Alternative History:Request for user rights

This page is for requests to join the TSPTF. Currently there is no set limit to the number of Constables. There can only be one administrator for every 1000 articles (Lieutenants and Brass combined). Calls for new administrators will be made each time a new one is needed or a current administrator has retired.

Voting will last two weeks from the date of nomination, ending at 0:00 UTC of the fourteenth day, at which time, if the vote is affirmative, the nominee will be granted the requested user rights.

Only registered users with 200 or more edits and at least two months on this wiki will be allowed to vote in the user nominations or to nominate candidates.

Rules

 * You may nominate another editor so long as they accept the nomination first.
 * You cannot nominate yourself.
 * Self-votes will not be counted in the vote totals.
 * Nominated user must explain why he wants to be a Constable.

To view past requests, see the archive.

Requirements
There are some basic things to consider when nominating a fellow editor to be a constable.
 * They have an account under a username.
 * They have actively contributed for at least six months to the wiki.
 * They have demonstrated a need for the ability through extensive anti-vandalism work.
 * Registered users' votes must have a two-thirds super majority for the request to be accepted.
 * TSPTF members’ votes must have a two-thirds super majority for the request to be accepted. (Separated from user votes)
 * You must also include the date in your nomination.
 * They must also not have had a nomination fail or been blocked in the last six months.

Current Nominations
Please copy and past this format for your own nomination.

===Name of Editor===

*Supporters

*Objectors

*Discussion

Note: Please put new nominations at the bottom.

Rules

 * You may nominate another editor so long as they accept the nomination.
 * You cannot nominate yourself.
 * Self-votes will not be counted in the vote totals.
 * Nominated user must explain why he wants to be a Lieutenant.

To view past requests, see the archive.

Requirements

 * They have an account under a username.
 * They have actively contributed for at least six months to the wiki.
 * They either are of adult age (18 years or older) or have one and a half years' worth of solid contribution to the site.
 * They have demonstrated they are willing to take on additional responsibilities to make the community better.
 * They have had at least some major article contributions.
 * They have dealings with other users on a regular basis in a fair, restrained and constructive manner.
 * They have demonstrated an understanding of the community's methods of operation.
 * Registered users' votes must have a two-thirds super majority for the request to be accepted.
 * TSPTF members’ votes must have a two-thirds super majority for the request to be accepted. (Separated from user votes)
 * You must also include the date in your nomination.
 * They must also have not had a nomination fail in the last six months.

Current Nominations
Please copy and past this format for your own nomination.

===Name of Editor===

*Supporters

*Objectors

*Discussion

Note: Please put new nominations at the bottom.

Nathan1123
Nate has been a thoroughly constructive presence on chat and on the wiki. He frequently lends a helping hand to people who need it and is all-around civil, something the wiki desperately needs. In addition, he is an active user. Prime TSPTF material. I actually forget that he isn't an Lt. already. He's very much earned my seal of approval and you guys know how picky I am. I hereby nominate him for the position. Curmudgeonly yours - Crim 00:09, March 16, 2017 (UTC)
 * Supporters
 * .....  Because I'm Just... Too... SSSWWWEEEEEETTT!!!   3/15/2017 5:18 PM PST
 * -KawaiiKame
 * This one is an obvious choice for me - Warrior
 * -Dev271
 * Joe Bob Bruh -Sultan
 * Lets not forget this  ~Oct
 * Lieutenant
 * far and away the best active mod. (except for the glories almighty scraw, who I humbly request to not smite me.) ~Fires
 * Objectors
 * I hate to do this, I really do, but I feel like Nate needs a bit more experience under his belt. I have seen him from the beginning and believe me when I say he is the right material, but I feel like he needs a bit more time and edits under his belt before he can be boosted up. Spend a bit more time and do a bit more good and when the next time he is nominated I hopefully believe he will be ready. [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 03:44, March 18, 2017 (UTC)
 * I hate to do this, I really do, but I feel like Nate needs a bit more experience under his belt. I have seen him from the beginning and believe me when I say he is the right material, but I feel like he needs a bit more time and edits under his belt before he can be boosted up. Spend a bit more time and do a bit more good and when the next time he is nominated I hopefully believe he will be ready. [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 03:44, March 18, 2017 (UTC)


 * Discussion
 * ​I am greatly humbled, and accept this nomination. I know I am not as active as others would like me to be, but I am trying my best with a real adult life around me. Oh, I didn't mean to push that button! † Oh, well leave a message I guess  00:32, March 16, 2017 (UTC)
 * I like Nate as a person, but I think he might be too soft on insurgents and those who break the rules. I will abstain for now. 01:43, March 18, 2017 (UTC)

Rules

 * Brass may be nominated here purely by another Lieutenant or Brass. (Please ensure they accept the nomination first)
 * You cannot nominate yourself.
 * Self-votes will not be counted in the vote totals.
 * Nominated user must explain why he or she wants to be part of the Brass.

To view past requests, see the archive.

Requirements
There are some basic things to consider when nominating a Lieutenant for promotion.
 * They are a Lieutenant.
 * They have actively contributed for at least a year to the wiki.
 * They have actively taken on additional responsibilities to make the encyclopedia better.
 * They have dealings with other users on a regular basis in a fair, restrained and constructive manner.
 * They have a deep understanding of the community's methods of operation.
 * Registered users' votes must have a three-fourths super majority for brass status to be accepted (Only users who have been registered for over a month — from the day the nomination is put forth — are counted).
 * TSPTF members’ votes must have a three-fourths super majority for nomination to be accepted.
 * You must also include the date in your nomination.
 * They must also not have had a nomination fail in the last six months.

Current Nominations
Please copy and past this format for your own nomination.

===Name of Editor===

*Supporters

*Objectors

*Discussion

Note: Please put new nominations at the bottom.

Impeachment
It is entirely possible that a member of the TSTPF may neglect his duties and/or abuse their power. If this happens they must have their user rights removed. To keep it fair, the following procedure has been adopted.

Rules

 * User who feels a TSPTF member should be impeached from his position, must first contact the TSPTF on their talk page with their complaint and attempt to work out the issue with them.
 * If user refuses to accept any compromise from the TSTPF he may then bring up the TSPTF member for impeachment, with support of at least one TSTPF member.
 * Impeaching user must explain why he thinks the TSPTF member should have his user rights removed.
 * Registered users' votes must have two-third super majority to impeach a TSPTF member (Only users who have been registered for over a month — from the day the nomination is put forth — are counted).
 * TSPTF members’ votes must have a two-third super majority to impeach a TSPTF member.

To view past impeachments, see the archive.

Reasons
There are only a few recognized reasons why a TSPTF member should have his user rights removed:
 * They are not actively participating as a member of the TSPTF.
 * They have not been carrying out the responsibilities they volunteered for.
 * They have have not been fair, restrained and/or constructive in their dealings with other editors.
 * They consistently refuse to follow the conventions and guidelines of this community.

'''One of these reasons alone is probably not enough to impeach a TSPTF member. Consider that before demanding an impeachment.'''

Current Impeachments
===Name of TSPTF Member===

*Supporters

*Objectors

*Discussion

Note: Please put new impeachments at the bottom.