Battlefield Wiki:Requests for Adminship

__NEWSECTIONLINK__ Users that wish to become an administrator or bureaucrat of the Battlefield Wiki need to go through a process known as a Request for Adminship (RfA). This process assesses the suitability of a user for the additional rights, tools and responsibilities, and gives the community a chance to voice their opinions on whether a user is suitable for the role in question.

You may nominate yourself or another editor (must have their consent) by following the instructions below.

This procedure does not apply to trusted user/rollback rights. To apply for these, please simply ask a bureaucrat.

How it Works


 * Click the Add topic button at the top (near the page title)
 * Add   and click publish
 * Text will appear in the new section; edit it, filling in the required information and answering the questions. When done, click publish. If you are applying for bureaucrat rights, this must be made clear.
 * Other users will then comment and vote on the nomination (instructions will appear in the relevant section).
 * After 7 days, the nomination will either be declared successful or unsuccessful and appropriate action taken

Rules


 * To vote, you must have at least 20 mainspace edits and have been here for over 1 month (to prevent multiple account abuse, any suspect accounts will be IP verified). Any ineligible votes will be struck-out and ignored. (Per BF:VOTE)
 * You should not request admin status unless you have 100 mainspace edits and been here for over 2 months. If you do, it will be immediately rejected and moved straight to the archives.
 * You may only become a bureaucrat if you are already an administrator. There are, however, no other requirements

Upon being concluded, nominations will be archived to Battlefield Wiki:Requests for Adminship/Archive

=Nominations=

Section 1
Nominator's Statement: In a few sentences, summarise why you think you are suitable for the role of an administrator. (This section should be completed by the nominator, if you are nominating somebody else, you should complete this section about the editor you are nominating, and the nominee should briefly state that they accept the nomination.)


 * Commitment, reliability and trustworthiness are 3 key traits of a good admin. I feel that in the year and a half that Yuri has edited here, he has grown as an editor to display all 3. I feel that adminship is the natural progression for Yuri and that the time is now right for him to give it a go - 14:51, September 7, 2011 (UTC)


 *  I accept the nomination, and thank Bondpedia for setting this up. Йура [[file:YuriKaslov - Sig image.gif|15px|link=User talk:YuriKaslov]] 15:34, September 7, 2011 (UTC)

Section 2
Please answer the following questions honestly and as fully as you can in the space provided. This section should only be completed by the nominee.

1) How often do you visit and how often do you edit? Do you anticipate your activity levels changing in the foreseeable future?


 * A: I try and visit at least once a day. With the exception of adverse conditions (ie Hurricane Irene), I don't think my activity will drop any time soon. 

2) When you visit, what do you typically do (eg. edit, read, check the forums/blogs, check recent changes, upload images)?


 * A: I do all of those things. I do "thumb through" pages from time to time, I edit a lot, I read and comment on blogs and forums. I tend to not upload many images except as the situation dictates. 

3) Which pages do you mainly edit (eg. Articles, Forums, Blogs, Templates, Talks, Images, User)? If you were made an admin, would this change?


 * A:  I mainly edit mainspace articles. I also do a lot of editing on forums, talk pages (both mainspace and user talk), and do comment on most blogs.

Thank you. Please stay tuned to take part in the debate, which may include further questioning.

Section 3
The following is for an admin to add: (don't worry, they are all 0 until updated)


 * As of September 7, 2011 (This should be set to reflect when the statistics were added. The statistics should only be updated if a major change occurs)


 * Total edits: 3351 (Using Special:Editcount)
 * Of which 1339 (39.96%) are in the mainspace
 * Of which 847 (25.28%) are in private spaces (This is the number and percentage of edits in 'non-useful' areas - blogs, blog comments and your userpage. This allows us to see the number that aren't namespace, but are still 'useful' - files, templates, project pages, etc.)


 * Total file uploads: 143 (Using Special:Log - Just a rough estimate, there's no way of counting precisely without doing it manually)
 * Upload rating: Very Good - Only 4 of Yuri's files ever deleted, the vast majority of the rest (I checked a reasonable sample, at random) are properly licensed (The admin compiling the statistics should take a brief glance through the nominees uploads, then based on the amount that have been deleted, that are improperly licensed and that are of poor quality, give a rough rating, eg. Bad, Poor, Average, Good, Excellent, etc. Please also leave a comment explaining this rating)


 * Total blocks: 0 (Using Special:Log)
 * Totalling a block time of 0 hours


 * Active since: May 13, 2010 (according to userpage header)

Voting
Vote below using:
 *  *Support - Reason - ~ 
 *  *Oppose - Reason - ~ 
 *  *Comment/Question - ~ 


 * Support - As nominator - 15:40, September 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * Support - Per nomination. Yuri is a great editor and has had little to no instances where he caused a problem. And how about that hurricane? I LOVED not having internets for five days... . 16:17, September 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * Support -Prepare for one helluva long support...
 * Now, while I'd definately see Yuri as the only candidate for the next admin upgrade, in the past I usually thought we should wait until the release of BF3. I now think that to upgrade him now would be the best solution. Not because it'd give him time to get used to the added tools (let's not forget he's a very, very capable wikian and is also an admin on numerous other wikis), but with the recent increase in viewing counts, an extra pair of admin hands would be very much appreciated, especially seeing as BP's not sure about his availablility (per below), we've also lost Cruz to school commitments, and with my laptop tearing itself apart, I'd be very happy seeing Yuri as an admin here.


 * End support notice... - 17:19, September 7, 2011 (UTC)


 * Just because he is an admin on numerous other wikis doesn't mean he should be an admin on this one. --Callofduty4 18:23, September 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * What I say with that is that, considering two of those wikis he is an admin at I have also edited at, he has the experience of the tools and the extra responsibilities, and that he has the ethos and mind-set to be an admin here - in my view and from my experience. - 19:34, September 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Contrary to Callofduty4's apparent opinion, I think Pete's making a very good point - 19:42, September 8, 2011 (UTC)


 * Support - Yuri is very intelligent, a great help, and per HP, we could use another admin here. Bumblebeeprime09 the Pilot 19:30, September 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak Oppose - I do not believe YuriKaslov is fit for the position of administrator since he often shows fits of stubbornness and wrongdoing. I need to see improvement before I am able to support this. That said though, he is a capable wikian as the nomination and support says. --Callofduty4 18:23, September 8, 2011 (UTC)


 * Support- Yuri is a great administrator on my wiki and even other wiki's, and I have no problem being an admin on this wiki. Besides, who really wants anons editing on this wiki anyway. Cod4, you already know what anons have done to the Call of Duty Fanfic Wiki, why does this site need to have it here? -MerchantofDeath 19:47, September 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah. We're in deep shit over here (If you will pardon my language). We could definitely use a strict-but-not-too-strict admin to keep 4chan off of us, in case they add us to the list of sites to wage a holy war against. Bumblebeeprime09 the Pilot 19:55, September 8, 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose - Per Cod4 and smuffikins. --  N7  &#91; T &#124; C &#93; 18:33, September 8, 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose - Whilst I see Yuri is more than capable and is an excellent contibutor to the Battlefield Wiki itself, I have great worries of him becoming an admin. As you can see here, Yuri is pretty totalitarian when it comes to vandals; most of the blocks he hands out are generally around the area of 30 days plus. Furthermore, from behaviour I've seen on other wikis, when Yuri doesn't get his way dealing with him can become very intense. As I said before, Yuri is an excellent contibutor to the Battlefield Wiki. However, whilst this is just from the view of my own editing ethic, I do not personlly see him fit to be an administrator. --Smuff[ The cake is a lie  ] 18:31, September 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Smuff has 14 mainspace edits. Voting requirements demand 20. This vote will, therefore, not be counted - 19:54, September 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Not really in the spirit of editing, is it Smuff. Vote reinstated regardless - 20:36, September 8, 2011 (UTC)


 * I know in the link I gave Yuri hasn't handed out any bans in about a month (nor has anyone); however I'm not too sure what the situation is like over there. From what I can gather it's fairly inactive. --Smuff[ The cake is a lie  ] 18:36, September 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Believe it or not, the idea came from this wiki's flagship administrator, SSD. Before he suggested the idea, I adhered to the policies I created. I get intense with vandals because stuff like this and this used to happen to me a lot, so yes, I had personal vendettas against some specific vandals. That being said, as can be seen on the other wikis I'm an admin at, I've lightened up on the banning. I don't think my frustration with vandals who persist over the course of a half a year (like azure doctor) is really not understandable.
 * I made it a point to stop being so iron-fisted when it came to banning, which is why I haven't made any long bans on any of the wikis I admin at in about three or so months. Йура [[file:YuriKaslov - Sig image.gif|15px|link=User talk:YuriKaslov]] 19:04, September 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Then couldn't you have just, like, fully protected your userpage? --Smuff[ The cake is a lie  ] 20:27, September 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * I did. Thing is, A) I'm not an admin at the CoD wiki or this one, so I had to wait for several hours before anybody did anything, and B) there are other ways to insult someone aside from editing their userpage. Azure Doctor and his many... many... IPs would vandalize mainspace pages and post disparaging blog comments as well. It drove me to my wits' end. Йура [[file:YuriKaslov - Sig image.gif|15px|link=User talk:YuriKaslov]] 20:32, September 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose - As per the others, Yuri's behaviour could be a problem. I have no doubts that he is a fantastic editor. However, from what I have seen of Yuri his behaviour can be slightly out of line, and at some times volatile. I will have to see some good evidence of a change in behaviour before I can support Yuri to become a sysop. TheDocRichtofen  (  Talk  ) 19:49, September 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Support - Yuri may had problems of stubborness when showing his opinions in the past with guys like nemo, but I don't see that happening that often to be problem (my opinion, may not be yours. It was expressing his opinion and discussing it, no flame involved), and he is a fantastic editor with a record of over 1,000 mainspace edits, he's responsible and take projects for real, such an example is the Refractor games cut content. He deserves an admin hot seat, and I believe he'll do well with it.This is Pedro9basket, go ahead... Roger, editing now 23:52, September 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * I think at this point Nemo and myself have put our differences in the past. Йура [[file:YuriKaslov - Sig image.gif|15px|link=User talk:YuriKaslov]] 00:00, September 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * Strong Support- yuri is very great. He's quick and smart. He a really good editor and is friendly I can't see any reason to hate him.-RIKA * SATAKO - nanodesu 01:25, September 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak Oppose - Per the others, he is a fantastic editor, but behaviour potentially could be a problem.
 * Weak Oppose - Per the others, he is a fantastic editor, but behaviour potentially could be a problem.

Results
After 7 days, an admin will close the discussion, file the results below, and move the discussion to the archive

Result:

Bureaucrat action:

Section 1
Nominator's Statement: In a few sentences, summarise why you think you are suitable for the role of an administrator. (This section should be completed by the nominator, if you are nominating somebody else, you should complete this section about the editor you are nominating, and the nominee should briefly state that they accept the nomination.)


 * I hope PE78 will excuse me, I'm going to spend the first half of this talking about somebody else entirely. SSD has emailed me his intention to quit editing here - I've been told he doesn't want a fuss - I'm trying to not attract attention to my departure, so please don't go bothering him. Furthermore, that's all I'm going to say on the matter. But I'm also likely going to be dropping in activity sometime in about a month, so I think it's time we got a new b'crat


 * Well, now that the need for a new b'crat is over and done with - why PE78? My first choice for replacing SSD (who agrees with me on the matter, as it happens - If I'm not gonna be there anymore, he's the best replacement I can think of, with his constant attention to the wiki, great editing and overall enthusiasm), Eden is a committed, trustworthy and experienced editor, who is regularly active on the site, both in community and mainspace editing  (I refer you to my nomination of him for 'User of the Month - August 2011'. I think that says more than I can repeat here)  - 15:20, September 7, 2011 (UTC)


 * I will miss having SSD around here as he was a great asset and the best editor here, racking up a total of over 10,000 edits in just shy of two years being here. Regardless, I humbly accept Bond's nomination for me as a bureaucrat. 19:17, September 7, 2011 (UTC)

Section 2
Please answer the following questions honestly and as fully as you can in the space provided. This section should only be completed by the nominee.

1) How often do you visit and how often do you edit? Do you anticipate your activity levels changing in the foreseeable future?


 * A: I am here multiple times a day, lurking about and seeing whats been changed. I am currently in college, so my edits will not be as major as they have been this summer, but when I have time, and especially after BF3 comes out, I will certainly be more active here due to the wealth of incoming knowledge.

2) When you visit, what do you typically do (eg. edit, read, check the forums/blogs, check recent changes, upload images)?


 * A: Recently, I have been editing less and sticking more to blogs and checking recent changes. Although I would like to do more editing, I only have so much time. That doesn't mean I won't edit at all, but it will not be as often as summer.

3) Which pages do you mainly edit (eg. Articles, Forums, Blogs, Templates, Talks, Images, User)? If you were made an admin b'crat, would this change?


 * A: I mainly edit mainspace articles and templates, but have recently increased my forum, blog, and talk page edits after becoming an admin. Becoming a bureaucrat, I would be able to direct Wikia staff to areas of interest, such as helping with MarkvA and JoePlay making our backdrop and main page up to date with the latest Battlefield games. Another thing I would like to do is to get the portals running much like other wikis, rather then have them as a page listing templates, but that would require coding knowledge I don't have.

Thank you. Please stay tuned to take part in the debate, which may include further questioning.

Section 3
The following is for an admin to add: (don't worry, they are all 0 until updated)


 * As of September 7, 2011 (This should be set to reflect when the statistics were added. The statistics should only be updated if a major change occurs)


 * Total edits: 5221 (Using Special:Editcount)
 * Of which 1801 (34.5%) are in the mainspace
 * Of which 647 (12.39%) are in private spaces (This is the number and percentage of edits in 'non-useful' areas - blogs, blog comments and your userpage. This allows us to see the number that aren't namespace, but are still 'useful' - files, templates, project pages, etc.)


 * Total file uploads: 825 (Using Special:Log - Just a rough estimate, there's no way of counting precisely without doing it manually)
 * Upload rating: Good - Many of the earlier uploads deleted, but those that remain are mainly licensed correctly (The admin compiling the statistics should take a brief glance through the nominees uploads, then based on the amount that have been deleted, that are improperly licensed and that are of poor quality, give a rough rating, eg. Bad, Poor, Average, Good, Excellent, etc. Please also leave a comment explaining this rating)


 * Total blocks: 0 (Using Special:Log)
 * Totalling a block time of 0 hours


 * Active since: April 6, 2010 (according to userpage header)

Voting
Vote below using:
 *  *Support - Reason - ~ 
 *  *Oppose - Reason - ~ 
 *  *Comment/Question - ~ 


 * Support - As nominator - 15:20, September 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * Support - Basically per nomination. I doubt the President would even need to fill in the blanks for anyone to see why he should be a b'crat. - 17:19, September 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * Support - Mr. President's friendly, helpful, and generally a pretty cool guy. From what I've seen he's a pretty good editor. In my opinion, he deserves B'crat flags. Йура [[file:YuriKaslov - Sig image.gif|15px|link=User talk:YuriKaslov]] 17:29, September 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * Support - Per Yuri & Per Nomination. Bumblebeeprime09 the Pilot 20:23, September 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * Support - No problems here. --Callofduty4 18:25, September 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Support - Per all. TheDocRichtofen  (  Talk  ) 19:50, September 8, 2011 (UTC)

Results
After 7 days, an admin will close the discussion, file the results below, and move the discussion to the archive

Result:

Bureaucrat action: