Avatar Wiki:Nominations for bureaucratship

Bureaucrats (nominations)

Admins (nominations)

Rollback (requests)

Moderators (requests)

Chat moderators (requests)

Standards Council

Community newsletter

User groups

Currently closed

2009 • 2011 • 2012

This is the page where formal nominations for bureaucratship are recorded and archived. Bureaucrats are users who can add rollback, administrator and bureaucrat flags to other users, and remove rollback and administrator flags. On Avatar Wiki, all bureaucrats are also administrators.

Requirements

There are no concrete requirements for a user to be a bureaucrat, except that the user must already be an administrator. However, bureaucrats will usually:

• Be among the most capable contributors to the wiki
• Be highly trusted by the community over a long period of time
• Be thorough and a good judge of character
• Be fair and balanced in determining consensus in difficult cases

Procedures

• Users must have made 50 edits in a regular fashion and have been active for at least two weeks to be able to vote or nominate. These edits can be from the wiki mainspaces and/or from the discussions.
• Users must have adminship to be nominated for bureaucratship.

Stage 1: Nominating

1. When this page is opened, users may be nominated by others. Statements must be fewer than 100 words.
2. If the nominee accepts a nomination, community members may ask the nominee any questions they may have. The nominee may choose not to answer.
3. At the end of one week, nominations are closed, questions are closed and voting is opened.

Stage 2: Voting

1. When voting begins, community members may do the following:
   1. Place one "support" vote under the nominee of their choice.
   2. Place one "oppose" and/or "neutral" vote under as many nominees as the user feels strongly about.
2. Attach reasoning to your position. Every vote must be logical, reasonable, and in line with the stated requirements for adminship. It is the responsibility of the voter to ensure compliance. Unless they are later clarified in an acceptable way, non-complying votes may be discarded without notice.
3. Individual votes may then be critiqued or discussed at any time in a civil and reasonable manner.
4. At the end of two weeks, voting is closed. Voting is also closed if there are no votes for three days.

Stage 3: Resolving

• The nominee with the most complying votes is considered first.
  • If the nominee has a rate of support of 75% or above, the rights are granted.
  • If the nominee has a rate of support between 65% and 75%, bureaucratic discretion is to be used in determining whether rights are granted. Arguments from the votes provided and the responses of the nominee to questions will be considered.
  • If the nominee has a rate of support of 65% or below, the rights are not granted.
• If the nominee with the most complying votes is not granted the rights, then the nominee with the next most complying votes is considered. The same process of percentages and bureaucratic discretion detailed above is used until a nominee with a suitably high rate of support is found.
  • This means that if no-one has a rate of support above 65%, the nominee with the highest rate of support is granted the rights.
• When deciding which nominee has the most complying votes, any draws are resolved by considering the candidate with the most support from current administrators first. If there is a draw in administrator votes, bureaucratic discretion will be used to determine which nominee will be considered first.

Current nominations

HammerOfThor

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
HammerOfThor will become Avatar Wiki's 8th bureaucrat.
Please do not edit this discussion.

HammerOfThor (wall · contribs · editcount · logs)

Nomination

I, Lady Lostris, nominate HammerOfThor for bureaucratship on Avatar Wiki. I debated whether or not I, as the sole other bureaucrat should nominate someone in an election where I will be the one carrying out the community wish, but I ultimately reckon that everyone knows I can be objective enough should there be multiple nominees.

Although only an admin for a relatively short time, HammerOfThor really is an established value within the community and admin team, and looking at the set "requirements" of what traits a bureaucrat should have, HoT easily ticks them all. Lady Lostris /  SOAP 17:51, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the nomination Lostris. I happily and humbly accept. HAMMEROFTHØR (wall) • 19:13, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Questions

• How do you think the wiki would benefit from a second bureaucrat? Dcasawang1 • wall 21:07, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
  • From a general perspective, two main reasons. Firstly, to help share the load with responding to requests for rollback rights when Lostris is unavailable or otherwise unable to get to it. The number of requests is obviously low right now, but I would anticipate activity on the wiki to increase over the coming months and so having another active bureaucrat will be beneficial in that regard.
    
    Secondly, I think it is beneficial to have another perspective in situations where bureaucrat input or discretion is needed. This is not to say that the intention should be to challenge the decision or disagree every time, but rather that having an additional perspective can help strengthen the response, as something that is more than the sum of its parts. HAMMEROFTHØR (wall) • 22:55, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
• What do you think is the maximum number of rollback users the wiki should have? Dcasawang1 • wall 12:46, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
  • I don't believe there should be a maximum number of rollbacks on the wiki, either as a hard limit or in that the current number of rollbacks should influence how a request is considered. The question of whether someone should be given rollback rights should be judged on their activity, their history, and that they can be trusted with the rights, not the current number of rollbacks. I think this is also something that is important to emphasis, so that users are not dissuaded from making a request because they feel we already "have enough" rollbacks. This was brought up before in relation to requests for moderator rights, and I wrote a post specifically on this point to allay those fears, and which would apply just the same to requests for rollback rights. HAMMEROFTHØR (wall) • 13:45, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
• Do you think that you will be more or less active on the wiki overall if granted bureaucrat rights? (Will new duties off-wiki conflict with your normal wiki activity, or will you perform enough on-wiki duties to counteract the aforementioned effect?) TMH · Talk to us · Search for our pawprints 14:00, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
  • No, I do not see that being granted bureaucrat rights will have any impact on my activity level on the wiki. The new responsibilities that would come with being a bureaucrat are entirely on-wiki, and my ability to balance my activity on the wiki against things IRL will be no different than it is currently. HAMMEROFTHØR (wall) • 14:26, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
• In the hypothetical situation that we start getting an important increase in activity following Avatar Studios' launch in the future, with an increase in vandalism as well and thus a need for more regulation; would you be more lenient on granting rollback rights to users or would you keep applying the same criteria? Dcasawang1 • wall 19:11, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
  • If there was an increase in activity and as a byproduct an increase in vandalism, I would not be more lenient in granting rollback rights. The criteria by which I would judge a user's request are the same as they would be now, and I would not weaken the criteria just to bolster the number of users with rollback rights. Doing so would be an overreaction that implies vandalism to be a bigger issue than it is.
    
    The only area that I can see the level of activity having an effect on is how I would consider the user's history of undoing vandalism. In the current situation where there is minimal vandalism on the wiki, I would consider the requirement that the user have a "History of anti-vandalism and corrective work" in light of this, and thus make greater allowance for them having a smaller history overall. If there was a much larger degree of vandalism on the wiki, then the consideration of their history of corrective work would again be balanced against the level overall. HAMMEROFTHØR (wall) • 22:51, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
• What has been the biggest lesson you've learned in the past year as an admin? – TechFilmer🍍 21:09, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
  • I think the biggest lesson I have learnt is that it is not a sign of indecisiveness to sometimes have to take a bit longer time to think over administrator actions like whether a user should be blocked or for how long. For sure, it is good to not be constantly second guessing yourself or to overanalyse every action or decision, but at the same time this shouldn't be taken to an extreme of not giving each decision the consideration it deserves in that moment. Users are not suddenly granted the ability to come to an immediate and decisive opinion on everything when they become admins; there are times when you have to say "hmm, I'm not sure" and take a bit longer to think things over, and before I might have worried about this being viewed as indecisive. HAMMEROFTHØR (wall) • 22:51, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Voting

Support

1. Support — I think HoT will make a fine bureaucrat. Zacatero • (Wall) •      10:15, August 17, 2021 (UTC)
2. Support — HoT is a very informative user and I believe he will help many more people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by IcaKalorra (wall • contribs) 11:55, August 17, 2021 (UTC)
3. Support — In the past couple months, working with HoT has been nothing but amazing. He has a level head, an excellent understanding of this wiki, and makes the effort to know everyone and communicate with them. HoT always had my vote, but what truly cinched this was his answer to the last question. – TechFilmer🍍 14:04, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
4. Support — HammerOfThor is the most capable user right now to get bureaucrat rights. He has the experience and I trust his judgement on important decisions. Dcasawang1 • wall 21:30, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
5. Support — Thor is a user with what at times seems to be an endless amount of patience, always keeping a level head and being calm in his responses, no matter what the situation. On top of this, he is one of, if not the most helpful and informative users on this fandom, knowledgeable about all areas of the wiki. He definitely has my support. Aang on a sec 10:25, 18 August 2021 (UTC)