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.

CodExpert
Hello, I am CodExpert, most of you may know me and some of you may not. I am here today to nominate myself for Adminstrative rights. I feel I have made some good contributions and have helped users. I have done my best to participate in forums and be as active as I can, by reverting vandalism, undoing bad edits, and spellchecking articles. I have accumulated on the wiki. I am a very active user, being on this wiki for several hours almost every day editing articles, reverting vandalism, helping users, and trying to do my best on the wiki to make it better. I have been well-mannered and friendly to other users and I have done my best to work up from that and improve this wiki. I am trying to improve this wiki the best I can and I see no possible way of ending that in the future. I promise that if I do pass I will never abuse my powers and I will treat users fairly unless they have done damage to the wiki and/or it's users, I believe that if I get Sysop powers I will deal with trolls and other vandals more effectively, I will assist wikians in need of help and help them to contribute to the wiki and not vandalize if they have done so in the past. I will say my opinion and stand by it unless the facts prove me wrong. Thank you all for your time. 16:29, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Strong Support - You are the only user that deserves Adminship right now CE. Your on late to protect against late-night vandals and you have perfect behaviour. Nice job.Slowrider7 16:34, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support- 7000+ edits is a lot. I always see you on the activity feed dealing with trolls and vandals. You definitely deserve to become an admin.

Support - Your dedication to the wiki is outstanding. You would really benefit the wiki with admin tools. 16:47, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - The 7,000 edits you have, added with the great integrity you uphold yourself with and the outstanding maturity = one of the most qualified requests I've ever seen. Corporal Juan José Rodriguez Reportin' for duty. 17:02, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per JJR, plus the fact that you are a friendly user would be an added benefit to you being an admin. - 17:06, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per COD4. Doc.  Richtofen  17:09, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - User has been a great anti-vandal and reverting dumb edits. He single-handingly saved the real life articles from deletion. He used to be a blog shitposter but he's really cleaned up his act. Has a perfect behavior record. Darkman 4 17:25, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per all, he demonstrates maturity and friendlyness towards all users he encounters.  Talk 18:06, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per all. The Z(Talk) 18:10, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - He is a great user whohas a great deal of maturity. Maj.Gage Talk. 18:15, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per Darkman and CoD4 Blinzy45 18:47, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per all.19:34, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - CodExpert is a mature, responsible user, and I have no doubt in my mind that he would be a great admin. 19:55, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per everyone.   404 Error   File Not Found  Please Try Again 19:57, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Thanks a lot for your votes, guys. It means a lot. 20:47, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Strong Support - CodExpert is a great contributor to this community. Not only that, but he is mature and nice. I think that CodExpert could only help this place out even more with admin tools. He is a fitting administrator, and I hope to see him on the list soon. This is SkullRod, out. 02:01, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per all. Imrlybord7 05:40, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - You have been a great help to the mainspace and other users, and I honestly think you deserve an administrative position. 🇨🇩

Neutral - You're a great guy, but it is undeniable that this recent business with TheManOfIron has involved more than myself. However you are a magnificent editor and one of our best contributors. TimSim (talk) 10:05, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - CodExpert has become a cordial member of the community and engages in discussion in a mature manner. He has also been doing an exceptional job at anti-vandal work, and would benefit from administrative powers in this way. Although I am slightly concerned about the flame bait incident that happened a few weeks back, CodExpert admitted that he was at fault, and that takes integrity. With commitment to the wiki, and a very much active user, CodExpert is certainly qualified for receiving an upgrade in user rights. 13:27, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Darthkenobi0
Darthkenobi0 has been a hard working editor ever since he became an editor here. He does a lot of work on the mainspace, and can be very influential in the War Room. Both of these are very important qualities when it comes to becoming an administrator. I feel that Darthkenobi would benefit the wiki greatly with new tools, as he is very active and swift to act when there is a problem. As he stated in an IRC discussion, he can be active when other administrators aren't (i.e. late at night). I believe he has the influence, skill and urge to help that it takes to become an administrator.

Support - as nominator. 16:47, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Darth, you are simply put, a highly intelligent, worthy and deserving user. It is your time. Corporal Juan José Rodriguez Reportin' for duty. 16:53, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - He's mature and etc, per his RfA draft wich is somewhere... 16:55, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Sysops need better behaviour than his. Dont take this personal Darth, but its true. You start way too much flamebait. Not just for TMOI and PGB, against Anons and really anyone. Slowrider7 16:58, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per nomination - 16:59, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per JJR. Doc.  Richtofen  17:09, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I don't think his "The wiki revolves around my opinions!" (seen here and here) attitude would be an asset to the community. He's great as an anti-vandal, but I don't feel that giving him admin tools would be a good idea, given his personality. Something tells me he'd cause an incident somewhere down the line because of his attitude. Darkman 4 17:26, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral - Darthkenobi0 is proactive in War Room discussions and has put forth proposals on numerous occasions. His eagerness to edit and improve the wiki is certainly something to be admired. Normally, I would give complete support, but there are two main concerns that I have with this user. The first more of an observation; Darthkenobi0 created the proposals that Imrlybord7 and Darkman 4 be desysoped and decratted, respectively. The second is a bigger issue I have with supporting. This conversation shows borderline personal attacks, calling TMOI "a bitch," "newfag," "ignorant asshole," and "prick," but TMOI may be provoking some of that. And I do agree in some respects with Darkman that his attitude can sometimes be the opposite of what an ideal administrator should have. 17:37, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Changed to: Neutal, leaning towards Support - I love your eager need for eidting. Those words you called TMOI were harsh even if he was provoking you. But per Bovell's points above, I'm not so sure anymore. I just don't want you unjustly blocking somebody for personal reasons. Sorry. 18:02, June 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - I'd peg what he said as flamebait, which is a big no-no, even if TMOI was acting up. Darkman 4 18:05, June 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * It wasn't flamebait, it was flame, I was baited, which is something I've always had a problem with, however your first piece of "evidence" is subjective, as is noted in the comments and later revisions I was making a suggestion based on my observations, and apologized if it came of as any sort of authoritative request. TimSim (talk) 10:37, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral, leaning towards Support - Darth is a very good user who points out various policies and tries to help this wiki the best he can. However, the propsals for de-cratting & de-sysoping other crats/admins really got me there. Aside from that, he would make a great admin. Maj.Gage Talk. 18:13, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per JJR. The Z(Talk) 18:15, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per all.19:35, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Darth has done a lot of good things for the wiki, and he would make a great admin. He also would be able to help out with the late-night jobs. 19:55, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Darth has been online with me on many late night "Vandal Ops" and together we have stopped some potentially dangerous vandals. While I agree that he can sometimes be flammable, I do think that if he is granted Sysop powers that he will be more tolerant of other users and not abuse his powers. He is an activist which can be good for change, and takes it upon himself to start new projects. He is not afraid to stand up for what he thinks is right.  Talk 05:10, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - As one of the only two users who I have ever truly attempted to guide toward adminship, the other being Smuff, I am disappointed to be casting an oppose vote for Darth. However, Darth's attitude is extremely variable and can range from friendly and civil to immature and cruel. He has admitted to having anger issues and semi-regularly allows issues from his personal life to affect his wiki behavior. His outbursts, although uncommon, are not rare, and are usually tremendous. I feel that at this time it would be a serious mistake to give Darth administrative privileges. But please trust me when I say that I am rooting for him more than any other user and am fairly confident that in the coming months he can prove himself to be calmer, more trustworthy, and more consistent in his behavior. Imrlybord7 05:39, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

 Refusal of Nomination Comment - Imrlybord7 is completely right in what he says, I am not yet ready, I'm way too stressed about my life and I need to work them out before I can consider this. When we posted requests the other night, it was mostly symbolic, I think all of those that gave me support, and Bord and Slowrider for keeping it neutral, but I disagree with Darkman's assessment of my blogs, and I apologize if I do come off to others the way I come off to him. TimSim (talk) 10:03, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Mau5killer has convinced me not to withdraw yet, I'll wait to see what happens, but I am by no means eager for this position, what I said directly above stands. TimSim (talk) 10:10, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Godly support I'm sorry this took so long Darth. Darth is a great user and friend I am glad to have known him i would write more but most people have already coverd it  T  C  E   B 10:33, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

II Helljumper II
'Sup I'm II Helljumper II, but you can me Lozza. I have been a member on this wikia since Christmas Day and I have an impressive [|edit count] under my belt. I am online when some other users arn't due to the fact I live in Britain. I really like the community aspect of this wikia, and IF I become an admin I will try to make sure what you want gets across. I really hate Vanadals and wish the would just get a life, like us :P Thanks,   Lima Oscar Zulu Zulu Alpha

Oppose - Your editcount is not nearly as large as that of CodExpert or Darthkenobi. Sorry, but they would be made admins over you. 17:18, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Do you really think that an arbitrary number such as edit count has any bearing on how qualified a user is to be an administrator? 17:41, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - When it is compared to other editors with edit counts of over 7000, yeah it shows. 21:06, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Editcount does not matter as someone could be a wonderful editor, rewriting article after article, and could only have 600 edits. 21:20, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I'm pretty disappointed that you would even post this. Not only is your edit count extraordinarily low (to the point that it does matter), but you have contributed little to the wiki and have been blocked for a substantial period of time in the past. Very few users with low edit counts have contributed a lot to the wiki, so when I say that a user's edit count is too low I am indeed taking the weight of those edits into account. If I ever support a user with a relatively low edit count, I will explain that they are one of the few exceptions. Imrlybord7 05:39, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - You're a good user, but unless you improve your blog behavior and raise your edit count, I will not support you. 🇨🇩

Comment - Don't you need 1,000 edits to request for adminship? This is SkullRod, out. 13:33, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Withdrawing my request.   Lima Oscar Zulu Zulu Alpha

WHISKEY35
To all concerned, I do hereby submit for your approval, a Request for Administrator status. I know that I am fairly new to the Wiki but I know that I can, and have been an asset to the Wiki. I have been active on the Wiki ever since I joined on 27 March 2010. I came here looking for info on Titles and Emblems and stayed on because I saw the need to better those pages. I have found that this wiki is in constant need of attention due to the vandalism that occurs here daily. I have made well over 6000 edits, equaling over 400 to files needing licensing, over 3500 welcoming New Users, numerous reverts made by vandals, numerous categorizing to pages in need. I have also helped lot of new users with questions. If I don't know the answer then I will direct them to someone who can help them. I am also active in the War Room Discusions. Some may say that all I do mostly is welcome New Users. While that maybe true, I believe that it is very important for letting the 'New" user know what the policies of the Wiki are and also to let them know help is available if they need it. Also they can check my edit counts and see that welcoming is not all I do in the Wiki. I am not merely interested in welcoming but the overall maintaining if the Wiki. I am usually on the Wiki all the time and live in a time zone that permits me to be on when most admins are sleeping or away. Therefore, if I had the tools available to me I could take immediate and appropriate action to stop vandalization of our Wiki. I believe I have demonstrated a mature and professional attitude while here on the Wiki and have made numerous friends while here. I do thank the Admins and Users that have helped me along the way and I will be here for a long time to come. Your kind consideration in a positive approval would be greatly appreciated and I promise to do my best in my administration of this wiki. Sincerely yours,  Talk  17:48, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Outstanding, mature, and friendly user, greatly deserves administrative rights. 17:50, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Great, mature, nice. I agree with CodExpert. 17:54, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per CodExpert. The Z(Talk) 18:08, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per CodExpert -  18:11, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - He is a very mature user and has welcomed SEVERAL user to this wiki, which means he has great skills with other people. I believe he has what it takes. Maj.Gage Talk. 18:09, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per CE. Doc.  Richtofen  18:26, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per CodExpert. 19:55, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per everyone.   404 Error   File Not Found  Please Try Again 20:00, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per Sactage --

Neutral, leaning towards support - I dont know you enough to support you, but the paragraph you posted seems pretty promising. Slowrider7 22:26, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support Damn good user that is dedicated to the wiki. He fixed the licensing for the images that didn't have one last month, so he's definatly dedicated. Has a perfect behavior record. 00:48, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per all. Imrlybord7 05:40, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - You really deserve administrative privileges because of your amicable behavior, your desire to help others, and your combat against vandalism. 🇨🇩

Neutral, Practically Support - I regret having to vote a neutral, but as with CE, I'm not the only one who's had harsh words with or about TMOI. I am proud to say though, that if I had to choose one new user out of all to become a sysop, it would be you, you're a great guy and an absolutely WHiskey (hell I had to come up with a new adjective!!!!) editor. TimSim (talk) 10:13, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Change to Support - He's done too much for this wiki not to deserve this. TimSim (talk) 10:57, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Definitely someone who has the patience and willingness to undertake admin duties actively. Has shown a definite commitment to many aspects of the wiki. --Scottie theNerd 16:23, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral - WHISKEY35 is a great contributor and has done a lot for this wiki, but he has lashed out at others for some little things and I'm not sure if he handles everything in the correct manor. Per this. (That was in response to this.)  16:36, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Change to Oppose - Per my earlier comment. 16:50, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Cpl. Dunn
Hi everyone, for those of you who don't know me, I'm Cpl. Dunn. I am here to nominate myself for adminship. I have tried to be a very helpful user, making userboxes for usergroups and making signatures for people. I have made edits, and about 2650 of those are mainspace edits. I have welcomed lots of new users, and made my own welcome templates with lots of useful information for them on them. I have no record of vandalism, save for a small message when I first started editing on Wikia. I have reverted a lot of vandalism and reported it to admins, to get it dealt with. I have always tried to be a mature and responsible user, and I assure you, if I get the admin tools, I will use them responsibly. Thanks for your time.

Support - With his editcount, that just shows the time he put in to make this wiki better. He's a great guy, and deserves Administrative rights. 19:54, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per CodExpert.   404 Error   File Not Found  Please Try Again 19:59, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Cpl. Dunn is a great editor. He is nice and mature. Also, I agree with CE. 20:02, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Dunn has consistantly proven to be an asset to the wiki any time he is online. I have the firm belief that he would be a great Admin. He demonstrates maturity and friendliness towards others at all times and helps out new users when asked. His Contributions to the wiki prove that he is a dedicated user and deserves the position of Admin  Talk  20:05, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

GODLY SUPPORT A great user and friend T  C  E  <font color="Crimson"> B 21:07, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Well liked and no issues. Has helped here and there and is currently working on our Topright project. I'd say he's dedicated enough to be an admin. Darkman 4 00:48, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - I was somewhat reluctant to cast this vote because Dunn doesn't really stand out in any particular way, but the more I thought about it the more I realized that he can be trusted with administrative privileges. He is always civil and has demonstrated an immense dedication to the wiki. Imrlybord7 05:39, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - you've done enormous amounts for this wiki but I don't see how administrator flags would be necessary for your work. You have done a great amount for this wiki and are a great guy, you should receive every medal we have. TimSim (talk) 10:18, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Between the amount of time he dedicates to the wiki and his exceptional attitude, I think that giving Dunn the ability to delete pages, block users and IPs, and protect pages (+ a few other things) will benefit the wiki. Imrlybord7 13:15, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Change to neutral - As of now I'm only supporting one user for admin, all other of my votes will remain neutral, as I only see the need for a new admin that is on when few others are, as a sort of "watchman" if you will, and my vote is cast for him. TimSim (talk) 13:18, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per CodExpert. The Z(Talk) 14:43, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Mau5killer
Support: 1

Neutral : 

Oppose : 1

Pending :

I am Mau5killer. I came to this wiki officially on December 26, 2009, looking for some callsign Titles and Emblems. I quickly made an account to get rid of those annoying advertisements, But I found a massive community of users. I quickly started editing, and in that time I have made 1,201 edits, 183 of them main space. I created this RfA after various incidents with vandals to which we had to call VSTF and Staff. I think I would be a rather good admin as I patrol this wiki for vandals every night or so, allowing other admins to rest easy. Mau5killer 21:17, June 24, 2010 (UTC)Mau5killer

Support - Mau5killer would make a good admin. He is always looking for vandals and lends a hand when he can. <font color="Green"> Talk 21:22, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Mau5killer has not contributed very much to the wiki in comparison to other administrators or potential administrators, and his attitude can be somewhat obnoxious at times. Although I appreciate what he has done, it is not nearly enough for me to feel confident in giving him administrative privileges. Imrlybord7 05:39, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I'm sorry Mau5, but your outburst at Callofduty4 was something (and I say this with great self-conflict) even I have not done, not even to PGB or TMOI. TimSim (talk) 10:15, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

I withdraw my nomination

Chief z
Hi, I am Chief z. I joined this wiki a little over a year ago and have been an active editor ever since. I've held off on going up for adminship until I've felt I knew and understood this wiki enough to make decisions that would help the site grow. I actively patrol for vandals, get involved with community discussions as much as I can, and constantly go through the existing articles looking for ways to improve them. I am well-mannered, friendly, and have a pretty good sense of humor. I try to help users as much as possible, or if there is a problem bring it to their attention. I promise you I won't abuse my powers, but use them to make this great wiki even better. Chief z 06:45, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - A good user with potential for adminship in the future, but it is way too early amigo. Imrlybord7 08:20, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I rarely see you active. TimSim (talk) 10:19, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I don't see you editing very much, and it's too early for you to post one of these. 11:07, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Too early? I've been on this wiki for over a year, and there are admins that I've been here longer than. As for active editing, sure I'm not filling up the Recent Changes, but I make my edits count. I single-handedly reorganized Soap's and Foley's bio, as both were just one large paragraph. I intend to do that with the other character articles. Chief z 11:52, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Too early for you. Restructuring a few character bios does not make you worthy of adminship. Imrlybord7 13:09, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I don't see a lot of involvement in the big community discussions that are directly concerned with community issues. While I acknowledge the quality of your edits, I don't feel the confidence I expect in someone willing to take on admin duties. --Scottie theNerd 16:21, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - You haven't really been editing here much. I haven't seen a lot of involvement in community discussion in the War Room, so, per Scottie. 17:28, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

CoD addict
CoD addict is the first of hopefully three users that I will be nominating for adminship. Before I discuss him specifically, I would just like to say that I am nominating these users because not only do I feel that they would make good administrators, but I feel that they would make better administrators than any other users with open RFAs. That is a compliment to them, not an insult to other users. Now let's get on topic.

CoD addict is an extremely dedicated editor with a focus on the mainspace. His edits are always of the utmost quality and he never leaves a job half-done. However, he also exhibits a satisfactory level of community involvement, during which he always presents himself as kind, polite, professional, and intelligent. I believe that he has done more than enough to prove that he will make an excellent administrator. And addict, if there is anything you would like to add to this please feel free to do so. Imrlybord7 08:29, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - As nominator. Imrlybord7 08:29, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral leaning towards Support - Per the nomination, I just have to look at your contributions and history a bit more before I make this a support. TimSim (talk) 10:21, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Weak Support - Per nomination. 11:07, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Judging by your contribs you are intelligent and a good editor. You appear to be extremely dedicated. From what I've seen from his contribs that were in War Room topics, he does seem very intelligent, polite, mature, and proffesional. Well, all in all, per nomination. 17:26, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Cpl. Wilding(3)
I know that I don't have nearly as many edits as other users on here. I know that not everybody knows me. What I do know is that judging from my past two RfAs, some of our admins trust me already, some (Callofduty4) have worked with me on other wikis and know that I can be trusted with admin powers. The only things I can offer to prove my worth are the fact that I run my own Wiki (Task Force 589 Wiki) which I have created a personality I feel is completely different from any other Wiki out there. The second I can bring is out of my 1,000+ edits, 1,013 of them are mainspace. Thank you for your time, mi amigos. Cpl. Wilding 14:27, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Seeing as how you dont have many edits, and you dont have much knowledge about templates because I had to fix the format of this, I dont think your ready.

Oppose - Too many of the above will be given, we actually will have enough admins, and honestly I rarely see you about.

Oppose - Haven't seen much activity from you in major community discussions. I don't really care much about your other wikis or your 1000+ edits; what we need are more willing admins who have the patience and consistency to deal with wiki issues. --Scottie theNerd 16:13, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Have not participated in major community discussions and haven't got many edits. I don't think you're fit for adminship yet. 16:27, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I haven't seen you active here enough, I haven't seen you partake in any major community discussions, edits don't matter as it is 'quality over quantity' (I do still appreciate the mainspace editing though), Running your own wiki doesn't really matter over on this one. Sorry, you just don't seem to be that ready for administrative rights yet. 17:23, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

DevilWarrior112 (4)
Hello amigos, this is the 4th time I am trying for adminship. This time, I have participated in many community discussions in the War Room and have talked to many users about stuff. Judging from my past 3 RfAs, some users have opposed me for my ignorant and demanding behaviour. I know some users can trust me (Saint, Doc) but some can't. I believe I can be trusted with adminship. I have accumalated more than 3,500 edits in my history on this wiki, particulary on Mainspace and community. I will use my powers in a positive way and not abuse them and let another admin do my work. We are running out of admins and more are needed, which is why all these RFAs have appeared. Darth, CE, Dunn and Whiskey will all become admins. I think I will become a great user in the future by becoming an admin. 16:44, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I don't feel you're ready because of everything Bord said on your talk page. TimSim (talk) 16:47, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose- I'm not sure you have the right judgement and ideals of becoming an Administrator, I don't feel you are ready for it. You try way too hard and value your opinions too much. As bord said. 16:52, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Your increase in community participation is good, but I haven't seen much that shows that you're suitable for an admin role. You're making a lot of claims without much to substantiate your responsibility and maturity. You also contradict yourself in saying that we're running out of admins (which alone is not a basis for application) and pointing out that at least four other users will be promoted, thus negating the need for your own application. --Scottie theNerd 16:54, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Devilwarrior, you make Adminship seem so glamorous by all you say. Its just the ability to block people and edit pages you normally cant. Stop trying this many times without great improvements. Slowrider7 16:55, June 25, 2010 (UTC)