Tardis:User rights nominations

Please put nominations (including self-nominations) for special user rights below. Do so by using the following format. Please cut and paste the entirety of this format, and put it underneath the most recent nominee in the section. Where the format says "UserName", please ensure you change it to their actual user name.

UserName

 * The rationale for nominating this user is:

Support

 * Please outline the reasons you support this nomination below:

Oppose

 * Why do you oppose this nomination?

Neutral

 * Feeling lukewarm about this user? Tell us why.

Comments and concerns

 * Do you have specific concerns about this user that are getting in the way of you making up your mind? Leave them here for the nominee to address.  To the nominee: failure to respond to comments left here may weigh against you when it comes time to close the nomination.

Adjustments may be made for special circumstances, but in general there will be at least a one week comment period.

See How do I become an admin? for additional questions and information on administrator roles on the Tardis Data Core Doctor Who Wiki. For more general information about becoming an administrator see Community Central - Tips for becoming an admin

For more information on on these roles see Help:User access levels. Special:Listusers/sysop shows the current admins, bureaucrats and staff IDs.


 * Archived nominations

Admins
An administrator has special responsibilities to watch over the wiki. In order to make it easier to fulfill those responsibilities, and admin can block user IDs or IP edits, protect pages and revert pages more easily.

Nominations:

Bongolium500

 * The rationale for nominating this user is:

With The Power of the Doctor recently bringing countless new eyes to the wiki, I'd like to seize the opportunity to nominate Bongolium500 for adminship.

Since some of his earliest edits, patiently helping new users learn our rules in the absence of our welcome bot, Bongo50 has been noticing technical shortcomings on the wiki and going above and beyond to plug the holes. He's always lending a helping hand to editors new and old, whether it's designing complex new templates like and ; crafting new CSS themes to fix, among other things, our infoboxes and Spotify player; or laying the groundwork for the return of DPL Forums. When it was our wiki's turn to migrate to FandomDesktop, our admins turned to Bongo50 to get the job done. His commitment to the wiki has already been recognised with the prestigious "The Doctor's Golden TARDIS Key" award, awarded for editing every day for 365 days, which has been earned by only 14 others ever.

This wiki was built by technical admins, CzechOut chief among them, who designed our templates and themes to keep things running. However, most of these admins have naturally moved on to other priorities. Over my years and years on the wiki, Bongo50 is the first user I've seen who's taken the steps to help fill their shoes. But because of his user permissions, every fix and improvement he designs for (eg) or Tardis.css has had to be conveyed to an admin. If there's anyone we can trust with access to these tools, it's Bongo50. Let's make it official! – n8 (☎) 18:10, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Support

 * Please outline the reasons you support this nomination below:


 * I support Bongo's nomination as an admin, not only has he done some great job as an editor, but I really respect his technical work, and as someone who has been greatly looking forward to the return of the forums, I find all his help on that side commendable. I think he would be a good addition to the Tardis Wiki admin team, and could only help make this a better place. Liria10 ☎  18:21, 16 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I'm definitely in support of Bongo's nomination for adminship. Their consistent presence on the Wiki has been an observable good and their care for long-term problems (e.g., forums and template designs) are both admirable traits for an editor and outright requirements for a Wiki Admin. I'm 100% down with this. NoNotTheMemes ☎  18:57, 16 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I'm fully in support of this. I've already commented that I find his forays into SMW incredibly interesting, and I look forward to seeing what can be done in that area as we move into the new era of Doctor Who. Najawin ☎  19:39, 16 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I wholeheartedly support Bongolium's nomination. His contributions to the wiki, both general and especially technical, have certainly improved it. Bongo also most definitely shows the editing and personal qualities for being an admin, and the admin rights would let him help better the wiki even more. Chubby Potato ☎  19:55, 16 November 2022 (UTC)


 * BONGOLIUM FOR ADMIN 2022/2023!!!... alright, but seriously, I support Bongo becoming an admin too because his work on the wiki is excellent, both in the public spaces and knowing where and how within the depths of the site all the css coding stuff works. It’s not easy to maintain a whole website, but Bongo proves that he knows his stuff and can manage it, and I think that an admin position will make it much easier for him to take action. —Danniesen ☎  23:04, 16 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I also support this nomination. I may not have been very active on the wiki lately, but even I have seen the good work Bongolium has done. And I'm sure his technical skills will be of valuable help to the admin team. LauraBatham ☎  02:14, 17 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I strongly support Bongo's nomination; we've desperately needed an Admin with high technical skills for ages. 21:45, 17 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I reckon he could probably do a good job as an admin. Cookieboy 2005 ☎  22:41, 17 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Joining the choir of support for Bongo's nomination. For several months now he has assisted me and other admin with creating, updating and fixing templates and css left and right. Often, his work was stopped by a technical limitation: not having direct access to edit those pages, as he wasn't an admin. While always more than happy to give the final push to his projects, he has proven himself trustworthy (and, let me be honest: necessary) on the Wiki.
 * Additionally, Bongo has always shown amicability and maintained discussions level-headed, often approaching new users with helpfull advice. In short, Bongo's creativity and skill would be greatly appreciated on the admin team, as others have pointed out we're short on these among the active ones, so I can see no reasons for Bongo not to join us as an admin. OncomingStorm12th ☎  18:14, 20 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Haven't had any personal interaction with this user (that I can recall) but seeing all the praise its clear they are right for the job. DrWHOCorrieFan ☎  18:17, 20 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I can't do much more than echo the full support of my fellow editors. Bongo has been nothing but polite in all the interactions I've observed with him and, crucially, his technical prowess is much-needed on the Wiki. There's no doubt in my mind that he would make a great admin. Borisashton ☎  18:28, 20 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Bongo's been a great help with the nuts-and-bolts of the Wiki; he has shown on multiple occasions that he works well with others and is respectful of policy — his many messages on my talk page to get official permission to test this or that bit of coding work prove that well enough. I have full confidence that if granted admin rights he will use them wisely and responsibly. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 17:13, 21 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Transferring Ser0slug's comment from User talk:CzechOut per technical difficulties:
 * I know I am in the wrong place however for some reason I am unable to comment on the user rights page but long story short i absolutely and wholeheartedly support bongolium 500 in becoming a admin, I know I haven't really contributed anything yet but this is because I am currently trying to learn the rules and how to include the source of my information but I will hopefully be contributing at some point as not only am I a huge doctor who fan but I sometimes work on doctor who as a stunt performer!!!, Anyway I support Bongolium 500 because as a newcomer to contributing on this wikia he is invaluable for the technical stuff in the form of creating new templates I plan to use his help with templates when I hopefully start contributing.
 * – n8 (☎) 19:04, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Oppose

 * We usually don't promote users to admin until they have been editing on the wiki for at least one year. My suggestion is to put this nomination on hold for about six months. During this time User:Bongolium500 can read through some of the older nominations (located at Tardis:User rights nominations/Archive) to see what areas he might be lacking in and can work on improving. And it's probably a good idea for everyone to read the old nominations just to get an idea of what an admin actually is and does, as well as the criteria we use to choose a new admin. Shambala108 ☎  02:52, 22 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Retracting the above comment. I still can't figure out how I misread the date of the first contribution (bad eyesight might be my only excuse). There really wasn't a need for so many people to make such a fuss, all it would have taken was one person (User:Bongolium500 or an admin) to message me on my talk page alerting me to my mistake. It's not like my comment was going to derail the nomination anyway. Shambala108 ☎  00:39, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Neutral

 * Feeling lukewarm about this user? Tell us why.

Comments and concerns

 * Do you have specific concerns about this user that are getting in the way of you making up your mind? Leave them here for the nominee to address.  To the nominee: failure to respond to comments left here may weigh against you when it comes time to close the nomination.

Wow, thanks for the nomination! I would happily take on the position of admin as it would make a lot of things that I already do, like making changes to css pages and protected templates (which are often protected for good reason) a lot easier. I know my main namespace edits aren't as plentiful as some users and admins, but I hope my more technical changes can make up for this. Bongo50  ☎  18:21, 16 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Just to note, Bongo has been editing on this wiki for over a year, he'll have been editing for two years exactly in two months time. So, politely, I'm not sure what bringing that up has to do with this nomination? I could be misreading Shambala's comment though. Najawin ☎  03:13, 22 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Yes, I share your confusion – part of the blame may be mine for citing Special:Diff/3124798 as "[one] of his earliest edits", when in fact he'd been around for 5 months by then, but even that diff was from May 2021, well over a year ago. Additionally, I'll note that I have read through Tardis:User rights nominations/Archive, and that this nomination was explicitly modelled after CzechOut's nominations of Boblipton and Amorkuz. Hopefully Shambala will clarify her comment. – n8 (☎) 04:08, 22 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I further share this confusion. At the time of my nomination, I'd been on the wiki for 665 days, compared to just 607 days for Shambala when she was nominated. SOTO was even nominated after just 363 days on the wiki! Bongo50   ☎  07:08, 22 November 2022 (UTC)


 * If we were really banking on the "one year" thing, it’s been 3.216 days as of today since my first edit, or 8.8 years to be exact. I’ve not seen a nomination, and I believe I’ve proven myself more than enough. (This is not me asking for one btw. This is simply to demonstrate that length of time shouldn’t matter). ——Danniesen ☎  11:51, 22 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I also concur with everyones confusion over @Shambala108's opposition based on @Bongolium500's time editing.
 * In the time @Bongolium500 has been editing here, he has proven himself to be an extremely good editor, meanwhile, I've been editing much longer but my edit history has been tumultuous, so length of time editing ≠ good Admin. Hypothetically, I wouldn't object to an extremely competent editor who has only been editing on this Wiki for a few months, provided they are familiar with our policies. Surely that shold be the criteria? 13:47, 22 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Well, okay, maybe I shouldn't have added my own response earlier, but there's really no need to pile on a simple mistake. Contra recent responses, I do think it's a good thing that we have a baseline standard for length of time, and it has no bearing that many editors have been active for longer: "time served" is just one of several prerequisites, but it is a prerequisite. And a prerequisite that Bongo50 amply satisfies! – n8 (☎) 15:05, 22 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I am similarly perplexed by @Shambala108's opposition. What is the actual reason you want to wait six months? If we are to accept "at least one year as a wiki editor" as a pre-requisite for adminship (which I believe is reasonable), then Bongo more than satisfies that pre-requisite. Previous administrators, including an administrator in this very discussion, have been nominated and accepted with less than 20 months of experience and definitely less than 26 months of experience. Compare Bongolium500 (20 months between first edit and nomination) with existing Tardis Wiki Admins; Shambala108 (18 months between first edit and nomination); SOTO (just under 12 months between first edit and nomination); Boblipton (6 months between first edit and nomination, though he declined the nomination). But see CzechOut (33 months between first edit and nomination). If a length of 20 months is enough to justify a 6 month delay on its own, then many of our previous administrators (including two of the above three cited) would have been delayed. I see no such evidence of that sort of request ever occurring in previous nominations. Certainly not on Shambala's, nor SOTOs, nor Bobliptons (though he is somewhat moot, given he rejected the nomination). The suggestion to "hold on for about six months", absent of any other justifications, seems needlessly arbitrary. If there are other deficiencies in the nomination, I would really like to see them identified. But as it stands, Shamabala's opposition cites states no reason for their opposition nor precedent for the delay they wish to prescribe. NoNotTheMemes ☎  15:50, 22 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I agree with Nate. This is probably just a simple mistake. Shambala probably just misread the "2021" date of Bongo's first edit as "2022", which would explain the suggestion to wait six months. But whatever the reason, we should probably wait for Shambala to explain before we start dogpiling or debating admin prerequisites. LauraBatham ☎  23:07, 22 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Want to just jump over here and apologize for jumping the gun on ye, Shambala108. The way I read it, your statement of "at least a year" put emphasis on the year-length not being satisfactory in this circumstance --but more importantly, I started typing that response before the surge of other responses and just took way too long before actually posting. Definitely didn't intend to contribute to a dogpile, so I'm very sorry about that! I should have waited to see your response. NoNotTheMemes ☎  01:09, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Bureaucrats
A bureaucrat has the same rights as an administrator and the additional permission to create new administrators and bureaucrats.

Nominations: