:::::{{VoteFor}} '''Support'''- Hana deserves adminship. I have seen her edits, and they are good, and she is helpful. [[User:Icecream18|にゃー！ --Icecream18]] ([[User talk:Icecream18|talk]]) 13:12, May 4, 2013 (UTC)
:::::{{VoteFor}} '''Support'''- Hana deserves adminship. I have seen her edits, and they are good, and she is helpful. [[User:Icecream18|にゃー！ --Icecream18]] ([[User talk:Icecream18|talk]]) 13:12, May 4, 2013 (UTC)
::::::{{VoteAgainst}} '''Weak Oppose''' - HanaGoth is obviously a very efficient editor. As well, she is very active. However, per the arguments of others, I am unsure on how she will be able to handle the social responsibilities of being an administrator. In my opinion, the social responsibilities of being an administrator are more important than editing. For example, administrators are often the ones who are asked for advice and help and one of their responsibilities is to help users who are having difficulties. However, as I see it, any user can make good edits without having admin rights. I believe that HanaGoth has not quite proven herself to be responsible in frustrating situations with users yet. --'''[[user:Bleeh|<font color="navy">Bleeh</font>]]'''<sup>[[User talk: Bleeh|<font color="#489094">(talk)</font>]]</sup> <sup>[[User blog:Bleeh|<font color="#489094">(blog)</font>]]</sup> 16:03, May 4, 2013 (UTC)
All new administrator applications must include a selection of two administrative projects that the applicant would like to fill upon promotion. Check the administrative projects page for a list of projects and the duties associated with them.
Administrator requests are almost always open on The Sims Wiki.
Minimum requirements
If you have proven yourself to be a valuable member of the community, and you think you're capable of doing the job, this is where to apply. Minimum requirements are:
Average or higher wiki editing knowledge.
This means you have to have contributed regularly to some wiki (not necessarily this one).
Having started to contribute on The Sims Wiki (edits in the content namespace are not taken too seriously).
Your first edit on The Sims Wiki should not be your application on this page.
Understandable, (almost 100%) correct English all the time.
If u talk liek dis, ur not rdy 2 bcome admin
Playing the game is nice, since you'll be editing and making decisions based on the game's content.
Be able to expand articles to make them more useful for the community.
You should not copy articles from Wikipedia and paste them here.
Rollback rights are a prerequisite for requesting adminship.
Stage 1: Nominating
Users may nominate themselves or be nominated by another user for administratorship. The nominee then has to accept the nomination before voting can begin.
If the nominee accepts the nomination, they should also choose two Administrative projects when stating their acceptance.
Multiple requests at one time are allowed.
Administrator candidates that are not given administrator privileges are ineligible to be nominated or to nominate themselves for at least a month.
Stage 2: Voting
Users may support, be neutral toward, or oppose the nomination. Users must provide a reason behind their position.
Users must have 50 edits and be a regular contributor for a month to be able to vote or nominate. Users who have been absent for extended periods of time (3 months or more) will be considered as "new users" for the purposes of RfA and must make 50 edits and be contributor for a further month before voting.
Everyone's vote counts as one vote. Admins do not hold extra power.
A bureaucrat will then determine whether consensus has been reached. This means that administrator requests require at least a two-thirds support rate to pass. Strength of argument is more important than the number of votes.
Admins and bureaucrats may nominate and/or vote on a nomination. However, a bureaucrat who votes on a nomination and later reviews the nomination must review according to the vote result, not their personal opinion of the nominee.
A vote on an RfA shall last for 1 week.
Votes on an RfA may be closed early if it is obvious that consensus against it will not be reached. (e.g. 6+ support and 0 oppose)
What you will do as an admin
Revert vandalism, warn and/or block vandals.
Move pages to correct page names, delete unnecessary redirects.
Have a strong voice when decisions have to be made.
Represent The Sims Wiki well in the Wikia and internet community.
What you may not do as an admin
Use your administrator privileges to take advantage of users or to control the wiki.
Ignore the needs and wants of wiki users.
Act as a poor representative of The Sims Wiki on other wikis, or participate in major cross-wiki drama.
More info and a list of current admins can be found at Administrators.
Positions available
Additionally, some special positions are available for administrators and members of the community. These are filled on the Requests for special positions page, though users requesting administratorship here may in their request ask for one or more of these positions. List of positions and their responsibilities is available on this page. Willingness to take on special duties may make you more likely to be selected.
Hello, my name is HanaGoth96 and I would like to nominate myself for sysop rights. I feel that I would be a good admin editor of this wiki as I am a helpful user, helping those who ask me for assistance. I also like to guide users the correct way, pointing out how to license images correctly and the correct templates to use when creating new fanon. I am also a rollbacker, having undid several acts of vandalism on various articles and I have also helped out with a few incidents involving vandals. English is my first language and I am familiar with the British-American spelling policy.
I joined this wiki in February 2013 and have already made more than 1700 edits, most of them consisting in mainspace articles. I am friendly to my fellow users and have partake frequently in community discussions. My knowledge on the wiki has grown vastly since joining and I feel ready to apply for the sysop rights. I don't know if the admin projects are still running or are being used at all, but as it is a prerequisite then I would like to work on the two projects Image & File Maintenance and Layout & Navigation. I would also like to say that I will not use my sysop rights to cause harm to the wiki and will apply these rights fairly and only when necessarily.
I would like to take the opportunity to thank you for considering my nomination and if the consensus goes my way, I will do my best to carry out the role to the best of my abilities. HanaGoth96 (Neigh...?) 18:01, May 2, 2013 (UTC)
Consensus on HanaGoth96
This period of consensus will last for one week. Time remaining: 18:07 May 9, 2013 UTC.
Question - I'm curious - you were nominated for admin less than a week ago, but you chose to turn it down; why? -- LostInRiverviewtalk ~ blog 18:08, May 2, 2013 (UTC)
Answer - I felt that Fangirl's nomination was not descriptive enough and it had some issues with the wording. I appreciated her nomination though. HanaGoth96 (Neigh...?) 18:11, May 2, 2013 (UTC)
There are two main questions that need to be answered when selecting new administrators. Firstly, is the applicant/nominee capable of using sysop rights effectively, to improve the wiki on a more technical level, to help grow the community, and to help combat vandalism? But beyond the question of whether a user can handle, technically-speaking, the powers that adminship provides, there is an additional question; can the user be trusted to apply those powers fairly, to apply them without prejudice, and to be open to criticism from users and other administrators if those powers are allegedly misused?
I am sure that HanaGoth meets the first of the two criteria I have listed. I am confident that if she were given administrator rights, she would be more than capable of using those tools that would be at her disposal; her edits so far on the wiki do prove this. But those very same edits and actions on the wiki also cause me some concern when it comes to the matter of answering the second of the two questions posed here. Unfortunately, Hana has shown a propensity towards rash action rather than well-thought reaction to criticisms, disagreements or quarrels.
I am not a fan of personal criticisms of applicants. I have been voted against on similar grounds in the past. For this reason, I do not oppose this application; I am simply hesitant. It would be improper for me to support the application given the issues I have seen, but it would be improper for me not to give her a chance to prove that she is ready for the position. -- LostInRiverviewtalk ~ blog 18:37, May 2, 2013 (UTC)
I understand that I do tend to take criticism a little too hard and that I do tend to get into disagreements and quarrels with other users, but I can also keep myself calm and I would really like the chance to prove to you that I do have what it takes to be an admin. HanaGoth96 (Neigh) 18:57, May 2, 2013 (UTC)
I guess for the sake of clarity and fairness to you, I'm going to come out and formally oppose this nomination. Actions speak louder than words, and there's no real way to prove that you've changed except through demonstration, which would be difficult to do in an RfA. It's not fair to you to expect you to try and demonstrate that to gain my support (although my support is only one vote). And, with all due respect, the time you have to prove that you're ready to be an administrator is before you apply to be one. My only advice is to take those faults you acknowledge and try to improve them, and apply later. - LostInRiverviewtalk ~ blog 04:18, May 3, 2013 (UTC)
Strong Support - I think that HanaGoth deserves to have admin rights. Being an active user for just 3 and a half months, she has a very impressive edit count consisting of many main content edits, along with a strong history of reverting vandalism. I assure you that Hana only has the best intentions. Cavia (wheek • speak) 19:32, May 2, 2013 (UTC)
Neutral - I don't doubt that Hana has admin potential; the skill and good intentions are clearly there. However, given the points that have been raised, I'm not sure she is ready for it yet, though I am still open on that matter. Dharden (talk) 12:44, May 3, 2013 (UTC)
Support - Hana is a great editor. Recently she may have been inappropriate but her behaviour has improved immensly. I really do think she is cut out for becoming an admin, she plans out everything. Heck, she's even been planning this request for weeks. Hana has evolved and learned from her mistakes. The only thing she needs to improve on is keeping her cool, which is already being worked on. She is was of the quickest learning editors out there and she'd be able to cope well and make good use out of the admin rights. If you tell Hana to improve on something then she will try.
Oppose - I'm not convinced at this time that you possess the mindset of an administrator and I'm worried, based on your tendency to overreact, that you'll make poor decisions with the admin tools. As LiR said, addressing these flaws should really be done before posting an RfA and I will safely say that you do have potential and everything else is sound, so don't be too disheartened by this. LostLabyrinth • (c) • (b) 17:56, May 3, 2013 (UTC)
Weak Oppose - Per Lab. DanPin • talk • contribs 18:23, May 3, 2013 (UTC)
Support - I think Hana deserves rights. She has an good edit count and reverts vandalism wherever she can. RossInSA (talk) 18:28, May 3, 2013 (UTC)
Support- To be honest, I personally feel that there have been times in the past where Hana has been quite reckless. However, I understand that making mistakes is all part of being human, and I feel Hana has learned from this. I also understand there has been the odd disagreement or two with other users over the past month or so, but I feel that a similar thing could be avoided if it happens again.
On more wiki-related reasoning, Hana's editing history has been excellent, and she is probably the fastest learning user I've seen on here to date. She understands how to use a wide variety of templates- both for fanon and mainspace use, and her anti-vandal history is very strong. In short; she knows what she's doing.
I understand Hana can make reckless decisions, but as I have previously stated, I feel she has learned from them (due to a certain incident over a policy that wasn't well-known or formally introduced, to my knowledge anyways). I doubt any similar incidents will happen again. I feel Hana is ready for this role, and I know from personal experience, it takes a little while to get to grips with, but she will become an effective administrator. AsherÉire'Sup? 19:52, May 3, 2013 (UTC)
Oppose - I agree with LiR and Lab. You've shown an extreme tendency to take simple discussions or minor disagreements with other users and blow them completely out of proportion. Normally, I would give you the benefit of the doubt, but you have still behaved like this very recently. LiR made a good point earlier that you should try to prove that you're ready for adminship before you make a request, as we currently have no reason to believe you won't overreact to something and end up misusing the admin tools. I'm sorry Hana, but based on your actions, I can't say I trust you enough to support this request, but if you try to improve your behavior, I may support next time around. —Random Ranaun(Talk to me!) 23:20, May 3, 2013 (UTC)
As the opposing side says, Hana does have that bit of tendency to be embroiled in conflict, and indeed, given that I'm aware of this even during my doldrum period in this wiki, I would say that this issue needs to be resolved in some manner. However, I am fully confident that Hana is otherwise a good candidate and editor, so I shall put out a vote of neutrality, especially in the light of those who say Hana has improved, which I may have missed out given my doldrum activities. MILK FOR THE UNYUUFEX, FLAT CHEST FOR THE CUTENESS THRONE, SKULLS FOR THE SKULL PROBES (user talk:Mathetesalexandrou) 23:51, May 3, 2013 (UTC)
Abstain - I dunno what to put for this so I'm just going to call this abstaining from voting. I've been away for the last week or so and I don't really know what sort of things have happened and I feel that my lack of knowledge means I can't make an educated decision. I'm going to say that while Hana is obviously competent these sort of things make me want to vote against, if I knew more. I dunno whether you could count this as a vote against, a neutral, or whatever, but I thought I'd just say this anyway. ―ฬђtalk01:23, May 4, 2013 (UTC)
Support- Hana deserves adminship. I have seen her edits, and they are good, and she is helpful. にゃー！ --Icecream18 (talk) 13:12, May 4, 2013 (UTC)
Weak Oppose - HanaGoth is obviously a very efficient editor. As well, she is very active. However, per the arguments of others, I am unsure on how she will be able to handle the social responsibilities of being an administrator. In my opinion, the social responsibilities of being an administrator are more important than editing. For example, administrators are often the ones who are asked for advice and help and one of their responsibilities is to help users who are having difficulties. However, as I see it, any user can make good edits without having admin rights. I believe that HanaGoth has not quite proven herself to be responsible in frustrating situations with users yet. --Bleeh(talk)(blog) 16:03, May 4, 2013 (UTC)
I would like to recieve sysop rights because I feel like I could help with at least minor bugs on The Sims Wiki. I would like to help organize stuff and just help out around the wiki. I would participate in fanon administration, image and file maintenance, and parts of community development. If you do not think I am prepared for this, please feel free to say so. I would try to keep good faith and keep calm, and I would try to keep on top of my duties despite my slight scatter-brainness. I would also try to help this wiki stay in shape to the best of my ability.23:32, May 3, 2013 (UTC)Hurshbr (talk) 23:32, May 3, 2013 (UTC)Hurshbr
Consensus on Hurshbr
This period of consensus will last for one week. Time remaining: 23:32 May 10, 2013 UTC.
- Not Yet - You only just received rollback rights a couple weeks ago, and I'd feel more comfortable supporting you if you had a little more experience using that tool. Also, and while this isn't a definite mark against you, your mainspace edits are quite sparse. Since you're applying for fanon admin it's not a huge thing, but I'd encourage you, in either case, to become more familar with the main namespace. So, all in all, I am not supporting this request at this time. You do good work in the fanon namespace - keep it up! - LostInRiverviewtalk ~ blog 00:25, May 4, 2013 (UTC)
- Not Yet - per above ―ฬђtalk01:15, May 4, 2013 (UTC)
- Not Yet - Agreed with LiR. I think you need a bit more experience with managing the fanon namespace as a whole (including marking other users' fanon for cleanup, improving mistakes on other pages, etc.), but definitely don't let this discourage you. You're going down the right road and as long as you meet the conditions I've listed, I'll likely support in the future. —Random Ranaun(Talk to me!) 01:27, May 4, 2013 (UTC)
Not yet - Per above. Just keep doing what you're doing and gain some experience with the rollback tool and you'll maybe get there next time. LostLabyrinth • (c) • (b) 11:02, May 4, 2013 (UTC)
Open to requests.
• (c) • (b) 17:56, May 3, 2013 (UTC)
.svg){kind=small}
