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 this set of requirements:
 * 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.

There is a discussion about administrator requirements feel free to contribute your thoughts.

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 subsection lists most vote types.
 * Support - A positive vote.
 * Strong Support - A very positive vote.
 * Weak Support - A positive vote, but the voter has not ruled out oppose.
 * 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.
 * Pending - Vote not yet decided; essentially the same as neutral.
 * Oppose - A negative vote.
 * Strong Oppose - A very negative vote.
 * Weak Oppose - A negative vote, but the voter has not ruled out support.
 * 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.
 * Comment - A comment.
 * : - a comment made in response to another comment can simply be indented.
 * 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.

Ukimies
Although Ukimies hasen't been active in a while, he has been involved in community discussions and nearly has 3000 edits. He never fails anyone and has a theory for anything. Imrlybord was going to nominate him for adminship but it looks I've beaten him to it. He is kind, mature and nice to any user and has welcomed enough new users. I think he deserves adminship now.20:10, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - As nominator. 20:10, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per nomination.   Lima Oscar Zulu Zulu Alpha

Comment - Ukimies hasn't been active because he's on vacation.
 * To receive adminship, a user has to accept their nomination or they will not receive their powers, no matter how many people support it so that if they don't want it they won't get it. If he's not able to post that he accepts this nomination it can't pass until he can. 20:06, July 1, 2010 (UTC)

Weak Support - Per nomination. 20:19, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per nomination, more or less. Imrlybord7 20:23, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per nomination. 20:28, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per nomination. Doc.  Richtofen  21:02, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per nomination. 21:02, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral - I don't see a fit. TimSim (talk) 21:09, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral - Per Darth. Slowrider7 23:33, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Ukimies is a huge help to the wiki. 🇨🇩

Support - Per nomination. The Z(Talk) 22:29, June 26, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Mostly per nomination.   404 Error   File Not Found  Please Try Again 11:50, June 27, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral - Per Darth. Sgt. Bravo  Rider 12:21, June 27, 2010 (UTC)

Weak Support - Per nomination and per all.  Commander W567123daniel Wanna Talk? 08:52, June 28, 2010 (UTC)

Change to Oppose - I see only one candidate that I believe will fulfill the responsibilities of an admin completely.
 * That was a statement not of comparison, but more of that I've only seen one candidate so far that I think is right for the position, sadly he is not you. I am by no means favoring one user and opposing all others.
 * Users don't "deserve" adminship, and as with everyone else, I really don't see you doing much that is "adminly", and I don't foresee you doing much you can't do now.

Comment I accepted on Bord's talk page but I'll also do that here. I, Ukimies, formally accept the nomination of adminship. -- 08:34, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per Cod addict. Shotrocket6 15:47, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

Not Yet - Although Ukimies is a great contributor, I don't that he is fully ready for adminship. As darth said, I have not seen many "adminly" things done by Ukimies. I think that given more time, Ukimies will be ready for Adminship, but as of now, I don't think he is quite ready.

Not Yet/Oppose - Per SkullRod, in due time. Corporal Juan José Rodriguez Reportin' for duty. 18:07, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Closed - RfA Unsuccesful 14:39, July 9, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - This looks like a successful RFA to me. Imrlybord7 01:03, July 10, 2010 (UTC)


 * There are 17 votes in total, 12 are supporting. Because this wiki works on a consensus, 70% of a vote is needed. This vote has 70.5%, which means it is actually successful in theory... 01:09, July 10, 2010 (UTC)


 * But remember, it's not just the percentage of votes; it's the reasoning and points raised in discussion. So far, the only main opposing point is from SkullRod, who raised his concern that the candidate hasn't shown admin qualities and is not yet the right time. Most proponents agreed with the nomination. However, the nomination itself is quite flawed: the reasons listed are barely relevant: being involved in community discussions (which is actually hasn't been frequently); never fails anyone (a baseless statement, unless he's a Russian spy); has a theory for everything (great if you're Einstein's protegé, not if you're an admin); has welcomed enough new users (not measurable and not an admin quality); and deserves adminship (which cannot be deserved). While I don't oppose the candidate, the reasons provided by the nomination and voters is quite poor given our raised awareness of admin issues. --Scottie theNerd 07:24, July 10, 2010 (UTC)


 * Ukimies consistently demonstrates all of the prerequisite administrator characteristics (professionalism, dedication, eloquence, intelligence, courteousness, cooperation, etc.) in the mainspace, user interaction, and community discussions. 'Nuff said. And Devil, thanks for throwing together a completely asinine (as Scottie thoroughly demonstrated) nomination just so that you could do it before me. I really fuckin' appreciate it, pal. Imrlybord7 07:37, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

Support - To remove doubt. --Scottie theNerd 09:37, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Thanks Bord. This was the time for Ukimies to shine though. He is an amazing editor and he could make a great admin. I think this could be the start of something new Bord... 09:41, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

Comment and Oppose - I agree with Scottie here - the nomination paragraph is very poor and contains baseless statements as you say. If I had no idea of what Ukimies was like and had to base my vote on the nomination it would be a flat oppose. But still, because we just made 3 new administrators, I do not think we need another one, so I do not support this RFA, for that reason and the fact the nomination paragraph is poorly written. Nomination paragraphs are extremely important and cannot be rushed and contain irrelevant points. 10:32, July 10, 2010 (UTC)


 * Ukimies is a personal favorite of mine and I would appreciate it if you considered my previous statement something of a nomination paragraph. Imrlybord7 20:19, July 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately this RFA needs one more support to be able to be called successful. Richtofen.jpg Doc.   Richtofen  20:26, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - The "nomination" paragraph Imrlybord provided is a thousand times better than Devil's, but I still think we do not need any more admins at the moment. Persuade me we do, and I'll change to support. 20:54, July 10, 2010 (UTC)


 * Not needing Opposing an RfA because there are more than enough Admins right now is something I use to think was fine, but now I think this "Well, if a user is meant to be an Admin, and there is enough Admins, it's better for a user to be an Admin sooner then later if he is qualified for a user rights upgrade." So if Ukimies is qualified for a user rights upgrade, and there are enough Admins why not make him an Admin sooner than having Ukimies wait if he is qualified. 21:03, July 10, 2010 (UTC)


 * It's because if there are already enough admins to handle the job, there is simply no point in making more. Administrative powers should only be handed out when and where they are needed, because otherwise there will be too many admins, and an overall imbalance in power. I'm not saying Ukimies should not be an admin at all because there are enough admins, just not at the moment. 21:13, July 10, 2010 (UTC)


 * Opposing on the grounds that we have "enough" admins has absolute nothing to do with the RfA. It is no fault of the candidate nor is it in their control. This isn't the first time we see people opposing candidates because we apparently have "enough". Look what happened last time. RfA page gets closed, admins become inactive, we go through a huge discussion to re-open the RfAs, and we keep on getting this notion of us having "too many". They're just admin tools, for crying out loud. There's no cost to having more admins and logically having more admins means less work demanded from each individual admin. Isn't that a good thing? It's pretentious for us to decide to open the RfA only to say, "Oh, you can't be admin because you were nominated a few days after the other guys". This page is for the community to provide their input on prospective candidates and their suitability. If you have an issue with RfAs and how many admins we have, bring it up in the War Room and get consensus. What you are doing now is protest voting and depreciating the efforts of all candidates, which is in turn removing the point of RfAs. I'm yet to see any reason why we have "enough". Persuade me so -- and do it in the War Room, not someone else's RfA. --Scottie theNerd 21:20, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

Support - As Imrlybord has stated, Ukimies exhibits professional conduct in community interaction and rarely is anything less. His dedication to improving articles is admirable, which, along with other qualities Bord mentioned, lead me to believe that Ukimies is ready to become a sysop. 21:39, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Again as Imrlybord stated, Ukimies does indeed posess the qualities an Admin should have. I can see no reason that he should not become an Admin. He has helped me when I first came to the wiki an did it in a very professional, giving manner. I will back him up in any way I can. I'm sure he'll do the same for anybody else.  Talk 21:56, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

Change to Support - It seems Scottie theNerd is intent on making me change my vote, and he's succeeded. Ukimies shows all the qualities an admin should possess. 18:41, July 11, 2010 (UTC)

Darthkenobi0
Most of you know me as Darth, Kenobi or Tim. Here on the Call of Duty Wiki, while I do have many social edits, I also edit the mainspace often, making more extensive edits than most (especially overhauls). Beyond that, you can see for yourselves that I help out the wiki as much as I can.

I feel that I could use sysop tools to more effectively and expediently deal with vandals, troll, or potential incidents. I have experience with wiki markup and am able to use most commands and am able to help users identify any problems they are having. I run a wiki myself, so have experience with the basic infrastructure of a wiki. I am quite involved in the War Room, and helped draft the User of the Month vote's new format, and have been very active in the discussion about Administrator requirements and the new medal system, as well as being the author of several other drafts, and involved in the discussions involving voting on RFAs.

I'm usually quite amiable (so I've been told) and am rarely rude. I have a fairly good reputation on the wiki, have reverted a large amount of vandalism, helped in the Overhaul Project, and welcomed many new users. Honestly, I feel that I could use these tools responsibly and effectively, thank you for your time.

Support -- as nominator --   E ight  O h   E ight  18:54, June 28, 2010 (UTC) -- Posted as protest, now an official request.

Oppose - Per my vote in his last NfA. 19:03, June 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support Great user.  Poketape Talk  20:47, June 28, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I'm not sure whether to be insulted that I'm part of Eight's ragequit from the wiki, or flattered...

Neutral - Would be a good late-night sysop, but I'm not really sure.

Oppose - While Darthkenobi0 may have been nominated by someone else this time, I believe the points made only three days ago still stand. tl;dr version: He needs to develop a consistent style of behavior, as conversations such as this are not acceptable. 01:12, June 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not disputing that my behavior was far from desirable, but I would like to point out the fact that I was baited, and received no block for my reactions (I bluntly stated to Imrlybord7, Chiafriend12, Callofduty4, and Doc.Richtofen that I would happily take a block if they deemed it necessary). And I do acknowledge the consistency argument, but as you might note, I am generally quite polite, and only react to an extreme against blatant trolls and/or flamers, every single of which has received blocks for baiting and trolling. Also, I feel I can calmly handle situations (as I did last night on Rampantlion's blog) in the future, as I have for the most part, in the past.

Oppose- Per Bovellnlm gr  01:14, June 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * I would appreciate if you would explain your vote beyond "Per Bovell", while I respect his vote, would you please elaborate more upon your own? Thank you.

Support - He's a hoss, what more can i say? Jeffnickers 01:16, June 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Elaborate please.

Oppose- He shouldn't get adminship because of the fact that he can over hype some times as he did at User talk:TheManOfIron. if he wants adminship he needs to quit overhyping. Jeez he like my friend who plays Bball with my when its a close games. Wayyy to overhyped.  Rampantlion513  02:04, June 29, 2010 (UTC) Vote withdrawn  Rampantlion513  02:28, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

Change to support-I have seen the good side of Darth and if he doesn't try to obbuse his power as an admin he would make a good admin.  Rampantlion513  02:36, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral - Definitely one of the few users who can make substantial claims to being qualified for adminship. However, attitude and manner is inconsistent and occasionally confrontational, as experienced in the past. While practical-minded and set to get things done, I'm concerned that his approach to his duties could be rash and unnecessarily personal, similar to how Imrlybord7 was. --Scottie theNerd 04:18, June 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, I've noticed again that Darthkenobi0 has struck out all his votes on the RfAs for the same reason as last time: there is only "one" person who deserves the position. In my eyes, it's unthoughtful to oppose every candidate in favour of one instead of judging each nomination by their own worth. --Scottie theNerd 04:22, June 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * I actually am not simply favoring that one user, it just happens that there is one I believe is capable of fully meeting the responsibilities of an admin, and that I don't feel those users are, my votes were, by no means, made in comparison against other candidates, simple coincidence and ease of copy and paste, if you would like me to put this onto every RFA I voted oppose on, I will happily do so, to explain.
 * Why not abstain from voting if you have nothing to say against that particular user? Your voting is practically protest voting,in that it provides no objective criticism or commentary but is opposed based on something they have no control over. --Scottie theNerd 04:37, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - This nomination was done as a joke and Darth just recently withdrew a nomination. /justsaying Imrlybord7 13:41, June 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sure most are aware, I replaced Ocho's joke nomination with my own formal request, as provided in the edit summary, a few friends said I should go for it for the feedback.

Support - I feel you would make a great admin. The reasons I stated when I nominated you previously have remained the same. While admittedly you can go overboard, it isn't a regular thing (though it would be better if it wasn't there at all, of course) and the good you do far outweighs the bad. You would do the wiki good. 21:03, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

Support - A great user, per CoD4 and the nomination. Doc.  Richtofen  21:11, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Darth is a great user and an activist in the wiki community. He has started and enacted the RCP & NUW user groups, which I am a part of. He proposes many changes in the War Room and that is more than I can say for the majority of the users in the community. He and I are almost always on late night, performing RCP ops and together have stopped many vandals. I know that if he gets his Admin flags he will think three times before acting on them. He knows the inner workings of the wiki and how get issues resolved. While he can be rash at times, I know that if he gets his Admin flags, his behavior will change.  Talk 21:37, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral leaning toward Support - Darth is obviously a great user who has done a lot for the wiki in not much time at all, but I am still weary of his temper and condescension. However, his reaction to the last RFA and subsequent behavior has bolstered my confidence in him. I do not, however, expect to change this vote during this RFA, but if this one does not pass I will almost definitely offer a supporting vote on the next one, provided it is not posted really really frickin' soon. Imrlybord7 00:03, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I just wanted to express my thanks for the great feedback and faith. I also wanted to say that I was toying with the idea before of simply posting my RFA on the last NfA, to express what I think are my good points, but had decided not to, however after EightOhEight's protest postings, I decided to take this opportunity to get feedback from the community to see what I have to improve upon. Once again, thanks to everyone for all the faith (especially from Bovell, who has shown faith in my future candidacy) it means a lot.

Strong Support - Per my last RfA support for him. Darth is an excellent user who always tries hard to impress. His edits are untouchable and amazing. His editcount is very high and he's just behind CodExpert. He only arrived in January 2010 and look what's happened with him over the past five months, awesomeness. Per all too. 07:15, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Darth does what he can for the wiki and its community, he's frequently on IRC, and on the wiki at irregular times. He works hard and is a mature, friendly user who knows his stuff. He'd make a great admin given the fact that he is aware of vandals and how to deal with them, and due to his activity at times when small numbers of users are active, he'd be able to block vandals instead of having to wait till an admin appears. His edits are also very constructive and he has done a lot of work redoing whole pages which were previously in bad condition. -  09:00, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I usually have great confidence in the reliability I can find in Darth, but it is when he acts out and calls others "stupid shithead"s, makes bestiality insults, and is generally rude that I don't think such behavior would be acceptable for an administrator. 20:06, July 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * I know this won't be that much better, but it wasn't a bestiality insult. It was just pretty much an insult in general. Corporal Juan José Rodriguez  Reportin' for duty. 23:43, July 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it warrants pointing out that Chia actually felt strongly enough to vote. Anyone with the ability to notice trends will hopefully see the significance there. Imrlybord7 04:26, July 8, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - You opposed the other RfAs because you say you see "one cadidate fully capable of meeting the responsibilities of an admin" and you submit one yourself? That kinda defeats the purpose of why you opposed. 23:17, July 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Not really... I was saying that I only saw one person who I had faith could fully carry out the duties of an admin, which doesn't contradict my own RFA in any way, it simply means that I think I could do the job well enough, so now it would be two, instead of one. Darthkenobi0 ^ (talk)  23:23, July 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * That's exactly what I think I could do. And as Scottie said, it sounds like your to "oppose every candidate in favour of one instead of judging each nomination by their own worth" and that it "provdes no objective critism based on somehting they have no control over". 23:26, July 1, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Ex, that was 808 who nominated him, not himself. Smuff 23:20, July 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * Ocho submitted it as a protest, Darth made it into an actual RfA. 23:21, July 1, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Your lack of self control and tendency to react personally to certain situations highlights the fact that you are not to be trusted with administrative powers. 🇨🇩


 * They aren't powers, they're tools.  Darthkenobi0 ^ (talk) 05:00, July 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * powerful tools = powers 🇨🇩
 * Just for a cheesy example, Batman has powerful tools, but he doesn't have powers. Powerful tools don't always equal powers. Corporal Juan José Rodriguez  Reportin' for duty. 23:43, July 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Just to use that cheesy example properly (i.e. in a way that is completely contrary to how you just used it), those powerful tools give Batman the ability to do many amazing things he could not otherwise do. Capabilities = powers. Imrlybord7 04:26, July 8, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I was going to vote support for you, as you are a GREAT editor who brings up policy changes and War Room topics very oftenly, and generally edits the mainspace a lot, but, after reading Chia's oppose with the links, I will have to oppose you. I was aware that you sometimes have some anger issues, and that's ok, we are all human, but calling other people Stupid Shitheads, Fucktard Shitmonkey and Fuckmonkeys is unacceptable, be the conversation with TMOI or any other editor.  Commander W567123daniel Wanna Talk? 10:12, July 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * I understand your point but could you please not underline and bold those? I did say them but I don't enjoy, and I don't think many others enjoy seeing those words so easily viewable when reading through this page. Darthkenobi0 ^ (talk)  04:07, July 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure. I was just trying to really get the point across.  Commander W567123daniel Wanna Talk? 08:48, July 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * It was an isolated outburst, sure Darth can take stuff hard, but he has only flipped out on one user. Doltensig.jpeg 00:35, July 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Darth has flipped out on more than one user. *cough* Imrlybord7 04:26, July 8, 2010 (UTC)

Support - My only hope is that you keep trying to uphold yourself with integrity and don't let anger get the best of you. Corporal Juan José Rodriguez Reportin' for duty. 23:43, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - User fails to control temper at times; may attack other users. 02:27, July 8, 2010 (UTC)

Extremely strong oppose - This user cannot seem to control himself in many situations, thinks offensive things are funny, insults our Wiki, saying they are full of retarded shitmonkeys, gets angry extremely easily, is sensitive, and is all around annoying. (IMO)--Letlev (Talk) 03:49, July 8, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - User can be extremely flamey at times, and does not seem to be able to control his anger. Sac tage  Talk  Editcount <font color="Orange">Contribs 23:46, July 8, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Yes he can be flamey at times but give him a chance. He is a good user and has not had any serious violation or else he would not qualify. He is influential and helpful. As well his mainspace edits are high. Besides some temper he is all you could want in an admin. Hell the first time I saw his profile I thought he already was one. His actions in the past do not seem to be still a present issue but rather something that is being dug up to stop him. We should give him a chance we all know he would benefit the wiki as an admin. And having the responsibility of an admin should help him calm down and stop future temper problems. If not his admin status can be revoked with the press of a button. Nobody can be perfect and Darth is certainly not. But I would say all he has done good far outweighs all the little he has done wrong. Foxtrot12 07:42, July 11, 2010 (UTC)


 * Some temper is what you don't want in an admin. You expect an admin to be calm, impersonal and professional. Very few admins that we currently have show that consistently, and a few have gotten into some trouble for making things too personal. I fear that Darthkenobi0, while certainly influential and knowledgeable, does not quite have the patience to deal with user issues in a professional manner. A little outburst and the entire admin team is discredited. --Scottie theNerd 18:25, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * He has shown some temper in the past and with great power comes great responsibility sorry that is the best I could think of. Being an admin he should be able to realize he has to get over it and stop. I think that by being an admin he would think twice and be reminded of his position before he loses his temper and makes things personal. Maybe you are right that he will not have patience but with all he has done for the wiki and alll he could do that is a risk we should be willing to take. I have a feeling that may be used against me but no matter. We should give him a chance. Because we all know he would make a decent admin what most people are scared of is his attitude when he gets angry. We have to hope and probably get his assurance that he will keep things under control and civil. If he does that what do we have to lose?Foxtrot12 18:48, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * He has shown some temper in the past and with great power comes great responsibility sorry that is the best I could think of. Being an admin he should be able to realize he has to get over it and stop. I think that by being an admin he would think twice and be reminded of his position before he loses his temper and makes things personal. Maybe you are right that he will not have patience but with all he has done for the wiki and alll he could do that is a risk we should be willing to take. I have a feeling that may be used against me but no matter. We should give him a chance. Because we all know he would make a decent admin what most people are scared of is his attitude when he gets angry. We have to hope and probably get his assurance that he will keep things under control and civil. If he does that what do we have to lose?Foxtrot12 18:48, July 11, 2010 (UTC)

Alex Martin Rider
Hi, I'm Alex Martin Rider. I nominate myself for the role of Adminship. I have been at this wiki for over two years ago now. My first account was "Batman Rider" then I made a new one. I go on here almost evey day. I edit pages, upload many valuable images used for pages, and take part in discussions I'm interested in. I don't get in fights with other users and cooperate with everyone I meet. I am an admin on two other wikis and understand the responsibilities of being one. I hope you seriously consider me for the role of an admin. Thank you for considering me! -- Alex Martin Rider 01:56, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Have never seen you around. --Scottie theNerd 04:14, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I've rarely seen you edit, and honestly you don't stand out as an exceptional editor.

Oppose - Have never seen you on Rampantlion513  04:44, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - You uploaded a lot of good quality pictures, but your editing is sporadic.

Strong Oppose - I'm with the above 3 on this one. I've seen you maybe once or twice. <font style="background:darkred">  404 Error   File Not Found  Please Try Again 12:10, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - This is a joke, right? Imrlybord7 13:42, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose Barely see you around. <font style="background:silver"> Poketape Talk  18:47, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I can honestly say this is the first time I have ever seen your name. Smuff 19:02, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Oh yeah, your mainspace count is way below par. Smuff 20:05, June 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * This is my second account....

Oppose - I've actually never seen you before, so I can't support you. There are far better candidates. Maybe some day. 20:47, June 29, 2010 (UTC) Comment You also stole my signature. I thought the whole idea of a signature was to be unique, but you just took it. I don't really like that either. <font style="background:silver"> Poketape Talk  01:44, June 30, 2010 (UTC) Oppose - Sure, you say you've been here for 2 years, but looking at you Userpage, 344 edits since Febuary 18th 2010? You call that active? Not to mention, I've never seen you around. <font style="color:firebrick">SSD  <font style="color:black">天皇陛下萬歳！ 01:54, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Callofduty4?! You know me! You helped put the background up on my wiki that I created! The Task Force 589 wiki. --
 * Oh, sorry! I didn't know that you're signature was like that. I can get it changed if you really oppose it. --
 * Comment It just seemed to me that signatures were supposed to be unique, and seeing you asked for yours to look like mine with different colors... 8-bit_price_r.jpg<font style="background:silver"> Poketape Talk 8-bit_price.jpg 18:15, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * And I'm sorry, do you want me to have it changed? I just love the 8-bit Cpt. Price. --
 * This is off-topic. Please discuss the RfA, not the signature. --Scottie theNerd 18:46, July 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment It's true, 8-bit Price is awesome, but I think you should go for something different. 8-bit_price_r.jpg<font style="background:silver"> Poketape Talk 8-bit_price.jpg 18:41, July 1, 2010 (UTC)

Strong Support- I support him because he is good with pictures and is friendly. I find that "Oh I haven't seen your name" means nothing. Look, if theres a page with no picture then it's just paragraphs. Remember not every one is on the computer every day. SO your at the right place BUT your at the not at the right time.BravoAlphaSix 03:25, June 30, 2010 (UTC) - User lacks mainspace edits.


 * I had a different account...
 * I was still talkin' about your current account. 344 edits in 4 months. 648px-Flag_of_South_Vietnam.svg.png <font style="color:firebrick">SSD  <font style="color:black">天皇陛下萬歳！ 02:02, June 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * Not trying to make excuses but I've been gone a lot lately. I actually have a life. Considering that I'll be gone until about noon every day this week for personal reasons.

Strong Oppose - What? Why nominate for an RfA now? I haven't seen you much, your editcount is way way low. I don't think you'll ever become one now. 07:11, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment -- Okay, I get the point. People on here don't like me, I just wanted to see what others thought of me. I was just hoping that I would get one supporting vote.....
 * A lot of people have lives too, and no one's going to criticise that. However, if you haven't been active or committed to the wiki, it's not likely that you'll do much as an admin. --Scottie theNerd 05:53, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Precisely, I wasn't necessarily judging you in any way, just an admin requires a good amount of attention towards the wiki. 648px-Flag_of_South_Vietnam.svg.png <font style="color:firebrick">SSD  <font style="color:black">天皇陛下萬歳！ 14:04, June 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment - Wow, Devil. What an unnecessarily mean and stupid thing to say. If failing RFAs was all it took to never become an admin, I don't think anyone would be in a worse position than you. Alex, it's not that nobody likes you. In fact, I've looked through some of your contributions and you seem to be a fine fellow. However, what you have done for the wiki is only a small fraction of what it takes to prove to the community that you can handle adminship. Adminship isn't about liking or disliking people. It's about confidence in their dedication and integrity. Now, I know that a few people might jump down my throat for bringing up edit count, but I'm just going to say that I never expect to see any more users with edit counts below 1,500 become admins, and even 1,500 would be pretty low for an admin. Imrlybord7 07:44, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - "I actually have a life." Is there something you seem to be implying there? Bord was right, people don't hate you, but posting stuff like that on an RfA isn't going to help your philosophy along very well. Smuff 17:42, July 1, 2010 (UTC)

Stong Oppose - I've only seen you on, what, twice? 17:06, July 2, 2010 (UTC)

Change to neutral,leaning toward Support-Just make more edits. Rampantlion513  16:40, July 11, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Replying to the comment above, let's say User A has 6,000 edits, bad behavior, more blog posts than anything, and somewhat a troll. While at least a thousand edits are minimum and User A has more than enough, User A is not fit to be an administrator, while User B has around 500 edits, he shows excellent behavior, reasoning skills and much more. User B does not have the criteria to become an admin (at least a thousand edits) but is more fit to be an admin than User A. While Alex Martin Rider is not User A, saying "Just make more edits" does not mean a user should become an admin just on having "more edits". -- 18:06, July 11, 2010 (UTC)

Poketape
Hello everbody! I, Poketape, nominate myself for 'cratship. I am a very dedicated user and have been here for more than a year now. I am always watching the recent contributions and have proven myself knowledgeble in CoD information. (After all, this is the CoD wiki.) I am always willing to help out new users and am always active in discussions. With the arrival of what so far appears to be 3-5 admins, I believe another crat is necessary and that I should be this crat. Thank you.

Support - We need another crat. And sorry for quoting Darthkenobi, but the glove fits for Poke. Slowrider7 20:14, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Always responsible, neutral, friendly and can get stuff done. He would make a great crat. Doc.  Richtofen  21:14, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

Support - per Doc Richtofen. <font color="Green"> Talk 23:01, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

Support - He's proffesional, friendly, and active in the War Room. He is a fine choice for Cratship. 23:03, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per Doc.- 23:55, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per Doc. -- 02:18, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - There are multiple admins who I would trust much more with 'cratship than Poketape. Although he is generally polite and friendly, he does not conduct himself in a particularly professional manner, and 'crats should basically be perfect. When I think about who is most like Chia and Saint, Poketape is certainly not a name that comes to mind. Imrlybord7 02:55, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Not Yet - You're a very friendly user and have never been caught up in any bad conflicts. However, in my opinion, I believe there are a few more users who deserve crat just a bit more than you. Nevertheless, if you become just a bit more active and voice your opinion regularly you will surely become a crat one day. 03:14, July 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * The position of bureaucrat is not something to be deserved. 10:58, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - The nomination does not convince me of the need to have another bureaucrat or why the candidate should be given authority over his peers. While Poketape has been visibly active in the recent past, I have not found it easy to work with him and don't think I would work as positively with Poketape as I would with others. --Scottie theNerd 11:07, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Not Yet - I feel there are better candidates for adminship. I feel it is OK to do a direct comparison to Bovell (considering he also has a RfB open), and Bovell comes out on top, with the impeccable way he portrays himself. I don't feel you will never become a bureaucrat, just not now. 11:16, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - There are far more other people who deserve 'cratship than Poketape. In the future when people think he's worthy enough, I'll support you. JUst at this time, it won't happen. I'm saying this not badly just as a user. Sorry, if anything I say makes you disappointed 15:26, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Not Yet - I don't think that we need more than one new bureaucrat, and I feel that Bovell should be that new bureaucrat. 16:19, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Please give the RfB votes the respect they deserve and provide additional reasons besides "Per ...." . 20:45, July 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * There's nothing wrong with agreeing with what another user has already written. If it's "disrespectful" for someone to write a comprehensive comment and thus prevent anyone else from voting, I'm quite happy copy/pasting the reasons to everyone's votes above. --Scottie theNerd 10:34, July 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Support - Good guy and good editor. Bovell will definitely win cratship but another will still help. Most of the oppose votes say that others deserve it more at the time not that he would not be a good 'crat and some support the idea he will become a 'crat but not now. If that is the case why wait for the inevitable? I support. Foxtrot12 07:57, July 11, 2010 (UTC)

Bovell
I, CodExpert, hereby nominate Bovell for the position of Bureaucrat. He is a very dedicated user to the wiki since February 15, 2009. He is very active in most War Room discussions and is a very intelligent, proffesional, and active Administrator. Bovell has shown himself completely worthy of being a Bureaucrat by being a nearly flawless user, he is definately one of the Administrators that are most wrothy in a user rights upgrade. And with these arrival of a large amount of Administrators, I think that the wiki would need another Bureaucrat. 21:16, July 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * I accept my nomination. 23:17, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

Support - As nominator. 21:16, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

Support - per nomination. He has always acted in a professional manner and has never acted out in a manner that would suggest otherwise. Always acts very mature on the wiki. <font color="Green"> Talk 22:57, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

Support per nomination. He's a great user. <font style="background:silver"> Poketape Talk  23:25, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Bovell is a great contributor, he acts properly and he is very active in Forum discussions. Everything he does is professional and done correctly. I think that with the new adminstrators coming in, we will need more Bureaucrats and Bovell defnately fits the spot.

Support - - Per nomination. -  23:56, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Bovell is always a mature, friendly editor, and he'll make a great bureaucrat. 02:50, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Support - I feel that Bovell is currently the best choice for a new 'crat. Intelligent, well-written, professional, courteous, kind, and insightful. Imrlybord7 02:57, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Support - I have had very productive sessions with Bovell. He is one of the few sysops who go about their duties in the community by working with policies and providing neutral, objective perspectives on sensitive issues. He is unafraid to caution users for wrong behaviour or correct his peers for misunderstandings and misconceptions. My conversations on IRC with him show a strong regard for the betterment of the wiki and a respectful attitude to all users. He would be, in my opinion, of the best people to take a leading role among admins. --Scottie theNerd 11:12, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Bovell has been on the wiki for a long time and clearly knows what he is doing. He conducts himself in a mature and intelligent manner and his large influence over the wiki (which is a good thing) would make him a fine bureaucrat. 11:16, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Support - If I say per Scottie, will he kill me? Either way, Per Scottie theNerd. <font style="background:darkred"><font color="Orange">Sac <font style="Background:orange"><font color ="Darkred">tage  <font style="background:darkred">Talk <font style="background:orange"> Editcount <font style="Background:Darkred"><font color="Orange">Contribs 11:58, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Support - per nomination.Insane281 12:18, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per all. Bovell is a great contribuator to this wiki. 15:19, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Please give the RfB votes the respect they deserve and provide additional reasons besides "Per ...." . 20:45, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Flawless user. Always Neutral, responsible and without any known flaws. Doc.  Richtofen  20:52, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per all. --TheManOfIron (Talk) 16:24, July 8, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Kind, mature, and respectful editor. I think he deserves to be a 'crat. 21:22, July 8, 2010 (UTC)

Support - I know this is kind of extreme, but Bovell is a near perfect user. Just be more active in discussions.

Comment - Should an admin close this? It seems to be unanimous, and I doubt 17 editors will randomly come in with good reasons not to crat him.


 * In the words of Scottie: "RfA (or RFB)s must remain open for the minimum time. There's no reason to waiver that requirement." My RfA had 24 supports, it waited for two weeks until darkman closed it. 16:09, July 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * Also consider that votes from sixteen out of potentially thousands of registered editors isn't exactly a "unanimous" decision. It's imperative that we follow procedure instead of trying to take shortcuts. --Scottie theNerd 16:44, July 9, 2010 (UTC)