The Sims Wiki:Requests for administratorship: Difference between revisions

::::::::The statement from HanaGoth really shows promise. If the statement is to be backed by future actions (which I believe is very likely), I believe Hana is sure to get the admin rights next time. <del>Now only if I can keep up my momentum on my CAW work...</del> [[User:Mathetesalexandrou|<span style="color:#00CC33">MILK FOR THE UNYUUFEX, </span><span style="color:#00AADD">FLAT CHEST FOR THE CUTENESS THRONE, </span><span style="color:#88AAAA">SKULLS FOR THE SKULL PROBES </span>]] ([[user talk:Mathetesalexandrou]]) 20:12, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

:::::::::{{VoteFor}} '''Support'''- Hana, from what I have seen, is what one might call a peacekeeper; she works to make sure that everything is alright and enforces the rules when she sees something astray from the norm. She is a promising editor and has always spoken to me positively. I, for one, think she deserves these rights. She may have only been here for a few months, but it is not how long she has been here that determines the quality of her edits but what she has done with the said time that makes all the difference. Hana is deserving of these rights and I fully '''support''' her. {{PGRSig}} 03:55, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

:::::::::::{{VoteAgainst}}'''Weak Oppose - '''Sorry Hana, while you are a great editor, some of the stuff I've seen tells me you're not quite read to be an admin. Do this again in a month or 2, and you'll mostly likely be ready. <font face="comic sans MS"><span style="text-shadow:aqua 0px 2px 2px;color:#0000BC">[[User:GAHSIcepick|GAHSIcepick]] ([[User talk:GAHSIcepick|talk]])</span></font> 02:31, May 9, 2013 (UTC)

 

 

::I'm not expecting my decision to go without controversy and if anybody does wish to complain then come on by to IRC and we can discuss this thoroughly and amicably. I'm now going to distance myself from this RfA to avoid any conflicts of interest with regards to my opposition vote. I do hope that in the future, those supporting an RfA will put more emphasis on the candidate's suitability for the role rather than personal ties, which, as LiR once again stated, appears to be most (though not all) of the support votes (oh and before somebody throws this at me, Auror's vote was striked due to the bad faith assertion of her argument with regards to other users, if I was camping on support votes then I would have striked the "she deserves this" votes too). {{LabSig}} 11:42, May 9, 2013 (UTC)

 

==== Conclusion ====