Shadowcrest 00:46, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Minor question
Just because I expect it will come up at some point, I think there should be some official statement of how long a user whose RfA failed has to wait before they are allowed to run again. I would think perhaps two months or something of that sort, or maybe saying that they can run again when they feel they've accopmlished enough more to make a difference. Miles (talk) 23:19, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
- Out of your reasons suggested, a specific time, like 2 months. Whether they've improved is highly opinionated, and will cause some arguments.Smoreking 2009 is coming! 14:55, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
- I don't think having a set time is an issue. If the person fails once and puts him/herself back up too soon it will just fail again. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 19:32, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Waiting
Pikamander's has been up since November 5th, and Shadowcrest has been up since November 15th. I understand Clarinet Hawk has to make an important decision, but I think 3 months is enough. 
UP/T/O 01:55, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
- I concur. Miles (talk) 03:38, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
- I concur, except that it's only been 2 months. :P --Shadowcrest 03:41, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, been out of town. Decisions or exact reasons and parameters for continuation will be up within 24 hours. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 20:52, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- I concur, except that it's only been 2 months. :P --Shadowcrest 03:41, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
