SmashWiki:Requests for adminship

This page documents an official SmashWiki policy, a widely accepted standard that all users should follow. When editing this page, please ensure that your revision reflects consensus. If in doubt, consider discussing changes on the talk page.

This is the page for requesting adminship for SmashWiki.

Rules and regulations

• Only self-nominations are allowed. If you think that another member would make a good sysop, then you can convince them to nominate themselves. You cannot make a nomination on behalf of another user.
• After sufficient time has passed to allow all users who wish to express an opinion the chance to do so, a decision will be made based on community consensus as to whether or not the request will succeed. Once a decision has been made, the discussion will be archived.
• Selections of sysops are not a simple vote count, or majority opinion. Users who wish to be promoted should demonstrate a steady commitment to this wiki, and be able to point to reasons that the sysop tools would allow them to do better editing.
• Candidates should describe why the wiki should want them to be sysops, not why they want to be sysops on the wiki.
• When supporting or opposing a candidate, give good reasons. Comments that describe in detail why the candidate should/should not become a sysop carry far more weight than simple support/oppose.
• Rollback status is not required for a successful RfA, but is highly encouraged. Users who only want sysop tools for quick reverts of vandalism will be directed towards the appropriate request.
• Upon request, a prospective sysop may be given a scenario and asked his/her opinion on how s/he would handle it.
• Users that have been blocked in the past, or who have previously made an RfA and failed, are no less eligible for adminship. However, such users should be able to demonstrate how they have improved since the block/previous RfA, lest their RfA find serious opposition.

Past nominations

• For a list of all previous requests for adminship that ended with the candidate's promotion, please see this category.
• For a list of all previous requests for adminship wherein the candidate was not promoted, please see this category.

How to nominate

If you have not had a request for adminship page before, follow this two-step process.

1. Go to the end of the requests section below, and add the following text:
   {{{{subst:FULLPAGENAME}}/Username}} Where "Username" is the name of the user being nominated.
2. Click on the created red link, and add:
   {{subst:rfa|Username|reason for nomination}}

However, if you have had a previous request for adminship, follow this process instead.

1. Go to the end of the requests section below, and add the following text:
   {{{{subst:FULLPAGENAME}}/Username (#)}}
   Where "Username" is the name of the user being nominated, and where # is 2 for the second RfA, 3 for the third, and so on.
2. Click on the created red link, and add:
   {{subst:rfa|Username|reason for nomination}}

Current requests

The following discussion is an archived debate of the nomination of a user for adminship. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

	This RfA was closed as failed.
	Reason:	User withdraws SerpentKing 23:22, December 27, 2019 (EST)

Zeckemyro (talk • contribs • edit count • RFA page)

Candidate, please summarize why you are running for adminship below.
I'm Zeckemyro and I would like to administrate SmashWiki to help protect the information it contains. I have done 3 947 edits and still going up. I am very knowledgeable in terms of technical data regarding characters' moves and I have a drive to keep the data as accurate as possible. I am online nearly every day and for a very long time throughout the day. I have experience in Discord moderation and although I don't know everything about how wikis work, I have the time and desire to learn. I'd like to put my time into making sure the information on this wiki is correct and credible.Hitbox Enthusiast Zeck (talk) 19:39, December 27, 2019 (EST)

Support

1. ...

Oppose

1. Strong oppose. There's no doubt that you are very good with technical data and hitbox visualizations, but when it comes to Wiki administration, and potentially even moderation as a whole, I don't think you are particularly well suited for the job at all. First of all, I don't think I've ever seen you attempt any dispute handling or conflict resolution of any kind, in fact I have seen you actively contribute to conflicts through actions such as edit warring. Secondly, your knowledge on the Wiki's policies seem questionable, and you have admitted yourself that your knowledge about how the Wiki functions is limited, which immediately places you below multiple potential candidates on this Wiki. But most concerning of all is your behaviour. While on the Wiki itself you haven't given much of an indication of this, I have both heard of and witnessed incidents of your poor behaviour on Discord, most notably holding strong grudges against people, which on one occasion I even got to see for myself, in addition to having a certain degree of contempt for many users as well, which is very concerning. Add to this your general tendency to be somewhat of a loose cannon, and I think you have quite a long way to go before you're ready to be an administrator here. Alex the Jigglypuff trainer 19:28, December 27, 2019 (EST)
   • Although it's true my interpersonal interactions haven't been the greatest. I do consult other staff and put effort into not escalating things when I have to be impartial like if I am a moderator/administrator. It no doubt requires work, but it's work I'm willing to put in to ensure the well-being of the wiki and its users.Hitbox Enthusiast Zeck (talk) 19:32, December 27, 2019 (EST)
2. Here goes. So, from the beginning, I could already tell where this was going. It was definitely ringing a lot of familiar bells, with you saying on Discord that you wanted to put up an RfA in the midst of a discussion about something big needing to happen on the wiki, despite having "no idea how to actually write it properly". That was point number one. Point number two comes from this page itself: it rings bells already rung in different RfAs time and time again. Edit count is entirely subjective in matters like this. And on the note of your contributions, it does become concerning when only two of your contributions are talk page-based, and an admin definitely should be not just known, but also active in the greater community. You want to have people who'll say "yes, I think this user should be running things, since they've shown they can handle the task." All in all, I unfortunately don't think you're quite ready to handle this. Aidan, the Festive Rurouni 22:36, December 27, 2019 (EST)
3. Oppose. You noted that you have made 3,947 edits, but how much of those were for enforcing rules or wiki discussions? From a look at your edit history, the majority of what you have done is upload and create technical data pages, which by the way I definitely appreciate. However, what you currently lack are the most important qualities of an administration: enforcing and interpreting rules, which I don't see anywhere in your contributions. Even if you do have some buried anywhere, I find it curious that it's not even mentioned anywhere on the RfA.

If you plan on doing another RfA in the future, I recommend reading this essay, which basically outlines what qualities administrators should have. CookiesCreme 23:06, December 27, 2019 (EST)

Neutral

1. ...

Comments

It seems I jumped the gun on this one. I genuinely want to be more involved but what the people opposing it said isn't entirely false. I don't have experience outside of Discord and most people just see me as the technical data guy and, to be honest, I don't know how wikis work enough yet. Thank you for the criticism. I'll keep it in mind if I make a second RfA eventually.Hitbox Enthusiast Zeck (talk) 23:19, December 27, 2019 (EST)

---