Tag: sourceedit |
(removing nomination and moving to archive) |
||
| (29 intermediate revisions by 17 users not shown) | |||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
Nominations: |
Nominations: |
||
| − | ===[[Special:Contributions/Amorkuz|Amorkuz]]=== |
||
| − | ::''Nominated by [[User:CzechOut|CzechOut]] 21:39, April 21, 2017 (UTC) |
||
| − | :'''Basic facts''' |
||
| − | :*[[Special:Editcount/Amorkuz|Edit count and distribution]] |
||
| − | :'''The rationale for nominating this user is:''' |
||
| − | * Good grasp of basic rules of the wiki |
||
| − | * Level-headed contributor to discussions, without that detracting from his overall contribution velocity |
||
| − | * ~75% of contributions to regular articles, but roughly 15% to community name spaces |
||
| − | * Minor edits to template namespace, but no apparent fear to at least try |
||
| − | * Has clear-cut editing projects |
||
| − | * Name bubbled to the top in admin discussions |
||
| − | ====Support==== |
||
| − | :'''Please outline the reasons you support this nomination below:''' |
||
| − | * I've had nothing but positive experiences editing with Amorkuz, and I believe they will make a great addition to the admin team. {{User:PicassoAndPringles/sig}} 22:02, April 21, 2017 (UTC) |
||
| − | * Amorkuz has proven to be an apt debator, and more importantly I always could tell that he actually cared about the site and edited regularly. It'll be good to have another admin on board, and Amorkuz seems like just the right option right now. [[User:OttselSpy25|OS25]] ([[User Talk:OttselSpy25|Talk]]) 23:18, April 21, 2017 (UTC) |
||
| − | * To me, the most important rule of them all is 'assume good faith'. Sometimes that can be sparse on this Wiki. In this respect, I've always found Amorkus to be a level-headed person and also never jumps to conclusions, which is why many find this person approachable and understanding. Furthermore, in a discussion, they like to take both sides of a debate in equal measure before reaching a fair conclusion. Everything said by Amorkus is for the good of the Wiki and all comments and feedback take people's feelings into consideration. I've enjoyed throwing ideas back and forth with them in the Inclusion debates (especially when we haven't agreed). It'd be nice to have a regular face on this Wiki who has such a positive effect on others. [[User:Thefartydoctor|<font color="blue">The</font><font color="silver">Farty</font><font color="red">Doctor</font>]] [[User talk:Thefartydoctor|<small><sup><font color="green">Talk</font></sup></small>]] 00:52, April 22, 2017 (UTC) |
||
| − | * Armorkuz is a dedicated editor, keeps to his projects, and always remains level-headed in discussions. In many cases, he will be the one regular contributor to a discussion who keeps things in perspective for everyone. Not only does he bring logical arguments, and ask very good questions, Amorkuz, perhaps without even trying, keeps the tone of any discussion quite friendly and accessible. I've collaborated with him many times on editing projects, small and large, and I can think of no better candidate for new admin than him. Full support. :){{User:SOTO/sig}} 02:40, April 22, 2017 (UTC) |
||
| − | * I support this nomination, a good editor who knows their stuff. It has been a pleasure to work with them since their early days on the wiki when asking for help on Big Finish Audios. '''[[User:AdricLovesNyssa|Adric♥Nyssa]]'''∩''[[User_talk:AdricLovesNyssa|Talk?]]'' 09:46, April 22, 2017 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | ====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. |
||
== Bureaucrats == |
== Bureaucrats == |
||
Revision as of 13:55, 1 February 2020
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.
===[[Special:Contributions/UserName|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.
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:
Bureaucrats
A bureaucrat has the same rights as an administrator and the additional permission to create new administrators and bureaucrats.
Nominations: