Wikireligion:Requests for adminship
From Wikireligion
(→{{Userinfo|Sir James Paul}}) |
(→{{Userinfo|RyGuy}}) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
-------- | -------- | ||
==={{Userinfo|RyGuy}}=== | ==={{Userinfo|RyGuy}}=== | ||
| - | '''Running for re-election to confirm adminship and bureucratship''' | + | '''Running for re-election to confirm adminship and bureucratship''' <i>1/0/0</i> |
| + | |||
| + | '''Support''' [[User:ForestH2|ForestH2]] 22:45, 13 March 2007 (EST) | ||
==={{Userinfo|Sir James Paul}}=== | ==={{Userinfo|Sir James Paul}}=== | ||
Revision as of 03:45, 14 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.
RyGuy (talk • contribs)
Running for re-election to confirm adminship and bureucratship 1/0/0
Support ForestH2 22:45, 13 March 2007 (EST)
Sir James Paul (talk • contribs)
Running for re-election to confirm adminship 2/2/0
- 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)
- Strong Support I looked into things and I found out the basic problem is Seven of nine is out of control and harrasing people and Sir James Paul is just doing a fine job and there's no reason to go netural for him. 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)
