The Sims Wiki:Requests for bureaucratship/Completed requests
This page shows former Requests for Bureaucratship on The Sims Wiki.
Duskey
Duskey (talk · contribs · editcount · block · modify rights · logs · block log)
Conclusion
Consensus was reached in support of Duskey becoming a bureaucrat and rights were given. --a_morris (talk) 20:55, September 21, 2010 (UTC)
Click here to expand the nomination | |
---|---|
NominationI, Eduardog3000, nominate Duskey for bureaucratship on The Sims Wiki.--Eduardog3000 00:31, September 7, 2010 (UTC) QuestionsVotingSupport
NeutralOppose |
Dharden
Dharden (talk · contribs · editcount · block · modify rights · logs · block log)
Conclusion
Consensus was reached in support of Dharden becoming a bureaucrat and rights were given. --a_morris (talk) 23:17, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
Click here to expand the nomination | |
---|---|
NominationI, Monster2821, nominate Dharden for bureaucratship on The Sims Wiki. QuestionsVotingSupport
NeutralOppose |
LostInRiverview
LostInRiverview (talk · contribs · editcount · block · modify rights · logs · block log)
Conclusion
Consensus was reached in support of LostInRiverview becoming a bureaucrat and rights were given. Dharden (talk) 17:15, February 26, 2011 (UTC)
Click here to expand the nomination | |
---|---|
NominationI, Dharden, nominate LostInRiverview for bureaucratship on The Sims Wiki.
QuestionsHas he accepted? |_Andronikos Leventis Talk 14:50, February 12, 2011 (UTC)
VotingSupport
NeutralOppose |
Random Ranaun
Random Ranaun (talk · contribs · editcount · block · modify rights · logs · block log)
Conclusion
Consensus was reached to give Random Ranaun Bureaucrat rights, and rights were given. -- LostInRiverview talk · blog 15:10, June 8, 2011 (UTC)
Click here to expand the nomination | |
---|---|
NominationI, BobNewbie, nominate Random Ranaun for bureaucrat rights. He has shown repeatedly on his time on the Wiki, community-wise, technical-wise and administration-wise that he is capable of handling the position. His contributions to the Wiki is nothing less then excellent, and I believe that The Sims Wiki will be positively effected by him becoming a bureaucrat. --Zombie talk • blog 19:33, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
QuestionsVotingVoting is closed. Support
NeutralOppose |
Lost Labyrinth
Lost Labyrinth (talk · contribs · editcount · block · modify rights · logs · block log)
Conclusion
Consensus was reached to give Lost Labyrinth Bureaucrat rights, and rights were given. —Random Ranaun (Talk to me!) 22:43, July 20, 2011 (UTC)
Click here to expand the nomination | |
---|---|
NominationI, Guilherme Guerreiro, nominate Lost Labyrinth for bureaucratship on The Sims Wiki. I think he deserves the priveleges for all the improvements made to the wiki, and to his particular efficiency when it comes to solving vandalism issues. --Guilherme Guerreiro (talk here) 16:18, July 6, 2011 (UTC)
QuestionsVotingSupport
NeutralOppose |
Bleeh
Bleeh (talk · contribs · editcount · block · modify rights · logs · block log)
Conclusion
Consensus was reached in support of Bleeh becoming a bureaucrat and rights were given. Lost Labyrinth • (c) • (b) 14:03, September 18, 2011 (UTC)
Click here to expand the nomination | |
---|---|
NominationI realize requests are closed, but I hope that you'll make an exception for a retiring bureaucrat and allow me to make this nomination. Bleeh has been a very long-term member of this community, and has served as community director as well as chronic IRC chatter. Aside from this, she has served as a stellar administrator (both before and after her long-term absence) and an all-around wonderful, if not a bit colorful and Big Brother-obsessed, person. I can think of no current administrator more deserving of this position, and I think that it's about time that she gets it. Therefore, I would like to nominate Bleeh for the position of Bureaucrat for The Sims Wiki. -- LostInRiverview talk · blog 05:12, September 4, 2011 (UTC)
VotingNote: Struck out votes have been eliminated because they do not meet the voting requirements. Support
NeutralOppose |
Woganhemlock
Woganhemlock (talk · contribs · editcount · block · modify rights · logs · block log)
Conclusion
Consensus was reached in support of Woganhemlock becoming a bureaucrat and rights were given. --Bleeh(talk) (blog) 22:10, October 3, 2011 (UTC)
Click here to expand the nomination | |
---|---|
NominationI, Lost Labyrinth, nominate Woganhemlock for bureaucratship on The Sims Wiki. What with the release of The Sims 3: Pets around the corner, I think that we could do with another bureaucrat. WH has done a lot to improve the wiki, whether it be from adding images to articles to vandalism clean-up and even improving the CSS/JS, not to mention that he never participates in any drama. Not only that, WH is a bureaucrat at The Sims Medieval Wiki and does a good job at it. With all those things in mind, I feel that he is a very strong choice to become a bureaucrat on TSW. Lost Labyrinth • (c) • (b) 17:09, September 25, 2011 (UTC) Questions
VotingSupport
NeutralOppose |
RoseGui
RoseGui (talk · contribs · editcount · block · modify rights · logs · block log)
Conclusion
Consensus was reached in support of RoseGui becoming a bureaucrat and rights were given. Dharden (talk) 21:40, March 13, 2012 (UTC)
Click here to expand the nomination | |
---|---|
NominationBased upon my recent/upcoming absence in addition to two other bureaucrats also listed as absent, I felt that it wouldn't hurt to promote one more user to the status of bureaucrat, especially as it seems that I can't decide whether I'm here or not. I am nominating RoseGui for bureaucratship on The Sims Wiki as you can tell she is a very dedicated editor just by looking at her contributions. She also tries to avoid hostility and drama at all costs and she doesn't carry an arrogant attitude towards situations and other users. With these qualities, I think Rose is the best user suited for this position and I feel that she has what it takes to be a bureaucrat, which is why I am nominating her. Lost Labyrinth • (c) • (b) 22:51, March 3, 2012 (UTC) QuestionsVotingSupport
Neutral
Oppose |
Nikel23
Nikel23 (talk · contribs · editcount · block · modify rights · logs · block log)
Conclusion
Nominee has declined the nomination. Lost Labyrinth • (c) • (b) 07:22, May 1, 2012 (UTC)
Click here to expand the nomination | |
---|---|
NominationI, Wiryawan310, nominate Nikel23 for bureaucratship on The Sims Wiki. I think Nikel23 is fit for this position, he is active administrator and great contributor for this wiki. |
Wiryawan310
Wiryawan310 (talk · contribs · editcount · block · modify rights · logs · block log)
Conclusion
Nominee declined the nomination after the vote started. Lost Labyrinth • (c) • (b) 19:59, May 4, 2012 (UTC)
Click here to expand the nomination | |
---|---|
NominationI, DanPin, nominate Wiryawan310 for bureaucratship on The Sims Wiki. He is an excellent admin, always reverting vandalism, blocking vandals and trolls, undoing edits containing uncited sources and still contributing to the Wiki. I think Wir is worthy of this position and that he would do great. DanPin • talk • contribs 06:26, May 4, 2012 (UTC)
QuestionsVotingSupportNeutralOppose
|
Nikel23
Nikel23 (talk · contribs · editcount · block · modify rights · logs · block log)
Conclusion
Consensus was reached in support of Nikel23 becoming a bureaucrat and rights were given. Lost Labyrinth • (c) • (b) 15:37, June 13, 2012 (UTC)
Click here to expand the nomination | |
---|---|
NominationI would like to nominate Nikel to be a bureaucrat. RoseGui and myself thought on IRC that he would be a very good candidate and I didn't even need to dig through his contributions and whatnot to know he'd be good at it - he's clearly dedicated, highly active, a nice person and I see no reason why he shouldn't be a bureaucrat. Lost Labyrinth • (c) • (b) 15:31, June 6, 2012 (UTC)
QuestionsVotingSupport
NeutralOppose |
LostInRiverview
LostInRiverview (talk · contribs · editcount · block · modify rights · logs · block log)
Conclusion
Consensus was reached in support of LostInRiverview becoming a bureaucrat and rights were given. ―ฬђ talk 04:48, July 26, 2012 (UTC)
Click here to expand the nomination | |
---|---|
NominationI, Woganhemlock, nominate LostInRiverview for the position of bureaucrat here on The Sims Wiki, as with the upcoming release of Supernatural as well as the steady growth of the wiki, not to mention the fact that several bureaucrats at the current time are somewhat sporadic at times in terms of activity. As well as this, LiR has had prior experience as a bureaucrat before his brief retirement, and remains one of the largest contributors on this wiki in terms of community and administration. ―ฬђ talk 03:44, July 19, 2012 (UTC)
QuestionsVotingSupport
NeutralOpposeDiscussion(There's no real place for discussion here, so I've created one rather than put it in the voting columns.) As you know, I can be a lengthy writer as well, so prepare for an even longer read, as I'll be going through the points brought up item-by-item. If you need to use the restroom, I'd suggest you do it now. First off, the case about having 'enough' active bureacurats is a personal opinion of anyone. I believe there's no such thing as too many, and there's no harm in having more, so long as they're qualified and active, etc. IRC Behavior forum thread - I have no defense for my initial comments except to repeat what I had said at the time - to me it looked like a re-hashing of previous arguments that I didn't want to have to deal with, so I replied while in a bad mood. I guarantee that I'm not the only one that did that in that discussion (for example, "Honestly I am becoming increasingly sick of all this crap... I don't want any further commentary on this pathetic waste of time, k?"), and when I had a chance to take a break, stand back and re-read the discussion I realized I was in the wrong and I apologized, which was the right thing to do. I know I'm not the first and won't be the last to make that mistake in a wiki discussion, either. "I know when something is definitely right..." Discussion - Never mind the topic of that conversation, as it's really not relevant to my point now. It doesn't take a person of perfection to realize when something just should or shouldn't be, and I was trying to make a point that there was something that just shouldn't be happening. No one at the time took any issue with my choice of wording. "...Kickbanning all the bots" comment - Clearly that was a baseless threat, similar to others I've heard from ops in the IRC (something like 'the next person to say walrus is getting -v' comes to mind). Those who know my IRC skills also likely know I wouldn't be able to kickban the bots even if I wanted to (there's something about hostmasks and all that which I just don't get... whatever). "I'm disappointed that this idea..." comment - The discussion after I made the proposal (to reactivate Achievements) quickly devolved into a repeating of the same issues - real or imagined - that were brought up when they were originally shut down in 2010. My comment was based on the idea that perhaps people should be trying to think more outside the box in considering the idea of achievements, something that I myself was attempting to do since I did oppose, and generally still don't support, their implementation. I can't figure how this can be construed to mean that I'm not AGF, I was simply suggesting that people might be better suited to take a step back and evaluate the present circumstances in addition to past discussions and personal beliefs/opinions/knowledge. I was not implying in any way that people weren't giving the discussion a chance, or that people were acting in bad faith in any way. I will admit to a few things. I'm passionate - I will form an opinion about things and will say things to advance that position. But, I like to think that I'm also flexible to alternative opinions or ideas of doing things. I like participating in and trying to move along discussions, and I know that my approach is somewhat direct, which may be off-putting to some. Except for the IRC behavior discussion, I like to think I've kept my cool as well as anyone else on the wiki, even if I personally disagreed with someone's opinion or the decision of the community. Even if I disagreed with a community decision, I would work to uphold that opinion when performing my duties. Passion in discussions should not be a reason to deny any person an opportunity to lend further services to the wiki. I'm not going through discussions saying 'You're wrong and everything you say is stupid' after all. I'm involved and I'm passionate because I truly care about the direction the community takes in its decisions, and I want to see this project be as successful as it can possibly be. I'm the same passionate person that I was when I was first unanimously approved to become a bureaucrat, and I think I pretty well proved the first time around that no matter what my opinion, I will work for the community to the best of my ability. If my previous record as a bureaucrat and my record as an administrator don't demonstrate this, there's nothing that will. -- LiR speak ~ read 16:47, July 19, 2012 (UTC)
|
Andronikos Leventis
Andronikos Leventis (talk · contribs · editcount · block · modify rights · logs · block log)
Conclusion
The nomination was invalid, as the nominator was not eligible to submit a nomination.
Click here to expand the nomination | |
---|---|
I, Yiouhoda nominate Andronikos Leventis for bureaucratship because he has done so well on his contribs making him fit for bureaucrat rights. Yiouhoda (talk) 03:34, April 19, 2013 (UTC)
|