The Sims Wiki:Requests for bureaucratship/Completed requests

Archived page

This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to the current talk page.

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

Nomination

I, Eduardog 3000, nominate Duskey for bureaucratship on The Sims Wiki.--Eduardog 3000 00:31, September 7, 2010 (UTC)

I accept. --Duskey^talk 01:04, September 7, 2010 (UTC)

Questions

Voting

Support

I'm surprised he isn't a bureaucrat. Also we need more active bureaucrats.--Eduardog 3000 00:31, September 7, 2010 (UTC)
I support Duskey for bureaucrat because he made a lot of good no excellent edits.-- Danny (Monster2821) (talk)(random page) @[1] 01:40, September 7, 2010 (UTC)
I think all the things he's done for the wiki in the months that he's been here more than make him qualified to serve as a bureaucrat. I think he is level-headed, extremely experienced and is willing to put the time in to do the job right. He has my full support. -- Patrick (LostInRiverview) (talk)(blog)(random page) 02:05, September 7, 2010 (UTC)
I agree with his nomination, he is active almost all days, he is very patience with our questions , he made a very good job as an admin. He knows a lot of things about the game and an important detail: He is very nice. I also support you fully. You will do a great job as an bureaucrat. Guilherme Guerreiro 10:52, September 7, 2010 (UTC)
Strong support. Very helpful, very good faith editor, will do a great job as a bureaucrat. Lost Labyrinth (talk) 18:15, September 16, 2010 (UTC)
You have helped me with some good advice, and I am supporting you for becoming a bureaucrat. I think you would do a magnificent job as one, besides your always helpful to the community.
You make more edits than there are Facebook user :), and you make great changes, so I am sure you always revert vandalism when you can. Overall you would make an excellent bureaucrat, I support you fully (as stated above), and you can always count on me for supporting you for whatever. -DarthCookie (talk)-Giovanna 06:54, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral

Oppose

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

Nomination

I, Monster2821, nominate Dharden for bureaucratship on The Sims Wiki.

I accept. Dharden (talk) 05:12, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

Questions

Voting

Support

Dharden has had such a positive impact on the Wiki and has served brilliantly as an administrator. It is quite obvious that Dharden is among the most reasonable and responsible people here, and I can think of few users who are more deserving of this position. I wholeheartedly support this nomination. -- LostInRiverview^{talk · blog} 05:37, September 24, 2010 (UTC)
Support because Dharden has done many good edits, and reverted much vandalism. I think he would do as much great as a Bureaucrat, as he does as an Admin. So full support Dharden, besides we need more active Bureaucrats.--♥DarthCookie♥ 05:51, September 24, 2010 (UTC)
He's got experience and most importantly: wisdom. --Duskey^talk 06:05, September 24, 2010 (UTC)
Same reason as above, he will do a great job (thanks for correcting me and warning me when I need to :)! ---Guilherme Guerreiro 17:11, September 24, 2010 (UTC)
Support. He is helpful. has made many good edits and already does a good job as a sysop. I am sure he will do great as a 'crat. GEORGIEGIBBONS ^talk _{contributions} 16:04, September 26, 2010 (UTC)
support He has done a good job as an admin so he will do a good job as a 'crat.--Monster2821 (talk) 16:10, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral

Oppose

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

Nomination

I, Dharden, nominate LostInRiverview for bureaucratship on The Sims Wiki.

Thank you for consideration. I will accept the nomination. -- LostInRiverview^{talk · blog} 16:47, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

Questions

Has he accepted? |_Andronikos Leventis^Talk 14:50, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

Yes I have. Feel free to ask any questions to me here. -- LostInRiverview^{talk · blog} 16:47, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

Voting

Support

Yes, he has done so much for this community he definitely deserves it. --Guilherme Guerreiro (talk here) 14:46, February 12, 2011 (UTC)
There's no doubt, he totally deserves it. --WG_94 Talk - Blog 14:49, February 12, 2011 (UTC)
Complete support. I think he is ready for it. |_Andronikos Leventis^Talk 14:53, February 12, 2011 (UTC)
Strong Support. He has done a lot for the wiki and he deserves the rights. GG (t) • (c) • (b) 15:31, February 12, 2011 (UTC)
--Eduardog 3000 19:12, February 12, 2011 (UTC)
--CookieMonster888^talk 00:24, February 13, 2011 (UTC)
--[Ѧüя◎ґ] 23:06, February 15, 2011 (UTC)
—Random Ranaun (Talk to me!) 23:22, February 15, 2011 (UTC)

Neutral

Oppose

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

Nomination

I, 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)

I accept the nomination. Thank you Bob. —Random Ranaun ^{(Talk to me!)} 04:49, May 18, 2011 (UTC)

Questions

Voting

Voting is closed.

Support

Strong Support - RR has done so much for the wiki and he deserves the rights! Lost Labyrinth • (c) • (b) 07:03, May 18, 2011 (UTC)
Full Support - The knowledge he has added to this wiki is absolutely stunning, he has had a very good behavior and never messes up with people. It would be a good move to have him as a bureaucrat! Good luck with the nomination! --Guilherme Guerreiro (talk here) 16:18, May 19, 2011 (UTC)
Strong Support - You have done so much for and to this wiki that you definately deserve bureaucrat rights. After all, this wiki owes you since you are such a good editor and the 97% of the family tree images have been uploaded and created by you. You deserve this promotion 100%!\_Andronikos Leventis^Talk 18:41, May 24, 2011 (UTC)
Support - I've been thinking about my vote a bit more, and I've came to this conclusion. Yes, we all can be a bit crazy sometimes. But, as I see it, I overreacted. That's no reason to oppose a user who has helped out on the wiki for years, and who is one of the best editors here. With this in mind, I have changed to support. Good luck. --W H ^(Talk) 08:30, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
Strong Support- Jones143! 01:20, June 3, 2011 (UTC)
Support- I had a quick look at what he's done. Seems bureau-worthy to me. 115.132.19.17 01:06, June 7, 2011 (UTC)

Neutral

Neutral --Bleeh^(talk) ^(blog) 01:32, June 3, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose

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

Nomination

I, 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)

Thank you very much for the thought Guilherme and I may as well give it a shot. I accept the nomination. Lost Labyrinth

• (c) • (b) 16:20, July 6, 2011 (UTC)

Questions

Voting

Support

Note: Struck-out votes are eliminated because they do not meet the minimum voting requirements.

GG is very dedicated and hard-working. I think he is worthy of this position. DanPin .:::. Talk 16:32, July 6, 2011 (UTC)
Lab has shown that he's a great administrator and would be an even better bureaucrat by all his anti-vandalism work. --Bleeh^(talk) ^(blog) 18:50, July 6, 2011 (UTC)
~>ฬђ ^{(tคlк ★ ς๏ภtгเ๒ร)} 06:32, July 7, 2011 (UTC)
GG always takes care the users who tried to do vandalism, mostly as I know. Nikel ^(Talk to _me!) 14:25, July 7, 2011 (UTC)
Jones143^Talk
~~One question: Why not? Pierogi 23:13, July 9, 2011 (UTC)~~
Fair, hard working, experienced, highly active, etc, are only a few reasons as to why I believe GEORGIE can, and should, become a bureaucrat. --BobNewbie ^∞(Talk)∞ 19:10, July 11, 2011 (UTC)
i vote for you Wir.wiryawan 07:54, July 14, 2011 (UTC)
~~Knows what he's doing and is very active. I see no reasons to not make GG a bureaucrat, but I see many reasons to make GG a bureaucrat. --Callofduty4 17:49, July 16, 2011 (UTC)~~
Lost Labyrinth is one of the best editors in The Sims Wiki and he is dedicated to it. Keep on with the great work, you deserve this. Vss2eip 21:14, July 16, 2011 (UTC)

Neutral

Oppose

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

Nomination

I 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)

Thank you, I'm flattered. :) I will accept the nomination. --Bleeh^(talk) ^(blog) 15:26, September 4, 2011 (UTC)

Voting

Note: Struck out votes have been eliminated because they do not meet the voting requirements.

Support

I think Bleeh has made so much for this community, her work has been stunning. She has been a responsible and kind admin, not to mention how popular she is on the wikia. ;) Good luck with the nomination! --RoseGui (talk here) 15:31, September 4, 2011 (UTC)
The characteristics Bleeh has shown on her time here prove that she can handle this task. Go Bleeh! :) --BobNewbie ^{๑ (Talk)๑} 15:33, September 4, 2011 (UTC)
She has a good number of edits on the wiki and a strong anti-vandalism history. I wish her best of luck! El cobaya^{talk here} 15:39, September 4, 2011 (UTC)
Bleeh can help us more as bureaucrat :) --Wir.wiryawan 16:36, September 4, 2011 (UTC)
~~Per nom nom nom nom. Pierogi 17:41, September 4, 2011 (UTC)~~
~~Per nominaton. --N7 ^[T|C] 17:49, September 4, 2011 (UTC)~~
Bleeh has proven on her long time on the wiki that she could be able to handle this position, and I have complete confidence she'll do a terrific job. Good luck! ―ฬђ ^talk 05:14, September 5, 2011 (UTC)
Bleeh will make a wonderful bureaucrat. Her knowledge is amazing and she is worthy of this title. DanPin (Talk) 18:31, September 7, 2011 (UTC)
Bleeh is with no doubt one of the most active and devoted editors here. She will do an amazing job! She has my full support. Andronikos Leventis^Talk 19:32, September 8, 2011 (UTC)
Bleeh makes an important role in this wiki. And she gains trusts to lead this wiki, along with some others crats. She is tremendous! Nikel _Talk 14:31, September 9, 2011 (UTC)
Bleeh has done very good work on this wiki. No doubt that she will do a good job as a Bureaucrat. She has my full support.--♥DarthCookie♥ 20:50, September 12, 2011 (UTC)

Neutral

Oppose

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

Nomination

I, 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)

Thank you for consideration Lab. I accept. ―ฬђ ^talk 00:02, September 26, 2011 (UTC)

Questions

Just one question before the vote. Is it really necessary to have another crat? We currently have 4 active crats, while Bleeh and GG are the most active atm. Don't we still have enough power and helping hand for The Sims 3: Pets articles, don't you think? Nikel _Talk 09:30, September 27, 2011 (UTC)

I can understand your point. However, as a couple of bureaucrats (one being myself) discussed on IRC about becoming a litte less active due to RL, we decided to open up the nominations for one more crat. A few admins were on IRC at the time as well and there wasn't any opposition. Besides, it wouldn't hurt too much to have another bureaucrat and I think WH is a good choice. Lost Labyrinth

• (c) • (b) 16:49, September 27, 2011 (UTC)

Sure, it all makes sense. I trust Wogan, and I wish the bureaucrats can now serve the wiki even better without risking their own RL. Nikel _Talk 08:48, September 28, 2011 (UTC)

Voting

Support

WH has made many improvement on this wiki. --Wir.wiryawan 02:06, September 26, 2011 (UTC)
I agreed Wir, Wh had helped me so much.LolitaG 11:28, September 26, 2011 (UTC)
Definitely, for all he has done for this wiki. --RoseGui (talk here) 17:49, September 26, 2011 (UTC)
Agree with above. Woganhemlock has a great anti-vandalism record and a good amount of edits. Vss2eip^{talk here} 17:52, September 26, 2011 (UTC)
Per all the above mentioned reasons. --Bob ^๑ 18:40, September 26, 2011 (UTC)
There is no need to explain how Wogan has contributed himself to this wiki. He deserves the bureaucracy privilege and responsibilities. I questioned this request, but not on the purpose to doubt his work. Nikel _Talk 08:44, September 28, 2011 (UTC)
I agree with all of the above and I think he will be a good bureaucrat. DanPin (Talk) 06:19, September 29, 2011 (UTC)

Neutral

Oppose

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

Nomination

Based 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)

I thank you, and I accept the nomination. --RoseGui

(talk here) 21:35, March 6, 2012 (UTC)

Questions

Voting

Support

Full support - Rose has been on TSW for a long time and is a very skilled and dedicated administrator. Although she is not a native English speaker, her skills in English have improved dramatically since her arrival here. She shows a very strong record of editing, dispute resolution and other administrative actions. -- LostInRiverview^{talk · blog} 21:58, March 6, 2012 (UTC)
Support - Since bleeh and gg absent, we need another crats and rose is the best for it! Wiryawan310 05:35, March 7, 2012 (UTC)
Full support - One of the best editors and Wikians in TSW.
TWikia _Talkie
11:06, March 7, 2012 (UTC)
Full support - What can I say... RoseGui is a terrific user, she's always in a good mood, she is more welcoming to new users than me (A LOT) and I couldn't expect less from a fellow Portuguese user. You've done an awesome job, Gui! DanPin • talk • contribs 21:26, March 7, 2012 (UTC)
Full support - I nominated about a year ago, when I was yet to understand the wiki's policies. By all means, I can offer nothing but my support. RoseGui is an amazing user, and one of the most active ones. She deserves to be a crat more than ever. Nothing else to be said.
Full support - Rose is a mature, welcoming, friendly, and dedicated editor. With almost 19,000 edits on this wiki alone, she does her best to keep the wiki a nice place. There's no one better fit for the position than her. Oh, and I love her. <3 1358 ^(Talk) 18:55, March 13, 2012 (UTC)

Neutral

Neutral —Random Ranaun ^{(Talk to me!)} 03:01, March 9, 2012 (UTC)

RR, you're welcome to vote however you wish but you really should provide a reason regarding your neutrality. Lost Labyrinth

• (c) • (b) 23:04, March 10, 2012 (UTC)

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

Nomination

I, 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.

Thank you, Wir, for your trust on me. :) Unfortunately, I am not feeling ready to become a bureaucrat. I might reconsider it again in the future. I decline the nomination. Nikel _Talk 07:16, May 1, 2012 (UTC)

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

Nomination

I, 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)

I think I still not good as administrator, busy with work on the office, and too soon judging anon that do vandalism on this wiki. but I will try to give my best to improve this wiki, I will accept this nomination. Wiryawan310 11:50, May 4, 2012 (UTC)

I want to pull back and decline my nomination since some work that need to be done in the real life. I doubt that I can handle this up.Wiryawan310 17:35, May 4, 2012 (UTC)

Questions

Voting

Support

Neutral

Oppose

Oppose - While his heart is definitely in the right place, I am concerned with Wiryawan's usage of his administrator tools, a flaw which he himself listed above. I feel that he can be too harsh to some users who make edits to the wiki and often blocks them without warning them. Also, and I'm not jumping to any conclusions here, I am slightly worried that if Wiryawan was to become a bureaucrat, he may become more "ban happy" knowing that he has more privileges, which would probably make matters worse. That is the only major moan I have; he could probably be a good bureaucrat someday and provided he becomes a little bit more relaxed with the block button, I may support him next time around. Lost Labyrinth • (c) • (b) 16:44, May 4, 2012 (UTC)
Oppose - To be honest... I'm fairly concerned about this... especially about the edit warring and such. It's not the edit warring that matters, but it's just that Wir "doesn't believe" anons. I'm sure that as time goes by, he'll become a better and more experienced admin, and eventually become a good crat... or sort of. Sorry... :/ Nikel _Talk 17:05, May 4, 2012 (UTC)

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

Nomination

I 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)

After thinking again since the last time I nominated, I think I'll be ready now. I accept the nomination. Nikel _Talk 15:36, June 6, 2012 (UTC)

Questions

Voting

Support

Well, Nikel's been around and kicking around, and ever since his return, his activities are at all time high, building up the wiki. Wait, I can vote here, right? MILK FOR THE UNYUUFEX, FLAT CHEST FOR THE CUTENESS THRONE, SKULLS FOR THE SKULL PROBES (user talk:Mathetesalexandrou) 15:39, June 6, 2012 (UTC)
As long as you meet the voting requirements, yes. And you meet them by a long shot anyway. :P Lost Labyrinth • (c) • (b) 15:47, June 6, 2012 (UTC)
Strong Support as nominator. Lost Labyrinth • (c) • (b) 15:47, June 6, 2012 (UTC)
Per above. DanPin • talk • contribs15:49, June 6, 2012 (UTC)
Strong Support - You're one of the best users around here, you're contributions are valueable and remarkable and you're really friendly. --RoseGui (talk here) 15:51, June 6, 2012 (UTC)
Strong Support- Nikel works really hard, he should be a Bureaucrat. Starmoonie(Talk Here) 17:22, June 6, 2012 (UTC)
Strong Support - per the above and such. ―ฬђ ^talk 00:11, June 7, 2012 (UTC)
Strong Support - Nikel is a very good contributor and a very good admin. This position is fully deserved. -- LiR^{speak ~ read} 20:04, June 7, 2012 (UTC)
Strong Support - One of the best editors on the wiki and definitely deserving the position. 11:48, June 8, 2012 (UTC)

Neutral

Oppose

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

Nomination

I, 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)

I accept the nomination. Please ask me any questions and I will respond to them. Thanks for the consideration. -- LiR^{speak ~ read} 03:53, July 19, 2012 (UTC)

Questions

Voting

Support

Support - I do realise that we are in somewhat of a position in which we have enough staff, but the way in which I see it we can't really have such a thing as "too many crats". I myself don't know how much longer I will be able to be here for due to my schoolwork next year. The way I see it, if we have someone who knows what they are doing, I see no issue in giving them the flags, and based on the growth of this wiki it won't be too long before we open RfB's if I hadn't done this. I would have never bothered with this nomination if I did not believe in it. I've read the comments below and I do see that some see LiR's attitude as somewhat of a problem, but the truth is we all have flaws. To me I see him as the same person who was very much capable of the position last year. I'm not afraid to admit that at times I have made mistakes, and I can recall times in which other admins have as well. All of the statements below stem from LiR's passion towards the wiki, which I see as a good thing. Maybe working a bit with that is something he should do, I admit, but given he knows what he's doing and has had the tools before his retirement, I see no reason why this shouldn't be approved. ―ฬђ ^talk 10:11, July 20, 2012 (UTC)
Support - I changed my vote because Wogan made a strong point and because LiR explained himself well. Everybody makes mistakes, and I make them too, so, there's no reason for me opposing this request. LiR even showed that he was willing to work his attitude if it was a problem. His experience as an admin and bureaucrat is also valueable and I realized I was wrong. So, I support now. --RoseGui (talk here) 10:26, July 20, 2012 (UTC)
Strong Support - In my opinion, and just like WH said above, there is no "too much staff" situation, because if we are already fully staffed, I see no reason for the RfBs to be open. Also, there is the old saying that says "The more, the merrier". Now, onto my opinions about LiR: He has been a 'crat already, so he knows how to handle the extra functions, because he seemed to work fine as a crat and there was no motives to worry. He is a worthy editor and a very experienced one. About his "behaviour issues", I believe that people make mistakes and they can change. If he is willing to not repeat his past troubles, I have abosolutely no problem with it, so I guess he should be promoted. DanPin • talk • contribs 23:20, July 21, 2012 (UTC)
Strong Support - I agree with Wogan and DanPin, there is no "too many staff members" problem - why would the RfBs be open if there was? Furthermore, I don't really see any issue with this nomination. LiR has been a responsible and trustworthy bureaucrat before, much longer than any of us here have in fact. GG, many of the reasons for your opposition are pretty weak. The "if I get pinged again I am kickbanning all the bots" thing was obviously a baseless threat, done for the sake of humour. I've seen many other users, including you, do the same thing - it's nothing to take seriously and definitely not a suitable reason to deny LiR bureaucrat rights. The other reasons, regarding what was said in the past, is exactly that - in the past. LiR shouldn't be punished for something that happened months ago, which he clearly apologized for. Most of the quotes you referred to give the impression that they were taken out of context and painted in a more negative light than they were originally intended. I don't see any issue with LiR's supposed "attitude problems", as his attitude has never caused any disruptions or any large issues. I'd hate to say it, but from where I'm standing, it seems the reason behind your opposition was personally motivated, if only slightly. LiR has proven a million times over that he is deserving of the rights, and is definitely dedicated enough and a skilled enough editor to warrant them. —Random Ranaun ^{(Talk to me!)} 00:51, July 22, 2012 (UTC)
Support - Let's just get on with this. Ѧüя◎ґ (talk) 00:56, July 22, 2012 (UTC)
Support - After giving this some thought, as well as reading LiR's response below, I felt that I overreacted. We're all far from perfect and if LiR is determined to work on keeping a positive attitude then it only makes sense for us to give him the chance. It's not like his occasional "moments" stop him from being an effective admin in general and I know from experience that LiR is a nice guy who you can actually talk to. I'm glad all that has been cleared up, hence why I changed my vote, and good luck LiR! :) Lost Labyrinth • (c) • (b) 11:03, July 22, 2012 (UTC)

Neutral

Oppose

Discussion

(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)

To be honest, I don't remember anyone saying "the next person to say walrus is getting -v", but yet, I haven't been much on the IRC. About the other things, I think I understand them now, but sometimes you seem to act a bit arrogant. However, whether that is a barrier to you becoming a bureaucrat can be subjective. I don't know, I'm kind of doubtful. --RoseGui

(talk here) 17:14, July 19, 2012 (UTC)

I do see how being passionate could translate into being arrogant. If that is true, then it's a flaw in myself that I have to work on but I don't think that should be a deciding factor in this decision. Everyone has flaws, after all, and any arrogance I may have had has never caused me to improperly perform my job. -- LiR^{speak ~ read} 17:44, July 19, 2012 (UTC)

Well, generally it's GG being "the next person to say yolo/swag gets kickbanned" etc. :3 1358 ^(Talk) 13:48, July 22, 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)

Nomination is invalid. The nominating user does not meet the 50 edit minimum requirement to nominate another user. -- LostInRiverview^{talk ~ blog} 03:41, April 19, 2013 (UTC)