Welcome to GTA Wiki:Requests for Promotion.
There are currently
Please apply below if you are interested.
GTA Wiki requires an active group of users to act as Staff.
You may apply for Rollback rights or Administrator/Bureaucrat 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 Demotion (RfD) may also be posted here. Please see Demotion Rules for instructions on how to deal with Demotion posts in the correct manner.
What are Staff roles?
There are three different Staff rights. Members of these rights have different powers and are trusted to use them responsibly.
How does one qualify?
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 bureaucrat discretion. Only bureaucrats should close votes.
Please submit your requests at the top of the "Active requests" page subsection.
BolbiiS - Patroller
Seeing as there's currently a whopping 5 Patroller spots vacant right now, It's as good a time as any that one of those slots be filled. And thanks to the recommendation of Kiwismurf (congrats on becoming a Bureaucrat, by the way), I'm finally going to make the dive and apply.
For those that care, I'm Nick. I'm 18 going on 19 and from the good ol' US of A. My experience with the Grand Theft Auto series is lacking compared to others on staff, considering my first time playing any GTA game was GTAV only 2 years ago, and I played playing GTA IV for the first time only a week ago, but I truly love the game and the series as a whole.
I first started editing the wiki around February of last year, but have been especially active since December, and it's been nice the contribute something significant to the Internet for the past year. With this promotion, I hope to help continue to make positive contributions to the Wiki and curb negative ones with the rollback tool.
Increased recent interest in GTA Online, with both it reaching a record number of players after the Casino Heist and the current worldwide quarantine, has brought more and more visitors to the wiki. Unfortunately, that also means more vandals and new editors who may not understand the rules. Additional help in article curation for both the present and the future is important, which is why I hope that with an induction into the staff, I can assist in keeping the Wiki a great place to visit. Even while I still have many things to learn in terms of editing, I think I am ready to be a part of the staff here.
- Yes - Matrexpingvin (talk) 15:04, April 12, 2020 (UTC)
- Yes - DocVinewood (talk) 15:15, April 12, 2020 (UTC)
- Yes - 15:21, April 12, 2020 (UTC)
- Yes - kamikatsu_ Talk 15:28, April 12, 2020 (UTC)
- Yes - Andy A. (Talk · Edits) 18:30, April 12, 2020 (UTC)
- Yes - S-424 (talk) 18:57, April 12, 2020 (UTC)
- Yes - Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 00:12, April 13, 2020 (UTC)
- Yes - NoirlimeTalk | Contribs 10:37, April 13, 2020 (UTC)
- Yes - SlashM,C 10:41, April 13, 2020 (UTC)
- Easy yes from me. You've already done some great work and I believe you'll be a fine addition to the team. Matrexpingvin (talk) 15:04, April 12, 2020 (UTC)
- Same as above. You have good contributions and you'll learn fast once you get the patroller position. -- 15:21, April 12, 2020 (UTC)
- The reason I recommended you apply is I have noticed you have been monitoring and fixing other edits for a while now, a clear indication of a willingness (and readiness) to be more than just a good content contributor. Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 00:12, April 13, 2020 (UTC)
Kiwismurf - Bureaucrat
Right, it's been a few months now of surviving with a solo Bureaucrat after Konan's removal and Monk's departure. While Sam is no doubt capable of handling that "load", in today's climate of global crisis, we have to be aware of the possibility of being left unexpectedly leaderless, so having a second Bureaucrat is really important. Plus, with GTAVI and GTAO2™ on the horizon, we could get busy later this year. Thankfully we have not had to deal with fallout from Gamepedia unification.
For those that don't know, the "s" in smurf is for my real name, Sean. I'm from New Zealand, and I'm old. Yes folks, my profile page doesn't lie, I really was born in '69 <insert R* sexual joke here>.
I've been Admin here since September 2017, having previously also served a period as an Admin under my retired account in 2015). If it means anything to you, my combined edit count over the 2 accounts (closing in on 30,000) makes me currently the 3rd most prolific editor on GTAWiki (excluding bots). Unlike last time, the many and various frustrations borne of community contribution in wikis in general has not resulted in resignation. Like any human, I still have some bad habits, some of which I'm trying to break, some of which I am nurturing. To make a good omelette, you have to break some eggs, and I still trust my instincts to know which eggs to break.
As the primary resident rules enforcer (a role I don't mind - as above, I'm not here to be any egg's friend), I have some "leadership" ideas on policy direction to improve our ranking within Fandom and particularly the handling of older content that no longer fits with the current (and probable future) policy that I plan to propose/implement this year. Don't worry, I'm not talking about any major shift in content focus (still no mods/fanon etc), just the way we present the content with an aim to increase page impressions and reduce repetitive (often conflicting) content.
I'll certainly continue to encourage all users to be unafraid to challenge leadership decisions following my own example of willingness to openly object to errors made by previously serving bureaucrats.
Also, despite my distaste for the Fandom mobile skin and the Fandom App, given they are now the majority of our content consumers (if not our editors yet), we have to accept that our content mostly looks terrible on those devices because we have focused on the full experience (I'm certainly guilty of building content that I know just won't work on mobile). Work needs to be done on that, hopefully not at the expense of our "full experience" though.
- YES SlashM,C 11:37, April 6, 2020 (UTC)
- Yes Matrexpingvin (talk) 11:40, April 6, 2020 (UTC)
- Yes - DocVinewood (talk) 12:42, April 6, 2020 (UTC)
- Yes - User:Raziel Reaper (Talk To Me • Edits ) 12:50, April 6, 2020 (UTC)
- Yes - S-424 (talk) 13:11, April 6, 2020 (UTC)
- Yes - kamikatsu_ Talk 13:22, April 6, 2020 (UTC)
- Yes - BolbiiS (Talk 14:25 April 6, 2020 (UTC)
- Yes - 14:34, April 6, 2020 (UTC)
- Yes - Sam Talk 18:29, April 6, 2020 (UTC)
- Yes - Andy A. (Talk · Edits) 18:35, April 6, 2020 (UTC)
- Easy yes from me. Been waiting for this day for a while. SlashM,C 11:37, April 6, 2020 (UTC)
- No doubt about this. Nobody is more suited for the position than you. DocVinewood (talk) 12:42, April 6, 2020 (UTC)
- No objections from me AT ALL. When Monk left we lost a very experienced 'crat and in you we'll be gaining another. Sam Talk 18:29, April 6, 2020 (UTC)
Demotion: TAlim 1994
Demotions are never a good thing, but having to demote a Bureaucrat is particularly distressing, especially one who has committed immensely in the past. Unfortunately it is of deep regret to bring to attention how inactive TAlim 1994 has been for the past. Last contributed this time 4 months ago (May), but that was only half a year's worth of activity; Konan went inactive for over a year as Admin back in 2018, and returned very late 2018, regaining activity shortly before applying and gaining a Bureaucrat position. His inactivity during this year has been understandable given the circumstances, but that still does not mean the position isn't currently being encumbered. Currently, Administrator positions are full which means that active Bureaucrats aren't essential, but if an Admin were to move up, that would require that Bureaucrats are either active or not present at all.
It can be noted that during his excessive one-year "hiatus", TAlim claims to have frequently edited on Wikipedia, and was one of the reasons he claims he (had) returned to the wiki with no difficulty after such a long break. Personally, and I'm sure many users will agree, editing on Wikipedia does not give a user "e-points" towards a Bureaucrat position, particularly after his intermission, and is part of the reason I regret voting towards his Bureaucrat promotion in the first place.
While not directly affecting the reason for this Demotion post, some of TAlim's endeavors during his bureaucracy have been less favorable in mine and others' opinions, including disturbing active Blocks and even going as far to unblock permanently banned users without discussion. I personally hold him responsible for dredging up Kintobor's block and causing months upon months, on-end, of arguments, harassment from and the eventual global block of the aforementioned user. This, and several other situations, have brought great difficulty to the community and other Staff members, including myself, have had to deal with them. As a bureaucrat is responsible for dealing with situations appropriately, I do not believe some of his actions have been suited to the role.
His activity remains idle and communication with him to alert him of his inactivity is minimal, I have had no response from several messages on the community Discord and here on the GTA Wiki itself. As I have alerted him that his inactivity has, on numerous occasions, brought reasonable difficulty to the staff team, and have had no response, I am proposing demotion of TAlim 1994. Monk Talk 20:53, September 16, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - Matrexpingvin (talk) 15:39, September 17, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - 20:38, September 19, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - Sam Talk 20:53, September 19, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 22:11, September 19, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - 05:57, September 20, 2019 (UTC)
- As already mentioned, TAlim's inactivity this year is somewhat reasonable, given what has happened. But nevertheless, four months of inactivity, especially without notifying anyone, is not expected behaviour of a staff member, much less a bureaucrat, and no response to messages isn't either. This and his unblocking antics have surely caused some trouble, and are the main reasons I'm voting Yes. Matrexpingvin (talk) 15:40, September 17, 2019 (UTC)
- I'm pretty sure that Kintobor would have continued harassing you and the others anyway, regardless of TAlim's message to him, so it doesn't really matter. But other than that, yeah, some points that I want to raise were already mentioned in this demotion request, such as the inactivity and the interference with blocks and warnings of troublesome users without proper discussion. Plus, as much as I hate to say it, I don't think he should have been promoted to bureaucrat in the first place; his first (failed) application was totally rushed as it was literally two days after his return from a one-year hiatus (at a time where he would have normally been demoted from the administrator position), and his second (succeeding) application was just over one month after it. I personally abstained from voting on the latter since I wasn't completely sure about it, but I later realized that he should have waited more before reapplying for the position. I'm terribly sorry about his personal circumstances that led to his inactivity again, but the very long time of inactivity during both periods (before and after his promotion) and the failure to respond to messages leave me no other choice but to say yes. 20:38, September 19, 2019 (UTC)
- I've given myself time to think about this and I'm sadly voting yes. TAlim's personal circumstances are very sad and his absence at the beginning of the year were 100% understandable. However, as others have said, some of his actions as a 'crat have been rushed and hasty especially with the unblockings, and the four months of inactivity without notifying anyone comes into play too. For the record, I have nothing against TAlim as a person and throughout his time on the Wiki he has come across as very polite and respectful, but I'm making the decision from a staff POV. Sam Talk 20:53, September 19, 2019 (UTC)
- Placeholder for my comments which I will add in a few hours. Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 22:11, September 19, 2019 (UTC)
- We know it is a shame to demote a user who has been a help for the wiki and we probably hoped for a return to "put things on order in the Wiki". Sadly, that did not happen, and his unblocking antics were apparently a change over the usual policy that did not work the way one could expect (or even should not have occured). As Sam said, there is nothing personal against him, but I have no choice but to say Yes. -- 05:57, September 20, 2019 (UTC)
Noirlime4L - Administrator
Okay, here goes. Since Monk is determined for a comeback, I figured I should keep up too.
So, nearly a year and a half since I went for a Patroller position, I'm still here, actively contributing. Aside from the fact that my interest towards gaming in general has degraded a lot over the months, the passion for editing the wiki remains, stronger than ever perhaps even. And in brings this RfP.
I'm noticing that as of late, with, as Monk pointed out, one modestly active Bureaucrat and a few Administrators regularly on the lookout, there hasn't been a lot of focus on the maintenance side of things. And also to note, the Staff team structure has undergone a drastic change in the recent months, I felt a change for the better might be timely.
I've grown tired of not being able to take sharp actions against ill-doers, or tackle templates, pages and files waiting to be accounted for. With Admin rights, this will definitely change and give me a chance to dig deeper into the inner-workings of a wiki.
- Yes - Monk Talk 20:25, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - SlashM,C 20:27, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - Sam Talk 21:03, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - 21:52, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - Matrexpingvin (talk) 22:46, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - GTAFan86 (talk) 06:35, August 9, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - kamikatsu_ Talk 20:45, August 11, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - Andy A. (Talk · Edits) 22:40, August 12, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 02:32, August 13, 2019 (UTC)
- Having been the one recommending it for a while now, I couldn't say no now :d perfect for the role, mature attitude, worthy contributor and very active too. Be good to get some up-to-date administrators in :) Monk Talk 20:25, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
- As Monk said. No concerns from me should you being promoted. Sam Talk 21:03, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Closing this request as Successful, a clear affirmative is the consensus here. Monk Talk 13:54, August 13, 2019 (UTC)
Monkeypolice188 - Bureaucrat
Just over one month after my last resignation, noticing that the Staff situation on the site currently isn't great, and adding that together with slightly more free-time (or rather, free wiki hours) and much more motivation to work on the site, I'm reapplying for the Bureaucrat position. It looks like we're still down to just one active bcrat and only a couple of administrators, and I feel my return may help balance things out.
Following a very, very busy DLC release which had a massive boost on the wiki activity - we reached an all-time high WAM rank and one of our highest ever peak activity duration - it's inevitable that another staff member may need to be available at-hand to deal with the recoil on this particular update and its trail of smaller events.
Hopefully you all still remember me and know how I roll :)
- Yes - SlashM,C 21:15, August 7, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - Matrexpingvin (talk) 21:26, August 7, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - Sam Talk 23:04, August 7, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - Andy A. (Talk · Edits) 23:25, August 7, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 23:46, August 7, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - GTAFan86 (talk) 09:24, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - 16:59, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - kamikatsu_ Talk 17:43, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - NoirlimeTalk | Contribs 20:22, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Been waiting for this day since you last resigned. All I can say is yes plz. SlashM,C 21:15, August 7, 2019 (UTC)
- I'll be the first to hold my hands up and say I've been neglecting my duties somewhat of late. I still monitor the Wiki daily but my personal life has become a bit more hectic in recent weeks so my editing is hit-and-miss. I say you are an absolute asset to the Wiki and I will not hesitate to have you back on the Staff. Sam Talk 23:04, August 7, 2019 (UTC)
- All good from me, I'm still very infrequent with my activity due to IRL issues. Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 23:46, August 7, 2019 (UTC)
- I am so used to see you as a Bureaucrat in here, did request you to edit my profile's protection when you're not even a staff member. So yeah, a definite yes from me. GTAFan86 (talk) 09:24, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Yep, no question. 16:59, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes without a doubt. You're a crucial part of the Staff team. NoirlimeTalk | Contribs 20:22, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Voting should normally run for seven days but consensus seems to be unanimous. I'm closing this request as successful now. Sam Talk 22:35, August 12, 2019 (UTC)
Matrexpingvin - Administrator
Hello, everyone! I've had this on my mind for a while and I've now decided to apply for the position of an Administrator, as there are two vacant positions.
For those who are less familiar, I've started being more active since last year, mainly working on various articles regarding GTA Online - creating, improving, or just standardising them.
After becoming a patroller back in January, I've also focused much more on monitoring new edits on the recent activity page; reverting incorrect ones and correcting grammar/spelling of valid edits, if needed. The extra tools would definitely benefit me in this regard, as I could, for example, delete new unnecessary pages (such as those created by vandals) without having to stick a "delete" template at the top and wait for someone else to take care of it.
I have also gone through the official policy a few times, learning how to properly deal with policy-violating users and vandals, something that would be easier as an admin. The tools would also help with my own editing, especially not having to leave a useless redirect, as I have already had to rename quite a few pages/files during my time on the wiki.
- Yes - SlashM,C 09:32, June 24, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - kamikatsu_ Talk 09:35, June 24, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - NoirlimeTalk | Contribs 10:04, June 24, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - Monk Talk 10:46, June 24, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - GTAFan86 (talk) 15:33, June 24, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - Sam Talk 16:16, June 24, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - 18:03, June 24, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, but... - Jeff (talk·stalk) 18:09, June 24, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - Andy A. (Talk · Edits) 19:46, June 24, 2019 (UTC)
- Yes - 08:30, June 25, 2019 (UTC)
- You have my support. Heck, I might file an RfP myself too, if all's well. NoirlimeTalk | Contribs 10:04, June 24, 2019 (UTC)
- An absolute yes. And an absolute yes to the above comment too :p Monk Talk 10:46, June 24, 2019 (UTC)
- You deserve it. GTAFan86 (talk) 15:33, June 24, 2019 (UTC)
- Why not? You are already doing a good work, so being admin you will get that work much easier. 18:03, June 24, 2019 (UTC)
- In my experience, Wikia users in general adverse to using redirects for some reason. In reality, most redirects are harmless and mildly beneficial - a slight misspelling of a character's name, for example, may not be strictly necessary, but it prevents a duplicate article from being created and helps people find the actual article. Other than that one very small issue, having taken a look at your edits I see absolutely no reason why you shouldn't be promoted. Jeff (talk·stalk) 18:09, June 24, 2019 (UTC)
- First of all, I want to thank you for your vote :). When I said "not having to leave a useless redirect", I primarily meant those actually useless redirects; for example, when I create a page titled "GTA Online Bonuses (June 2019)" and then if there's another "bonuses" event that month, I have to add "Part 1" to the first one. I definitely agree that the kind of redirects you mentioned should stay. Matrexpingvin (talk) 18:56, June 24, 2019 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me, I'm convinced by your edits and consistent activity that's you'll do a good job at it. 08:30, June 25, 2019 (UTC)