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)

Comment - I'm trying to get more involoved in the community by posting comments on blogs, talk pages and more. I'll do it again at about March or April. OK? 16:20, March 2, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Fine by me. Also, this page, UoTM's, RIDA's and FA's are good places to get involved.

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?)

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)

Support - 808 is a great user and he will not abuse his admin powers. Cpl.  Dunn  18:15, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support - 808 is great. He helped me with my signature, when I was asking the most stupid questions. I'm surprised he isn't already an admin. II  Helljumper   II  18:22, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support - 808 isn't an admin? I thought he was, he certainlty looks after this wiki well and displays a ton of admin like qualities, he's perfect for the job. Smuff 18:54, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support - It's strange he ain't admin yet. His edits is good, and he looks after the wiki very well. User lacks required mainspace edits. Imrlybord7 19:03, February 28, 2010 (UTC) Captain Knutzen 19:00, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support - 808 is a great editor, friendly helper, and is very creative. I think that 808's most valuable asset as an admin with rollback abilities is the time zone he lives in. Most vandals think they are clever when they get up from their bed in New Jersey, let's say, at 2 a.m., but that doesn't stop 808 from reverting their edits, because where he lives it's like 9 p.m.! 🇨🇩 19:32, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support Per all above, great user, nice, well known. All in all admin materialLt. Col. Gen.Cain T C   E 21:32, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support Per all. He's a great user and very nice to everybody. Poketape 21:33, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Ah, hell, why not? 00:17, March 1, 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)

Comment Please don't bring me into this. He actually opposed my rfa. (Although from a vote standpoint weak oppose and oppose are the same thing). Poketape 21:29, 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)


 * Comment - This should also be looked at. It's very concerning. -- 2nd_Lieutenant.png8oh8sig.png  T   C    E   18:39, 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)


 * Comment - As 808 said, percentage means little compared to the number of edits. In many ways, looking only at mainspace edits and percentages punishes editors who take a more active part in discussion on Talk pages and COD space. --Scottie theNerd 10:05, March 1, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I really wish you had listened to the advice I gave you on your talk page. The community is not ready to trust you yet, and I am not confident that giving you admin powers will really help the wiki. I gave you more than enough advice on how to best go about becoming an admin. It is way too soon and you still aren't ready for adminship, even ignoring your past offenses. Also, constantly RFA'ing when most users feel that you aren't ready comes across as arrogant, impatient, and immature, which can hurt your chances in future RFAs, where your chances at success would have been more realistic (but don't worry, it's not like you've sentenced yourself to death by doing this or anything like that). And if this is another RFA that is just for the purpose of getting user input, then "bad idea" is really all I have to say. There are plenty of other ways to get user input. Imrlybord7 18:31, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Give it another month or two, you have matured up, let's see if it stays that way... Smuff 18:46, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Two days after a block that was actually revoked early is a little too soon. It wasn't a minor offense either, for me, a one month block is far from minor. Plus I do believe that Juan made a great point in his comment. More than half of your upwards of 3000 edits come from user talk, user blog, and user blog comments alone. As Imrlybord has suggested, it may be in your best interest to wait a while before nominating yourself for adminship again, in order to earn the community's trust. 19:17, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Not Yet An admin shouldn't have as many enemies as you. Also, an admin should have close to no blocks. This recent block shows you still need time. Poketape 21:35, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Comment- Actully Poketape, besides stupid users that have no purpose but to be stupid, I honestly have no enemies. Jose and I are working our problems out. Greivier, EightOhEight and Bord have both been solved and so with Callofduty4. Also, I'mrlybord7 was blocked for one and a half days for flaming another user and still got it.


 * Comment - I doubt Jose would describe your conversation as "working it out". There's also Warpanda13. And 1 1/2 days ≠ 30 days. -- 2nd_Lieutenant.png8oh8sig.png <font color="darkolivegreen"> T  <font color="darkolivegreen"> C   <font color="darkolivegreen"> E   23:32, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Comment I especially can't support you after you tried to vote twice in the featured articles and got blocked. Poketape Talk 02:19, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I have no confidence in Peter Griffin Boy. Admins should have a clean record, which reflects their capacity to work positively with other users. There's no reason to waiver this requirement, especially since PGB has a serious record of offenses and has only just come back from a block. The wiki isn't that desperate for admins to appoint someone who has a proven to be inconsiderate and hot-headed. To make PGB an admin is to demean the purpose and status of an administrator. --Scottie theNerd 10:00, March 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - Recent disputes and yet another block further establish that PGB is not suitable to be a member of the admin team. --Scottie theNerd 05:39, March 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - I agree completely. I doubt that I will ever support you in an RFA, and I'm sure most users feel the same. Although you have demonstrated the potential to change, you have also shown that you are prone to misbehaving, which is an unacceptable trait for an admin. Imrlybord7 13:52, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Only about a couple hundred more edits PGB and you'll be there, ok? Jst hang in there and it will happen. 16:04, March 1, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral - When I first joined the Wikia, everyone was talking about something bad that PGB had done. I really don't know how bad it was but it sounded pretty bad. Lt.  Dunn   22:30, March 3, 2010 (UTC)

Doc.Richtofen
I have been here since August 2009. In the past few months I have become very involved in reporting vandals to admins and fixing pages that have been vandalized. I have an impeccable behaviour record. I have amassed over 500 mainspace edits. With administrative powers, I could handle pages better. I could also block vandals myself, instead of waiting for an admin to do it, which is sometimes a lengthy process.

Support- I believe you would make a great admin.AdvancedRookie 19:51, March 2, 2010 (UTC)

Support - With a perfect behavioral record and a lot of contributions to the site, I can't imagine why not. Imrlybord7 20:52, March 2, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Very easy-to-get-along-with user, and does excellent anti-vandal work as well. 21:41, March 2, 2010 (UTC)

Support - The Doctor is a very kind and helpful user. He's mature, and has a flawless behavioral record. A great editor and user all round. 21:51, March 2, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Doc. has made many contributions and is always nice to new users. I think he would make an amazing admin. Lt.  Dunn   23:07, March 2, 2010 (UTC)

Support- Per all above and he has no enemies. <font color="darkred" font size="4" font face="Neuropol">Lt. Col. Gen.Cain T C   E 00:04, March 3, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Strong presence on the wiki. Has an excellent track record and an good attitude towards working with other editors. Would be an asset to the admin team. --Scottie theNerd 06:49, March 3, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Same thing I said about 808, how you're not an editor already beats me, you're one of the most dedicated editors to this wiki. Smuff 19:22, March 3, 2010 (UTC)

Cpl. Wilding
I believe my last RfA failed either because I didn't have the mainspace or it was just too soon. Either way, I believe I have the skills to be an admin and to help the wiki become a better place.


 * Over 800 mainspace edits


 * Active in the community


 * Started "The War on Impersonal Yous"
 * Has reverted a lot of vandalism

Pending/Comment - You may be the most active member of the coalition against impersonal yous, but I'm still the founder. Anyway, you are clearly a great editor, but I'm not entirely sure that you wield enough influence to be deserving of adminship. Sorry to leave you hanging like that. Imrlybord7 13:44, March 3, 2010 (UTC)

Pending - Per Imrlybord7. It shouldn't be long though before it will be supports. It's sort of like with DevilWarrior, get your opinion heard in more places and that will help.

Change to Support - After looking through your contributions I think you are worthy. Imrlybord7 16:29, March 3, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Wilding is a deserving and active editor. 22:16, March 3, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Wilding is an active user and has many mainspace edits. Lt.  Dunn   22:27, March 3, 2010 (UTC)

Support - per Imrlybord. But about point #3, that's vague and unprofessional. So I can say that I started "The War On Vandals"? --  <font color="darkolivegreen"> T   <font color="darkolivegreen"> C   <font color="darkolivegreen"> E    <font style="background:black"> '''EightOhEight    T     C     E     21:06, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

Support - You are a very active editor, I see you fixing things all the time. I think you would make a great admin as you have the wiki's best interest in mind.

Change to Support - Per Saint.

DevilWarrior112 (2)
My RFA a month ago didn't work because I wasn't involved in the community enough. But I've tried to in blog posts, talk pages and more. I'm trying to become an admin because I can revese vandals, stay more connected with the community and help the wiki become a better wiki.
 * Started a blog story "The Black Devil"
 * More active in the community
 * Editing pages that need editing.


 * Oppose - Erm, it's been a week since your RFA. Your previous RFA hasn't even closed yet. One week isn't enough to see significant changes that prove your suitability as an admin. Of your points of improvement, #2 and #3 are vague and generic; while #1 has absolutely nothing to do with administration -- blog posting is a personal activity; not community involvement. As you commented previously, you need a few months to work on your areas of improvement. It's only been a few days. Patience, I beg of you. --Scottie theNerd 11:40, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - /facepalm Imrlybord7 13:32, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Can I delete this? 15:50, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Nope.

RFA Closed - User already has an open RFA. Imrlybord7 15:58, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

SaintofLosAngelesXD(m)
I hereby nominate Saint for the position of bureaucrat. I feel that A) we need another 'crat (no offense to Chia, but it's too big a job for one user), and B) that Saint is the most "flawless" of all of the sysops. He is extremely intelligent, friendly, patient, helpful, dedicated, and well-behaved. I can think of no reason not to afford him these powers. Imrlybord7 17:41, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

Support - as nominator. Imrlybord7 17:41, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Completely agree.

Support - I agree wholeheartedly with this nomination. Mmm, Crispy... 19:02, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per all, Saint's a good choice for the position.--WouldYouKindly 19:19, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

Support - We definitely need another active b'crat --  <font color="darkolivegreen"> T   <font color="darkolivegreen"> C   <font color="darkolivegreen"> E    <font style="background:black"> '''EightOhEight    T     C     E     20:12, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose- I'm sorry, but he's more of the social editor. He's made around 930 mainspace edits, but I see another, more deserving, better editing admin right below this.

Comment RfAs shouldn't be affected by each other. It's whether or not Saint is deserving. Poketape Talk 04:13, March 6, 2010 (UTC)

Support Definately. I wish I nominated him! Poketape Talk 00:03, March 6, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Has the right method and manner for someone to take on higher administration duties. --Scottie theNerd 04:16, March 6, 2010 (UTC)

Callofduty4 (2)
I nominate COD4 as a bureaucrat because he helps a lot out and is a great user too. He is a great administrator, does a lot of work and is a big help to the wiki. He should really deserve these powers. 20:00, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

Support - As nominator. 20:00, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral - This has been brought up before, and has been put down because Callofduty4 lacks the aloofness of a bureaucrat or something like that --  <font color="darkolivegreen"> T   <font color="darkolivegreen"> C   <font color="darkolivegreen"> E    <font style="background:black"> '''EightOhEight    T     C     E     20:25, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - He's going to become a 'crat in November. Ask Chia about it.


 * Comment - With all due respect, Doc, Chia doesn't decide that. -- 2nd_Lieutenant.png8oh8sig.png <font color="darkolivegreen"> T   <font color="darkolivegreen"> C   <font color="darkolivegreen"> E    TF141.jpg<font style="background:black"> '''EightOhEight    T     C     E     20:25, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Well, why dosen't he become one earlier? I'll talk to Chia about it. 20:23, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Wait a second, isn't he an admin already? Smuff 20:55, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Smuff, this is to be a Beauracrat. Slowrider7 20:57, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

Comment- No the only reason Callofduty4 can block people is because he's got funk.

Support- He's neen a pal, has around 1250 mainspace edits and has been very kind to a lot of people. I'm going to call him a mirror, if you're nice and do good stuff, he's nice. If you're a selfish, asshole vandal, he'll act selfish and be an ass to you, cause you deserve it. If you disagree with me you must now be paying much attention,

Oppose That actually needs a little attention. Acting like an ass to asses might seem okay, but it's important to create a standard. Poketape Talk 00:03, March 6, 2010 (UTC)

Comment-Poketape showing vandals respect should be worth a block.

Cod1 (5)
Hi there everybody. Well it's me again. I believe it is the right time to try again. If I become an admin, I promise to work with everybody. I promise to use my tools to good measure, and with great professionalism.

I have the determination to make this wiki an even better place for CoD info. I promise to be professional with my tools, and act like any other user. I know being an administrator does not make you any more important than anyone else. I feel I am pretty well known on this wiki, I have a pretty mixed reputation, and over 2100 edits.

So please have your say. Thanks a lot, 00:33, March 6, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Cod1 has the required mainspace edits and would be a good admin. Lt.  Dunn   00:42, March 6, 2010 (UTC)

Nuetral- It pains me to do this. But there are three main reasons why I must do this. 1) There's gonna be a hell load of admins coming in. I think it would be better if you and I ran together in April 2)You're not that well known and haven't been that active lately 3)You're not that active in community disscussions. I wanna support but I just can't see it . You deserve this, it is a very tough decision, but I'm going for nuetral, but you'll most likely get passed.

Comment Is there really any reason to run at the same time? If anything wouldn't that just lessen your chances? Poketape Talk 03:56, March 6, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral leaning towards Support - Sorry about this dude, but I've never seen you until this point, however, you do look like a good editor, you do have a nice edit count and if you get more votes from some admins or high profile users (808 and Doc for eg.) I'll happily change it to a yes. Also, don't worry, not having a rep isn't that bad a thing, just get some support ok? Smuff 01:07, March 6, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose I still don't think you're up to adminship. At least you took a long time this time. Make sure you remember to include what number try this is. To me it seems like you just took longer so people would forget about you (Which seems to have worked). Poketape Talk 03:56, March 6, 2010 (UTC)