UDWiki:Administration/Promotions

Shortcut:
A/PM

Candidates still requiring vouches

Thadeous Oakley

MisterGame (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss) So here I am making an attempt at becoming a Sysops. I have been tinkering with the thought of doing so for a short while now and decided to give it a go. My main reason of becoming a member of the admin team is because I want to see if I can do it. Be a successful sysops. Of course, in this position I can also provide an extra helping hand to the others, though I think the current team is doing a fine job at the moment.

As for my own history, well I have been here for quite a while. Made my account in late 07, and became active somewhere in mid 08. Since I have made countless edits, well okay if I count probably over 3000. My path from then to today has not always been easy, not for me and certainly not for others. Still, I learned, and have grown through the years. I have edits in most of the admin sections, I have been involved in Arbitration (both as an involved party as well as the arbitrator), A/PM, A/VB, A/M, etc. The rare janitorial edit springs out as well.

As for my personality, something that obviously reflects back in my actions; I'm not afraid to speak up and give my opinion (which I frequently do). I'm not always the best diplomat out there, sometimes I'm harsh, though I'd like to call it "direct". So no, I'm not an impenetrable wall of patience like for example Aichon or Ross. In the past, I have had my conflicts with certain individuals. That said, I live by forgive and forget. I'm not one to hold grudges, and I'm not afraid to give a sincere apology if I believe that I was in the wrong. Generally speaking, I'll get along with most people. The bit above might suggest otherwise, but I'm not that impatient. If you're new, then I'll will extra nice. Good-faith and civility work best with me. On the other hand, if your name is Iscariot or Grim then I'll happily admit, no Sir I won't take your shit.

So I could probably go on for a few more blocks of text but I really don't want this to turn into a wall. I think most of you probably already formed an opinion without this text anway.

Tldr; I have my shortcomings, but I deem myself capable of being a sysops. Its up to you if you trust me to indeed be so, and if you do then don't hesitate to Vouch.

Sincerely, --Thadeous Oakley 13:16, 20 July 2010 (BST)

• Abstain - you'd be better than yonnua is i guess Cyberbob  Talk  13:21, 20 July 2010 (BST)

  An abstain coming from you instead of an against means a lot to me. Ya, rly. --Thadeous Oakley 14:33, 20 July 2010 (BST)

• Against -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 13:23, 20 July 2010 (BST)

  I would appreciate it if you gave me your reasoning behind this. So, tell me why plz. --Thadeous Oakley 14:33, 20 July 2010 (BST)

  I've seen you do a little bit of everything, but I think you need to stay off the vandalism page, and out of the relative discusssions on the mainspace of A/VB. I also think that you're to aggressive on how you approach the involved parties considering you have nothing to do with the case, aside from wanting to comment on them. Move your comments to the talk page, and I'd be okay with this. That aside, I'd consider vouching for you. -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 00:03, 22 July 2010 (BST)

• Question: In what areas do you see yourself contributing? - User:Whitehouse 13:27, 20 July 2010 (BST)

  In the beginning I'll go for being the Jack of all trades. As soon as (if) I get the powers, I'll start with janitorial work; I'll make my way through A/PT, A/MR, A/DE anywhere I'm necessary. In this manner, I'll try to learn how to use the abilities that come with sysopship. I don't expect it to be of mathematical difficulty, but I want some experience in moving, deleting and protecting stuff. After that I probably linger back to the A/VB, A/M and A/A sections.

If you look in my contributions you'll see most of edits tend to be in those parts. Once I'm done with being new on the team, I'll probably linger the most in what some call the "drama" sections. --Thadeous Oakley 14:33, 20 July 2010 (BST)

• Thad is the first to admit that he can be in conflict with other users, and can sometimes even be a jerk (my interpenetration of the above.) That said, I genuinely believe that he has the best interests of the wiki at heart, and he's been around here long enough now to know how the place works. Yes, he's been an asshat in the past, and yes, he's had some genuine personality conflicts with users. But if he's genuine in his statement that he will forgive and forget, this shouldn't matter. In short, he's a good guy who will be an asset to the sysop team, although like all sysops, he has his problems. Much to his credit, he shows a willingness to see these problems, and attempt to fix them (a note on my A/PM comments.) Linkthewindow  Talk  13:28, 20 July 2010 (BST)

  Thanks for the kinds words Link, stuff like that motivates. You have quite an interesting stance on A/PM comments, haven't seen that before. --Thadeous Oakley 14:33, 20 July 2010 (BST)

  It's actually a common trait with Boxy when he isn't exercising impartiality as a crat. It always annoyed me, actually. --

   

   

   

   

  14:37, 20 July 2010 (BST)

• Against Based pure and simply on the fact that he has still at least one alt on the Zerg Liste. While the game and the wiki are separate things, _promoting_ someone who breaks the only real rule of UD (or at least is incapable of proving his innocence) would do no good for the reputation of the wiki in general and the sys-op team in particular. Once he gets himself actually removed from the ZL, I'd see no major objections. -- Spiderzed▋ 14:16, 20 July 2010 (BST) Abstain now that that matter is cleared up. -- Spiderzed▋ 15:17, 20 July 2010 (BST)

  Ah, that's a blast from the past. Yeah, that was a stupid affair back then relating to the Umbrella/UBCS drama. I don't really see the relevance of something that old of the game to this bid, but if you insist I'll see if I can get myself off. --Thadeous Oakley 14:41, 20 July 2010 (BST)

  Done. Check the relevant thread. --Thadeous Oakley 15:08, 20 July 2010 (BST)

  No ZL mod reaction yet, but the screenies look legit to me (and match with the current dead/alive status of the alts). Changed my vote to Abstain. -- Spiderzed▋ 15:17, 20 July 2010 (BST)

  My lord, you would have LOVED conndraka. --

   

   

   

   

  15:41, 20 July 2010 (BST)

• Abstain - This is a toughie, I have a reasons both for and against. I like Thad and in the last few months, he's been around admin areas and for the most part I agree with what he has to say or where he's coming from, in fact very much so. Behind the scenes I see little from Thad, no real work cycling things, archiving and the like, a fair bit of WN'ing newbies (before we made up I often took notes that he'd WN users without even checking their edit and following up both housekeeping and vandal-wise) but not much else. I feel obliged to mention it and add the weight its worth in my 'vote' even though as a sysop it isn't specifically necessary and I doubt he doesn't understand such processes anyway, and as far as WNing bloopers go some of the more "prestigious" users do just the same without recieving anywhere near the flak of my entire above reference. Trying to reiterate why this is still an abstain even though I spent plenty of time on negatives, I guess it's subjective but I just think he's a well-rounded decision maker, and has demonstrated little bias in the past months since the Umbrella epic has shifted elsewhere and died down. He definitely has a larger tolerance and less intimidating demeanour towards idiots than what I consider myself to have and he has exercised that quality every time it's been around lately. I still can't say whether he does what he does because he loves the place more than this position, I'd like to think it's the former but I'm used to judging that on hard behind-the-scenes work that no one else does as well as extensive proactivity, rather than just give an opinion on everything on whatever pops up on RC. Would I regret letting him onto the team? Probably not, but ideally I'd consider perhaps giving a month or two longer with some more tips in hand. --
   
   
   
   
  14:37, 20 July 2010 (BST)

  christ shut up already Cyberbob  Talk  09:44, 21 July 2010 (BST)

• Against Sorry mate, I'm just not convinced. Technical Pacifist 14:41, 20 July 2010 (BST)

  Why not? I noticed your new here, so that means you only got a first-hand impression of me, perhaps during this very bid. May I ask what it is that bothers you in regard to myself? --Thadeous Oakley 15:28, 20 July 2010 (BST)

  You're correct, I only have a first-hand impression from here. In all honesty, my main concern was the zerging.. which appears to have been cleared since I made my comment. So, now that that's gone, you seem fine enough. Vouch. Technical Pacifist 19:07, 20 July 2010 (BST)

• Against damn i knew this day would come.. where is rak or sonny when you need them? Thad is a huge asshole. always has been always will. i would hate to think what this faggot would do with any real power. NO NO NO NO NO NO.----sexualharrison ¯\()/¯ 15:17, 20 July 2010 (BST)

  Wow. Looks like I really got him in a panic, eh? --Thadeous Oakley 15:19, 20 July 2010 (BST)

  In a serious response, I really don't know who you are. Only time I remember you was from DDR's last promotion bid, during which you called me faggot or something because you disagreed with my stance on his bid (even though we both vouched). Oh, and I hope WOOT vouches for me, I always did for him :( --Thadeous Oakley 15:25, 20 July 2010 (BST)

• Question Why do you want to be a sysop? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 15:35, 20 July 2010 (BST)

  There are a handful of reasons. I'd like to play a more prominent role in discussions in certain sections such A/VB A/M, of course I can give my opinion without being sysop but it does not carry the same weight, simply said I can't rule on cases. Second, I'm curious if I can and be a successful sysop, now I have the desire I can't help but feel kinda excited to start out if this goes well. Third, and this one isn't out of self-interest, so I can provide that extra to hand the current team; This can be helpful if it turns out Kevan really wants to implement some major new mechanics and actually move the game forward again, which can lead to an increase in traffic at the wiki.

• If you give me your trust, then aside from being honored, I will prove myself to be an (in)valuable asset to the team. Should I fail to do that, then I'm not going to slack and abuse around, I'll know what to do. I know that may seem like an empty promise ("that's what your saying now"), but I just want to make clear that I'm not doing this simply for having powers and the "position". I know a certain ex-sysop who believed popularity wasn't necessary in order to do his job, but I think I can't ever do a job without enough support of (in this case) both the community and the sysop team. That, and I have been here as a regular user for over 2 years, if I wanted to be a sysops so badly (with perhaps the wrong motives) I'd probably done this wayyyyy earlier. Will all that do for motivation :D ? --Thadeous Oakley 19:01, 21 July 2010 (BST)

• Probably. The number of abstains is maddening. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 19:45, 21 July 2010 (BST)

  Yeah, I noticed it. Might actually break a record in A/PM history. I'm pretty content; I haven't seen any serious (and by serious, I mean with solid argumentation which I can understand and learn from) opposition aka "against". --Thadeous Oakley 19:53, 21 July 2010 (BST)

• Against -- No offense, but I generally vote recommend against folk who self-nominate. Asheets 15:40, 20 July 2010 (BST)

  ... This makes no sense. Why is self-nomination a bad thing? Does it betray a personality or a trait that is undesirable in a Sysop? (And yes, I do realise the irony of the statement, coming from someone who, unsuccessfully at that, self-nominated.)(Also, I'm not sure I'm allowed to reply to this. So don't shoot me for doing this?) -- Rahrah is pumped that he's going to lose another Manhunt. 22:44, 20 July 2010 (BST)

  It makes sense to me. If someone else nominates them, you can be sure that they've made friends and proven their worth, at least to some extent. If they self-nominate, they show a certain amount of narcissism. --VVV ^RPMBG 22:59, 20 July 2010 (BST)

  Still makes little sense, the two bids below this one demonstrate well what friends will do for one another if you need them too, making ahseet's system not only really unreliable, but also if you're going to vote on something so petty it's basically a null vote from a bureaucrat's point of view. --

   

   

   

   

  00:17, 21 July 2010 (BST)

  People who self-nominate show that they think they can do the job (it's much easier to accept a nomination then it is to put one up,) and, additionally, that they have the self-esteem to think they can do the job. But people who are nominated show that they have friends, and someone who's willing to go as far as nominating them for the job. One is not inherently better. Linkthewindow  Talk  10:44, 21 July 2010 (BST)

  Well, even a null recommendation still must count for something in the final analysis. And I did vouch for you several times, so I my opinion can't be completely worthless. Asheets 16:03, 21 July 2010 (BST)

• Abstain - I don't think, with the current number of active users, we need more Pyschos at the moment. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 15:50, 20 July 2010 (BST)
• Weak Against - Cyberbob makes an excellent point, but that doesn't make Thad any less controversial.So basically, as Harrison, but a little less charged. --VVV ^RPMBG 19:29, 20 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - In all my time I've not seen Thad do anything even remotely as bad as any other sysop has ever done, nor has his attitude been adverse to the position. Basically, he's done nothing to show he should not be a sysop, his only conflicts being seemingly on a personal level. I see no reason not to give him a chance at it. He's shown himself not to be unwilling to involve himself in the opinionated sides of the wiki's admin services, and I've seen times where A/M, A/VB and the like could do with another involved individual instead of an abstained vote. Of course my vouch is also conditional on him doing the usual grunt work too but with an extra set of hands that should be very light (also given that his time zone is unique to the team it'd help us reach an around-the-clock presence, which can never be a bad thing). 21:21, 20 July 2010 (BST)

  Well yeah, you don't have anyone from mainland Europe, in fact no one who isn't native in English currently, but the timezone difference between the UK and Holland is only one hour ;) Oh and thanks for your trust. --Thadeous Oakley 19:35, 21 July 2010 (BST)

• Following Link's Example - Thad has definitely come a long way. I know that just a few months back, his interpersonal issues (especially the ones with SA) were really bothering me and would've resulted in an instant Against vote. In the last few months however, it hasn't been nearly as much of an issue. He's not afraid to disagree with the sysops, but he doesn't do it arbitrarily or just for the sake of doing it. Instead, he offers a sound opinion most of the time, and generally has valid points to contribute to the discussion. He's definitely not as serious in nature as some of the folks around here, which is both good and bad. Honestly, I hadn't really considered the possibility of his promotion prior to seeing this, so I'm curious what his response will be to Ross' question as well, since motivation is a key factor. —Aichon— 21:37, 20 July 2010 (BST)
• Abstain - People are saying he's come a long way. I haven't been around to know if this is true so I am Abstaining. But it is worth mentioning that the MisterGame I used to know was an absolutely, unqualified no-go for the sysop position. --WanYao 05:12, 21 July 2010 (BST)
• Abstain - As DDR.-- Adward  15:00, 21 July 2010 (BST)
• Against You got the attitude for the sysop, but your contribution just.... insignificant, and rarely seen helping user(for me). (edited by my latest respond)--Evan Arnoldi^{TalkStoriesTimeMachine} 15:52, 21 July 2010 (BST)

  Dude, not to offend you, but you have been here for 2 days. I don't really think you can judge my contributions in such a short time-span.--Thadeous Oakley 19:31, 21 July 2010 (BST)

  wait, 2 days? hoho, dont judge me by edits boy, i have lurked this wiki from early 2008, and just starting to assemble with the community for last 2 days, and don't think i judged your contribution just this last 2 days. Your lack of knowledge for veteran lurker amuse me. And yeah, self-promoting are bad. I change my vote to Against.--Evan Arnoldi^{TalkStoriesTimeMachine} 08:16, 22 July 2010 (BST)

• Vouch Thadeous has contributed quite a bit and I'm positive he has the best intentions at heart. --Chairman Fanglord, 01:28, 22 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - kinda decent guy. In the unlikely event he gets through just turn a small issue into a major incident and demote him while he's out celebrating the turn of the year while you losers are at home on the UDWiki. xoxo 07:43, 22 July 2010 (BST)

Candidates currently under community discussion

User:Grim s

Grim s (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Per this and this, I hereby nominate:

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard." —H.L. Mencken

Come on, Grim, you know you want to. :P ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 16:42, 5 July 2010 (BST)

Fuck you Revenant. Fuck. you. The Grimch ^{U! E!} 16:44, 5 July 2010 (BST)

Now that's one hell of an opening edit. Ill cycle this as unaccepted. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 16:46, 5 July 2010 (BST)

Not so fast bucko. Revenant has a decision to make. The Grimch ^{U! E!} 16:54, 5 July 2010 (BST)

right. I'll leave the existing copy in unaccepted until you two decide if you're running. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 16:55, 5 July 2010 (BST)

oh... fuck you. I hope you get it. fine, guess I Accept too. let the circus commence The Grimch ^{U! E!} 17:00, 5 July 2010 (BST)

Because some bombs need to be dropped:

	Grim is a God
	This User or Group believes that Grim should be nominated for sainthood, and placed on a pedestal with the other greats of our time.

This user fears his wiki overlord(s).

	Grim's Coup d'etat
	This user survived and remembers the Great Wiki Coup of October 9, 2008 by the all powerful Grim s!

	Good Night Sweet Prince
	2005-2008

Brought to you by the Know Your Evil Initiative. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 17:31, 5 July 2010 (BST)

Discussion

• Vouch. Grim deserves a chance to prove to the people of the world that he is in fact a cuddly little teddy bear. 16:57, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Question - Would you do a coup, a coup, would you do?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:59, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  Answer: Only if you made me crat The Grimch ^{U! E!} 17:02, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  Well that's my next crat vote sorted. Real Question: Are you even vaugely up to date with wiki-events?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 17:03, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  the only answer to that is "Not in the slightest". Although revenant kept dropping references to it, that sly fucker. should have known he was up to something The Grimch ^{U! E!} 18:22, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  Right, I seem to recall you proposing a split of Arbitration in to Arbitration and mediation, for editting and personal conflicts respectively. It's always interested me as a policy, and would you be likely to persue this policy if you hang around?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 18:27, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  If he doesn't, I will, so we'll probably be making use of his brain one way or another. (In a jar, if necessary.) ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 20:06, 5 July 2010 (BST)

• Question Upon your last appearance you felt that the wiki, its policies and administration team were inherently broken (probably massively paraphrasing and distorting you here, but hey). Has anything changed in the intervening time, or do you still feel only a complete restructuring of the wiki is the only solution? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 17:07, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  I plan to work from within the system. The first thing on my agenda for restructuring is your face (do I know you?) The Grimch ^{U! E!} 17:52, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  Sorry, sometimes I forget we are different people. :P ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 17:54, 5 July 2010 (BST)

• Against - Too soon. Does not meet criteria. Spam bid. --Thadeous Oakley 17:39, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  You I vaguely remember. Something about fucking sheep. I wouldnt accept your approval anyway The Grimch ^{U! E!} 18:00, 5 July 2010 (BST)

• Vouch – Wait, do I have to do this or is it assumed since I made the nomination? ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 18:14, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - I'm at your disposal, Dark Overlord of the wiki... -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 18:36, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - Where do I have to sign for this.--Thari ^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 18:40, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - No, seriously 100% VOUCH! --Honestmistake 18:48, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - I think it was my idea?--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks ^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 19:12, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - Whatever his past, Grim has proven that he cares about this wiki and has its best interests at heart. ~ AphelionT 19:58, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - I vouched for WOOT, Grim can't be much worse.--^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 20:00, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Abstain - You're a mean one, Mr. Grimch. Also, I really don't think I've lived through enough wikidrama to have an educated opinion on this issue. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 21:49, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch mostly for all the memory's. and the impending drama storm that will come from it.----sexualharrison ¯\()/¯ 22:02, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch I, for one, look forward to being under the iron fist of our cruel Overlord Grim. Also he cares more about the wikipedia than any other single user. He'll be an excellent Administrator. -- Goribus 22:55, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - Terrible. The last time he was trusted with buttons he fucked up so bad that Kevan to come in and fix his mess. The fact that he didn't get permabanned is a joke, and this sysop bid is an even bigger joke, whether intentional or not. If he really "cares about the wiki" so much he can prove it by making positive contributions to the community. I suspect the only real reason he'd want to become sysop would be to see how bad he could screw up again.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 03:52, 6 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - but a vouch for joke promotion campaigns. glad to see this one has slipped through the ever tightening net on wikifun.xoxo 04:00, 6 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - Too soon. Even if he was serious, the wiki has changed a lot in the past year and a half. Linkthewindow  Talk  04:55, 6 July 2010 (BST)

  Also, as Giles. Linkthewindow  Talk  12:17, 7 July 2010 (BST)

• Vouch I'm always in for a good coup. Oidar 08:06, 6 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - Level headed and rational, will make a fantastic sysop. --Kooks 14:57, 6 July 2010 (BST)
• Against -- As Giles. Asheets 16:22, 6 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch -- The wiki has been missing Grim. MOAR GRIM FOR WIKI 10' -- Jelly Otter 19:41, 6 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - until yesterday, there has been no activity since October 2008. Grim s is definitely not suited to be a SysOp. G F J 20:18, 6 July 2010 (BST)

  That was not Cuddly Bunny Grim's fault, though. 20:50, 6 July 2010 (BST)

  So? Doesn't change the fact he hasn't been active for a year and a half. Linkthewindow  Talk  12:17, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  Exactly. Someone with such an activity is simply not suited to become a SysOp, this is all that matters. G F J 12:42, 7 July 2010 (BST)

• Vouch -- Past deeds show he knows what is best for the wiki.-- Papa Jadkor ^{(RRF) (MotA) (MT11)} 20:26, 6 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch -- I'd be interested in seeing how "little Grim" mixes with Original Strength. --Akule ^{Maker of fine, hand-crafted UDWiki sass since 2006 -- Akule School's back in session™} 00:30, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  Don't you dare compare them, Grim is rational and intelligent, DDR is an overzealous retard who is too headstrong to admit he's ever wrong, which is almost always is. --/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 10:14, 8 July 2010 (BST)

• Vouch - I don't see why not.-- » JS talk contribs » 02:43, 7 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - he won't get it, but this is still fucking hilarious. --
   
   
   
   
  04:44, 7 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - As Giles. He broke the number one rule of the wiki: never make Kevan do anything. --VVV ^RPMBG 18:54, 7 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - I could cite the guidelines, but I'm sure it would be pointed out that that's simply an argument from authority. Instead, I'll cite a better reason: I don't vouch for people I don't know. Every other candidate I've vouched for has been someone I've known, and even though we're not all friends, I at least know who they are and what I've come to expect of them. Grim, to me, is an unknown, and I don't vouch for things I don't know. It's a mistake for anyone to put their name on the line for an unknown. —Aichon— 20:21, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  fair enough... but some of us are voting in the full knowledge of who and what Grim is/was.... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Honestmistake (talk • contribs) at an unknown time.

  Of course. I was merely speaking for myself here and making a general statement about my opinion on the matter, but if you know Grim, then none of what I said applies to you. —Aichon— 00:09, 8 July 2010 (BST)

• You're one of my least favorite User here, but I'm still Vouching. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 04:02, 8 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - The last bastion of hope that this wiki will not be plagued by sysops faggotry and circle jerking. Long live the king.--/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 10:14, 8 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - After that long hiatus, he should first contribute for a few months again. Only then an educated opinion can be formed. -- Spiderzed▋ 22:26, 8 July 2010 (BST)
• Abstain - It's a joke, but he'd probably still make a bettter 'op than some.-- Adward  23:27, 8 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch Grim would clearly make an excellent sysop. --Michael Barnaby 00:28, 9 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - Get the fuck out you lifeless diseased afterbirth. Seriously - how have you managed to avoid suicide this long? Cyberbob  Talk  12:43, 12 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch I've heard of you Grim! Also, Why do you got to be a HUGE JERK to everyone cyberbob? Jesus Shut up dude everyone's getting tired of you ranting. I should take you to VB for your Abusive Comments you raging jerkaholic.-- Jerrel tlk _{(82nd!) (Project Unwelcome!)}. 05:45, 13 July 2010 (BST)

  You vouch Grim and then take a swipe at me for being a HUGE JERK? I don't think you know anything about Grim beyond the fact that he exists (I don't think I need to explain why that is a dumb basis on which to vouch someone for sysophood). Cyberbob  Talk  05:51, 13 July 2010 (BST)

  Well you don't have to cuss the poor guy out. If you don't like him, put'against' and leave it at that. He probabley has gone and commited suicide now. Jeez...-- Jerrel tlk _{(82nd!) (Project Unwelcome!)}. 06:03, 13 July 2010 (BST)

  "Poor guy", lol. Grim's posting is such that any sympathy for his shitty existence IRL is quickly wiped out by his self-righteous tirades of LOOK AT ME I CAN WRITE LOTS OF WORDS AREN'T I GOOD AT ARGUING. As far as suicide goes, I certainly hope so but somehow I doubt it. Cyberbob  Talk  06:08, 13 July 2010 (BST)

  I don't know if I've ever mentioned this, but Jerk/Annoyance/Troll ≠ Vandal. --VVV ^RPMBG 05:58, 13 July 2010 (BST)

  And that's exactley why i didn't take him...-- Jerrel tlk _{(82nd!) (Project Unwelcome!)}. 06:03, 13 July 2010 (BST)

• Vouch - I vouch for you only on the premise that you try and take over the wiki again, if you promise that you won't, then please remove my vote. ----Ash  ^{|  T  |  яя  |} 23:40, 13 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - Even putting the coup aside there's the fact you've been away for about 2 years and you don't really seem to want this. -- Cheese 22:50, 14 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - After much consideration, I am against Grim_s getting buttons again at this point in time. As many others have pointed out, you have been away from the wiki for quite the spell. Thus, regardless of how confident I may or may not be with your abilities, the fact remains that your recent contributions are most certainly out-dated and maybe even out-of-touch with the current goings on. Integrate yourself back into the wiki and come back in a couple months; then we'll talk. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 09:23, 16 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - He is needed. --Grogh 21:33, 17 July 2010 (BST)

*Vouch - A necessary if bitter tonic? He'll actually be kept in check by the current crowd of ops. I think it'd be a good balance. --WanYao 05:09, 21 July 2010 (BST) ignore me --WanYao 07:59, 21 July 2010 (BST)

The community discussion is now closed. The bureaucrats will make their decision.-- Adward  18:00, 19 July 2010 (BST)

So anyway, after the usual discussion with boxy, the decision has been made to deny the bid. I could cite the coup attempt, the fact that the wiki isn't the same as it was 18 months ago, or the fact that you haven't made a single edit in the last 9 days. But the basic fact remains. Without Rev nominating you, I don't think you would have ever considered running again. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 19:37, 21 July 2010 (BST)

User:Revenant

Revenant (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Two can play at this game. I only accept if revenant accepts. Put that in your pipe and smoke it. The Grimch ^{U! E!} 16:49, 5 July 2010 (BST)

Sigh. But I just archived it. I'll stop editing a while, so you two can come to an understanding. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 16:52, 5 July 2010 (BST)

Accept – HARH! Fine! You'll rue this day, you bastard. :P ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 16:56, 5 July 2010 (BST)

Campaign statement

Revenant Sysop Campaign Assets

№	Title	Content
00001	Logo
00002	Theme	"We Care A Lot" by Faith No More
00004	Dossier	"Any questions?" (alternate title) by Revenant
00005	Slogan	"If you want a thing done well, do it yourself." (Proverb)

Authorised by ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 17:13, 5 July 2010 (BST)

Note

For the record (and because DDR expressed this concern below), I would like to note that I have resumed full-time study as of this week and am unable to check UDWiki from my current campus (at least until I set up an SSL proxy at home). However, a lot of the stuff I plan to do for UDWiki dovetails into my studies, so regardless of the outcome of this bid I plan to be around more and working on stuff to improve the wiki. Having the sysop buttons would make it easier, but then it's not much more difficult to have another sysop implement changes, and following best practices I should be getting consensus for anything sysop-only anyway. This is more of a FYI than anything, and delivered for the sake of openness. Back to your regularly-scheduled whatever! ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 09:40, 18 July 2010 (BST)

Questions, vouches, et cetera

• Vouch. Revenant has shown himself to be commited and dedicated, and has a strong sense of right and left. 16:53, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Question - Would you do a coup? A coup, would you do?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 17:00, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  Considering I advised against the original, and predicted the result, I'm going to say the answer to this should be self evident. The only method of government overthrow I support is via anarchy/direct democracy, not tyranny. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 17:05, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  Real Question - What areas of the wiki do you think need imporvement?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 17:06, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  I will answer your question by directing you to my #Campaign statement. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 17:13, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  Question - You mention a list of plans somewhere down the page. Would it be possible to give us a vague idea of such plans?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 14:06, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  Done. (Vague, as requested. :P) ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 04:14, 8 July 2010 (BST)

• Abstain - Moar work at the admin sections plz. --Thadeous Oakley 17:41, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  Also does not meet criteria. Spam bid. --Thadeous Oakley 17:44, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  I've been busy. I now have more time on my hands and am getting to work on some projects I've nto had time for. If elected, I will probably work on as many fixes and reforms as I can, and then drop back to a general "maintenance" level of activity. I do already have pretty much the "Drama Pages" watched and know a lot more about wiki software and this wiki in particular than probably half the currently serving sysops. For what that's worth. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 17:57, 5 July 2010 (BST)

• Vouch – Now we are tied again, fucker. i still haven't forgiven you for this. Expect something epic The Grimch ^{U! E!} 18:20, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  But of course! I'll be waiting. ;) ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 18:23, 5 July 2010 (BST)

• Against -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 18:37, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch because bringing Grim back might be just about the most positive thing anyone has done around here since the crotchety old git left ;) --Honestmistake 18:50, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - Simply because you are the number one person I love to do voiceover work for when you are drunk and can't figure out a mic.--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks ^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 19:17, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - I know Revenant well, and I can say that he cares about the rules, not just following them but also questioning and reforming them when necessary. Moreover, he's cool-headed, fair, not afraid to stand up for what he thinks is right, and not afraid to back down when he's wrong. Also, he has extensive wiki experience, not just with the UD wiki but also with other wikis, and as such he can provide an objective outsider's point of view that the sysop team would otherwise lack. In short, he's an excellent choice. ~ AphelionT 19:58, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  Follow them rulz! -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 20:06, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  Incidentally, he did follow the rules! If you look at the vandalism policy page, his actions were not in violation, but this is an argument for that page, not this one. ~ AphelionT 20:13, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  For what he was originally charged with. Regardless, he still recieved a warning for vandalism. You can't dispute that. -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 20:24, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  He did, but it's my hope that it'll be overturned. The warning was unjust. But again, that discussion is for A/VB. ~ AphelionT 20:44, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  It won't be. That aside though,... I look at it this way. It's only a warning. It's no big deal. He'll be able to have it struck in two months if he's active enough, and if he isn't,... he shouldn't have this job anyway. -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 20:52, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  You are wrong. I *am* disputing it. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 21:32, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  further discussion on the talk page --

   

   

   

   

  10:27, 10 July 2010 (BST)

• Against - Your recent vandalisums (lolz fail spelling) have made me lose faith in your abilitys.--^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 20:03, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  What's even funnier is that he recieved a warning for something unrelated to what was originally brought up in A/A. -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 20:05, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  I am a political prisoner and the victim of sysop bias. Hence my running against psyop corruption. Consider the source: I have never even been brought to A/VB before, whereas the ruling sysop is not only involved in the case but has a history of being brought there. (Also, as Poodle.) ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 20:11, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  You are the Nelson Mandela of this wiki.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:47, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  He can't, and shouldn't, be balmed for being in a position you put him in Rev. -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 20:51, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  He is the master of his fate, and the captain of his soul--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks ^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 20:54, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  ¤Ṱḫḝ Ḩḗḷḹ?¤ ^©® -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 20:59, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  Allow me to elaborate: last I checked, DDR was a sentient being responsible for his own actions. Am I wrong? ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 21:35, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  So if I were to massivly vandalise the wiki, say, I took images and that were masivly used, linked to on thousands of pages,... And edited their pages to include {{Subst:User Talk:Poodle of doom}}, severly hindering the wiki's performance, and did that on all the op's pages as well, not a one of them could rule vandalism, because they'd all be involved? -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 21:56, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  …No. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 04:16, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  further discussion on the talk page --

   

   

   

   

  10:27, 10 July 2010 (BST)

  Precisely, AS. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 21:32, 5 July 2010 (BST)

• Vouch I have always liked revs.. he answers my stupid questions. and mostly does what i ask.----sexualharrison ¯\()/¯ 22:03, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch Rev is one of the most respected and influential people in Urban Dead. He's an RG Mod, ZL Mod, and he's a member in high standing of far too many groups to name. I can't think of anyone else better suited for the Administration on this wiki. -- Goribus 22:46, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Abstain - is awesome just the way he is. don't want him wrecked by adminality.xoxo 02:51, 6 July 2010 (BST)

  I know that you only have my best interests at heart, Eris bless your soul. But I am already an admin at way too many places – it's far too late for me. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 12:58, 7 July 2010 (BST)

• Vouch - I think Rev is a pretty cool guy. eh does work and doesnt afraid of anything. -- Jelly Otter 06:39, 6 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch No, for realz. You seem like a good candidate. Oidar 08:09, 6 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - Barhah! --Kooks 14:58, 6 July 2010 (BST)
• Against -- For his obviously joking nomination, above. Asheets 16:26, 6 July 2010 (BST)

  I am as serious as cancer. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 12:38, 7 July 2010 (BST)

• Vouch - Revenant has done more for the actual game than anyone sysop I can see. I think it would be good to have more sysops that actually do stuff that is beneficial for the game community and are actually respected instead of just jacking off on a power trip and wasting bandwidth. --Rapture 14:58, 6 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - He does the ZL and works for the RG. I don't see the wiki being that much harder. --Akule ^{Maker of fine, hand-crafted UDWiki sass since 2006 -- Akule School's back in session™} 00:31, 7 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - Yeah... -- » JS talk contribs » 02:42, 7 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - Even if he didn't fail criterion 2 and 3, his knowledge and understanding of this wiki is only as abysmal as his attempts to rectify it with his wikilawyering, of which his talent is about on par with that of Poodle. Also, if he's going to behave like shit and piss every time something goes against him, it's probably best he not have buttons. However, this week's escapade whilst annoying was totally fucking worth it because he managed to bring back Grim. But you can only revive grim once, friend. --
   
   
   
   
  04:50, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  Hey, funny coincidence: that first link is actually on my list of things to fix. I should probably write that list down so I remember to write up the policy. Cheers! ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 11:36, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  That's also another reason I'm against your promotion, you've just hit the number 1 reason on my "why not to vouch" list. As per your comment "I've been busy. I now have more time on my hands and am getting to work on some projects I've nto had time for. If elected, I will probably work on as many fixes and reforms as I can, and then drop back to a general "maintenance" level of activity. I do already have pretty much the "Drama Pages" watched and know a lot more about wiki software and this wiki in particular than probably half the currently serving sysops. For what that's worth.", empty promises of the future with no evidence to assure us you'll go through with them isn't something that flys well on this wiki for obvious reasons; You haven't fulfilled criterion 2 on the sheet above and before you all say "If a user is highly exemplary in one criterion blah blah", no. Not achieving 500 edits in 6 months is poor for a wiki where the last 8 or 9 (moree) promoted users all were promoted with edits in the thousands during that time frame, we've come to expect a bit more. As it stands, you're around, it's true. But you're barely around, you barely qualify for sysop in a quantitative state and this bid is only the product of a retaliatory drama-filled event which is ridiculously poor form for a "budding sysop", so I don't even know why I'm taking it as seriously as I am, so I guess you've got me there. --

   

   

   

   

  12:18, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  I'd rather spend an hour or three fixing a page properly in a single edit than make 500 tiny edits. Edit whoring is pointless. I could do it, but I'd rather spend my time, y'know, making the place better. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 12:30, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  Also, please don't you tell me why I did something. Projection is an ugly habit. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 12:32, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  This defence has the same effect if you'd called me a troll by this point. Using such an argument is ignorance not because it's plausible as a viewpoint, you're simply trying to scramble for excuses for your noncontribution. You find solace in saying such edits were "spam edits" when they in fact weren't, you are more than happy to look through any of these (maybe not SA's) edits and notice that at leased 95% of them were contributive. Yours on the other hand, well, I think yesterdays fiasco speaks enough words. --

   

   

   

   

  14:01, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  Please, do yourself a favour and lay off the ad hominem attacks – I have a hard time taking you seriously when you resort to logical fallacies with every comment. Can we just talk calmly, rationally, and civilly, please, and cease casting aspersions on each others' intentions? ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 04:04, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  No prob, but I really have nothing more to say, i've already said how I feel about the bid. --

   

   

   

   

  04:06, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  Can I hold you to that? I've already got it in writing. :P ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 04:14, 8 July 2010 (BST)

• Against - I'm failing to find a sufficient activity and perhaps interest in the wiki during the last weeks/months. And no, this is not a matter of making major edits in contrast to lots of minor ones since apart from recent mayor stuff those "fixing a page properly"-edits seem to be rare as well. G F J 12:42, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  To tell the truth, I've not had much time for Urban Dead in general or the wiki specifically for a while until very recently. Partly because I've been ridiculously busy IRL, and partly because there is so much that needs fixing that I've simply written it off as a Sisyphean task. Left to my own devices, I may or may not have run for psyop eventually, but certainly not so soon. However, I am not one to back down from a challenge (especially one I am fairly prepared for anyway), and if Grim or anyone else thinks so, they are welcome to be proven wrong. Hope that addresses your misgivings. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 13:06, 7 July 2010 (BST)

• Vouch - Drama retardant. --VVV ^RPMBG 18:54, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  You'll go far with that sense of humour! ;) ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 03:57, 8 July 2010 (BST)

• Question/Statement - Despite this week's actions which I disagree with, and the fact that he doesn't quite meet all of the guidelines, I do believe Revenant is a capable and extremely contributive member to the meta-game, including the wiki. While I see him as having quite a bit of disdain for the rules around the wiki, I also see that as a good thing, inasmuch as he can help to challenge them and reform them (and they are desperately in need of rethinking, so fresh perspectives are welcome). And if he gets too far out of line while doing so, there's always A/M to handle that. So, my question: do you plan to work from within the system to change it, or do you plan to merely use your new authority to circumvent the system to bring about change? —Aichon— 20:31, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  I believe I have answered this with my response to Yonnua, above. (Work within the system to reform the system.) And I would say that rather than disdain for the rules, per se, I have disdain for people who believe that unwritten rules take precedence over both rational thought and those rules the community has written, examined, voted on, and approved. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 03:57, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  Vouch - This is a sincere and honest vouch, not meant in jest or otherwise, 'crats. While Revenant is by no means perfect (who is?), I do think he would be an asset to the team and would give us some much-needed perspective. We've been reading far too much into the letter of the law recently and really do need to be getting back to the roots that were the basis for those rules, rather than the monstrosities that they've become. I trust that he can bring a viewpoint that is valuable. Rev, if accepted, you definitely need to work a bit on your tact, just so you know. :P —Aichon— 04:38, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  Tact? Aich', I hate to tell you this, but I have been: normally I think too much that I don't say, but I have found that the philosophy of "not giving a fuck" gets much better results and leaves me much less stressed. ;) ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 04:46, 8 July 2010 (BST)

• Vouch only because. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 04:04, 8 July 2010 (BST)
• I don't doubt that if promoted, Rev would be an asset to the team - as others have alluded to, he's very active in the metagame (which can't really be said for many sysops,) has good skills with computers, and simply isn't a dickhead. Like Aichon, I agree that a fresh perspective would be good for the wiki, especially if (him/we) finally get around to overhauling the rules. That said, he's never been terribly active here - unlike DDR, I don't think every sysop needs to have several thousand edits before they can be considered for a promotion, but at the same time, a prospective sysop needs to understand the day-to-day workings of the wiki, and a bit of it's history (even if they plan to change them.) That said, I've always suspected Revenant has been lurking around here, but not editing. Oh, and a Question - do you have any plans at the moment on how your would potentially reform the system? Linkthewindow  Talk  05:07, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  Thank you. And yes. (Please see my reply to Yonnua, above.) ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 05:37, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  Saw that, was wondering if you had anything a little more specific in mind ;). Still, my above comments above stand. Linkthewindow  Talk  12:21, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  Either you did not dig deep (or late) enough, or you are posting in the wrong place. :P Also, thanks, man. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 14:50, 8 July 2010 (BST)

• vouch - You're not a faggot, and thus better than every other sysops in power right now.--/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 10:10, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  <3 (no homo) ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 14:16, 8 July 2010 (BST)

• against - From what little I can glean by recent edits, my impression of Revenant is that he fights relentlessly to the last word on any dispute, and he makes a big stink/crusade when something doesn't go his way. Conversations and votes often tilt the wrong direction here, and I'd like to trust that a sysop can let those things roll of their back and remain objective. Maybe my impression is all wrong, but I can just see Rev misusing sysop powers because he was so sure in his mind that he was right. If I could see more examples of Revenant taking disagreements in stride I would feel happier about vouching for him.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 13:00, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  I would rather be corrected and proven wrong than continue to be wrong. Possibly as a result of this philosophy, I have a certificate from a duly appointed government official that says <real name censored> Is Always Right. What can I say? If you contend that I am wrong, I want you to prove it. It's the most honest way. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 14:04, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  Also, BTW, I proved Grim wrong on the case that became "Grimgate" and he backed down. Of course, by then it was too late because the mob were already baying for blood, but I pride myself on being able to resolve disputed by rational discourse. Tell me that's not something this wiki could use more of. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 14:15, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  You see the problem with the wiki is that there is often a fine line between "right" and "wrong" and being able to "prove" such things. Mostly, it's all just users butting heads and the best action relies on what users most agree with, and you've shown considerable problems accepting this factor on the wiki, say for example, the recent sysop vote (note vote though you still seemed to find me at fault) to have you warned on A/VB. For all we know you could be the most accepting person in the world once they've been proven wrong, but expecting to be "proven" wrong when we are simply offering the best option to compensate for the lack of a perfect result is something I think you have to learn to work with. --

   

   

   

   

  15:39, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  It's true, I often expect people to be smarter than they are. P.S. I knew you couldn't resist commenting. <3 ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 16:20, 8 July 2010 (BST)

• Against - A good guy, but not sysopy.-- Adward  23:25, 8 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch Yay Rev! --Michael Barnaby 00:38, 9 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - Literally retarded. Cyberbob  Talk  12:42, 12 July 2010 (BST)

  "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 15:23, 12 July 2010 (BST)

  "what is hyperbole?? what is a comedic device??? please help me to understand these concepts as I am 12 years old" --u Cyberbob  Talk  16:31, 12 July 2010 (BST)

  i dun geddit? plz to b xplainin kthx ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 07:30, 16 July 2010 (BST)

• Abstain Never really heard good Or bad of you.-- Jerrel tlk _{(82nd!) (Project Unwelcome!)}. 05:48, 13 July 2010 (BST)

  where the fuck have you been the last 5 or so years? not playing UD i guess.----sexualharrison ¯\()/¯ 04:47, 16 July 2010 (BST)

• Vouch - Rev has promised to air mail me cookies, and, quite frankly, I really have the munchies at the moment. ----Ash  ^{|  T  |  яя  |} 23:41, 13 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - He is needed, too. --Grogh 21:34, 17 July 2010 (BST)

The community discussion is now closed. The bureaucrats will make their decision.-- Adward  18:00, 19 July 2010 (BST)

So, yeah. After the usual discussion with boxy the decision has made to deny the bid. However Rev is very active in the community, and if, as he states elsewhere he does contribute more to the wiki over the next few months, a future bid will be looked on more favourably. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 19:40, 21 July 2010 (BST)

Recently Concluded Bids

For more concluded bids, see Promotion Candidacies.

Archived Promotions

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