Call of Duty Wiki:Requests for Adminship

Give a good reason and request for adminship in the bottom subsection if you wish to become an administrator, or bureaucrat.

Requirements for adminship
To qualify to be an administrator, you must meet a set of requirements.

You must
 * Have been here for at least a month.
 * Have edited at least a thousand times.
 * Be civil.
 * Have no record of serious offenses (E.g. vandalism, personal attacks).
 * Be known and trusted by others.

Regulations for voting

 * Keep your cool. RfAs have been known to host some nasty flame wars. If another user disagrees with you and gives you trouble, just keep your cool and don't fight back. That may sound "cowardly", but if you fight back, you could receive a block, and/or make the flame war escalate.
 * New users can't vote. Sorry, but that's the way it is. Someone can easily make a bunch of dummy accounts, all vote for their friend to be an admin, and unfairly turn the tide of the vote. For this reason, new users cannot vote for the possibility of being a sockpuppet. Anyone trying to use sockpuppets will be blocked.
 * Be descriptive. Though you don't have to, it's a lot easier for a discussion if you say why you're voting what you're voting. If you just say "Support - --Example 06:24, 20 April 2008 (UTC)", you're not really saying why the candidate should be an admin, and your vote may be excluded and strikethrough ed. It's not just for supports, but for all votes.

Glossary of vote titles
Not just the standard "Support" and "Oppose"s are used in RfAs. This subsections lists mosts vote types.
 * Support - A positive vote.
 * Strong Support - A very positive vote.
 * Weak Support - A positive vote, but the voter is bound to change their vote.
 * Neutral - A vote saying that the voter is unsure about the nominee/between supporting and opposing.
 * Neutral leaning towards Support - A neutral vote, but closer to support than oppose.
 * Neutral leaning towards Oppose - A neutral vote, but closer to oppose than support.
 * Oppose - A negative vote.
 * Pending - Vote not yet decided.


 * Comment - A comment.
 * Not yet - A negative vote saying that the nominee has not been around long enough, but would be admin material if they had been around for a longer time.
 * Question - A sort of comment that asks a question. (Ex. What would you do with your tools?)

Requests
If you feel you are up to the job, make a subsection for your request, and the community will discuss it.

DevilWarrior112
- I'm going to give it a try now. The vandals are annoying me now and I welcome new users to the wiki all the time. I also have done work on my subpages very hard. DevilWarrior112 07:51, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Great user with tons of mainspace edits, but not involved enough in the community. You need to establish widespread trust and respect first, and I don't think that many users know you. Sorry. Imrlybord7 08:19, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose-You'll get there kid, but right now I gotta say nah. Peter Griffen Boy 19:42, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral - Per Imrlybord7. Doc.Richtofen 21:10, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Imrlybord7. Slowrider7 21:30, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral - I just don't really know you well enough. I want to make it clear that I have nothing against you though. -- Alex Martin Rider 21:48, February 26, 2010 (UTC) User lacks mainspace edits. Poketape 03:49, February 27, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - *Tries to think of something original* ...Ah, screw it, per Imrlybord. 22:06, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Erm... err... yeah, per all. 22:11, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Sorry, I'm with Imrlybord here, I've never seen you until here, and I'm on this ALOT. Smuff 22:12, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - On your user page you said you created "The Gulag," but I created that. I also noticed that some of the other pages were created with one word. For the article of "Takedown," you started the article with "Slums." You definately need more time here. Poketape 03:27, February 27, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I'll try again in a few months time. So I'll accept all your comments. Sorry for screwing up. DevilWarrior112 09:00, February 27, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Don't consider it a screw-up. It's a learning experience. RFAs are a great way for users to see what areas they need improvement in. So don't worry about it. Imrlybord7 09:25, February 27, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Per Imrlybord7. Doc.Richtofen 14:52, February 27, 2010 (UTC)

Not Yet - Per all. Good user judging by his contributions, but not all that well-known to the community.--WouldYouKindly 16:47, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

EightOhEight (2)
This is my second try. I'm trying again because during the course of this RFA, I am hoping to accumulate close to 150 mainspace edits.

Anyway, for those of you who do not know me, I'm EightOhEight. I design userbars, creative images, and other things for the members of this wiki. I make decent edits, and I've made many disambiguation pages. I've fixed many walkthroughs, and I've created our own browser toolbar.

Last time, people said that my lack of mainspace edits and the short amount of time I have been here were the only reasons they opposed me. However, I have shown that I can handle situations, and I have past experience being a sysop. I maintain that wiki all by myself.

I had the full support of a bureaucrat, and some respected and senior users. I feel I can do my job better if I have admin powers, especially because I can control vandalism late at night. --  T    C    E   06:34, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Damn it, I liked being the late night vandal blocker. But yeah, you have proven yourself more than worthy. Imrlybord7 08:45, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per Imrlybord7 (What? What else is there to say?) Doc.Richtofen 09:54, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support - I think we can trust him to do a good job. 11:42, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support - You have done well on the wiki and you are very mature. You certainly deserve to become a administrator. User lacks required mainspace edits. Imrlybord7 14:02, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Me & you have never really spoken, but I already know your a damn fine editor and you participate socially here too, as in blogs. Slowrider7 13:50, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Question - Have you really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like? C'mon. Really? Imrlybord7 14:02, February 28, 2010 (UTC) Slowrider7 13:50, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Proven to be a reliable and dedicated editor; has the know-how to be a good admin. However, I'm a bit concerned that this sets a bad precedent for future RFAs. It's barely been a week since 808's previous RFA was closed, and while the first RFA went on for quite a while, it doesn't seem quite right for another attempt so soon after the first. Perhaps this is something that should be looked at? --Scottie theNerd 14:00, February 28, 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment' - I understand that, but when Chia nominated me, he didn't bother to write something that described me well. -- 2nd_Lieutenant.png8oh8sig.png  T   C    E   17:03, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral- Your lack of mainspace edits is what concerns me, as you've made a few good edits, but not nearly enough to get there alone. While becoming an admin on any wiki is good, your wiki is very empty and few of vandals, so it doesn't make me quite feel ready to support. However, you've been a mature user and have made some good userbars. Both of these are very strong points and cancel each other out, therefore I'm going to have to go for neutral.

Support per all.--WouldYouKindly 16:46, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support Yeah, basically everything has been said by my fellow supporters. -ScotlandTheBest 16:49, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Peter Griffen Boy (2)
I've been told by some users to try to get some suggestions from other users, so here I go again. I've been an admin on another wiki, (the Call of Duty Fanon Wiki, also known as MUC) and feel that I have matured up significantly, and have gotten about 650 mainspace edits and just got 3000 total edits.

Neutral - You have matured up and now have no problems here with any users, which is a good thing. The problem why I can't support you is that you have only recently came off of a block. If you had not have been blocked I would have supported but unfortunately, it is a neutral from me. Doc.Richtofen 16:13, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Not Yet/Weak Oppose - While I totally agree you have matured significantly, you're mainspace edit count is still quite low, and your recent block is very fresh in people's heads. I would wait until March/April or when you reach 1000 mainspace edits. Then I'd full on support you. 16:16, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Comment- Good to see people aren't still angry, I'm here to take some advice from my other users. However on mainspace edits may I argue that Poketape does have a tad bit more mainspace then I do (around twenty) and still got in? I still enjoy seeing Weak Opposes and Nuetrals.

Comment - Correct. I didn't exactly support Poketape's RFA though. I still want to see some more mainspace action and then that weak oppose of mine will turn into a weak support, and with even more mainspace edits it will turn it into a full on support. 16:32, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

'Neutral - In the requirements, it says an admin can not have had any serious offenses. Maybe we can overrule that in your favor, but it's been two days since you got off your block for a series of personal harassment. However, the change in your attitude has been so great over those 30 days that I have to say I'm pleased. Also, being an admin on a fanon wiki isn't that much of a great achievement, especially when it has 4 or 5 editors and pretty much no vandals. Just keep at it the way you are now, and prove to people that you have matured, and it'll be fine. --  T    C    E   17:14, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I'm going to set aside all of your past misdemeanors, which itself is a pretty big issue. You just came off of a ban, and your actions that caused said ban are still pretty questionable. But here's the thing - the top THREE editors on this wikia without powers are: CoD1, you and me. I looked into the edit stats:

You have, as of now, 668 mainspace edits, leading up to a 22%. Your highest percentage is Blog Posts, totaling up to 821 user blog comments and 157 blog edits. That adds up to 978 blog edits, or approximately 32%. Adding your user page edits and talk page edits, (291 and 993 respectively, 1,284 together) that gives you a 42% with that. 42 + 32 = 74. You could add everything else into account - more than 75% of your edits are... well... not mainspace edits.

CoD1 has 1,085 mainspace edits, giving him over 52%. I have nothing against that.

I have 1,572 mainspace edits, totaling up to 91% mainspace.

Mainspace editing alone... sorry, but this is how I see it. Corporal Juan José Rodriguez Reportin' for duty. 17:38, February 28, 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment - I agree with what you're saying, but just because his percentage isn't above 50 doesn't mean anything. We look at count, not percentage. -- 2nd_Lieutenant.png8oh8sig.png  T   C    E   17:41, February 28, 2010 (UTC)