Difference between revisions of "NSWiki:Admin nominations"

Revision as of 08:37, 31 December 2005

See existing administrators.

To view previous nomination votes, see NSwiki:New admins.

Please use wikipedia:Requests for adminship as a guide for nominating and formatting.

Most importantly, an admin should have thorough knowledge of NSwiki and should visit meta pages often. It is preferred if the admin has had a large amount of edits (In the top 20% of editors), and contributes on a relatively regular basis.

As the Wikipedia guide linked to above indicates, only users who are registered and logged in can vote and/or be nominated.

If you don't know whether to nominate a user as a sysop or as a bureaucrat, go with "sysop" by default. If a user has been doing well as a sysop, then nominate him/her as a "bureaucrat."

Rules

Administrator status is granted to known and trusted members of the community who are familiar with NSwiki policies. Administrators have no special authority on NSwiki, but are held to higher standards, because they are perceived by many, particularly new, users as the official face of NSwiki. Therefore they should take care to be courteous, and exercise good judgment and patience in dealing with other users. Nominees should have been on NSwiki long enough for people to see whether they have these qualities.

Nominations remain for seven days so the community can vote and comment on the nomination. Bureaucrats may extend this when consensus is unclear (because consensus is subjective, bureaucrats have some discretion, but the threshold on this page is roughly three-quarters support). Nominations which are clearly not going to gain sufficient support may be removed earlier to prevent discussions that generate ill will; however, a reasonable amount of time should be allowed. If your nomination is rejected, please wait a reasonable period of time before applying again.

To add your vote, edit the section for that candidate. You may add a short comment to your vote, but discussion and responses to other comments belong in the Comments/Questions section below every nomination. When voting, please update the vote tally of the nomination that you are voting in. The vote tally format is as follows: (Support/Oppose/Neutral).

Nominations for sysopship

Note: Nominations have to be accepted by the user in question. If you nominate a user, please also leave a message on their talk page and ask them to reply here if they accept the nomination.

Current time is 02:38, 19 April 2024 (GMT)

Ceorana

(2/0/0) ending 20:50, Wednesday, January 4, 2006 (GMT)

He's been a HUGE asset to NSwiki over the past month or two, and has shown he has advanced skill and high interest in contributing and bettering this wiki. He's helped fill the void where it's needed and made it seem like we still have five continuously active sysops. And, most importantly, he tells users what they're doing wrong and how to fix it but in friendly, cooperative tones. It's time to give him the promotion I feel he definitely deserves. --Pacitalkia 20:50, 28 December 2005 (GMT)

I accept this nomination, thanks. → Ceo \ squawk 21:47, 28 December 2005 (GMT)

Support

1. Supporting in position as nominator. --Pacitalkia 20:50, 28 December 2005 (GMT)
   
2. Pacitalia beat me to it; I was planning to nominate him in the next week or so. Plenty of edits, familiar with code, knows his way around the meta pages, has reverted vandalism, welcomes more users than I do...very strong support from me. Gruen2alk 21:18, 28 December 2005 (GMT)

Oppose

Neutral

Comments/Questions

• In the region of 800 edits made since becoming active. Gruen2alk 21:18, 28 December 2005 (GMT)
  • That's 872 edits since 9 October 2005. --Goobergunch|? 02:47, 31 December 2005 (GMT)

Some general optional questions for Ceorana to answer, to help those not familiar with his contributions. 1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with?

A I anticipate helping mostly with cleanup-style tasks: helping users move pages, getting rid of vandalism/vandalous users, deleting pages with consensus, helping new users, etc. I'll try not to be quite as aggressive as I have been in fixing stuff: just today I found some vandalism, reverted it, looked at the IP's contribs, found that Gruenberg had been vandalized by him and reverted it, only to realize that that was two months ago and had been reverted long ago. I'll try to avoid that happening in the future. :)

2. Of your articles or contributions to NSwiki, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?

A I suppose my nation page, Ceorana, is probably my largest contribution. I've created a few infoboxes (Infobox School and a few others like Template:Ceo-Officials that I use for my own nation pages.) I guess most of my contributions have been small ones, like categorizing a page or fixing code that someone didn't get quite right. I also started Nation codes, although it's been changed a lot since I started it.

3. 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?

A I've had some minor debates about article content (see Talk: Violet), but none that really escalated into a "conflict", per se.

Nominations for bureaucratship

Pacitalia

(2/0/3) ending 06:50 Friday December 30, 2005 Tuesday January 3 2006

Extended by Goobergunch on 02:44, 31 December 2005 (GMT). The lack of activity in voting here seems to be because of the holidays, and I'm going to allow a chance for this to fix itself.

Pacitalia's been helpful to a lot of people, and is very active on NSWiki. He gives constructive critism where due and praise where that's due, and he's a fabulous all-round guy ;). So, nominating Paci for bureaucratship. LE (WP) | Talk (C) 06:50, 23 December 2005 (GMT)
Support

1. As nominator LE (WP) | Talk (C) 06:50, 23 December 2005 (GMT)
   
2. Paci's done a great job, and is pretty active. I think he's earned it. → Ceo\squawk 16:14, December 23, 2005 (GMT)

Oppose

Neutral

1. I could not justifiably vote either way, until someone explains what a bureaucrat actually does, or points to a page where this is noted. Gruen2alk 16:20, 23 December 2005 (GMT)

   The wikipedia definition is at Wikipedia:Administrators#Bureaucrats. → Ceo\squawk 17:27, December 23, 2005 (GMT)

   More interested in the NSwiki definition for now. Gruen2alk 17:50, 23 December 2005 (GMT)

   I think the powers include basically changing user names and rights, as well as just being held to higher standards in Nswiki. There's no real page that says that, but the bureaucrat log lists changes in user rights, and that's what it says on wikipedia, which runs on the same software. → Ceo\squawk 17:59, December 23, 2005 (GMT)

2. It is not that I am not pleased with Paci as a sysop (I am very much so) but rather that I do not see why these extra powers should be given to him, specifically, and why they should be given to him now. I'll also wait for the word from Goober on this decision, which will weigh very heavily on my decision on how to vote. It should be noted that I really like Pacitalia, so that is completely not an issue. UPDATE: my abstention is going to reflect Goobers vote in this case then. --|Knoot|KNOOtalk 22:54, 23 December 2005 (GMT)
3. I'm not going to vote. However, I'll note that a bureaucrat has exactly one power that a sysop doesn't have; the power to create new sysops and bureaucrats (and set bot flags, but anybody running a bot on NSwiki had better talk to me first). User rename changes cannot be done without database-level access, as Wikipedia's tool is not part of the standard MediaWiki distribution. --Goobergunch|? 03:27, 24 December 2005 (GMT)

Comments

• I'm surprised at your sentiments after I blasted you above for your own nomination. Thanks for nominating me, though - I'm honoured! --Pacitalkia 07:11, 23 December 2005 (GMT)
  • Commonwealth English speakers are always good. :P LE (WP) | Talk (C) 07:16, 23 December 2005 (GMT)

Questions for the candidate

1. People expect Bureaucrats to adhere to high standards of fairness, knowledge of policy and the ability to engage others in the community. Why do you feel you meet those standards?

A. I spend a lot of time on here (but not too much ;) ) so I know much of the general dispute that goes on here between users, as well as the ability to catch vandals and linkspammers when I see it happening. I'm the kind of guy who will defend his argument until the only way to go is a compromise, but that does not mean I can't see the other side - and that is a big reason why I prefer to be fair and clear-headed when mediating disputes. Most of my attempts at engaging the community involve linking other users to NSwiki articles for reference - I think the more people that know the Wiki is here and open to everyone, the more users will sign up and contribute. Plus I'm pleased to see the quality and quantity of users' work is increasing steadily; that is a very good sign for the health of this Wiki. I feel that I meet these standards because a lot of people trust my judgment and ask for help or advice on their editing or styling, which is nice to see. I'm always happy to lend a hand.

2. Why bureaucrat? Why not simply remain sysop?

A. A good question - I feel, generally, that I have worked hard and served the community well enough to qualify for that extra responsibility. It's not my intention to influence others to vote for me here, so if people feel strongly enough that I should be elevated to a higher position, I hope they comment and vote on this topic. Still, as I said, it's not up to me, in my mind, whether I go up the ladder here - but up to the users that are pleased with the way I worked as a sysop.

3. If voted in, do you anticipate having the main consequence of that being that you would have extra responsibility in setting user rights, or do you feel that it would mainly serve as a promotion in recognition of work as a sysop?

A. I have a feeling that many people would vote me in based on the latter, but I would prefer it would be for the former - and as such, people would be able to trust me with those extra responsibilities.