UDWiki:Administration/Promotions

Shortcut:
A/PM

Candidates still requiring vouches

There are no candidates still requiring vouches.

Candidates currently under community discussion

Cheese

Righty ho, I've been pottering about as one of the masses again for a while and I wouldn't mind getting my old sysop buttons back. For those who don't know much about me, I joined the wiki waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay back in 2006 and became a sysop in 2008 before getting demoted about 2 and a half weeks ago. In my most recent re-evaluation the main sticking point for most people was my lack of activity in my final term which I have attempted to address and I'm pretty confident that it won't be repeated thanks to a pretty generous uni timetable this semester.

I usually spend my time doing janitor-y tasks like image and page categorising and I've been taking a stab at clearing through the Short Pages list to try and clear away redundant pages. I've made just slightly less than 500 edits in the last 6 months however about 450 of these have been in the last month and a half so I have been pretty active since I came back to the wiki.

I hope you guys would like me back as I've enjoyed serving the community for the past few years and I will continue to do so to the best of my abilities. =) -- Cheese 16:56, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

• Strong Vouch - But I see you running in to opposition given the short space of time since your demotion.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:57, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
• Vouch Need more veterans on the syop team--^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 16:58, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
• Question Any particular event motivated the decision at this time? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 16:59, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

  I wouldn't so much say event but the lack of the ability to move pages is starting to make me a bit sad. -- Cheese 17:11, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

  Ahhh. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 17:13, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

  I assume you were thinking of this? -- Cheese 17:15, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

  That, a raft of promotions, discussions on suburb listings, the suburb map, discussion about provisional sysop privileges, the largest wiki news section in history etc, etc, etc. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 17:19, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

• As Yonnua. It's barely been 2 weeks. I would have nominated you myself after a while since you're doing great work, but this screams "too soon" to me. Meh, I'll think it over. --Thadeous Oakley Talk 17:05, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

  Fuck it, I'm sure he'll stay active this time. Other than poor timing, great candidate that I would even consider for crat material (which he once was). Vouch --Thadeous Oakley Talk 17:07, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

• Weak Against. Simply for re-appearing far too early for me to be able to make an educated guess on your activity level in the future. Just keep up being helpful and especially active for a couple of more months, and I'd gladly vouch for you just on the grounds of your past strong janitorial contributions. -- Spiderzed▋ 17:12, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
• Vouch - I voted to keep you during A/RE so yeah. IMO Cheese deserves his buttons. ~ 17:20, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
• Vouch, just so long as you're more active. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 17:35, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
• Weak against - I haven't heard bad things about your sysop time, so that's not really a problem for me. The question I have is how long are you able to stay active? You said yourself that you have a good timetable this semester, but what happens next semester? You continue your work or become inactive again? You get demoted for low activity and a few semesters later when you have another good timetable you want to become sysop again? I say weak against now, but if you can convince me you can remain active as sysop for a decent amount of time I'm willing to make a vouch for you. --Efighter 20:39, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

  This semester lasts until the end of May with a 3 week break some point towards the end of March. I then don't start back until end of September. That's the start of my honours year so I don't know how that's going to look yet but we'll cross that bridge when we get to it. Suffice to say that I'm going to be pretty active for at least the next 7 months and quite possibly beyond that. -- Cheese 20:50, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

• Weak Against - It's just too soon after your failed re-evaluation to be trying for another promotion. --^A_O^R_D^M_O^P_R^I _! ^T 20:57, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Axe Hack

• Axe Hack (talk | contribs | UDWiki contribs | vndl data)

Since his last bid, he has strongly shaped up in the janitorial department. It's now regularly him who does the unloved task of cycling the admin pages each month. (A task that would also run much smoother if he had himself the necessary Protection buttons to deal with the scheduled stuff.)

His other big new janitorial contribution is the project Very Funny Or Not, which tackles one of the most badly neglected backwaters of the wiki and also shows his leadership ambitions.

Apart of that, he is still going strong as a community member and event organizer. Having him on the op team would be a boon, as he offers an unique perspective, while still proving that he's ready to get his hands dirty when necessary.

I strongly hope he will accept this one. -- Spiderzed▋ 04:09, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

The first thing I wanna see on the net when I wake up and have a cup of joe nearby is not something that will make me spit out my cup of joe because it caught me slightly off guard because somebody said not to expect a nomination until the weekend. Now that my spill has been cleaned...Like the previous time, I'm going to wait a week before I decide if I wish to accept this or not. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 14:02, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, on second thought, I decided to go a bit earlier. There already four days between the closing times of the two latest bids. At worst, the crats need a couple of days more due to workload (which would just be the same result as holding back the bid.) -- Spiderzed▋ 15:19, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

• Vouch. See the bid text for my reasons. -- Spiderzed▋ 04:09, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
• Vouch - I was very resolute in my stance against Axe in his last bid, but he immediately stepped up and started doing beautiful things around the wiki, and it was then I knew that he could be a good op. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 04:23, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

  Weak against - losing confidence in his decision making skills if he can't even decide about accepting bid. otherwise as boxy, regretfully enough. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 04:10, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

  Well, if you must know, I had made a decision two days into the bid. I just don't think it's wise to jump the gun and present my decision to the community early into the bid. However, DDR (and any others who are wondering), if you really really want to know, fine. I won't leave the wiki in any more suspense. I, Axe Hack, will accept Spiderzed's nomination. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 06:48, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

• Vouch - i've been playing with the little gook for like forever.. sure why not. anyone but thad.----sexualharrison ¯\()/¯ 04:39, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
• Strong Vouch - Massively active, makes good edits all around and stays perfectly neutral when necessary. If he accepts he would be a major asset to the sysop team.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 08:26, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
• Question Have you any experience of sysop/adminship on other wikis? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 11:52, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

  There was the Dealt in Lead wiki before it went offline, and I am currently an Op on the newer Battle Row wiki. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 14:02, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

  Why ask a question you know the answer to :| -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 23:58, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

  Just because I know something, doesn't mean everyone else does as well. And I always ask questions. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 19:26, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

  Dorothy Dixer -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 04:11 6 February 2011 (BST)

• Vouch Will be nice to see how his sense of humour works as sysop. --Honestmistake 15:37, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
• Vouch Has proved competance over on the battle row wiki--^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 16:20, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
• Weak Vouch Weak, only because I don't know the candidate as well as I should... Asheets 16:21, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
• Abstain - For the same reason I abstained on Spidey's bid. Will make decision after you accept your bid. You could expect a vouch, though. ~ 18:03, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

  Alright I guess its been long enough now that I can cast a real vote. You still don't seem to thrilled about the idea of possibly becoming an op but I may just be reading into it wrong. Even if that is the case, I think you'll come around. I can tell you are one to really think before offering your opinions on things and I think that's a good quality. You've made lots of good contibutions to the wiki, technically savvy, show desire to improve the wiki (funny...or not project), not afraid of janitorial work. So I vouch for Axe Hack. Make this man an op. ~ 08:08, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

• Vouch --^A_O^R_D^M_O^P_R^I _! ^T 21:01, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
• Vouch - Go get 'em tiger.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 19:23, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
• Mega Vouch Unsure - You mean he wasn't a sysop already?! --Ash  ^{|  T  |  яя  |} 10:14, 5 February 2011 (UTC) Wait, you knew you were getting nominated and now you think you can wait a week to see if you want to accept the position of being nominated?

  QUESTION: If elected, would you wait a week for every decision you make even if you knew you should probably make the decision beforehand? --Ash  ^{|  T  |  яя  |} 23:42, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

  That depends on the situation at hand. If the situation is a pretty big deal, I'll spend two days at most looking over and reviewing the facts before making my decision. If a situation is minor, I see no reason why not to prolong my decision to a week at most. Another factor would also be if there are any time limits as to when a decision needs to be made, such as this nomination. Should there be a time limit that (in my opinion) extends at least 3-4 days, I see no reason why 50%-75% of that time cannot be used to think things over carefully (as such is this nomination bid) or (looking outside of this bid) to review the facts and pin everything down to the last detail. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 00:21, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

  Sure, why not. He was still going to get my vouch anyway. --Ash  ^{|  T  |  яя  |} 17:06, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

• Against - wont commit to running or not... and has a mega-spammy sig that I see enough of already -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 11:00 5 February 2011 (BST)
• Against - Was leaning on to vouching, but his lack of decision making skills told me otherwise. Sorry Axe, but you haven't convinced me with tangling about accepting this bid yes or not, which you did even more than Spider. And I have my doubt whether this insecurity is a one-time only, I don't deem you capable yet of making important decisions, which you will have to make to as an op. You shouldn't be so afraid of a negative outcome. You know what would convince me outright? Come back in a few months (1, 2) and self-nominate.--Thadeous Oakley Talk 09:59, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

  The bid's already accepted. See the response under DDR's opinion. And also, I don't believe in self-nomination. It just makes the self-nominator look...desperate-ish. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 16:47, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

  I know that it has been accepted, I just don't agree how. --Thadeous Oakley Talk 17:11, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

• Vouch coz AH rulez!!!!! --  ▧  ^{: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :} 10:35, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
• Fulfills all the criteria (maybe a little discrepancy in the desire to be sysop thing, but accepting the bid signifies at least some desire, doesn't it?) -- †  talk ? f.u. 13:04, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
• Question How do you feel you have dealt with/ would deal with drama? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 20:34, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

  I don't get involved in drama as often as some of the other folks on this wiki. I do, however, check to see what the commotion is about, and if I have any objections, I will speak up. If and when I do speak up, there's only one thing I look for. Facts. Facts are very important when it comes to voicing my opinion in any commotion, if I absolutely must get involved. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 22:55, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

• Question As the recent goatse VB case has split the team in their vote and turned quite heated, what would your ruling have been if you had been an op at that time? -- Spiderzed▋ 15:19, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

  Umm, it was 6-3, that isn't exactly "splitting the team".--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 15:30, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

  It's hardly unanimous dear fellow. (Twirls Moustache). --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 15:54, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

  Personally, I disagree with the verdict completely. I mean, Wikipedia has their fair share of pornographic images. In fact, in the case of Mark D. Stroyer vs Gage, Gage himself has even listed a few Wikipedia links that contained sexual contents. Hell, if we look at Michelangelo's infamous "David", it even has sexual content, especially since there are replicas of it in public places. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 17:49, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Recently Concluded Bids

Spiderzed

• Spiderzed (talk | contribs | UDWiki contribs | vndl data)

Experienced user, does good work as a janitor. Speaks up, and makes good points. Good all-round qualities. Not perfect, but no serious faults that couldn't be fixed. Can work in any section of the wiki. I think he'd be a great Op. Honestly, if your active on this wiki you'll have seen Spiderzed in action plenty of times. We could use some sysops anyway, since we are a bit low on them. Get this guy in. I have a feeling he'll get plenty of vouches. Don't prove me wrong here community. --Thadeous Oakley Talk 13:49, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

As I said already on Thad's talk page, I'm not so sure that a.) I'm qualified to be a sys-op, b.) that there would be substantial community support for me and c.) most importantly, I actually need or want op buttons. I'll first need some time to think about it and watch the community input before I can definitively accept or decline this bid. Keep this especially in mind when you put up Questions for me - I might not answer them timely. Not because I won't watch this bid (I will), but because I first have to mull myself over my potential future sys-op business a bit. -- Spiderzed▋ 14:03, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

OK, Vapor and Yon, you've convinced me. I accept the nomination. While op buttons aren't something I crave and need every day, there's still the odd case where I could use them, as with the protected Template:Banneduser where a link to Vandal Data would have been more useful, but I was limited to asking for a change. Or my combat with the Cornholioo sockpuppets here and there that could have been much easier with a temporary block. Of course I'd also branch out my daily gnomeing routine to areas as A/SD and A/MR, and would offer a quick second opinion on blatant A/VB cases (and an educated opinion on the rare more controversial A/VB or A/M case). But you shouldn't expect the revolution to come when you vote for me, just my usual routine with a few more options. -- Spiderzed▋ 19:48, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, in the first case, you should probably have commented on the talk page even if you were a sysop.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:11, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, discussing it first would have been the polite thing to do (and the route I'd have gone). It would still have allowed me to follow through myself as soon as their was clear support for the change. -- Spiderzed▋ 20:17, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

• Vouch Obviously. Never had a problem with him too. A conversation was kept in mind when putting him up --Thadeous Oakley Talk 13:49, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
• Vouch Sounds like an accept to me --^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 14:18, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
• Vouch You remind me of Vapor. And I saw the currentminute2 thingy you did. Mull it over as much as you want, just don't take two weeks or your bid'll close. ;P -- †  talk ? f.u. 14:25, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
• Vouch - Do it too it brotha'. And mull some wine while you're at it, always helps me to make clear decisions. =B --_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 14:28, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
• Irrelevant Question - Are you a man or a woman, because it's been giving me problems in conversation before?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 15:32, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

  While a surprising lot of folks have told me in PMs and on IRC that they think of me as female, I'm actually male. Probably because my by far most visible alt (my Cobra PKer) is female, while my male alts either are idled or try to keep a low profile as a death-cultist. -- Spiderzed▋ 15:37, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

  I don't really know, because I was ready to give a somewhat weak vouch, but then I saw that you used your "vote" on Giles' bid essentially to flame me, and I don't think an attitude like that would really be good on the sysop team. I don't think it's good to be trying to put down users not even involved in the discussion at hand. Other than that, you've been largely good (you might have needed a month to simmer, imo, but you're decent enough) so consider this a hearty Abstain --Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 15:42, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

  I didn't mean to pick you for flaming, but as a recent example of someone having weird opinions on A/VB cases. (Your questioning of Ross' checkusering on one of the blatant Izumi wiki alts comes to mind.) -- Spiderzed▋ 15:52, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

  Umm, sorry? That didn't happen. The case you're thinking of wasn't Izumi, and I said at the time I didn't think it was Misconduct, I just thought it was what I had been MC'd for. And it wasn't exactly a weird opinion, MHSstaff said the same thing.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:05, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

  Checked back, it was indeed the Zombieman11 fiasco, which happened around the same time as the Izumi heap. My bad, must have confused the cases. (Although I still think that the reasoning was weird.) -- Spiderzed▋ 16:09, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

  Don't worry about it, it's no problem. It's a good sign that you can admit your mistakes.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:12, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

  By the way, since my abstain seems a whole lot more negative than it actually is, Spiderzed would be good because he's a good janitor, etc. and was the ninth most active user in 2010.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 19:11, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

  Against - This is quite possibly one of the most abysmal things I have ever seen. I have no support for a candidate who thinks it's acceptable to "flame" another user off of the wiki.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 19:47, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

  Relevant. Spider is answering Harrison's question, not offering a suggestion. 20:08, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

  Blatantly not. Read the comment for once. The language is quite clear. Now go do something better than repeatedly hounding everybody who disagrees with you.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:15, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

  As Mis has ninja'd (stupid edit conflict!), I was answering a question Harrisson had left on Ross' talk page about civility. At no point did I ask Harrisson to "flame" Thad off the wiki. While it's no big secret that I haven't been a fan of his promotion at the current time (I againsted, duh) and am still not convinced, I'd rather give him a chance to improve. -- Spiderzed▋ 20:18, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

  Off-topic discussion moved to talk page -- Spiderzed▋ 22:02, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

• Vouch - I can confirm that he works well with others --THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks ^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 17:41, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
• Vouch - See how he does on the job. -MHSstaff 17:50, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
• Question - What specifically is holding you back from accepting your bid? I think your an exemplary user. You obviously know what you're doing. You actively contribute to admin page, do a lot of janitorial work, and generally make the wiki a better place. So why the hesitation for considering promotion? ~ 18:55, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

  Mostly not being sure if I want op duties after having seen some burn out in their time as ops, particularly as I rarely need the buttons to do what I do on the wiki. At least I'd be a bit dumbfounded right now at the usual question of "What do you want op buttons for?" but for the obvious points as "To maintain A/SD".
  However, this bid goes surprisingly well - I'd have expected a lot of more Abstains and Weak Vouches, as I didn't consider myself as a prime op candidate. If this overwhelming support continues for the remainder of the first 24h, I think I have little choice but to accept. -- Spiderzed▋ 19:08, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

  Just accept and judge how you feel about it after a couple of months. You can always resign if you don't like it.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 19:11, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

  Abstain - But reluctantly. For the points I made above I think you'd make a good sysop. Above all, though I think one needs to want to be a sysop to be a good sysop. I don't think community support should be one's primary reason for wanting promotion, though. If you decide that a promotion is something you'd like, then you can expect that I'd happily vouch for you. If you do as Yon suggested and just went in with an open mind about it then I'd happily vouch for you. If you want to go on doing great work on the wiki as a regular user, I completely understand and won't try to persuade you otherwise. ~ 19:33, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

  Vouch - I think Spidey would make a great addition to the team and glad he decided to accept the nomination. ~ 20:59, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

  Yeah, I wouldn't base this on your perception of community support. Do this only if you really want to do it, or if you feel that there is a need for your services. Otherwise, its not worth getting burned out on. -MHSstaff 19:40, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

• Reluctantly Against for similar reasons to Vapor. I have no problems with you yourself and you do a good job but wanting to become a sysop is one of the criteria for promotion after all. -- Cheese 19:46, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
• Against im with Vapor....shame really because you seem honest enough --C Whitty 20:18, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
• Vouch - On the condition that he change his sig (EDIT: he doesn't actually have to; I'll vouch either way, but I'll vouch harder if he changes it to something better, maybe). I dunno why, but I am NOT a fan, and I kid you not, it has actually negatively affected my opinion. I have no clue why, and it's totally irrational. Go figure. Other than that though, I agree with the rest of the comments. Exemplary user. Level headed. Does great janitorial work with little notice or reward. Just the type we're looking for in the role of sysop. He'd be perfect if it weren't for that sig and the way he kinda tried to hedge his bets here with accepting the bid. ;) —Aichon— 20:25, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

  I noticed the hedging too, but I don't consider it the worst thing in the world, given some people's irrational hatred of people wanting the job.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:43, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

  Oh, it's definitely not a big deal for me. While I do consider it ideal if a candidate is aware enough of the wiki community to know when their name is being bantered around for a possible nomination and that they would decide in advance whether or not they are a good candidate and would want to accept a nomination, it's by no means a deal-breaker if they'd like some reassurance first. Everyone can be a little unsure of themselves at times, so it's entirely warranted that he'd do that. Hell, I'd probably have done it too for my own bid if Iscariot hadn't threatened to A/PM me so many times that I knew I needed to prepare my thoughts for that eventuality. —Aichon— 20:55, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

  In all honesty, the actual bid has hit me a bit out of the blue, and I'm still quite puzzled at the support (that I didn't expect, at least not that wide-spread). Apart from Trips edit comment some months back and a bit of bantering with Mis on IRC about potential future op candidates, Thad's comment on Giles' bid was just the third time for me to be directly mentioned as an op candidate. I'd first have expected a promotion for Trips (and maybe some more vacant spots in the current team) before things get actually serious for me. -- Spiderzed▋ 21:37, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

  Frankly, I think the next few people to be promoted should probably be the two currently up, Axe Hack and MHSstaff (These four names taken from a cross of my activity-ma-bob and the fact that they do lots of good edits). I also expect several others to run but not make it in the mean time (anyone not mentioned above who helped with GSGM, other than giles, who should be promoted but will refuse).--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 21:41, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

  Really? I could've sworn I've heard your name bantered around at least a half dozen times in the last few months. And strangely enough, going back through my talk page, I found references to myself, Yonn, Giles, Maverick and Rorybob being listed as potential candidates back in December 2009. So...yeah. These things can stretch back a ways sometimes, but you've definitely been discussed, and I've never really seen it as a queue that needs to be processed in order (where one person has to be promoted before others can be), so much as a pool that gets drawn from as folks are willing and able. —Aichon— 23:00, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

  Considering Rorybob and I both ran in November 2009, that's hardly a surprise. :P Then Rorybob said something like he only wanted the power and decided to never run again. I quit Urbandead for 3 days and played Diablo instead, until SA inspired me to return on IRC.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 00:26, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

• I can vouch for Spidey. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 21:41, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
• Against. Sorry, but I don't particularly trust Spiderzed to be an objective judge in cases where his personal interests or in-game affiliations come into play. G F J 22:36, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
• Vouch ooooooh, not sure if I completely trust him, but only because I don't know much about the user behind the actions. I dig spiderzed though, an odd but good worker. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 23:36, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
• weak vouch anybody but thad. and I like that fact that he didn't seek the position. makes he seem more genuine. and I love nazi hunters. ----sexualharrison ¯\()/¯ 02:38, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
• V-V-V-VOUCH. Doesn't even need an explanation, in my opinion. As long as he stays the way he is, s'all good. --Ash  ^{|  T  |  яя  |} 09:41, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
• Vouch --^A_O^R_D^M_O^P_R^I _! ^T 20:58, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
• Question Whats your response to GFJ's comment? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 20:08, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

  I am pretty opinionated, lean heavily towards the anti-survivor side in UD and have not the best opinion on certain groups and individuals. This includes DEM, which seems to be GFJ's concern, particularly along with this VB case. (In hindsight, I used the wrong tool (A/VB) to deal with the right problem (the removal of useful information on a mainspace article). Fortunately, it has been resolved now by GFJ returning to the Metagaming article and expanding the DEMon parts, leaving the article even better than it was before.)

  However, I consider it as hugely important to separate wiki duties from my personal opinions, preferences and affiliations, and to enact them as impartially as possible. This would become even more important when I actually gain the power to potentially disrupt other users by such means as deletions or escalations.

  Of course, it is very easy to talk about such virtues, but at times very hard to act on them. So rather than to blather on, I'd point at instances where I actually have done so: I even helped Cornholioo with formatting woes, interlink technicalities and informing about incoming VB cases - and the DEM hasn't earned nearly as much ire of mine as Cornhole has. -- Spiderzed▋ 20:39, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

  Probably about even. Follow Up. What's your favourite page on UDWiki and why? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 20:50, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

  That is clearly the Guides page. If there is a single page that has been the greatest use to me as an information resource for UD, it is this one. It's also the greatest show of potential that there is for this wiki, by providing a bridge between a.) the purely descriptional resource pages as the suburb maps or the skills descriptions, and b.) multiple people acting independently of each other to do their own thing, teach each other their insights into UD and helping them to become better at the game. It plays directly at the strengths of a wiki system, makes this wiki a better place, and along with Category:Player Resources it's the most useful and accessible thing to casual UDWiki users that there is. -- Spiderzed▋ 21:08, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

• Against -- The fact that you seemed to be waiting for popular support before accepting (hedging your bets, as mentioned above) has me doubting whether you should really have this position. Trying to get a position because you can is very different than trying to get it because you want it. You display no true eagerness for the tasks, apart from to speed up own ideas/conflicts. You do good janitorial work but I don't really feel you need the extra buttons to continue doing so. As you admitted you are heavily biased towards a specific style of in-game play, I'm not sure you could be trusted to be objective when it comes to issues concerning a conflict involving said playstyle, or using information gained to further your own agenda. I know you believe that you could keep the in-game and the wiki seperate, but you would for example have access to checkuser, which I would not trust a user with who could easily find him/herself in a conflict with other users over ideology (not quite the word but it will do). Caesar Salad 23:33, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

  Specifically privacy (including checkuser) is something I care strongly about. I brought up one misconduct case and one VB case about these matters, and won't tolerate any privacy violations, neither by myself nor by others. That's the kind of shit that can damage people beyond the wiki and affect their real life. (On an unrelated note, would you mind to tell us how you found out about that bid? It seems a bit hard to believe that someone registers on the wiki the other day, learns about promotions as first thing and then brings up a comment about it that references facts from all over the wiki history and is flawless as far as formatting goes.) -- Spiderzed▋ 19:30, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

• Weak Vouch Weak, only because I don't know the candidate as well as I should... Asheets 16:23, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
• Seems acceptable -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 11:01 5 February 2011 (BST)
• Vouch already does a great wiki-jan job --  ▧  ^{: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :} 13:57, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
• Vouch As I trust the user more than any other wikimod--Rapture 00:56, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
• Vouch As hilarious as MisterLame's tenure is going to be, we do need to balance it out with someone with an actual brain. As long as we now have a Zerger in a sysop position, it would probably be wise to get a Zerg Hunter in there as well to keep an eye on it.--
  
  | T | BALLS! | 20:25 9 February 2011(UTC)
• Strong Vouch Spiderzed will restore balance to the farce. Furthermore, I demand that the Zerg Hunter get all up in the Zerger's bizniz. Spiderzed is a formidable person and should be considered a serious threat by everyone who hated Grim_s and Iscariot. Run, vermin, run! --DT^PK 03:45, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
• Vouch - There's a level of doggedness, thoroughness and ethics that are generally required for these positions, and I feel Spiderzed ticks these boxes. He's always shown a care towards the wiki as a tool and a resource, but also a no-nonsense attitude to difficult decisions. I feel that he would be an asset to the decision-making sections of the admin team just as he currently is to the janitorial side already. 00:29, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Spiderzed is another recent candidate that Ross and I (but also, more importantly, the community) approve of to obtain sysop position. Has a good head about him and is a hard worker, and a dedicated player of the game. Ross and I have promoted Spiderzed. Keep up the helpful work, it is much appreciated by all. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 13:31, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

15 days ago, I wouldn't have expected that I'd be one of the wiki overlords by middle of February. And it is still a bit hard to believe for me that I have actually become, and that so many wikizens put so much trust into me. But indeed there are red exclamation marks on my RC and funky buttons on the top of the page, so there's no denial anymore. Cheers to everyone who had nice things to say about my work, and thanks to those who brought up criticisms and issues - I'll do my very best to keep them in mind.
(And now excuse me, I'm going to delete some admin pages and permaban everyone who againsted me to test those powers ;-P ) -- Spiderzed▋ 14:29, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Thadeous Oakley

Archived at here as successful -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 08:54, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

For older concluded bids, see Promotion Candidacies.

Archived Promotions

• Complete list of Promotion Requests
• Successful Promotions Candidacies
• Unsuccessful Promotions Candidacies
• Unaccepted Nominations
• Withdrawn Promotions Candidacies