Wikireligion:Requests for adminship
From Wikireligion
(→{{Userinfo|Sir James Paul}}: huh?) |
(→{{Userinfo|Sir James Paul}}) |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
::''Who'' should be blocked? And what does "inappropriateness of adminship" mean as a reason? [[User:Seven of nine|Seven of nine]] 17:26, 9 March 2007 (EST) | ::''Who'' should be blocked? And what does "inappropriateness of adminship" mean as a reason? [[User:Seven of nine|Seven of nine]] 17:26, 9 March 2007 (EST) | ||
*'''Oppose''' Sir James has a LONG HISTORY of abusing admin powers, lack of judgement, etc, etc. [[User:Seven of nine|Seven of nine]] 17:23, 9 March 2007 (EST) | *'''Oppose''' Sir James has a LONG HISTORY of abusing admin powers, lack of judgement, etc, etc. [[User:Seven of nine|Seven of nine]] 17:23, 9 March 2007 (EST) | ||
| + | *'''Comment''' It is okay to work out of policies here and at wikipedia if you see that it is fit to. It is not abuse to work outside of policies in most cases. Besides me blocking you over a month ago I have not abused my power. When it was pointed to me that one of my moves was not good I changed it. That is not abuse. --[[User:Sir James Paul|Sir James Paul]] 17:34, 9 March 2007 (EST) | ||
==={{Userinfo|ForestH2}}=== | ==={{Userinfo|ForestH2}}=== | ||
'''Running for re-election to confirm adminship''' | '''Running for re-election to confirm adminship''' | ||
*'''oppose''' - not much better than Sir James, really [[User:Seven of nine|Seven of nine]] 17:25, 9 March 2007 (EST) | *'''oppose''' - not much better than Sir James, really [[User:Seven of nine|Seven of nine]] 17:25, 9 March 2007 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 22:34, 9 March 2007
Trying in a Rfa is the first step in becoming a sysop here at wikireligion. Rfa's last for about three weeks. To become a sysop you need 75% of the votes to be support and over 4 people need to vote. After passing, you get the tools and you are assigned a sysop to watch over you. If after a month he thinks you are doing good you will become a permanent sysop as long as you follow policies. If he does not think you are doing good enough you are assigned another sysop, this can happen up to three times. If the sysop does not think you are ready you are only a temporary admin, meaning you have the tools for three months. It will usualy take you one and a half months to become a sysop but may take up to two and a half.
Put your name below the line to start an RfA.
Contents |
Matthew (talk • contribs)
RFA closed: fails to meet RfA requirements
- Closed 08:31, 8 March 2007 (EST)
RyGuy (talk • contribs)
Running for bureucrat and re-election to confirm adminship
Sir James Paul (talk • contribs)
Running for re-election to confirm adminship
- Support - Should be given a second chance. -- RyGuy (talk • contribs) 08:31, 8 March 2007 (EST)
- Strong Oppose - indef blocked AntiChrist in violation of Wikireligion:Blocking policy - Sir James has a LONG history of abusing his admin powers. JesusFreak 09:19, 8 March 2007 (EST)
- Comment He has been warned a few times already. That person has been trolling this place for a long time. I will unblock him and give him 1 more chance. :) --Sir James Paul 20:21, 8 March 2007 (EST)
- Netrual I was happy that you came back and blocked some of the trolls btu not that you unblocked him just because JesusFreak said so. By the way, he should be blocked for inappropriateness of adminship. ForestH2 10:49, 9 March 2007 (EST)
- Who should be blocked? And what does "inappropriateness of adminship" mean as a reason? Seven of nine 17:26, 9 March 2007 (EST)
- Oppose Sir James has a LONG HISTORY of abusing admin powers, lack of judgement, etc, etc. Seven of nine 17:23, 9 March 2007 (EST)
- Comment It is okay to work out of policies here and at wikipedia if you see that it is fit to. It is not abuse to work outside of policies in most cases. Besides me blocking you over a month ago I have not abused my power. When it was pointed to me that one of my moves was not good I changed it. That is not abuse. --Sir James Paul 17:34, 9 March 2007 (EST)
ForestH2 (talk • contribs)
Running for re-election to confirm adminship
- oppose - not much better than Sir James, really Seven of nine 17:25, 9 March 2007 (EST)
