GTA Wiki:Requests for Promotion

Welcome to GTA Wiki:Requests for Promotion.

You may apply for Rollback Rights or Administrator privileges on this noticeboard. To do so, you must meet the prerequisites, and then state what position you are looking for and why you think you need the rollback and/or administrator tools.

Requests for Oversight and Checkuser must be done at Wikia Central (and they'll probably be declined).

Rollback is a tool that allows users to quickly revert vandalism.

Administrators have the power to block and ban users, protect pages, move images, and delete pages and images, in addition to rollback.

To qualify for rollback rights, editors must have been active for two months with no rules violations. Rollbackers must receive a 60% 'yes' percentage to be promoted.

To qualify for administrator rights, editors must have been active for four months with no rules violations. Administrators must receive a 70% 'yes' percentage to be promoted. Those applying for adminship will likely be asked questions on how they deal with certain situations. This is to see if a user has the capabilities of being an administrator.

Editors with rollback and administrator experience on other wikis are encouraged to apply, and based on the editor in question exceptions may be made to the length of time editing required for promotion.

When applying for promotion, a community vote will take place. Voting lasts 7 days, although it may be allowed to run shorter (in the case of an obvious pass/fail) or longer (in the case of a very close vote) at sysop discretion.

Application users who are caught tampering with other users votes, such as changing a no to a yes, will have their request closed immediately.

Please submit your requests at the top of the "Active requests" page subsection.

Requests where the voting has finished can be found at


 * GTA Wiki:Requests for Promotion/Archived Requests 2011-12
 * GTA Wiki:Requests for Promotion/Archived Requests 2013

LS11sVaultBoy - Admin
Hi there. My name is Tom and I am a Patroller here on the GTA Wiki (You probably already know that). I am requesting Adminship here on the Wiki as I believe I have made a lot of edits, I have great grammar, punctuation and spelling qualities and I guess I'm a friendly guy. I've been editing here on the wiki almost every day since first joining, even if it was one edit the odd day. Please vote for me as I think I will be very helpful as an Admin and the increase in Patrollers means we may need to promote some of the Patrollers to get them out of the section.

Thanks,

VaultBoy Tom (Talk to me this way) 12:43, March 21, 2013 (UTC)

Votes

 * Yes - ILan ( XD &bull; Edits &bull; Home ) 18:06, March 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes - Ray boccino (talk) 22:47, March 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes - Messi1983 (talk) 03:32, March 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * No  - JBanton (Talk | Contribs) 07:59, March 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes - Dodo8_logo.png Dodo8  Talk

Comments

 * VaultBoy definitely deserves promotion. Did very helpful edits over the past days. -- ILan ( XD &bull; Edits &bull; Home ) 18:06, March 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * I think the same as ILan. Ray boccino (talk) 22:47, March 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes per Ilan and Ray. Messi1983 (talk) 03:32, March 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * I have based this vote on the same factor that I based the vote for Tony on; having a look through contibutions I cannot find any evidence of dealing with a dispute or acting under pressure, so I cannot give a straight yes vote. I did remember Dan and Jeff saying that these skills and more would be required to make any good admin. I have no problems with edit or personality, just key skills. JBanton (Talk | Contribs) 08:03, March 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * @JBanton, he told me, but mostly Tony, to calm down when we had that fight, you know. I appreciate him for this, he would make a good admin. About the edits, I see he is active at least a few times a day. I'll vote Yes. Dodo8_logo.png Dodo8  Talk

Demotion: Sasquatch101
I presume anyone who'll be reading this noticeboard is already familiar with the situation between Dodo8 and Sasquatch101 that lead me to impose an interaction ban on them. While Dodo has stuck to the ban, Sasquatch doesn't seem to comprehend it. After acknowledging the ban, two edits later he insulted Dodo8 again, causing me to block him for a day. On returning from the block, he proclaimed that he has never done anything wrong and that he is an exemplary editor, and insulted Dodo8 again. Having witnessed this, I no longer believe Sasquatch has the maturity to handle a staff job, and am calling for a demotion.


 * Update - his response was to file a demotion request against Dodo8, yet again violating the interaction ban . Per my earlier explanation as to how violations of the ban would be treated, Sasquatch has been blocked for 3 days. Jeff (talk|stalk) 03:35, March 20, 2013 (UTC)


 * Further update - I have written a timeline of the entire Dodo/Sasquatch dispute, which can be found at User:McJeff/Dodo_Sasquatch_dispute_timeline.

Votes

 * Support (as nominator) Oppose per this - Jeff (talk|stalk) 02:50, March 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose- Boomer8 (talk) 04:40, March 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * Support - JBanton (Talk | Contribs) 06:47, March 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * Support  Oppose - VaultBoy Tom (Talk to me this way) 12:42, March 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * Not Sure - Mikey Klebbitz (talk) 15:09, March 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * Not Sure - istalo (Talk to me) 18:38, March 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * Support - Mr. T. (talk) 22:24, March 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Messi1983 (talk) 05:59, March 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose - ILan ( XD &bull; Edits &bull; Home ) 12:32, March 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Tom Talk 23:01, March 21, 2013 (UTC)

Comments

 * While I actually like the user and believes he cares for the wiki, he has shown an inability to follow simple instructions. But my main problem is him having a grudge against another staff member, who clearly has a grudge against him, but followed the instruction not to interact. GTA Wiki Staff are a team of users who work together to make sure that this wiki runs smoothly. Sure we have disagreements, but the reason we all work well together is that we've never held grudges. Messi1983 (talk) 04:21, March 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * I've reviewed the situation and I dont think this is worthy of a demotion. He is a great editor here, and has made alot of contributions. I don't think he should be demoted over a stupid, petty arguement. I think he's been punished enough with the block Jeff gave him, and has learned his lessson. I'd give him a second chance, because he is a good editor and I believe he truly wants to do good here.  Boomer8 (talk) 04:40, March 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * I have no problem with editing abilities but staff should have the ability to remain composed for community activity. While the main purpose of the wiki isn't the community aspect it does play a signifcant role in its operation and such behaviour should not be tolerated. I'm in support here with the hope that we don't get repeats of this situation in the future. JBanton (Talk | Contribs) 06:50, March 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * As much as I like Sasquatch I'm afraid I'm going to have to agree with this. It is inacceptable and I think he should be demoted. VaultBoy Tom (Talk to me this way) 12:42, March 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * I am not sure. I have to think a little more about this. But my first opinion is that if one's getting demoted, so should the other. But, as Dodo has cleaned up his act, and Sasquatch hasn't yet let go of that grievance, I'll think and write a decisive opinion soon. Mikey Klebbitz (talk) 15:14, March 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * Why should Dodo8 get demoted when it's only Sasquatch who's continuing to fight and violating the interaction ban? Jeff (talk|stalk) 18:17, March 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * ...Not sure if he deserves it, anyway, I've been following the situation, and his fight with Dodo8 is getting annoying as I would say, anyway Dodo is keeping his mouth shut about Sasquatch, so I'll make my choice later. istalo (Talk to me) 18:38, March 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * This is a bit off-topic, but why do we allow "undecided" votes? I mean they take up extra space for relatively little progress. JBanton (Talk | Contribs) 21:47, March 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * So people can participate in the discussion without leaping to one side or another. If the voting period expires while they're undecided, I don't include "undecided" (or any variation thereof) votes in the total at all. Jeff (talk|stalk) 00:01, March 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * As per Mikey and Istalo, Sasquatch hasn't put this behind. I, myself, have put this behind and I assume Dodo has, but Sasquatch keeps on bringing this conflict up. It's really getting annoying and this childish way of gossiping about he "got wrongfully blocked" to myself and others and breaking his Interaction Ban, it would be in my interest to support of Sasquatch's demotion. Mr. T. (talk) 22:24, March 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * User has apologised on his talkpage and I believe  it is sincere. Plus he knows he is on his last legs with me, as I gave him a firm final warning. I am now opposing his demotion. Messi1983 (talk) 05:59, March 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * Changed to oppose per Sasquatch's apology on his talk page. Jeff (talk|stalk) 06:23, March 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * I've decided to go with "oppose". Personally, I think he and Dodo are good editors, but, then again, this has nothing to do with their edits, but with their attitude towards each other,. Basically, I checked the conflict's timeline, and read his apology, and, for the time being, I believe both Sasquatch and Dodo can continue their work here as Patrollers.-- ILan ( XD &bull; Edits &bull; Home ) 12:32, March 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * Same as Jeff. Tom Talk 23:01, March 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * I've decided to oppose on this after learning of his apology, but if it happens again then I will have no choice but to vote Support. VaultBoy Tom (Talk to me this way) 12:59, March 22, 2013 (UTC)