Call of Duty Wiki
Register
Advertisement
Call of Duty Wiki
Archive This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page, other than for maintenance.

Request for Adminship: Bumblebeeprime09
Submitted: 01:27, September 1, 2010 (UTC), by Speical ops genral minigun
Closed: 13:33, September 1, 2010 (UTC), by CodExpert
Result: Invalid nomination

Group:Sysop

Reason:Many edits

Contributes:Many talks and blogs

additionall notes:he can be a bad blog destroyer if he abusses his power we can take it CoD1 Weapon PPShSignatureSpecialOpsGenralMinigunRay Gun 3rd person view WaW 01:27, September 1, 2010 (UTC)


Support[]

  1. Pictogram voting support Strong Support — <As nominater>CoD1 Weapon PPShSignatureSpecialOpsGenralMinigunRay Gun 3rd person view WaW 01:23, September 1, 2010 (UTC)
  2. Pictogram voting support Support — EXTREMLEY STRONG SUPPORT: Because he is a really awesome user with alot of edits and does alot of good things to help the wiki and is just an all around good userColdProPillsbury810Pillsbury doughboy 01:26, September 1, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral[]

Oppose[]

  1. Pictogram voting oppose Oppose — The nomination doesn't have enough information or valid reasoning to be taken in a serious manner. Plus, I don't find Bumblebeeprime to be ready for adminsitrative tasks. Sigr5od Talk? Edits 01:18, September 1, 2010 (UTC)
  2. Pictogram voting oppose Oppose — The nomination does not give me any information about why I should support him other then he has many edits, and that is irrelevant in an RfA. Cpl. Dunn(Talk) 01:22, September 1, 2010 (UTC)
  3. Pictogram voting oppose Oppose — Just the amount of spelling mistakes in this RfA leads me to question SOGM's intelligence, let alone his actual intentions in nominating BBP09. Personal Joe Copp sig 01:28, September 1, 2010 (UTC)
  4. Pictogram voting oppose Oppose — Indeed I feel he is not ready. I have never seen him in the War Room discussions making policy nor have I seen him making any noticeable amount of contributions to the wiki as a whole. The majority of his time is spent making or commenting on blogs. Sorry pal. Personal WHISKEY35 signature Talk 01:30, September 1, 2010 (UTC)
  5. Pictogram voting oppose Oppose — This RFA is poorly written, poorly structured, and was not even put in properly... beyond that there are no actual examples given of why this user would make a good sysop, therefore I simply cannot take this seriously and vote oppose. --Good editing! Darthkenobi0(talk) 01:31, September 1, 2010 (UTC)
  6. Pictogram voting oppose Oppose — BBP09 has focused almost solely on blogging, and has a very small edit count in relation to some users on the wiki. Has he even accepted this nomination? YuriKaslov 01:32, September 1, 2010 (UTC)
  7. Pictogram voting oppose Oppose — I have not seen him make a significant impact on wikia and the nomination is very weak, short, and unorganized. E.TALE Barracks Headquarters 01:35, September 1, 2010 (UTC)
  8. Pictogram voting oppose Oppose — It looks like 10 seconds went into the making of this RfA, and I am not convinced of either his need for these tools, or how the wiki would be benefited by him receiving them. Sorry. Ajraddatz Talk 01:48, September 1, 2010 (UTC)
  9. Pictogram voting oppose Oppose — His edit-count is is mostly blogs/blog comments. Also, does not participate in War Room topics. <|Munchable901|> <Contact> 03:23, September 1, 2010 (UTC)
  10. Pictogram voting oppose Oppose — I can't take the nomination as anything more than a joke. There's no write-up and there's no understanding of what an admin does. I don't know the nominator is and I certainly don't know who the candidate is. --Scottie theNerd 13:21, September 1, 2010 (UTC)
  11. Pictogram voting oppose Strong Oppose — Bumblebeeprime09 has not shown himself as a good administrator, and as the nomination said he blogs and talks, that doesn't make a user a good admin. And I am going to point out flaws in the supporting votes:
  • "Because he is a really awesome user with alot of edits and does alot of good things to help the wiki and is just an all around good user" - most of those edits are on blogs and talk pages, as the nomination even said. There are a lot of users that can be considered "good", but that does not mean that they would handle the responsibilities that an administrator is supposed to have.
  • "Many talks and blogs" - that's not a good reason for an RfA. Commenting on blogs, and BBP09 mostly bumps them with random pictures, is hardly the best thing a sysop would do. There are War Room proposals, articles for deletion, improvement drive articles, and many other things that an admin would do the best thing he can do.
  • "He made his fanfics which I think can sometimes bring in new users" - new users can join becauuse they either wnat to get rid of those annoying advertisements or because they want to join the wiki and it's community, not to read a lot of fanfics, we already have a wiki for that
  • "he has alot of edits" - users should not be judged from their edit count, as it means nothing, but by their actual contributions, and BBP09 has made a lot of edits to his fanfics and other blogs/blog comments. One thing he should focus his edits on is reverting vandalism/spam, giving input in then war room, articles for deletion page, etc.
  • "he has made some of good blogs that can relate to some of the stuff on the wiki - it's still a blog, and that doesn't make a user good nor a good administrator. Suppose a vandal made a blog about fan fiction, does that mean he would be a good admin? No. Blogging should never make a user a good admin, and I doubt it ever will.

And Bumblebeeprime09, I'll ask you these three questions:

  • What will you do as an administrator?
  • Why do you think you will be a good admin?
  • Why do you think we need more admins and that you would be a good choice?

Those questions can tell us that you would be a good or bad admin, what you would do and how you would handle situations, and why you think you would do the best you can do as an administrator. --<choose><option>azuris_</option><option>22px-1888721.png Azuristalk</option> 12:56, September 1, 2010 (UTC)

Comments[]

Pictogram voting comment Comment — @Pillsbury810: All of your points are invalid for an RFA. Name the good things he has done, you can't just say "he has done good things", you have to elaborate. Sigr5od Talk? Edits 01:30, September 1, 2010 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment Comment — @Yuri: No, he hasn't yet. Cpl. Dunn(Talk) 01:35, September 1, 2010 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment Comment — @ Skullrod He made his fanfics which I think can sometimes bring in new users,he has alot of edits(well depending on who you are comparing him to),I do not think he has started any fights or anything like that,he has made some of good blogs that can relate to some of the stuff on the wiki,and just alot of other things i dont feel like naming cause I dont like typing long comments.

Also how do I use the template with the plus or minus thing when I support or oppose and thank you whoever fixed it(I think it was Dunn).ColdProPillsbury810Pillsbury doughboy 01:42, September 1, 2010 (UTC)

Try using Source mode some time. And those aren't good reasons for him to get flags, he's just another regular guy. --Good editing! Darthkenobi0(talk) 01:43, September 1, 2010 (UTC)
{{Comment|text}} or Oppose, Support etc.. Anyway, as Darth stated, those aren't legitamate reasons for Bumblebee to get flags. Sigr5od Talk? Edits 01:46, September 1, 2010 (UTC)
Advertisement