LEGO Message Boards Wiki:Requests for Rights/Administrator

This is LMBW's requests for administrator page. If you wish to request administrator rights, please read this page first, and make sure you fulfill the requirements listed here.

To file a request, place the following code under the "current requests" header, above any existing requests.

replace this with your username
replace this with a brief paragraph about why you want to be nominated. ~

Comments


Requests made on this page are a vote, meaning that if they achieve at least 25 supporting votes and 75% support out of the total supports and opposes, then their request will be closed as successful. Opposers must provide reasons for opposing. Most requests last for around a week, unless there is clear consensus either way after a short period of time.

If a user has requested administrator rights before, add  to the end of the topic header. If a request for administrator fails, the user who requested the rights must wait 8 weeks before requesting them again. For users with multiple requests, add the respective number of the request. It is also considered good practice to link to previous requests for rights when nominating a user.

Archived requests can be found here.

Ireithien
I have a few reasons why I would like to be promoted to administrator, and I will try to cover them all, being as brief as I can.

The admin team, while normally effective, have very few members regularly active on this site. They all participate in discussions on their admin site, but in order for those to be as productive as they can be, the team's members also need to be participating users of this site. Thus, I believe that I can fill a spot on the team, being active both here and there. Every admin is valuable, and they are carefully chosen. We are not in danger of having "too many."

I'm confident in my abilities as an administrator: I have been a chat moderator for nearly two years, and in the past I have been an editor. Admittedly, I do not have the time to edit the articles, but nevertheless, my edits are part of my credentials. I am an active user, and am fully ready to take on the load of an administrator's work. I understand it is a difficult and serious job, and I am ready to accept this responsibility. I believe I would be a valuable addition and asset to our admin team, as well as a servant to our community.

Please vote according to your opinion. As a final note, I am certain some of you will bring up some of my previous "behavior" as evidence against my capability as an administrator. I understand your skepticism well: however, I am able to confidently assure you that I am still able to carry out the duties of administration effectively and fairly. As I said before, it is a lot of responsibility, but I know I am ready to take it on.

Feel free to ask me questions regarding my various positions/opinions via chat/the comment section below.

(So much for a brief paragraph. )

Support

 * 1) Watson Doggy may have had questionable behaviour before, but he's been good recently. And I told him I'd support him, so here, I hope you're happy, Watson Doggy  Aravis (talk)
 * 2) Yes. Peregrin Took (talk)
 * 3) I feel that Ireithien could use the rights well. Though he has made some questionable comments in the past, I have not witnessed him make any in several months. I also feel like him having the rights could help the wiki (although I would like to see you edit mainspace a bit more. ) -
 * 4) He was going to be entrusted with admin during the Brickimedia move, so what's so different now? - Twisted

Neutral

 * Ire would be a good administrator, but I feel he needs to edit the mainspace for me to support him.
 * I don't really know you well enough to say yes or no. DetJonesGo Heels All Day (talk) 21:53, April 16, 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm not entirely sure if Ire is the best choice. Since I only want to support one person I'll stay neutral. Marcel77799
 * I'm not saying Ire isn't suited for this role, but there seem to be be more qualified people in each category (such as connection to the community, mainspace editing, coding etc.) GuacamoleCCXR (talk) 22:02, April 16, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) I feel that he has been kicked once too often to be a trustworthy administrator. Le Beater
 * 2) I personally feel like he doesn't edit enough, and doesn't really meet the maturity level our admins should have.   Randomized  ( wall ) 21:56, April 16, 2014 (UTC)

Comments

 * @Von: I understand your concern, but I don't think that that is really a good basis for opposition. "Been kicked too much" isn't really much of a constructive reason to help the candidate improve. Examples, if you have them, would be nice. Thanks. Ireithien
 * Per. I also haven't witnessed him being kicked in several months. -

Alemas2005
I would like to be nominated because I think I can do the job well and I can benefit the community. I am active, I'm always present in chat, I pressure admins for decisions, I have ideas to put forward to the admins, and I can edit a lot and with quality (updating post counts, avatars, ranks). I've also started welcoming newbies in chat (in my own special way, of course), not calling them dupes as soon as I see them.

I would like to get the job because I think I can do good for the community, not for gaining power. I genuinely believe I can help as an admin. I've been a user here since almost two years now, and I've been a mod for over a year, which makes me a very experienced user. I don't get complained-about as a mod either (except by the people who I ban, of course), which shows that I have good judgement in moments of pressure.

Yes, I was originally very immature, and quite undeserving of any sort of rights, when I joined. But now I think I managed to mature quite a bit, without sacrificing my sense of humour. After all, who would want a robot-like admin?

Then again, if you still, still think that I would make a bad admin, even after all my efforts, you can say it. But at least tell me why, because I really want to help this community in any way possible. Alemas2005: Mostly Harmless(Talk to me) 20:07, April 16, 2014 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) He makes extremely quality edits, on chat quite a bit and on at hours that aren't very covered by the majority of CMs, very experienced, and is also active. FULLY SUPPORT. The awesome one (talk) 20:13, April 16, 2014 (UTC)
 * 2) Benboy755
 * 3) I haven't been on chat a single day without seeing Alemas just...there, being mature and moddy. He seems like a natural admin, and I'm for this all the way. Bgirlabby (talk)
 * 4) Full support, Alemas is a natural admin
 * 5) When I first joined, I was surprised that Alemas wasn't an admin. Full support. Peregrin Took (talk)
 * 6) Because IRE wont stahp buggin' me about votin' Marshal6000 (Talk)
 * 7) You should be a admin already. You may be a bit TOO mature if anything. DetJonesGo Heels All Day (talk) 21:53, April 16, 2014 (UTC)

Neutral

 * Neutral for now. Down the road, I may support. Alemas could offer a sharp contrast and fresh look on problems that arise, as well as have good ideas. I won't oppose, at least. Ireithien
 * Alemas just doesn't strike me as "admin material". Also, you haven't been editing very much, and is "pressuring the admins" that much of a good thing? They can sort things out themselves.
 * I'm not entirely sure if Alemas is the best choice. Since I only want to support one person I'll stay neutral. Marcel77799

Oppose

 * 1) Sorry, no. You seem to think of your rights as "ranks", and you are quite biased towards new users. I have witnessed both of these lately, and until I see them improve, I'm opposing. (I did read what you said in your request, by the way, but I'm still not exactly comfortable with it.) -
 * 2) Too harsh on new users - literally never assumes good faith, in fact, encourages otherwise.  Randomized  ( wall ) 21:55, April 16, 2014 (UTC)
 * 3) Per the 2 oppositions made above. Le Beater

Comments

 * I have only two main concerns. One is your treatment of new users. You mention something about improving on that, so does that mean you no longer accuse users of being dupes? The second is your view of user rights entailing superiority. What is your current opinion on that?
 * 1) No, not anymore. I've managed to let go my fear of dupes.


 * 2) I've got a very abstract mind. Let's take non-CMs and CMs: CMs have powers that non-CMs don't have, so in my very abstract and simple mind, that automatically means that CMs are, rights-wise, superior to non-CMs. Buro > Admins > CMs > normal users. It's a structure which I can't take off my mind.


 * Then again, I'm sure you can convince me that admins aren't superior to normal users anyway. Alemas2005: Mostly Harmless(Talk to me) 20:25, April 16, 2014 (UTC)


 * It is true that some users have more technical abilities than others, in the order that you described. However, it's important to recognize that having more technical abilities, or even making more decisions, doesn't make you better, superior, or more important than other users. What it means is that you have a responsibility, and that you have an opportunity to help the community in ways that other users cannot. Make sense?


 * So if we use responsibilities, the order would be: Buros = Admins = CMs = normal users. Each set has its own responsibilities, which are independent of others. Ok, I'm getting my head round this... Alemas2005: Mostly Harmless(Talk to me) 20:49, April 16, 2014 (UTC)

It's a pity that Obi made that rule about not being able to oppose people if you don't like them. I'm not even sure anymore why I don't like you. What did you ever do to get that from me? I guess I should stop not liking you since I don't have any reason to.