The Sims Wiki:Requests for administratorship/Mate1234 (November 2013)

I would like to request the administrator rights. I'm active and my number of contributions is 1 436, but it's higher every day, or hour and even a minute (sometimes). When I joined the wiki, we had some tensions, but that's past. Now, I'm experienced editor on TSW and I have learned a lot about editing, templates and more. I'm a rollback (Thank you, Lab!).

I'm: and more...
 * 1) reasonably active
 * 2) excellent in English
 * 3) very good in editing
 * 4) big Sims fan

If I get admin rights, I promise, I won't abuse them, and I will try to act as regular user the best I can, since administrators are here to help, not rule.

Bureaucrats, decide the best. Deny my request if you think that I'm not ready to become an admin.

 Mate1234 ( Chatterbox...  ) 17:36, November 20, 2013 (UTC)


 * The nominee is eligible and this request is correct. The discussion page will be created shortly. --  LostInRiverview talk ~ blog 20:24, November 20, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion
This period of discussion is ongoing

I'm a little skeptical about your request. For starters, you only received rollback rights one month ago and have not used that button much. Instead, you use the 'undo' button to remove vandalism. This is more due to a trusting issue on my part. I'm not supporting this request, but I'm not disapproving of your request. I'm just a tad unconvinced on your part. I think it's more down to a trusting issue on my part. Beds (parlare - da leggere ) 11:34, November 23, 2013 (UTC)

I'm in weak support of this request. I believe there were some edit warring/reverting and images issues in the past, and while they were in the past, they were pretty big issues. Also, I don't believe that Mate has participated in many community discussions lately, an important way to be connected to the community. That caused me to think lesser about this request. However, Mate is a good editor and contributes consistently and regularly to the main namespace, which is what ultimately turned my thoughts from opposing this request to (very) weakly supporting it. ~ Waikikamukow  ( Anyone wanna chat? )  07:59, November 24, 2013 (UTC)

This RfA is one of those situations where it's hard to express a simple opinion on the matter so I'll just list off my thoughts as bullet points:
 * This self-nomination doesn't really explain why you want or need to be an admin other than that you're active and competent at editing. While these are good traits to have, it doesn't say much, if anything, about your need for the sysop tools. These traits can honestly apply to any experienced user.
 * I still feel that at times you can get yourself into unnecessary situations like you did here. While I do agree that the whole fiasco with images and edit warring should be pushed aside, it does come up when users are questioning each other's actions. I'm not saying that whole thing was entirely your fault but the fact that it escalated to the level that it did was ridiculous - and you did play a major part in it.
 * You don't really use your rollback button much, as Beds stated. While you do revert vandalism, albeit with the Undo button, I can't really see why you would need more tools when you don't really take advantage of the tools you've already got.

Criticisms aside, you are a competent and efficient editor and I do see you as an asset to the wiki. I'm not outright opposing your RfA but I'd like for you to try and get more involved with the community, particularly community discussions as Waikikamukow said, take advantage of the tools you already have and just try to be a little bit more level headed. Being bold shows you have courage, which is another good trait, but being bold can only go so far. If you at least make an effort to take my advice into account then I'm very happy to support you next time around. 12:23, November 24, 2013 (UTC)

''After five days, no consensus can yet be found in favor of this promotion. Therefore, discussion will continue until there is a two day-long lapse in discussion. At that point, or after five days (whichever comes first), a determination of consensus will be held and, if necessary, a vote will be started.'' --  LostInRiverview talk ~ blog 23:04, November 25, 2013 (UTC)

Voting
There is still no clear consensus in favor of this nomination. Therefore, we are progressing to a vote, in accordance with the Stage 3 rules outlined on the Requests for Administratorship page.
 * No arguments for or against the nominee may accompany a vote. Votes may be in support or may oppose the nomination.
 * A 2/3rds majority of votes in favor will be required to bring about a promotion.
 * The nominee may choose to cancel this vote within two days of the beginning of this voting period.

As outlined in the Stage 3 rules, this vote will last for seven days. --  LostInRiverview talk ~ blog 15:17, November 29, 2013 (UTC)