Guild Wars Wiki:Requests for adminship

From Guild Wars Wiki

(Redirected from GWW:RFA)
Jump to: navigation, search
Policy

This page is an official policy on the Guild Wars Wiki.

It has wide acceptance among editors and is considered a standard that all users should follow.
Shortcut:
GWW:RFA

Contents

A request for adminship (or RFA) is a process by which the community decides whether a user is to have the position of sysop. Note that sysophood is not a reward for good contributing nor a promotion to have more authority than other users. In general, a successful RFA represents a user being trusted with access to technical features to aid in maintenance. There is no inherent limit to the number of active sysops.

"Request for adminship" is also something of a misnomer as both sysops and bureaucrats are considered administrators. The RFA process here only applies to the sysop position; see Guild Wars Wiki:Elections regarding the process for the bureaucrat position.

[edit] Starting an RFA

RFAs should not be started for:

  • someone else, unless there is a clear acceptance in the "Pending nominations" section below. If it is an RFA for yourself, you should be logged in before starting.
  • IP accounts
  • someone with another active RFA
  • someone with an unsuccessful RFA that closed less than 1 month ago (unless there is good reason, one should wait 2 to 3 months to generally avoid being viewed as trying too often)

To start an RFA:

  1. Archive any existing RFA for the candidate by moving it to "Guild Wars Wiki:Requests for adminship/Username/Archive 1" (or Archive 2, etc as necessary) along with its talk page.
  2. Create the RFA page for the candidate:
    The page should start with the candidate's user name as a level 3 section heading (with the rest of the page under that heading) and include: a link to their user page, a link to their user talk page, a link to their list of contributions, the time of creation, a section for the candidate statement, and separate obvious sections for Support/Oppose/Neutral opinions.
    1. Manually edit "Guild Wars Wiki:Requests for adminship/Username" into {{subst:Project:Requests for adminship/base template}}, which automatically fills it in using the template at Guild Wars Wiki:Requests for adminship/base template.
    2. Alternatively, change the USERNAME part in the following textbox with the name of the user the RFA is started for, and press the Start RFA page-button:

  3. Fill in the candidate statement as appropriate.
  4. Add the page to the list of current RFAs below.

[edit] Resolving an RFA

While an RFA is active (not resolved), any user is welcome to give their opinion within it. Short explanations are encouraged, but avoid personal attacks; consider simply giving links to evidence if necessary, and keeping criticism constructive.

RFAs that have been properly created can be resolved in any of these ways:

  • Candidate withdrawal (for any or no reason) automatically fails the RFA.
  • The RFA has been active for roughly one week. A bureaucrat would close it and determine the result. In general, the RFA is successful if it has at least 3 times as much support as those in opposition; but it is not a simple tally. The bureaucrat will exercise discretion when gauging/interpreting the amount of support/opposition.

To close an RFA:

  1. Edit the RFA page, adding a notice like: {{notice|This RFA has been resolved. Please do not add further support/oppose opinions.}}.
  2. Edit the page to reflect the result (whether the RFA was successful or not, and change any categorization appropriately). If the RFA resolved as successful, add a section (initially empty) titled "Request for reconfirmation" to the end of the RFA page.
  3. Remove it from the list of current RFAs below.
  4. Assign new user rights if appropriate.

[edit] Reconfirmation

Reconfirmation is a process by which a sysop is reconfirmed in his role as sysop. If the reconfirmation fails, the person in question loses sysop status. The reconfirmation process itself is simply another RFA for the sysop. It can brought about by one of the following conditions:

  • enough user support:
While a user is a sysop, anyone may add their support to the "Request for reconfirmation" section of that sysop's latest successful RFA. Short explanations are encouraged, but avoid personal attacks; consider simply giving links to evidence if necessary. This generally has no immediate effect and does not trigger the reconfirmation process until there is enough accumulated support for reconfirmation. The level of required support starts at the amount of support given for sysophood during the latest RFA (direct opposition to either is not counted), and this requirement gradually descends over time to a minimum of one user supporting after one year. Whenever this threshold is reached (as judged by a bureaucrat, not simple tallies), a bureaucrat will give notice to the sysop that they must be successfully reconfirmed within two weeks or lose their sysop status.
  • the sysop in question voluntarily choosing so
  • community consensus (such as a reconfirmation timeline for grandfathered sysops)
  • part of a ruling/remedy by the arbitration committee (not an individual bureaucrat)

[edit] Recent reconfirmation requests

Sysops who have had a reconfirmation request in the last seven days should have their most recent RfA on this list. These are reconfirmation requests, not active RfAs -- please do not vote Support or Oppose. If you also wish for the sysop in question to be reconfirmed, add your name to the "Requests for Reconfirmation" block at the bottom.

[edit] Pending nominations

To nominate another user, add a statement below (signed) and inform the nominee. If you have been nominated, please respond with a clear, signed acceptance or rejection. If you accept, you may also want to provide a candidate statement to be used in your RFA (or just start the RFA yourself).

When requesting adminship for yourself, this step is not necessary, but you could give your candidate statement here and request help in creating your RFA page if you want.

Stale or resolved nominations should be cleaned out of this section periodically.

I nominate...

currently no pending nominations

[edit] List of current RFAs

Add {{Guild Wars Wiki:Requests for adminship/USERNAME}} to the top of this list (replacing USERNAME with the candidate's name).

[edit] Auron

This request is for the sysophood of User:Auron (talk • contribs).
Created by poke | talk 21:25, 31 August 2008 (UTC).

[edit] Candidate statement

(to be filled in)

[edit] Support

  1. Support. Auron has successfully proven his abilities within the last bureaucrat term. poke | talk 21:25, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  2. Support. I trust Auron not to break anything :P --Wyn's Talk page Wyn 21:30, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  3. Support. Agree with Poke. - anja talk 21:37, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  4. Support. Poke said it all. -TalkWhy 21:39, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  5. Strong Support. He's had the sysop tools as part of being a bcrat for months now, so there really can't be much question of trusting him not to abuse them. Knows his way around the tools, solid judgment, active. I was going to start an RfA for him myself, but Poke beat me to it. - Tanetris 21:46, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  6. Support His last term as bcrat showed enough proof for me that he can separate his normal non-social behavior from his job as admin.--Fighterdoken 21:50, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  7. Strong Support. If there was ever any doubt that Auron wasn't fit to be a Sysop, there shouldn't be any longer. Although people will always complain about his "attitude," Auron has always been able to compartmentalize his behavior, that is, able to separate his "user" actions from his "sysop" actions; indeed, when he wants to be, he can be remarkably diplomatic, and he's level-headed and rational besides. *Defiant Elements* +talk 21:54, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  8. Strong Support. A vote for Auron is a vote for a bright future and awesomeness. --Cursed Angel talk 22:06, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  9. Strong Support. Like the others said. He knows his way around being a sysop, and being a Bcrat the last term a should show that he is perfectly capable of handling situations (Basically what DE said...) ~PheNaxKian Talk 22:14, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  10. Support - the sysop-hood of Auron is a benefit to the Wiki. Ale_Jrb (talk) 23:01, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  11. Support - Auron is definitely a no-nonsense type of guy who will deal with vandals and trolls quickly and efficiently. He did fine as a bureaucrat, he'll do well as a sysop. Calor Talk 23:53, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  12. Support. There is no reason to oppose the promotion of such an intelligent and capable user to sysop. Lord Belar 02:04, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  13. Support - He doesn't dick around. And for many of the reasons stated above. - VanguardImage:User-VanguardAvatar.PNG 03:32, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  14. Strong Support. You aren't supposed to be able to cuddle an admin if he doesn't seem nice to you good, that means hes doing his job.--Shadowsin 03:35, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  15. Support- Yes! --Silverleaf User_talk:Silverleaf 07:09, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  16. Strong support-Auron has shown to all of us that he deserves his role as a bureaucrat, which in my opinion makes him fit to be a sysop. --Burning Freebies 07:51, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  17. Support - As per poke. Cassie 09:15, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  18. Support What cursed said. -- NUKLEAR IIV 12:31, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  19. Support Auron has proven himself ~ KurdImage:User Kurd sig.png
  20. Support. As stated by many above, he's proven himself to be more than capable of being a bureaucrat, so I see no reason to deny his having access to sysop tools. Kokuou 20:47, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  21. Support. I echo Poke's assessment. --LemmingImage:User Lemming64 sigicon.png 18:58, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
  22. If GWW needs sysops, Auron would be an excellent choice. Even if he can be a prick, most of the time it's with good reason. --Shadowcrest 00:19, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
  23. Lul. —Image:User Warwick Signature.png Warwick 17:51, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
  24. Support. GogogadgetAuron. -- CoRrRan (CoRrRan / talk) 22:43, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
  25. Support. -- scourge rawr! 00:01, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
  26. Support. —ZerphatalkThe Improver 11:33, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
  27. Support. I really don't have anything to add, all has been said already. Nontheless, I leave my support. — Galil Talk page 11:40, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Oppose

  1. Oppose His personality doesn't match what I feel is needed on this wiki. Dominator Matrix 21:30, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  2. A discussion style characterised by namecalling and other insults over reason is not a suitable trait in a sysop. Backsword 09:30, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
  3. The attitude he displays on the wiki when talking about perceived problem areas such as the ursan talk page, guild wars suggestions pages or other areas I've run into him makes me think he is more likely to misuse sysop tools to doll out harsh judgements on users which are unnecessary when there are alternative options to take. He is not the most... well how to put it, I wouldn't send him in to mitigate a problem, he is too blunt and forceful in his beliefs and would more likely escalate a small problem with a simple solution requiring patience and biting of the tongue instead of aggressive sysop action. This would particularly become a problem with users like J Kougar where bans didn't stop them (I don't disagree with the bans of the user - my point is a ban is a final last result and ultimately less valuable/effective and often counter-productive compared to a sysop which can mitigate a problem). His brief tenure during an uneventful BC seat has nothing to do with being an admin - you could be an incredible BC but a terrible admin. Auron didn't make a bad BC but I don't think he has - and hasn't shown - the mitigation skills, temperament and dedication to resolve a problem before using sysop tools to do the job. I've changed my mind. After looking at his recent activity over the last couple of weeks I realise I was thinking of experiences with Auron from a long time ago and not recently. I no longer feel strong enough to oppose.122.104.161.96 17:04, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
  4. Oppose. Should Auron choose to give a reason why the wiki would benefit from him having the sysop tools I may change my opinion but absent that I see no reason to support, and am not of the opinion that we simply need more sysops and thus should take whomever can be gotten and thus see no point in being neutral. -- Inspired to ____ 03:44, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Neutral

  1. Neutral. I really don't know about Auron being a sysop. One one hand, he's an excellent contributor and an excellent bureaucrat. On the other hand, I'm really not sure about the way he handles some situations. He has quite a blunt attitude and has little tolerance about some things. However, trying to weigh the goods and the bads is difficult, and thus far I will remian neutral about this decision. -- Wandering Traveler 22:05, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  2. Neutral. We need more sysops, and we all know that Auron has had experince with the sysop tools in the past. However, I don't think his personality is right for adminship and frankly I don't completely trust him. Due to our high need for sysops, I will stay at neutral for now. --ShadowphoenixPlease, talk to me; I'm so lonely ;-; 22:06, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  3. Neutral. Sorry but i don't know enough about Auron to support or vote against. — Seru Talk 02:06, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  4. Neutral. Neither during the very un-eventful stint as bureaucrat nor during the period before have I seen any actions by Auron that would particularily speak in favor of a sysop position. --Xeeron 09:44, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  5. Neutral. As per Xeeron -- Salome 11:44, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  6. Neutral. Same line of thinking as WT and SP. -- ab.er.rant 14:05, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  7. Neutral. A few months ago, I would have supported Auron for sysop without having to think about it. However, in the past few months, both here and especially on GuildWiki, it seems to me that he has handled some situations... less than ideally. It's not that the actions he took were wrong, but more that, in explaining, he was too blunt when just a little bit of tact could have helped prevent ensuing wikidrama. Basically, what I'm trying to say is that while bluntness is often a good thing and indeed necessary, there are also times when you need to be more diplomatic, and recently Auron hasn't shown that he can do that. ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777(talk) 19:19, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
  8. Neutral. I have to agree with Xeeron, while I haven't seen anything that would necessarily make me oppose; yes Auron can come off rather blunt there are times when this can be useful as well as times it isn't; I have also not seen anything that would make me support this RFA. --Kakarot Talk 21:59, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
  9. Basically the same thing I said for DE's. — ク Eloc 貢 02:17, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
  10. I just think he needs to exercise a bit of resolve... (Terra Xin 11:22, 6 September 2008 (UTC))


[edit] User:Burning Freebies

This request is for the sysophood of User:Burning Freebies (talk • contribs).
Created by Burning Freebies 07:25, 1 September 2008 (UTC).

[edit] Candidate statement

Hello everyone. My name is Burning Freebies. I started work on the wiki about half a year ago. I am based on this wiki and have found no other intrest in other wikis. Ever since i have joined, i have become found of improving my userpage and starting off wanted pages, especially on GW2 wiki where i have made some pages about Arena Net staff.

So why me as a sysop? Why someone who you could consider a "wikinoob"?

A leader or someone in authority needs several characteristics to show that they can be trusted to rule. Some of these are:

  • Knowledge of the wiki
  • Someone who has done much good work in the past and wishes to carry it on with bigger projects which require higher authority
  • Activeness
  • Knowledge of the rules, terms and conditions of the wiki.
  • Someone who votes for the right leaders in elections for bureaucrats
  • Someone who has a calm head
  • Someone who will user their new authority to its full extent to provide for the community and improve the wiki.
  • Someone who has a basic knowledge of graphic design of the wiki.

Now you need to ask your self whether you agree with my requirements, and whether you think i have them. Its not whether i believe i do, its what you think. You must choose to elect me as your leader.

Another question to ask is-"What do you intend to acomplish in such a role"

I have many projects that i am planning to do, such as

  • Start more wanted pages
  • Work on GW2 wiki by moving significant pages over to the new wiki
  • Improve current pages
  • Help people creating userpages
  • Improve NPA violation rules and to use my power to control people involved in such crossfires
  • Removing comments from pages that people do not wish to have
  • Updating the front page of the wiki
  • Learn more about graphic design to allow me to work more effeciently on the wiki

I believe i am fit for such a job. However, if you all disagree with me my thoughts are useless. You know the right desicision to make. I know i have upset people, and i am not planning any cruel revenge on them, as this would cause my expulsion from the wiki. If i have upset you, think about the desicion you make before choosing. Remember, no can be the right choice sometimes, but its all up to you.

Feel free to ask questions on the talk page regarding my projects etc. I hope you make the right choice. --Burning Freebies 07:25, 1 September 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Support

  1. ...


[edit] Oppose

  1. Oppose. I feel that Burning Freebies needs to become much more impartial in his interactions with other users, and focus on what is good for the wiki over all. Participation in discussions and mainspace contributions would be a good place to start. See my additional comments here--Wyn's Talk page Wyn 07:37, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  2. Most of the goals listed are general user responsibilities, not the duty of a sysop. Things like "Removing comments from pages that people do not wish to have" make me doubt his knowledge of policy and the wiki way; users can remove unwanted comments/attacks from their own talk pages, but that's about it. Sysops, for the most part, don't remove comments - even if they're in violation of policy, comments are usually left untouched (even though the user may be banned for them). -Auron 07:54, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  3. Strong Oppose. Perhaps an even more basic question than, "Can I trust user X with the Sysop tools?" would be, "Does user X understand what it means to be a Sysop?" After reading Burning Frisbee's candidate statement and perusing his contributions, I'm not so sure that the answer to the latter question is "yes," and I'm certain that the answer to the former is "no." Burning Frisbee has demonstrated neither the level-headedness/rationality/impartiality/etc. nor the knowledge of policy that I would expect from a Sysop. *Defiant Elements* +talk 07:56, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  4. Oppose. Agreed with Defiant. --TalkPeople of Antioch 08:00, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  5. Strong Oppose. Apart from completely not understanding what "...if you all disagree with me my thoughts are useless..." means, I have to agree with DE above. You need to understand what a sysop actually does before you'd ever have a chance of becoming one. Being a sysop doesn't give you "power" in the way you think it does. Kokuou 08:21, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  6. Oppose - from the candidate statement written by Burning Freebies, I think it is clear that he has no real understanding of the role of a sysop on a wiki - neither the general guidelines that govern what it means to be one, nor the specific policies and guidelines that we adhere to on GWW. The mentions of 'authority' and 'power' trouble me, as it seems that these are the reasons for the RFA, rather than the betterment of the wiki. In addition, the majority of the intended activities do not require sysop privileges, and those that do are not in line with our policies or guiding ideals. Until Burning Freebies realises what it means to be a sysop, I think it unlikely that an RFA will pass. Ale_Jrb (talk) 09:05, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  7. Oppose - as the others above me have said, I don't think this user really understands the sysop role. Furthermore, I think he needs to develop a few more skills in handling interactions with others, judging by how he has acted on events-related pages.Cassie 09:23, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  8. Oppose. As with Seru, nothing new to add for me here. --Xeeron 09:51, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  9. Oppose. Agreed with Wyn on the talk page. poke | talk 11:01, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  10. Strong Oppose. Far too often has he both instigated or been involved with wiki drama and each time it becomes a flamefest. I'm sorry but their is no way I can support this individual in this RFA now and he would have to completely change for me to support him in the future. -- Salome 11:33, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  11. Oppose. I strongly agree with the comments on the talk page. -- Indochine talk 11:51, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  12. Oppose on a personality basis. I wouldn't support him for sysop on PvX, so I won't here. -- Armond WarbladeImage:User Armond sig image.png 11:53, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  13. Oppose More or less agree with the above comments, Defiant Elements and Wyn in particular. --Kakarot Talk 13:04, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  14. Oppose User did not demonstrate an understanding of policies, does not seem to possess a generally calm behavior, and have not participated in discussions outside of content and projects. -- ab.er.rant 14:11, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  15. Oppose. I havent seen much of Burning Freebies, but what I have seen was, in general, unconstructive to a degree. I don't think he is ready to take on the position of a sysop for quite a while. -- Wandering Traveler 14:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  16. Oppose. power, leadership and authority! --Cursed Angel talk 14:26, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  17. Oppose. Everyone else, namely DE and Wyn, summed up how I feel. Calor Talk 14:35, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  18. Oppose Agreed with Salome. Dominator Matrix 14:38, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  19. Oppose. Intelligence is usually a requirement for sysops. Lord Belar 21:17, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  20. Oppose.Salome and Wyn summed up my thoughts Image:User_BlackBlood_Pacman1.JPGBlackBlood - talk 17:31, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
  21. Oppose. Enough has probably already been said...anyway, I don't trust this user to be a sysop. -- Inspired to ____ 03:47, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
  22. Oppose You need to get around more on the wiki. (Terra Xin 11:17, 6 September 2008 (UTC))
  23. Doesn't look very well when you get blocked 2 days after making your RFA. — ク Eloc 貢 18:34, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Neutral

  1. Neutral. I don't have enough of an opinion of Burning Freebies to put together a fair vote. — Galil Talk page 11:42, 6 September 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Calor

This request is for the sysophood of User:Calor (talk • contribs).
Created by poke | talk 23:53, 31 August 2008 (UTC) (actually by Anja, but she already went to bed :P).

[edit] Candidate statement

Well... wow, first, thanks Poke, it's good to know such a well-respected contributor backs me up (and you too, Anja, don't think I missed your message :)). I'm sure most, if not all, of the people who take part in RfAs know who I am, what I stand for, what I've done, and all that. I've made a bit under 10,000 contributions between GWW and GW2W (according to my preferences). According to Poke's awesome contrib checker tool, I have 7776 contributions on GWW, 7777 when I save this. Now, obviously, it's quality, not quantity for contributions, and the number really doesn't matter. I was very active in the heyday of the inventory icons project. I also tagged hundreds, probably thousands, of images in a project with Wyn that allowed us to make galleries of skill icons. I've always been one to watch RC and revert vandalism, especially in the days of the move vandal and the gibberbots. If I do garner enough support to become sysop, I definitely intend to take a look at the ArenaNet namespace and see how I can help (if I'm needed there). Anyways, I'm not exactly a public speaker, and you all probably have an opinion of me from what you've seen on the wiki, so I'll end my ranting and let you think for yourselves. Calor Talk 00:10, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Support

  1. Support. I don't think I need to say much; just that Calor will be a great sysop :) poke | talk 23:53, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  2. Support. I believe Calor will continue to work for the benefit of this wiki, and the tools will make it easier. --Wyn's Talk page Wyn 23:56, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  3. Support. Calor is quite the helpful member of the community. With the sysop tools in hand, I think that he'll be able to help us even more. Best of luck, Calor! -- Wandering Traveler 00:09, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  4. Support. Calor has demonstrated many times that he is an active, helpful and competent member of the wiki. He will actively use the sysop tools for the betterment of the wiki and the community. Anyone who believes that he is not active enough to become a sysop only proves how little they themselves are on the wiki. Lord Belar 02:13, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  5. Support. Calor has demonstrated time and time again that he is intelligent, mature, and open-minded; I have no doubt that he will make an excellent Sysop, and the fact that he always seems to be watching GWW doesn't hurt either. *Defiant Elements* +talk 03:06, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  6. Support. To be honest, already thought he was a sysop. -- Salome 03:13, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  7. Support. Agreed with ab ove comments --ShadowphoenixPlease, talk to me; I'm so lonely ;-; 04:26, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  8. Support. It is time, I'm sure he's learned quite a bit and matured as well. --TalkPeople of Antioch 06:04, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  9. Support. Calor has definitely shown he can be trusted now. It's time. :) - anja talk 07:07, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  10. Indeed. --Silverleaf User_talk:Silverleaf 07:11, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  11. Calor has shown his work to me when i looked at his userpage for 1 minute. It took me that long to see all his projects on his list. That not good enough for a sysop? --Burning Freebies 07:48, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  12. Support - Calor will not abuse the tools, and the wiki will benefit from his having them. Ale_Jrb (talk) 09:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  13. Support. I remember Calor as very level headed in all policy discussions. --Xeeron 09:46, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  14. Support. Yes please :P -- Indochine talk 09:47, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  15. Support. Calor has presented himself as a calm and level-headed person. -- ab.er.rant 13:59, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  16. Support. Calor has been here for a long while and is a very mature person. I feel he would make a good addition to the team. Dominator Matrix 14:44, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  17. Support. No idea if I qualify for voting, but I thought he was already a sysop tbh. :\ —Image:User Warwick Signature.png Warwick 15:26, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  18. Support. Really, is there any reason not to? ;) Kokuou 20:50, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  19. Support. Sticks out as a very admin-worthy user. — Skakid 20:52, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  20. Support. Definitely admin material. ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777(talk) 04:46, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
  21. Support. Calor knows what's happening on the wiki. I can only agree with Poke, Wyn and DE. TalkWhy 21:37, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
  22. Support. Calor has shown he is level headed & calm in discussions and would make a good addition to the sysop team. --Kakarot Talk 22:10, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
  23. Umm, sure? — ク Eloc 貢 02:19, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
  24. Support. Calor looks at issues progressively. I like what this person has done. :) (Terra Xin 11:15, 6 September 2008 (UTC))
  25. Support. Despite Calor not being one of the most active members lately, i have to agree to all comments above. I'm also grateful for his previous contributions as those he stated in his comment for example, and i'm quite sure we can look forward to helpful future doings of him. —ZerphatalkThe Improver 11:30, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
  26. Support. Again my support isn't really needed, neither for adding something nor for count reasons. Still, I add my support to the list. — Galil Talk page 11:45, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Oppose

  1. Oppose He doesn't seem to be active enough to be a sysop. Dominator Matrix 00:05, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  2. Basically what Backsword said, but with a little more focus on the now. I haven't seen anything recently that would make me detest your sysophood, but I've also seen nothing that would make me more comfortable with it, either. Since that doesn't even out to a neutral vote, I'm inclined to oppose. -Auron 12:03, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
  3. ...

[edit] Neutral

  1. The events that would disqualify Calor is all well in the past. But I haven't seen that much of him lately. Backsword 09:16, 2 September 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Defiant Elements

This request is for the sysophood of User:Defiant Elements (talk • contribs).
Created by *Defiant Elements* +talk 21:49, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Candidate statement

I always hate writing candidate statements because, as I've said on more RfAs than I can count, there are only a very few people who can honestly claim that they “need” the Sysop tools. That said, I'll limit my self-aggrandizement to simply saying that I believe I'd make a strong addition to the Sysop team and let you all be the judges. Remember, a vote for me is a vote for me becoming a sysop. *Defiant Elements* +talk 21:49, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Support

  1. Support. I feel Defiant Elements would respect the sysop tools, and use them to benefit this wiki. --Wyn's Talk page Wyn 21:52, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  2. Support. Especially with the last bureaucrat election, DE has proven that the community trusts him, so do I. poke | talk 21:54, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  3. Support. Agreed with Wyn. Dominator Matrix 21:53, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  4. Support. Agreed with Wyn. -- Salome 21:56, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  5. Support. I believe DE will handle the sysop tools well, and for the better of the wiki. TalkWhy 21:58, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  6. Support. In agreement with Wyn and Poke --ShadowphoenixPlease, talk to me; I'm so lonely ;-; 22:02, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  7. Support. This is something he'd excel at, and the previous bureaucrat election has shown us that he's got 'the right stuff' -- Indochine talk 22:06, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  8. Support. In agreement with all of the above. -- Wandering Traveler 22:08, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  9. Support. A vote for DE is a vote for awesomeness. (and what every one else said ;D, not really much else to say.) ~PheNaxKian Talk 22:17, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  10. Support DE gets things done. He would be a great addition to the sysop team, and definitely thinks more difficult actions through. He'd deal with users appropriately, but not overkill it. Calor Talk 23:55, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  11. Support. About time. Lord Belar 02:14, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  12. Support--Shadowsin 03:32, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  13. Communism rocks. -Auron 05:34, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  14. A smart guy, who would make an excellent administrator. --Readem 05:50, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  15. Support. As per Calor. --TalkPeople of Antioch 06:02, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  16. Support Communism? Cool. All for all and one more vote for DE. --Silverleaf User_talk:Silverleaf 07:14, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  17. --Burning Freebies 07:27, 1 September 2008 (UTC), a good bureaucrat should be a sysop when his term is up. (mistaken)
  18. Support. Knows the policies around here better than some sysops and can be trusted to enforce them. --Xeeron 09:47, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  19. And slowly, slowly, slowly, we put the PvXwiki administrators into positions of power... *evil cackle* -- Armond WarbladeImage:User Armond sig image.png 11:46, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  20. Support. DE is a powerful administrator. Misery 11:59, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  21. Pretty much everything has been said already. -- Mini Me talk 12:32, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  22. Support. -- ab.er.rant 14:07, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  23. Support. Time and again, DE has shown that he is calm, articulate, and understands wiki policies thoroughly. Kokuou 20:52, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  24. Support. The single best candidate for every wiki I've seen him contribute on. — Skakid 20:54, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  25. Support "Defiant Elements" is basically synonymous with "epic adminness incarnate". ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777(talk) 04:44, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
  26. I'm not as sure as Xeeron, but if Xeeron is right, I belive DE would make a good sysop. Backsword 09:14, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
  27. Support. More walls ftw. - anja talk 17:41, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
  28. Support. Gogo DE. —Image:User Warwick Signature.png Warwick 17:53, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
  29. Support. -- scourge rawr! 00:02, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
  30. Support. So. Many. Walls... But that alone isn't a reason to oppose. I trust DE not to misuse the sysop tools and to make good, level-headed decisions. — Galil Talk page 11:48, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Oppose

  1. A vote for DE is a vote for communism! --Cursed Angel talk 22:09, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  2. Oppose. Not only do fail to see such a pressing need for additional sysops, but especially not to go recruiting them from other wikis. Of course it should be important what a potential sysop has done here, after all this is where they will be using the sysop tools if granted to them. On that basis combined with a discomfort over the direction DE would like to take this wiki's policies I oppose him becoming a sysop. -- Inspired to ____ 03:55, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
  3. From what I've seen from DE on the wiki it seems more to me that his interest in the Sysop position is more to do with a desire for power than a genuine interest to benefit the wiki. Candidates these days look so much politicians putting in token time with small contributions, while not pissing anyone off. Getting your name out the heavier wiki editors, often sysops, is also a must. I'm also hesitant to give power to anyone who is so invested in policy making. While I recognise the synergy between policy making and the role of a sysop, I think there is too much emphasis on admin discretion and the idea of giving power to someone with such strong views of how he wants things to be. 122.104.161.96 01:11, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Neutral

  1. Not really sure how to feel about this. On one side, I haven't had very good experiences with Defiant Elements, but on the other, he has experience. — ク Eloc 貢 01:58, 4 September 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Indochine

This request is for the sysophood of User:Indochine (talk • contribs).
Created by Wyn's Talk page Wyn 21:09, 31 August 2008 (UTC).

[edit] Candidate statement

First of all thank you very much for the RfA nomination from Wyn.

I don't really want to write a lot about myself as I know and believe the outcome of this RfA will be decided on my contributions rather than what I write here. Being a sysop is something I feel I'd be quite good at and I've mastered the basics of using the tools on a test wiki of mine and I know that I will use them in a mature, level-headed, and unbiased way in practice, for real.

I may not contribute much to policy discussion but I've learnt the policy from my mistakes; I have a good grasp of them and how to enforce them - something I'd like to take to the next level by being a sysop.

Thank you. -- Indochine talk 21:56, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Support

  1. Support. I feel that Indochine would handle the sysop tools well, he has a calm head, a firm grasp on policy, and has worked tirelessly for the benefit of this wiki. My expanded comments. --Wyn's Talk page Wyn 21:28, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  2. Support. *copies Wyn* - anja talk 21:38, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  3. Support. No reason to say no :). Dominator Matrix 21:44, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  4. Support. *copies Anja* --ShadowphoenixPlease, talk to me; I'm so lonely ;-; 22:09, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  5. Support. No real reason to oppose, nor reasons to stay neutral, so supporting the candidacy.--Fighterdoken 22:20, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  6. Weak Support. I was a bit unsure about this first, but in the end I trust Indochine and would be happy to have a completely new face within the administration team :) (Added "weak" because of reasons given by ab.er, brains, DE and my initial insecurity)poke | talk 22:21, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  7. Weakish Support: (because it isn't entirely weak, per se) I feel almost exactly like DE. There are loads of reasons to support Indo, a reason or two to oppose, but I've never had any real conversations with Indo to get a feel with what he's like and where he stands on certain issues. However, many other people feel they can trust Indo, and looking through his contribs, I see nothing that really makes me nervous about Indo with sysop tools. Lastly, with Aiiane's bureaucratship, we're down to four active sysops. The wiki desperately needs active sysops. If Indo becomes more active, like discussed on the talk, he would more likely than not make a fine sysop. Calor Talk 00:29, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  8. Support.Solid wiki'er and trustworthy user,think he will make a fine addition to the team -- Salome 03:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  9. Support Invisible doesn't mean inactive. More responsibility can generate more visibility. --Silverleaf User_talk:Silverleaf 07:17, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  10. --Burning Freebies 07:34, 1 September 2008 (UTC), I just feel this guy can do good. His userpage shows he has a good understanding of graphics on the wiki and his contributions show his good intentions.
  11. Having sufficent contributions, but spread out over the full lifespan of the wiki is not a disadvantage. Backsword 09:12, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
  12. Weak Support. Per Calor. — Galil Talk page 11:53, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
  13. You keep this place copyvio free, and your determination at that tells me that you will be determined at your job of a Sysop if you get it. — ク Eloc 貢 18:36, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Oppose

  1. no thanks sir. --Cursed Angel talk 22:10, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  2. User may be able to understand the tools and policies, but that's not a very high standard. Without a clear goal or reason, I'm not sure I can support at this point - most of the work I've seen Indo do has been with copyrights and image attribution, yet sysop tools wouldn't help very much with that. -Auron 07:47, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  3. Oppose. Trusting a user with sysop tools is one thing; whether or not it is useful is another. A valued contributor he is in the image department, but I neither see any interest in matters pertaining to how a wiki should function nor much participation in the more "visible" areas of the wiki. I am just unsure as to how Indochine might handle conflicts. -- ab.er.rant 14:23, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  4. Oppose. lol --Venomoth 11:27, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Neutral

  1. Neutral. Indochine is, without a doubt, one of GWW's most valuable contributors, and I don't doubt that he would use the Sysop tools wisely. That said, in large part due to my own ignorance (i.e. I don't know Indochine very well), I'm unable to gauge the extent to which he "needs" the Sysop tools (I hate using that as a reason for refraining from supporting this RfA, but it's a valid concern in my mind, nevertheless) and I'm equally unable to gauge his "grasp of policy" (again mostly due to my own ignorance coupled with relatively few contributions to the GWWT namespace, et. al.). For the record, however, I'm leaning heavily toward support (if weak support). *Defiant Elements* +talk 22:06, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  2. Neutral. After looking through some on Indochine's contribs, it appears that most of his work deals with copyvios. While this is valuable and necessary work, I am not sure how the sysop tools would help him with this. Also, while I believe that, given the tools and the associated responsibility, he will become more active and helpful, I do not know him well enough to be entirety certain. Additionally, while we are currently in need of a greater number of sysops, this is, firstly, not a valid reason for promoting a less able candidate, and, secondly, this is partially negated by the fact that there are three RfAs above that appear likely to succeed, as no one has yet raised any valid objections to any of them. Lord Belar 04:23, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  3. Neutral. Not really sure how he would use the sysop tools. --Xeeron 09:49, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  4. Neutral (but leaning towards oppose). Without seeing Indochine involved in user conflicts or "dramatic situations", I can't make an accurate decision on how he will act when he should play a part in resolving them. Indochine is ... known (:P) for his efforts at dealing with copyright violations and complaints from those who don't want their favourite images deleted (and I commend him for doing so), but all these actions, reasons, and solutions are written down in policy. Without seeing Indochine in matters where discretion is needed, I don't know whether I should support or oppose; however, the fact that I haven't seen Indochine in those situations makes me lean towards opposition -- I can't safely assume that upon becoming a sysop, Indochine will act appropriately. I also agree with Xeeron's response, and some of Belar's. -- Brains12 \ talk 16:35, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  5. Neutral. While no doubt a great contributor, I've not seen enough activity outside of tagging for copyvios (which, mind you, you do a great job on) and such to be able to vote support. I'm leaning towards weak support, but for now I'll have to say neutral. Kokuou 20:54, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  6. Neutral. As Plingggggg mentioned I haven't really seen Indochine deal with situations that require discretion and thus can't make a proper assessment as to how he would deal with certain situations. While he has done well in dealing with copyvios as well as explaining to the uploader the reasoning behind the copyvio tag on their image as was also said above this is all written down in policy. Finally as Xeeron I'm not entirely sure how he would use the sysop tools. So basically I agree with what Pling said although I'm not necessarily leaning in either direction. --Kakarot Talk 21:28, 6 September 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Salome

This request is for the sysophood of User:Salome (talk • contribs).
Created by Salome 14:16, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Candidate statement

Hello guys,

after reading of the sysops need for a more active sysop team I thought I would throw my hat into the ring. However I don't really expect to be successful, instead I'm hoping to glean some valuable insight into what parts of my own character and psyche I would need to develop to be considered to be sysop material within this community in the future; personal growth and development and all that.

I will say this, I do care passionately about this community and I am able to compartmentalize my behavior and attitudes quite effectively. I know as a user I can come across as argumentative and a bit emotional at times, which I am well aware have no place in the role of a sysop, but I am quite able to remove that side of my psyche when acting in an official capacity, as I do so on a daily basis in my work life. However I do not expect anyone just to take my word for it and I understand that the proof of the pudding is in the eating. My track record on this wiki has had its high points and low points which speaks for itself really.

I believe I have a solid grasp of policy and I have taken part in some policy discussion. I also believe I know what it is to be a sysop and ultimately I'm only motivated here by the strong desire to help keep this wiki ticking over and to make this wiki better. I spend an awful lot of time on the wiki and I try to help as and where possible, moving, tidying, tagging, formatting and filling in whats missing but I am aware I do not need sysop tools to continue in this role. I would however like to develop those abilities so I can be more help to the wiki.

Once again, I'm more doing this for some helpful feedback in how to develop my own self on this wiki, so as in the future I could be considered able to be a sysop, as I very much doubt that this RFA will be successful. Thus I would ask that those putting in oppose votes, which I'm sure their will be many, could you kindly also add some constructive criticism to your votes so I can take it under advisement and work on the areas of my psyche/behavior that are identified.

Blessed be -- Salome 14:16, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Support

  1. Support. He knows his way around policy, has a good attitude, and I have no reason to think that he would abuse sysop tools. --ShadowphoenixPlease, talk to me; I'm so lonely ;-; 16:11, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  2. Even if I hadn't already supported, the severe irony of Brains post would convince me. Backsword 09:11, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
  3. Support. Backsword hits the first reason out of the park; but more importantly...Salome has demonstrated that he has a reasonable head on his shoulders, and is able to listen to others and perhaps even modify his initial impressions without being indecisive. -- Inspired to ____ 04:03, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Oppose

  1. Oppose. While I could trust Salome to deal with deletions, simple vandals and whatnot, I don't believe I'd be able to completely trust him with issues of user conduct or in situations where discretion is needed. He has often responded to trolls in a manner which isn't all that useful (feeding them, in other words, but perhaps unknowingly so), often lets his emotions control the way he acts, and I think situations as a sysop will make him even more vulnerable to acting on emotion. I don't believe it's all that easy to shed them, as he says he will, so I can't rely on these emotions disappearing upon becoming a sysop. I understand that we need more sysops to deal with maintenance and deletions, but unless certain sysops are kept specialised to that certain area and not all sysop situations, I can't support this RfA. -- Brains12 \ talk 16:22, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  2. Oppose Calor summed it up, but I'm leaning to an oppose. Dominator Matrix 20:11, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  3. Oppose feed trolls tbh. admins shouldn't do that. --Venomoth 11:31, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
  4. Per Brains. -Auron 12:00, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
  5. Oppose While a valued contributor, and one I would trust with the every day wiki maintenance like routine deletions etc, I'm not confident Salome would handle user disputes well. As Pling/Brains says, emotions tend to influence his behaviour more often that I'm comfortable with. And I can assure being a sysop only makes it worse, just look at me. ;) - anja talk 17:39, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
  6. Oppose. Nope. -- CoRrRan (CoRrRan / talk) 22:47, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Neutral

  1. Neutral. Salome, you're a great contributor, but I have to agree with Brains in that your way of dealing with some of the more major trolls isnt exactly the best way. But, if this problem can be fixed, I see you as a great sysop. I'm going to remain neutral because I can't speak for any recent outbursts you may (or may not >_<) have had. I do see you as a good sysop one day, but I just don't know yet. Thanks. -- Wandering Traveler 16:29, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  2. Neutral. Another RfA that reminds me of my first one. Salome shows great promise, but, as we have seen, he lacks in the area of effectively dealing with user disputes. Calor Talk 16:40, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  3. Neutral. Salome is a great contributor and very articulate, but I'm not sure how he'd handle user disputes. I've no doubt he'd be perfectly fine with maintenance tools, but before I can vote support, I'd like to see more activity in terms of preventing wiki drama. Keep it up, though, and I very well could vote support next time around! :D Kokuou 20:58, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  4. Neutral. Not comfortable with a sysop who seems to lack confidence in one's abilities and the repeated self-depreciating comments about one's potential as an admin. It raises doubts should assertiveness and firmness in disputes be required. Yet he has proven trustworthy and may perhaps gain better self-control when thrust into the role. So, neutral. -- ab.er.rant 14:03, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
  5. Neutral Salome, I have to agree with Ab.er.rant's points; though I lean slightly to oppose, your ability to grow and mature leave this as a neutral vote. --TalkPeople of Antioch 15:02, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
  6. Neutral I have seen many a good and some irritable words of Salome. But respectfully I do not know enough to make up my mind. --Silverleaf User_talk:Silverleaf 20:21, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
  7. Neutral In my various interactions with Salome, my impression has always been that he has the best interest of the wiki at heart. He may stumble a bit, particularly in letting emotions of the moment cloud his better judgment, but the intentions are there, and I've always found him open to constructive criticism. He's friendly, readily willing to accept that he's made a mistake and work to correct it or to accept that someone has a better idea and work with them, and knows when to ask for help, all of which are traits I wish more contributors shared. The bit way back up there about his emotions clouding his better judgment keeps this from being a support this time, but with a bit of work on that point, I'd be happy to welcome him to the sysop team in the future. - Tanetris 10:52, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
  8. Neutral. Again, I don't have a strong enough opinion towards either support or oppose to be able to make a fair vote. He's a very friendly fellow, and one solid contributor, but that's about all I know about him. Well, and the fact he likes the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. :P — Galil Talk page 12:08, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
  9. Not quite sure how to think about this RFA, so ya, Neutral for me. — ク Eloc 貢 18:38, 6 September 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Seru

This request is for the sysophood of User:Seru (talk • contribs).
Created by — Seru Talk 03:15, 1 September 2008 (UTC).

[edit] Candidate statement

I have been around long enough that i know the policies to become a Sysop. I mainly work on userboxes when on the wiki, but i also work on the cinematics project. With school now i honestly cannot be as active as i was, but i pledge to donate a daily amount of work on the wiki. I plan on working on fixing up the category tree to something that is usable for all of the wiki community. I have been a little harsh at times, but i promise to use neutrality in my future decisions.

[edit] Support

  1. --Burning Freebies 07:31, 1 September 2008 (UTC) Your helped me in the past, and for that i thank you. And give you a vote for a role i strongly believe you should have.

[edit] Oppose

  1. Oppose. Why not establish a record of neutrality first? And I also don't see how you would give extra value with sysop tools. JonTheMon 03:30, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  2. Oppose. A good user, but not quite ready to be a sysop. Lord Belar 03:32, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  3. Oppose....--Shadowsin 03:33, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  4. Oppose. The most basic criterion for supporting an RfA is, "Can I trust user X with the Sysop tools?" Like Jon, I'm simply not willing to make the assumption that Seru will be impartial in the future on the basis of his word alone. I don't doubt that Seru is a good user/contributor, but without any evidence that he is sufficiently level-headed, rational, etc. and similarly lacking the evidence that he has a thorough grasp of policy, I'm afraid I cannot support his RfA, at least not for the time being, perhaps in a few months. Additionally, perhaps I'm putting a bit too much stock in Seru's candidate statement, but I'm really not sure what he thinks he can accomplish as a Sysop, nor do I fully understand why he wants to be a Sysop. *Defiant Elements* +talk 03:41, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  5. Oppose. Agreed with Jon and DE; I haven't seen enough of Seru to trust him with sysop tools, yet. --ShadowphoenixPlease, talk to me; I'm so lonely ;-; 04:30, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  6. Wat. -Auron 07:48, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  7. Oppose. --Xeeron 09:50, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  8. Oppose. everyone runs for this shit now..? --Cursed Angel talk 14:30, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  9. Oppose. The candidate statement and user contributions does not show why sysop tools would be useful. More participation in matters pertaining to the wiki in general (not just on content) will help show one's general behavior and grasp of policies. -- ab.er.rant 14:35, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  10. Oppose Agreed with Ab.er.rant. Dominator Matrix 14:37, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  11. Oppose. You already said it, you primarily work on your wiki content projects - and that is totally fine - but as long as you don't show a bit more interest in important discussions, I don't think sysop is really something that fit's you. However continue with what makes you fun, and if you have the feeling that you want to participate in those discussions feel free to do it, and I think then you would be able to become a good sysop :) poke | talk 16:53, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  12. Oppose. Agreed with Jon and DE. Oh, and Auron. o_O Kokuou 21:01, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  13. I believe this users inexperience in admin matters are a sufficient reason to oppose. Backsword 09:08, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
  14. Oppose. Agree with DE, Ab.er and Poke so no point writing anything else. --Kakarot