Alternative History
Don't have an account?
Register
Advertisement
Register
Alternative History
Alternative History
91,077
pages

Alternative History:Request for user rights

Revision as of 22:45, 9 October 2015 by Fritzmet (talk | contribs) (→‎WILDSTARSKAORI)
View source

This page is for requests to join the TSPTF (user rights). Currently there is no set limit to the number of Constables. There can only 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.

IMPORTANT: 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.

Constable Request

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 supermajority for the request to be accepted.
  • TSPTF members’ votes must have a two-thirds supermajority 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.

LightningLynx89

  • LightningLynx has been a wonderful contributor to our community lately, contributing to pieces such as Grand Union, Reverse a Dragon and a Titan, as well as other pieces. LL has also been a decent chat user, not getting too worked up and taking care of situations sanely, which I think is a sure sign that he's capable of this task. He also shows leadership and maturity, which are key pieces to the wiki. I think would be a mistake not to vote him in. Saturn120 22:52, October 4, 2015 (UTC)
  • Supporters
  • Objectors
    • If this is the kind of attitude they have with an admin, I'd cringe at the thought of what they'd do as an admin.[1][2][3] A BIG no vote from me. -- NuclearVacuum Russian America 23:08, October 4, 2015 (UTC)
    • Spartian300 (talk) 16:04, October 5, 2015 (UTC)
    • Not feeling it, sorry I am that guy (talk)
    • Sorry, but I see this only leading to more problems. Lynx is notorious for exploding on people in chat and clashing with the TSPTF on occasion. It's no good having TSPTF members who only cause conflict with each other, it's important to be able to work well and communicate within. Furthermore I have concerns about Lynx's maturity/ability, he hasn't done much anti-vandalism work for example in recent memory, and on chat I've only seen him cause problems (troll, antagonize, curse constantly), not solve them. Harvenard2 (talk) 23:47, October 6, 2015 (UTC)
    • Although Lynx has made attempts to make amends with people in the past, I still feel his frequent bursts of cursing fits and arguments are a problem. And as noted above Lynx seems proud of his past arguments and subsequent kicks from certain admins, and I don't think a potential moderator should have preexisting problems with the already established TSPTF. Fritzmet (talk)
    • Very obivous reasons I could state for this. But I think that I should refrain from writing essays on the TSTPF page because that seems to be a trend. #PraiseRoosevelt.
    • Although I like Lynx I don't think he's ready for this. I also disagree with what Josh said, Lynx is pretty openly bias toward certain people. Not to mention during Upvote's impeachment Lynx was one of the main people called into question as being a part of a certain group (and a part of its seemingly bias or unfair actions). Tr0llis (talk)
    • No Bloody way. Lordganon (talk) 11:40, October 8, 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
    • This is really cool actually. I thank Sat for the nomination and hopefully I can do this wiki proud. I can promise you I will not be a 100% perfect mod, no one can. I don't think any mod can be perfect. Though hopefully I can do this wiki proud in a sense. I have been with this wiki for a long time now, I think 3 years almost. I've seen a lot of changes occur and hopefully I can help move this place forward and make it better. ..... Because I'm Just... Too... SSSWWWEEEEEETTT!!!
    • I find it funny that two people like Harv and Fritz would try and vote against me. When I in the past have made up with Fritz and have moved on from him. Even going as far as making sure we don't acknowledge one another. Yet he seemingly forgets that he is the antagonizer and the one who indeed causes the most trouble on chat. The same could also be said for Harv. ..... Because I'm Just... Too... SSSWWWEEEEEETTT!!!

Ace009

I would like to nominate Ace009 for constable. He has proven to be a trustworthy, polite, and reliable user. I find him to a great help around the wiki, and he has contributed to several TLs. He is, frankly, one of the best users on here. Spartian300 (talk) 16:04, October 5, 2015 (UTC)

  • Supporters
  • Objectors
  • Discussion
    • As much as I'd like Ace as a mod, he will only cause trouble for the wiki. He is also very biased. AM
    • 2 things, Edge. 1. It is in the past. 2. How am I biased, Andreas? And to be frank, I have considered this and honestly, Spartian, I respectfully decline your nomination. I am just not ready for TSPTF responsibility. And this is truly with all honesty. Through Stars We Rise. (Welcome to the Universe). 01:11, October 9, 2015 (UTC)

WILDSTARSKAORI

Kaori, often referred to as WILD, is a very non biased, polite, and mature user on the wiki. While he does not have many edits here, he is certainly very active on chat and also manages several wikis of his own. WILD has also been a member here for a good amount of time and is certainly able to handle responsibility. Instating WILD as a Constable would be very beneficial to us and our wiki's security. United Republic

  • Supporters
  • Objectors
    • Barley active. Hasn't done anything to warrent this. #PraiseRoosevelt.
    • Sorry WILD, I just think you need more time and experience before I think you are capable of anything. From what I have heard and seen, it's not easy being a TSPTF member, and I still think you have a lot of ways to go before I can consider you. Saturn120 22:36, October 9, 2015 (UTC)
    • Fritzmet (talk) 22:45, October 9, 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion

Lieutenant Request

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 supermajority for the request to be accepted.
  • TSPTF members’ votes must have a two-thirds supermajority 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.

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.


Brass Requests

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 supermajority 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 supermajority 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.

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 supermajority 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 supermajority 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.

Note: 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.

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.
More Fandoms
Advertisement