Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 12:53, 19 June 2003 view sourceMenchi (talk \| contribs)Administrators30,401 edits nomination of kt2 ; I'd like to help more← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 17:38, 25 December 2024 view source AmandaNP (talk \| contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Bureaucrats, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators45,699 edits remove successful RfATag: Manual revert
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Short description\|Process of the Misplaced Pages community}}
	Here you can make a '''request for adminship'''. See ] for what this entails and for a list of current admins.
			<noinclude>{{pp-protected\|small=yes}}{{pp-move-indef}}</noinclude>
			{{Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Header}}<!-- ***Do not move this line, as it is not an RfA!*** -->
			{{bots\|allow=ClueBot NG}}<!--

			-->
	Current Misplaced Pages policy is to grant administrator status to anyone who has been an active Misplaced Pages contributor for a while and is generally a known and trusted member of the community. Most users seem to agree that the more administrators there are the better.
			== Current nominations for adminship ==
			<div style="text-align: center;">
			Current time is '''{{FULLDATE\|type=wiki}}'''
			</div>

			----
	If you want to become an administrator then add your name to the list below. Other users can comment on your request - they might express reservations (because, for example, they suspect you will abuse your new-found powers, or if you've joined very recently), but hopefully they will approve and say lovely things about you.
			<div style="text-align: center; font-size: 85%; color: inherit;">
			'''{{purge\|Purge page cache}} if nominations have not updated.'''
			</div>
			<!-- INSTRUCTIONS
			New nominations for adminship, whether you are nominating yourself or someone else, are placed below these instructions. Please note that RfA policy states that ALL RfA nominations posted here MUST have candidate acceptance, or the nominations may be removed. Please read the revised directions carefully. Thank you.
			ATTENTION: Your nomination will be considered "malformed" and may be reverted if you do not follow the instructions at https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Nominate

			Please place new nominations for adminship immediately below the "----" line with the hidden comment, above the most recent nomination.
	If there is general agreement that someone who requests adminship should be given it, then a developer will make it so.
			Please leave the first "----" alone and don't forget to include a new "----" line between the new nomination and the previous one as shown in the example.

			Example:
	==Current requests for adminship==
			("There are no current nominations" message, hidden if there are open RfAs)
			---- (hidden comment "please leave this horizontal rule and place RfA transclusion below ")
			----

			Ready now? Take a deep breath and go!
	*], Hi! I'd wouldn't mind being an admin. ] 02:26 18 Jun 2003 (UTC)
	**Seconded. I've seen Poor Yorick for some time, and with some good edits. --] 02:31 19 Jun 2003 (UTC)

			END INSTRUCTIONS -->
	*] er well, I've been here for quite a while now, so I might as well try to become an administrator. ] 00:08 18 Jun 2003 (UTC)
			{{#ifexpr:{{User:Amalthea/RfX/RfA count}}>0\|\|<div style="text-align: center;">{{grey\|'''There are no current nominations.'''}}</div>}}
			---- <!--Please leave this horizontal rule and place RfA transclusion below-->
			----

			== About RfB ==
	*] When in the Course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one User to request sysop-status; it'd be nice if they had a good reason for it. I don't. The reason I am typing this is: One way or the other, I want to stop thinking about the subject. That's it. ] 18:23 16 Jun 2003 (UTC)
			{{redirect\|WP:RFB\|bot requests\|Misplaced Pages:Bot requests\|help with referencing\|Misplaced Pages:Referencing for beginners}}
	**Seconded. No good reason, but no bad reasons either. --] 02:32 19 Jun 2003 (UTC)
			{{Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/bureaucratship}}
	**Thirded. ] 04:42 19 Jun 2003 (UTC)
	**fourthed ] 08:29 19 Jun 2003 (UTC)

			== Current nominations for bureaucratship ==
	*<font size=-1>] - A bit curious what the admin functions look like, and whether anyone has noticed my existance... I'm probably too small and easy to miss, for that, though.] 22:01 17 Jun 2003 (UTC)</font>
			<div style="text-align: center;">{{grey\|'''There are no current nominations.'''}}</div>
	**I've noticed. Cyp is a great contributor with a solid record of ] and not getting into fights. IMO, Cyp will make a great Admin who will not abuse sysop powers. --] 23:18 17 Jun 2003 (UTC)
			---- <!-- Please leave this horizontal rule -->

			== Related pages ==
	* Nomination: ], a Canadian largely unrecognized for his over 5000 edits (the 31st ]). He has encountered his share of impoliteness from others, but, as far as I can tell, has never responded eye-for-an-eye. Judging from his past contribution, Kt2 is probably not too into banning or reverting edit wars, but administratorship allow him to maintain the articles he works on more easily and faster, as his workload is still going strong and stable. <br> He is a trustworthy and experienced Wikipedian, and with qualities suitable as an admininstrator. --] 12:53 19 Jun 2003 (UTC)
			* ]
			* ]

			=== For RfX participants ===
	* ]: Since joining the WP community half a year ago and 3000 edits later, I have not instigated an edit war or flamewar. Although apparently I had a twin with the exact same name as I do, only that ] starts with "F___". :o) --] 12:53 19 Jun 2003 (UTC)
			* ]
			* ]
			* ]
			* ]
			* ]
			* ]
			* ] – RfA candidates sharing their RfA experience

			=== History and statistics ===
			* ]
			* ]
			* ]
			* ]
			* ]
			* ]
			* ]
			* ]

			=== Removal of adminship ===
	==Recently created admins==
			* ] – Requests to remove administrator access for abuse and/or self-de-adminship
			*]
			* ]

			=== Noticeboards ===
	(most recent first)
			* ]
			* ]

			=== Permissions ===
	*] (requested via mailing list post]
			* Requests to mark an account as a bot can be made at ].
	**(negative)Ilyanep apparently has only been with WP for a month. -]
			* Requests for other user permissions can be made at ].
	**I've elaborated through . You'll find my counter to the 'only been here for a month' argument. -- ] Jun 15 2003
	**NOTE:There have been some people second on and
	** Re:. Like many people, I'm not commenting because I don't know Ilya. Hence, I neither support nor oppose Ilya's application. ] 21:36 17 Jun 2003 (UTC)
	*** I don't see why so many people feel like making that certain. If they're neutral, why don't they just not reply, and nobody will care, I don't mean it to sound too rude or agressive if it does. ] 21:51 17 Jun 2003 (UTC)
	*** Well, since there seem to be no serious objections and two approvals, I made you a sysop. --] 23:02 17 Jun 2003 (UTC)

			== Footnotes ==
	*] Hi I'd like to be a sysop { I did't know whether to put the request at the top or bottom of the list. I've plumped for the bottom, if this is wrong I'm sorry :-( } ] 09:32 16 Jun 2003 (UTC)
			{{Reflist}}<noinclude>
	** I'll second Theresa, especially for what she's done for images and HowTos. -- ] 09:38 16 Jun 2003 (UTC)
	** Yep. Good Admin choice. Make it so! --]
	** I agree. ] 09:47 16 Jun 2003 (UTC)
	** Yes, because she pays attention to detail, like realizing that ] is better with white ]. ] 22:28 17 Jun 2003 (UTC)

			]
	*] - I would like to be a sysop so I can query the database to find articles without bold markings and to find new users. I currently search for these by looking at the recent changes page, but would love a way of doing it automatically. Thanks. ] 19:25 15 Jun 2003 (UTC)
			]
	** Angela has only been with us for a month: please send an E-mail to the ] mailing list, Angela. ] 19:38 15 Jun 2003 (UTC)
			]
	*** Please don't. The mailing list is obsolete for sysop requests because of this page, also, wikipedia-l would be the wrong list anyway. --] 19:47 15 Jun 2003 (UTC)
			]</noinclude><!--
	***Angela has been here longer than that, her first logged-in edit was 20th Feb 2003, () -- ] 20:02 15 Jun 2003 (UTC)
	***My bad. I withdraw my comment, and vote for Angela becoming a sysop. ] 09:45 16 Jun 2003 (UTC)
	**I think Angela would be a fine sysop - she seems to have the hang of things, and she's done a good job welcoming new users. --] 20:04 15 Jun 2003 (UTC)

			Interwiki links are includeonly-transcluded from /Header
	*] (requested via mailing list post)
			-->
	**She has already be nominated, seconded, thirded, etc on the mailing list. All we needed was her consent - now we have it. Make it so! --]
	**I think it got up to about 78th. So I hereby 79th her nomination. ;) -- ] 08:33 15 Jun 2003 (UTC)
	** 80th! :) ] 13:48 15 Jun 2003 (UTC)
	** I think we're up to 2,000 (I 2001th) :) ] 15 Jun 2003

	*] (requested via mailing list post)
	**Well, of course! --]
	**Make it so! --]
	**Fourthed -- ]
	**Definitely! -- ]
	**6 -- ]

	*] (requested via mailing list post)
	**I'll second Quercus - he'll be a great sysop. --]
	**Make it so! --]
	**Fourthed -- ]
	**Fifthed (that's hard to pronounce) - ]

Latest revision as of 17:38, 25 December 2024

Process of the Misplaced Pages community

"WP:RFA" redirects here. You may be looking for Misplaced Pages:Requested articles, Misplaced Pages:Requests for administrator attention, Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates, Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests, or requests for assistance at Misplaced Pages:Help desk. Note: Although this page is under extended confirmed protection, non-extended confirmed editors may still comment on individual requests, which are located on subpages of this page.

↓↓Skip to current nominations for adminship

v t e Advice, administrator elections (AdE), requests for adminship (RfA), bureaucratship (RfB), and past request archives
Administrators	Noticeboard Requests for adminship watch talk talk archives Administrator elections watch talk De-adminship Recall Adminship reform unbundling Successful candidacies Alphabetical AdE Alphabetical RFA Chronological Unsuccessful candidacies Alphabetical AdE Alphabetical RFA Chronological Resysopped administrators Inactive administrators Former administrators
Bureaucrats	Noticeboard Requests for bureaucratship Bureaucrat discussion Bureaucrat activity Successful RfBs Alphabetical Chronological Unsuccessful RfBs Alphabetical Chronological
AdE/RfX participants	Advice for RfA candidates Guide Miniguide Optional RfA candidate poll RfA nominations Request nom Self-nomination Advice for voters Asking questions Arguments to avoid Debriefs
History & statistics	RFA reform RFA by year RFA by month Desysoppings by month
Useful pages	Searchbox RFX report Logs User rights log Old log Meta log Meta old log AdE category RFA category
Current admin count: 848 (list all) Current bureaucrat count: 15 (list all)

Purge page cache if nominations haven't updated.

Policies on civility and personal attacks apply here. Editors may not make accusations about personal behavior without evidence. Uninvolved administrators and bureaucrats are encouraged to enforce conduct policies and guidelines, including—when necessary—with blocks.

Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update
No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful)

Current time is 17:20, 28 December 2024 (UTC). — Purge this page

Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update
No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful)

Current time is 17:20, 28 December 2024 (UTC). — Purge this page Shortcuts

Requests for adminship (RfA) is the process by which the Misplaced Pages community decides who will become administrators (also known as admins), who are users with access to additional technical features that aid in maintenance. Users can either submit their own requests for adminship (self-nomination) or may be nominated by other users. Please be familiar with the administrators' reading list, how-to guide, and guide to requests for adminship before submitting your request. Also, consider asking the community about your chances of passing an RfA.

This page also hosts requests for bureaucratship (RfB), where new bureaucrats are selected.

If you are new to participating in a request for adminship, or are not sure how to gauge the candidate, then kindly go through this mini guide for RfA voters before you participate.

One trial run of an experimental process of administrator elections took place in October 2024.

About administrators

The additional features granted to administrators are considered to require a high level of trust from the community. While administrative actions are publicly logged and can be reverted by other administrators just as other edits can be, the actions of administrators involve features that can affect the entire site. Among other functions, administrators are responsible for blocking users from editing, controlling page protection, and deleting pages. However, they are not the final arbiters in content disputes and do not have special powers to decide on content matters, except to enforce the community consensus and the Arbitration Commitee rulings by protecting or deleting pages and applying sanctions to users.

About RfA

Recent RfA, RfBs, and admin elections (update)
Candidate	Type	Result	Date of close	Tally
Candidate	Type	Result	Date of close	S	O	N	%
Sennecaster	RfA	Successful	25 Dec 2024	230	0	0	100
Hog Farm	RfA	Successful	22 Dec 2024	179	14	12	93
Graham87	RRfA	Withdrawn by candidate	20 Nov 2024	119	145	11	45
Worm That Turned	RfA	Successful	18 Nov 2024	275	5	9	98
Voorts	RfA	Successful	8 Nov 2024	156	15	4	91

The community grants administrator access to trusted users, so nominees should have been on Misplaced Pages long enough for people to determine whether they are trustworthy. Administrators are held to high standards of conduct because other editors often turn to them for help and advice, and because they have access to tools that can have a negative impact on users or content if carelessly applied.

Nomination standards

The only formal prerequisite for adminship is having an extended confirmed account on Misplaced Pages (500 edits and 30 days of experience). However, the community usually looks for candidates with much more experience and those without are generally unlikely to succeed at gaining adminship. The community looks for a variety of factors in candidates and discussion can be intense. To get an insight of what the community is looking for, you could review some successful and some unsuccessful RfAs, or start an RfA candidate poll.

If you are unsure about nominating yourself or another user for adminship, you may first wish to consult a few editors you respect to get an idea of what the community might think of your request. There is also a list of editors willing to consider nominating you. Editors interested in becoming administrators might explore adoption by a more experienced user to gain experience. They may also add themselves to Category:Misplaced Pages administrator hopefuls; a list of names and some additional information are automatically maintained at Misplaced Pages:List of administrator hopefuls. The RfA guide and the miniguide might be helpful, while Advice for RfA candidates will let you evaluate whether or not you are ready to be an admin.

Nominations

To nominate either yourself or another user for adminship, follow these instructions. If you wish to nominate someone else, check with them before making the nomination page. Nominations may only be added by the candidate or after the candidate has signed the acceptance of the nomination.

Notice of RfA

Some candidates display the {{RfX-notice}} on their userpages. Also, per community consensus, RfAs are to be advertised on MediaWiki:Watchlist-messages and Template:Centralized discussion. The watchlist notice will only be visible to you if your user interface language is set to (plain) en.

Expressing opinions

All Wikipedians—including those without an account or not logged in ("anons")—are welcome to comment and ask questions in an RfA. Numerated (#) "votes" in the Support, Oppose, and Neutral sections may only be placed by editors with an extended confirmed account. Other comments are welcomed in the general comments section at the bottom of the page, and comments by editors who are not extended confirmed may be moved to this section if mistakenly placed elsewhere.

If you are relatively new to contributing to Misplaced Pages, or if you have not yet participated on many RfAs, please consider first reading "Advice for RfA voters".

There is a limit of two questions per editor, with relevant follow-ups permitted. The two-question limit cannot be circumvented by asking questions that require multiple answers (e.g. asking the candidate what they would do in each of five scenarios). The candidate may respond to the comments of others. Certain comments may be discounted if there are suspicions of fraud; these may be the contributions of very new editors, sockpuppets, or meatpuppets. Please explain your opinion by including a short explanation of your reasoning. Your input (positive or negative) will carry more weight if supported by evidence.

To add a comment, click the "Voice your opinion" link for the candidate. Always be respectful towards others in your comments. Constructive criticism will help the candidate make proper adjustments and possibly fare better in a future RfA attempt. Note that bureaucrats have been authorized by the community to clerk at RfA, so they may appropriately deal with comments and !votes which they deem to be inappropriate. You may wish to review arguments to avoid in adminship discussions. Irrelevant questions may be removed or ignored, so please stay on topic.

The RfA process attracts many Wikipedians and some may routinely oppose many or most requests; other editors routinely support many or most requests. Although the community currently endorses the right of every Wikipedian with an account to participate, one-sided approaches to RfA voting have been labeled as "trolling" by some. Before commenting or responding to comments (especially to Oppose comments with uncommon rationales or which feel like baiting) consider whether others are likely to treat it as influential, and whether RfA is an appropriate forum for your point. Try hard not to fan the fire. Remember, the bureaucrats who close discussions have considerable experience and give more weight to constructive comments than unproductive ones.

Discussion, decision, and closing procedures

For more information, see: Misplaced Pages:Bureaucrats § Promotions and RfX closures.

Most nominations will remain active for a minimum of seven days from the time the nomination is posted on this page, during which users give their opinions, ask questions, and make comments. This discussion process is not a vote (it is sometimes referred to as a !vote, using the computer science negation symbol). At the end of the discussion period, a bureaucrat will review the discussion to see whether there is a consensus for promotion. Consensus at RfA is not determined by surpassing a numerical threshold, but by the strength of rationales presented. In practice, most RfAs above 75% support pass.

In December 2015 the community determined that in general, RfAs that finish between 65 and 75% support are subject to the discretion of bureaucrats (so, therefore, almost all RfAs below 65% will fail). However, a request for adminship is first and foremost a consensus-building process. In calculating an RfA's percentage, only numbered Support and Oppose comments are considered. Neutral comments are ignored for calculating an RfA's percentage, but they (and other relevant information) are considered for determining consensus by the closing bureaucrat.

In nominations where consensus is unclear, detailed explanations behind Support or Oppose comments will have more impact than positions with no explanations or simple comments such as "yep" and "no way". A nomination may be closed as successful only by bureaucrats. In exceptional circumstances, bureaucrats may extend RfAs beyond seven days or restart the nomination to make consensus clearer. They may also close nominations early if success is unlikely and leaving the application open has no likely benefit, and the candidate may withdraw their application at any time for any reason.

If uncontroversial, any user in good standing can close a request that has no chance of passing in accordance with WP:SNOW or WP:NOTNOW. Do not close any requests that you have taken part in, or those that have even a slim chance of passing, unless you are the candidate and you are withdrawing your application. In the case of vandalism, improper formatting, or a declined or withdrawn nomination, non-bureaucrats may also delist a nomination. A list of procedures to close an RfA may be found at WP:Bureaucrats. If your nomination fails, then please wait for a reasonable period of time before renominating yourself or accepting another nomination. Some candidates have tried again and succeeded within three months, but many editors prefer to wait considerably longer before reapplying.

Monitors

Shortcut

WP:MONITOR

In the 2024 RfA review, the community authorized designated administrators and bureaucrats to act as monitors to moderate discussion at RfA. The monitors can either self-select when an RfA starts, or can be chosen ahead of time by the candidate privately. Monitors may not be involved with the candidate, may not nominate the candidate, may not !vote in the RfA, and may not close the RfA, although if the monitor is a bureaucrat they may participate in the RfA's bureaucrat discussion. In addition to normal moderation tools, monitors may remove !votes from the tally or from the discussion entirely at their discretion when the !vote contains significant policy violations that must be struck or otherwise redacted and provides no rational basis for its position – or when the comment itself is a blockable offense. The text of the !vote can still be struck and/or redacted as normal. Monitors are encouraged to review the RfA regularly. Admins and bureaucrats who are not monitors may still enforce user conduct policies and guidelines at RfA as normal.

Current nominations for adminship

Current time is 17:20:36, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

Purge page cache if nominations have not updated.

There are no current nominations.

About RfB

"WP:RFB" redirects here. For bot requests, see Misplaced Pages:Bot requests. For help with referencing, see Misplaced Pages:Referencing for beginners. Shortcut

WP:RFB

Requests for bureaucratship (RfB) is the process by which the Misplaced Pages community decides who will become bureaucrats. Bureaucrats can make other users administrators or bureaucrats, based on community decisions reached here, and remove administrator rights in limited circumstances. They can also grant or remove bot status on an account.

The process for bureaucrats is similar to that for adminship above; however the expectation for promotion to bureaucratship is significantly higher than for admin, requiring a clearer consensus. In general, the threshold for consensus is somewhere around 85%. Bureaucrats are expected to determine consensus in difficult cases and be ready to explain their decisions.

Create a new RfB page as you would for an RfA, and insert

{{subst:RfB|User=Username|Description=Your description of the candidate. ~~~~}}

into it, then answer the questions. New bureaucrats are recorded at Misplaced Pages:Successful bureaucratship candidacies. Failed nominations are at Misplaced Pages:Unsuccessful bureaucratship candidacies.

At minimum, study what is expected of a bureaucrat by reading discussions at Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for adminship including the recent archives, before seeking this position.

While canvassing for support is often viewed negatively by the community, some users find it helpful to place the neutrally worded {{RfX-notice|b}} on their userpages – this is generally not seen as canvassing. Like requests for adminship, requests for bureaucratship are advertised on the watchlist and on Template:Centralized discussion.

Please add new requests at the top of the section immediately below this line.

Current nominations for bureaucratship