I would like to be a admin. I would be nice to people and work things out just like said on the page about what makes a good admin and I have 1 wikia for wii u at wii-u-fun.wikia.com.

Dezaunio [DENIED]

Im Dezaunio,I have Made 3 wikis and joinded many!I have seen the job that admins have to do and i respect that athourity so Please entrust me to Be an admin. Thank you for taking your time to read this.                                 

Over Clocked Kai [DENIED]

This is OVER CLOCKED KAI.  I have created two wikis and joined three.  So, I have seen the admin dashboard on those wikis, fiddled around with it, and I know what it takes to be admin.  Also, one wiki I created was for a JoyDo Mine Mini Game.  Thanks for reading!

OVER CLOCKED KAI (talk) 19:04, February 26, 2014 (UTC)OVER CLOCKED KAI

dak47922 [Postpone]

Hello I am dak47922. I think I am a good candidate for becoming an admin on this wiki beacause I have the derermination to get the job done. I am familiar with wikia and am very active on the Terraria wiki.(at the time of writing this I am rated 10th on the wiki leaderboard(out of thousands) and am a member of the rollback group.) With my particular skill set I think I am very worty of becoming an admin.


  Dak47922 talk contrib count 21:17, December 21, 2011 (UTC) Iballisticsquid 12:10, March 20, 2014 (UTC)--Iballisticsquid 12:10, March 20, 2014 (UTC)

Denied. I am pleased you are experienced in other Wikis', but follow the rules. You must be constantly contributing in this wiki. Show me your editing skills in this wiki and I will consider. Otherwise, "I, Asian, will be postponing this request". Xx AsiAnZ xX 01:42, December 22, 2011 (UTC)

Legonman [Denied]

Hello, I am MrLegoman. I believe a great administrator needs to be someone who has helped on this wiki, follows the rules, and does what the other admins say. I think I will be a good admin because I am ranked 11th and have the time to contribute at least every other day. I am also familiar with Wikia and have and interest in playing Minecraft and posting anything new and helping out the community. Thank you very much for your time.

MrLegoman_____ML 02:22, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

Denied, Get more edits and apply for rollback. LF 001380.gif 20:35, February 26, 2012 (UTC)

Suggested Request [Accepted]

This is not a request for me, but a suggestion for another individual.

What do I have to say? Should Sharple become admin anon? For what I have to say is a very serious acknowledgement. Shall this Sharple become an admin? For whatever reason, he is not. I'm just guessing he does not wish to be. And yet, I crave him to be. --HMarrowIV {Talk} 02:26, May 30, 2012 (UTC)

Accepted. - Diamondore2.png MLG | talk | edit count | contribs 12:24, May 31, 2012 (UTC)

Autis21XT [Denied]

Hello I would really like to be admin as I believe it would be a good experience and also I would attempt to make edits every time I made a discovery or found some trivia about objects within minecraft and also I would make use of my current experience and expand it from there.Thank you Autis21XT (talk) 15:46, August 27, 2012 (UTC)

Declined for obvious reasons. Cheers LF 001380.gif 20:00, September 3, 2012 (UTC)

User:Sharple Bureaucrat Application [Approved]

Hello, most of you guys have known me since the beginning of this year. Since then I have cleaned the wiki's Special:Uncategorizedpages, undid vandalism and now I'm here to request for bur rights since I've been an very active user here also, I revamp our Policy, cleaned and expanded articles such as Anvil. I added article comment colors (have to admit tho that Pathos helped contributed), new backgrounds and much more, please consider this request.

Good day & Happy editing! Sharple Talk/Contributes 02:36, November 11, 2012 (UTC)

CandD [On Hold]

This is not a request for me, but a nomination for another user.

This user is a respectful editor, made 521 constructive edits and was here since August 30, 2012. MM777 (talk) 19:19, December 16, 2012 (UTC)

CandD needs to become a rollback before you apply him for adminship, please reread this page Sharple Talk/Contributes 19:41, December 16, 2012 (UTC)

The Pathogen For Administrator [On Hold] and Bureaucrat Rights [Denied]

This is not a request for me, but a nomination for another user.

This user is respectful with his rollback rights. He also has 474 edits and was here since January 5, 2012. MM777 (talk) 00:20, December 17, 2012 (UTC)

Hi MM777, I really do see Pathogen as a great editor and a great coder but I would like to hear from him why he should be given administrator rights, as for the bureaucrat that's a little to soon. Sharple Talk/Contributes 03:30, January 26, 2013 (UTC)
Hey there Sharple, just noticed that the nomination had been updated! So I thought it'd be a good time to give you the reasons you asked for. ^ᴗ^ I'd like to quickly cover the bureaucrat nomination first, as even I think that it's far too soon for that kind of position to be bestowed. Now, as per the administrator request, here is what I can think of at this time:
  • I have a considerable amount of experience with:
    • Vandalism-cleaning and prevention
    • Community management
    • Using the admin tools and admin pages
    • Working with sensitive wikitext with a much lower risk of bad consequences (And in the event of said bad consequences, the knowledge to fix them).
  • I am a long-standing administrator (and newly-appointed bureaucrat) over on the Terraria Wiki.
  • I have a lot of experience dealing with templates and fixing template compatibility, as well as making the code more efficient.
  • I feel that I could contribute to the Minecraft Wiki community on a greater level with those powers. (Straight off the bat, I can think of a template that is in need of an admin to edit it, and that could use the implementation of a {{clr}} template in it - the Blocks template.)
Those are the relevant reasons I can think of at this time, if you're in need of anything more, please don't hesitate to tell me so. :) I eagerly await your reply. 20px-New_brs.png  Pathos | Talk Page | Fri 15 February 2013, 05:59
Sysop request approved, Bur is on hold. Sharple Talk/Contributes 01:11, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
Addendum; Wondering if there's an update on the Bur decision, no problem if that's not the case though. Thanks! 20px-New_brs.png  Pathos | Talk Page | Sat 13 July 2013, 00:07
Bur request is now approved, congrats! Sharple Talk/Contributes 19:33, July 25, 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Sharple! I hope to continue be a positive contributor to the wiki. :) 20px-New_brs.png  Pathos | Talk Page | Thu 25 July 2013, 23:47

HiddenVale [Denied due to lack of Rollback Rights]

I have been a major contributor on this Wiki for awhile, minus a month-long break recently. I am Admin. of two other Wikias, one very big and one small and not heavily populated, and here have worked hard at consistency throughout pages. Sharple even once offered if I would like to become Admin. earlier this year, then for some reason....dropped the subject.  HiddenVale - HV logo.png MyTalkPage 03:44, July 12, 2013 (UTC)

I've seen Hidden's edits over time, and I can back up that he is a great contributor to the wiki, he maintains a good attitude while editing and dealing with the community, and in addition is an all-round nice guy. I think he'd be a great addition to the MC Wiki's Admin team. 20px-New_brs.png  Pathos | Talk Page | Sat 13 July 2013, 00:07
...oh yeah right, Sharple is the one with the gavel. Great! Now I wait. HiddenVale - HV logo.png MyTalkPage 01:15, July 13, 2013 (UTC)
Edit: Just noticed that you don't actually have Rollback rights yet, HiddenVale. It is a requirement, so I'll have to get you to apply over on the rollback page before we can even consider this application. :/ 20px-New_brs.png  Pathos | Talk Page | Thu 25 July 2013, 23:47
Well you've already apparently considered it;  alright then.... HiddenVale - HV logo.png MyTalkPage


I'm requesting to become an admin here mainly to help out with things. There are many pages that either need to be deleted or have locks on them, preventing much-needed edits. I have been a member here for a few months, which isn't very long, however, I'm already a rollback and a very active member (with a total of 700+ edits). I do my hardest to help this wiki as much as I can, and the extra rights would help even more. I have experience on another wiki as well, so power could be trusted. With a lack of active administrators/bureaucrats, I could prevent spam and/or vandalism too. Please consider accepting my request :D


05:16, July 1, 2014 (UTC)

I've been watching over Four4's edits since the very first day he joined the Minecraft wiki, and I can say (with confidence) that he is only driven by good-faith-edits and wanting to improve the wiki. I think he would be a great addition to the admin roster. This is further reinforced by his activity. He is much more active than myself and Sharple, making him a good choice as an admin. (My job is taking up most of my time, at the moment.) I personally think that he very much deserves this "upgrade" or promotion. 20px-New_brs.png  Pathos | Talk Page | Wed 9 July 2014, 07:31
Edit: I noticed there has been no other edits in the past 8 days since this request was made. If there are no further votes; I will take it upon myself to make the decision. 20px-New_brs.png  Pathos | Talk Page | Wed 9 July 2014, 07:32

Spoon2978 [DENIED]

I would like to be promoted to admin. I think that I would be a good admin because I would only make edits if necessary, meaning I would only make good-faith edits. I would also like to improve the wiki. I think I am worthy to be an admin because I will only do what is needed and not vandalize this wiki ever. I promise that I will never do anything to harm this wiki in any way. Thanks for taking time to read my request.
Apologies, but you need more than just two edits here to become one. Dragonballgtgoku «Talk Page/Contribs» 00:09, July 18, 2015 (UTC)


I would like to formally request administrator (sysop) rights for this wiki. I have been visiting this wiki on a daily basis (several times a day) for the past while, spending a considerable time cleaning up articles and fixing broken code. Since I began my recent stint of heavy editing, I have become one of the top ten contributors of all time to this wiki (sadly, several of the top-ten are now MIA). Given the frequency of edits in recent weeks/months, I can see how it may be handy to have another active administrator around. I have considerable experience in the Sysop rights group on the Wikia network, as I am an administrator on a few other wikis, and have been a member of the Wikia network for the past ten years. A point-by-point breakdown of my reasons for this request/qualifications are as follows:

  • I already have Rollback permissions on this wiki, and have been using them to undo vandalism a few times each week.
  • I visit this wiki several times a day, so I am typically able to respond to issues within an hour or two of them occurring.
  • I happily respond to user inquiries in a professional manner, if I happen to know the answer to their question.
  • I am quite familiar with wiki code and have been using it to fix a handful of previously-broken templates on this wiki. I have also created a few new ones. There are a few other templates and articles which could use some fixing, but they are unfortunately locked to editing.
  • Although I am able to rollback edits at this time, I am unable to fully delete spam articles or images from the wiki. (Sysop privileges would solve that issue)
  • The "Candidates for deletion" category does not seem to be given much attention on this wiki. I would be happy to review and clear the list on a regular basis, if I had permission.
  • As already brought up by another user, the Main Page has not been updated in a considerable amount of time. This is something I would try to keep current.
  • I have a lengthy list of projects which I have either already completed, or am working on here. Some of these projects are conditional based on my editing permissions.

If you are still curious about my personal goals for this wiki or anything to that effect, you may find more info on my profile. I'm happy to discuss this request further, if desired. I look forward to hearing a response. :D
-Sitb (talk) 18:52, April 25, 2016 (UTC)

Sitb (Bureaucrat) [PASSED]

I would like to request bureaucrat rights on this wiki.

As I'm sure you are aready aware, I am currently our most active administrator on this wiki, and have consistently been the wiki's most active contributer for nearly the past year. I make a point to monitor all recent edits and discussions on a daily basis, keeping on top of issues as they occurr. Since my arrival, I have performed widespread overhauls and reformatting of articles for the purposes of standardization, clarity and accuracy. I have repaired, and continue to refine several broken and/or incomplete templates. I have also created a few new useful templates myself, which are now in widespread use across the wiki. I have spent some of my time updating and providing more structure to the wiki's rules and editing policies. I communicate with wikia staff on occasion, submitting tickets for service requests when certain aspects of the wiki are in need of repair. Perhaps most important, is my willingness and openness to engage with any user of the wiki. I like to think I remain tolerant and fair when dealing with any user, regardless of their frustration or behavior. I also make a point to respond to any user's questions, whether directed at me specifically, or to the community in general.

I am requesting bureaucrat rights for a couple of reasons:

  • I believe it is important for each wiki to have at least one bureaucrat who is fully invested into the well-being and maintenance of the wiki, by contributing to a degree on par with some of it's most active users.
  • It appears that, at one point, three active bureaucrats was an acceptable amount for this wiki. A few years have passed since that time, and we currently are left with just one active bureaucrat here. This forces all top-level decision making to be run through a single individual, who may not always be available.
    • I feel it is unnecessary at this point for me to relay requests that require the atention of a bureaucrat, when I have the capability and ample time to respond to these requests myself.
  • There is content on this wiki which I feel is in need of updating/refining (mostly policy-reated). However, I do not feel comfortable updating these policies from a position below that of bureaucrat, as they may directly affect the rules I am expected to follow as a sysop.

Hopefully the wall of text above covers everything clearly, and that I have made a decent petetion for instating bureaucrat rights on my user account. However, I also believe my contribution history speaks for itself. As with any topic on this wiki, I am happy to discuss my request, if desired. SmileySmall.png

-Sitb (talk) 15:06, February 4, 2017 (UTC)

    • Your request is successful Dragonballgtgoku ?Talk Page/Contribs? 15:25, February 4, 2017 (UTC)

NinjaDogDB (Approved)

I would like to apply for admin rights on this wiki because of multiple reasons. First off, I have been helping out this wiki for months, and I have proven myself in multiple ways. While I haven't been able to rollback any vandalism or anything as a rollback, I have been a rollback for a long while now. Secondly, I have recently been helping out the Plague Inc Wiki, and so far I have respected that wikis policy. I have helped them out a bit, and I have also been very respectable to the admins especially DiseaseMaster7. Thirdly, most of my edits do go along with the Manual of Style and the Editing Policy, and I have at times looked back on these while editing an article in order to clear up anything that I am unsure of. Fourthly, most of my edits are useful and helpful to certain articles, and some of the articles that I have added recently include a fair amount of information. The most notable article is the Glide article. Finally, I think that another active admin is needed to help out on this wiki due to how large it is, and the ever increasing addition of articles due to Minecraft updates. Becoming an admin would present new opportunities for me to grow and learn as well as helping to keep things updated, so readers can find the most amount of information possible on anything they want to learn about. These are the reasons why I think I am fit to be an admin.
-NinjaDogDB (talk) 18:54, April 27, 2017 (UTC)

While I'm not an admin, you've been a very helpful user with over a thousand good edits. We are also in need of active admins. Supporting this all the way.  DanzxvFan8275 (MCUE)Giphy (1).gif   
You've also got an upvote from SLScool (message wall) 22:49, April 27, 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Phillydan and SLScool. Oh and also for some reason I was planning on asking for becoming admin after gaining 1,000 edits, but the edit count doesn't matter as much as the quality does in this scenario. But I am always happy to help out this wiki and its (almost) 800 articles on it. Again I would like to say thanks to y'all for the support. -NinjaDogDB (talk) 22:56, April 27, 2017 (UTC)

You have been a very active, and consistent contributor to this wiki over the past few months, have shown a willingness to engage members of our community, and you appear to be fluent in the wiki's editing policies. You also have a presence elsewhere on the Fandom network, showing that you are more heavily invested, than if this was just a "one-off" wiki that you contributed to. These are all qualities which align with those expected of an administrator, so you've got my support for your application. SmileySmall.png
-Sitb (talk) 10:12, April 28, 2017 (UTC)
As per the reasoning of the others, I give my support. You seem fairly active on the wiki and your contributions have been helpful. Dragonballgtgoku ?Talk Page/Contribs? 10:28, April 28, 2017 (UTC)
It looks like you have the support of each admin (TheGamingMaster contacted me on my message wall), and no objections to your request otherwise, so your request is approved. I will update your user rights shortly.
-Sitb (talk) 13:30, April 29, 2017 (UTC)

XXCastAwayXx (Denied)

I would like to apply for administrator rights on this wiki because I feel I would be great for the job. I administrate a good bit of wikis and a majority I am the main coder on. I check logs and wiki activity very frequently. If you would like a list of the wikis I administrate please check my profile under my wikia tab. I love this wiki, the community is nice, I check on it very frequently and I just feel it would be great to have another active administrator. Though I don't seem to edit pages much, I do have ideas. I hope you will take this into consideration.

14:29, March 29, 2017 (UTC)

Your edit count is smaller than some. However, if you take into account the CSS coding you have assembled yourself, and passed onto me for implementation on the wiki (plus any intermediate editing you did while putting together that code), then your contributions would add up to more than what is actually displayed on your profile. I have taken a look at your activity for other wikis in the past, and you seem to be a respectable user on each of the wikis you visit. You're a great resource for coding, yet you are currently locked out of updating the code on Minecraft Wiki yourself without sysop user rights. Granting you these rights will at least allow you to make coding changes yourself, without having to pass everything through me, so that's a big plus. I offer my support for your request. We will leave your request here for a while to see if there's any more input on the matter from other admins or users of the wiki.
-Sitb (talk) 17:09, March 29, 2017 (UTC)
I'm not an admin, but I'd just like to give my opinion on this. In my opinion, you have too little edits for admin. 200 edits aren't really that many. You also have only 35 mainspace edits. I know you said that you have little mainspace edits, but 35, in my opinion, it too little. While you are very good at coding, that's not really a necessity for admins. Coding is always a plus, not really a requirement. And you did say "it would be great to have another active administrator." I know the admins on the wiki aren't very active except for Sitb, and you are one of the most active contributors here. However, I don't think you display enough activity for admin. In my opinion, there is a better candidate (you probably know who I'm talking about lol). While I do think you could be a pretty useful admin, I don't think you are ready for admin yet. However, your access to the MediaWiki namespace is crucial, so that's a plus. Consider this a weak oppose.  DanzxvFan8275 (MCUE)Giphy (1).gif   
Also, I forgot to include this in my reason, but you are fairly new here, as you have been here for less than 2 months. Also, you have only been a rollback for about 3 weeks. In my opinion, that isn't really enough time to become an admin.  DanzxvFan8275 (MCUE)Giphy (1).gif   

ty for the input im trying my best ^^

14:10, March 30, 2017 (UTC):Phillydan25 makes some good points about level of activity. Part of being an admin is being active on a wiki over an extended period of time. I expect (hope) that XXCastAwayXx's contributions will increase naturally over time. However, a user can technically be considered "active" at any point, while not necessarily making a large amounts of edits. For example, if a user has shown they can easily be reached at any point via their message wall, it shows they can help to serve the users who come to them with questions or concerns. XXCastAwayXx has shown this quality, as she typically answers messages within the same day. It is also important to not solely focus on what are considered "Mainspace" edits, as XXCastAwayXx has made even more "file" contributions (uploading images), which is also a very important type of content to have on a wiki. A large chunk of her "user" contributions include several modifications she has made to other users' profile pages, which basically amounts to her serving/helping out members of our community by request. Phillydan25 is right that coding is not necessarily a requirement of admins. However, one of XXCastAwayXx's strongest skills appears to be coding, something which only admins can do. In the end, the only way she is going to be able to contribute to the wiki to her fullest potential, is by having access to the CSS and Javascript aspects of the wiki.

One more quick note: the eligibility of one user to be promoted to admin, shouldn't really affect the eligibility of another user who may also be qualified. All users are welcome to submit a request for themselves or recommend another user (if they meet the qualifications). Each request is evaluated separately, and is not dependent on any other requests which may be open at the same time.
-Sitb (talk) 14:29, March 30, 2017 (UTC)
I think we should wait a bit longer before promoting you to admin Castaway. I know that you are very respectable on other wikis including your own, and you are also an admin on other wikis as well. I do think that Phillydan is correct in being a Rollback for a longer time is necessary before being promoted to Admin as well. That's just my opinion though on this discussion.
-NinjaDogDB (talk) 16:29, March 30, 2017 (UTC)
@Sitb Hmm...good points. However, about your last part: the eligibility of said user did not affect my opinion. I was just stating that since I did think that there is a better user for admin. My oppose did not get stronger or weaker; like I said, it wasn't dependent on that fact. Thanks for adding that, though  DanzxvFan8275 (MCUE)Giphy (1).gif   
Everyone has made a decent point(s). You are an excellent coder but have fewer contributions than most. Though that is more understandable in this case. Hopefully, your activity can improve a bit. I will give a support. Dragonballgtgoku ?Talk Page/Contribs? 12:34, March 31, 2017 (UTC)

You have shown a need for the tools granted to administrators, and a great attitude in regards to the wiki and it's users. No one has offered any negative responses yet regarding the way you operate on the wiki. However, it is clear that some of our community's most active users at this time have concerns about the fact that you are still relatively new to the wiki. Out of fairness to the community, I think it is necessary to consider these users' concerns. At this point, your admin request is on hold for now, until you can build a more extensive contribution history on the wiki. This seems to be the only concern that users have expressed, so if you can continue contributing to the wiki regularly over the next while, I don't see why we couldn't eventually revisit this request. Just stick around as a contributor, and things will likely fall into place. SmileySmall.png
-Sitb (talk) 10:28, April 4, 2017 (UTC)

It appears as though your activity has tapered off over the last few months. It therefore seems appropriate to decline your application at this point, because you don't display the level of activity and engagement with our community, which is preferred for an administrator. You are absolutely free to apply again, if you find yourself active on this Wiki in the future.
-Sitb (talk) 13:32, July 14, 2017 (UTC)

SLScool (Approved)

As the biggest Minecraft wiki on Wikia (though the Gamepedia wiki is bigger), it is impressive. 800 pages, countless contributors over the years, a strong community. In total, I am a small factor; but within 2017, I have done a lot. 138: The number of days I have been here. 2,138: the number of edits I have made. The sum: SLScool, a rollback user on the wiki. There has been a lot on the wiki during that period—a couple users fading away as many new users join, 1.12, sparse vandalism, a ton of improvements. I have spurred a lot of it (at least for the last point). I proved my worthiness three-and-a-half months ago by gaining the rollback tool; however, I feel I could better serve the wiki if in a higher position. That is why I request administrator rights on this wiki.

A confession, and perhaps a suggestion, to make: I have been finding the rollback tool not nearly as necessary. According to Help:Administrators'_how-to_guide#Reverting_undesirable_edits and Help:User_rights#Rollbacks, the tool is not to be used for mistake edits—only malicious edits. I have used an alternative of: use the tool and write on a message wall; or go the previous version and publish it, explaining in the summary. It appears only the latter is supposed to be used, if anything; not the former. However, is it okay for this wiki to go against that? I am personally okay with the current usage on the wiki, if allowed.

However, I will be using the administrator status. That paragraph: a prime of example of how I will use the rights. I am not sure if blocking, (un)deleting, and protecting will be used very often; though, when it is necessary, I could very easily be the first admin on the spot. The main reason is the non-tool power granted by the right. I very often write on the message wall of Sitb, mentioning whatever stuff requires the attention of an administrator—like the above paragraph. However, with the rights, I can take charge myself and make the decision, as I will have the authority to do so. Sitb does not mind me addressing him; however, it will be a lot better for the both of us if I do not have to filtering everything through him. A second power of the administrator tool I desire: moderation. Mini-modding is not allowed (for very good reason). No non-sysop is allowed to administrate—though, there are a couple exceptions I have found, such as explaining rollbacked edits. But, as an administrator, I can address the issue myself, politely informing the user of the issue. It is not as big of a reason as decision-making, but moderation is still something I request for the same reason.

I am also a Boy Scout; I have learned leadership and diplomacy there, in addition to on Wikia here—but what does it mean that I am a Boy Scout? Instead of merely saying it, let us take the law, along with some examples. Trustworthy: proven through my obtaining and usage of the rollback tool, and everything that says about me. Loyal: I am still here after several months; less than a dozen users of this wiki can say the same. Helpful: recently on Sitb's wall, there were two questions posed to him, which I both found solutions to. Friendly: In It Did Happen., I developed a friendship (by online-safety standards) with SteveBobMinecraftPants. Courteous: IconLink and Edits, both threads made by me about user edits, were diplomatic. Kind: I have not lashed out at other users. Obedient: I have not gone against the decrees and advice of administrators; I have objected when the policies seemed wrong, but never went against them until they were countermanded. Cheerful: I have not been really negative here. Thrifty: instead of spending several hours scouring the wiki for certain mistakes, I have saved time and employed SLSbot, my trusted bot account. Brave: I have stood up against the admins and their policies when they seemed wrong, though there was more to be brave about when I was newer and less acquainted. Clean: my language, as in I never swear; not on wikis, not online, not even in real life; at all. And reverent: as Minecraft is non-religious, the most I can say is that I have never been religiously offensive (cannot say the same for politics, though).

Minecraft Wiki is a great wiki, but there is always room for improvement—otherwise, there would be no edits. There can also be bigger improvements, such as style changes; but they often require administrative approval to be put into effect. There can also be bad editors, the symptoms of whom get reversed quickly by hard-working users; but dealing with the cause is better done by an administrator who is known to be assertive with the issues. Was I expecting this entire five-paragraph essay to be read? It did require several minutes of the readers' time; however, the results include more to judge me on, both in critique and improvement, and in evaluation and approval. But my hope is to be one of those administrators, a trusted leader of the wiki, someone to look up to, someone exemplifying all of those characteristics.SLScool (message wall) 23:59, July 21, 2017 (UTC)


  • Aboslutely not. Sorry if that first sentence was rude, but I have to get my concerns across. First, most of your contributions seem to minor edits on articles that most users can easily do. Second, you said that your only needs for admin rights are blocking and deleting articles. These can easily be done by other admins, and these are the only reasons you need these rights. If you don't bring much to the table, then I don't see why you need these rights. Third, you don't really need the rights. As I said in concern #1, most of your edits are minor, and admin rights do not exactly extend what you can do in this. You're doing a good job with rollback, and that's great, but that's pretty much all you really needed. Admin rights will not really have you access more tools to this, unless there is a protected article, but then again, there aren't many articles that are protected. Fourth, we're not really in need of more admins. There hasn't been much vandalism or spam lately, and when there is, it's usually quickly cleaned up and dealt with by our current admins. And fifth and final, your behavior towards me and other users hasn't really been the best. For example, you've acted arrogantly in several discussions with me, and criticized the way users have made blogs. I don't really want an admin who does this, as I feel that you will abuse your power just so you can get your way and use it in your favor, while the other user hasn't really broken our policy. Sorry if this sounded rude, but I have strong opposition to this request, per my past concerns.  DanzxvFan8275 (MCUE)Giphy (1).gif  00:11, July 22, 2017 (UTC) 
  • Philly has a point but I believe you could be trusted with Sysop rights considering what you've done. You've made over 1,000 mainspace edits based on the EditCount and haven't done anything that breaks the rules. I give some support to this request. -- Comrade SS (talk) 21:24, July 21, 2017 (UTC)
  • (Started writing this before Comrade SS made their response) That first concern: isn't that what everybody does? That second concern is false: "I am not sure if blocking, (un)deleting, and protecting will be used very often; though, when it is necessary, I could very easily be the first admin on the spot." This was a five-paragraph application, so you probably missed how I said I didn't. It's a mistake you've made before, such as on that political thread thing (the first time I've offended someone) from a couple months back. Third concern: see responses to first and second concerns. Fourth concern: "Sysop rights may be applied at any time, while bureaucrats are only created if another one is good to have or needed." That's a quote from the end of the first section. Fifth concern: strongest point; however, NinjaDogDB is the only other user I've seen take offense at me, in that political thread thingy. In addition, the majority of the time that I have offended you is when you interjected, taking a perspective at my writing that no one else had. However, the remainder was me failing to stay neutral in my logic and reason.SLScool (message wall) 00:25, July 22, 2017 (UTC)
  • 1. Yes, maybe regular users, but not admins. Do you see users like Sitb or NinjaDogDB making those really minor edits? 2. No, it's not. I saw what you said, and I'm still going with what I originally said. 3. Alright, so see what I said to those. 4. That's not what I meant. In my opinion, we're not in need of more admins. Our admins, in my opinion, seem to be getting the job done, and seem to be doing a good job with handling and managing our wiki already. 5. That's not what matters. The fact is, you made the remarks in the first place. It doesn't matter how the user responded to it, the thing that matters is that admins can't be making those types of comments towards other users. Of course, they haven't been totally offensive, but they are unnecessary and rude.  DanzxvFan8275 (MCUE)Giphy (1).gif  00:31, July 22, 2017 (UTC) 
  • 1. I see Sitb and NinjaDogDB make edits of quality similar to mine: sometimes small things, sometimes big things, always contributive. I will let those two admin users support or reject that claim. 2. I don't get it. You said I only need it for blocking and deleting, I said it's the opposite; which part of this request thread are you referring to? 3. "Alright, so see what I said to those." 4. Sometimes I am on when the other admins are not; that's when I would need the tools the most. Rather than I remove the bad content and let the other admins address the user several hours later, I can remove the bad content and address the user. 5. That political thread thing: I was quite naïve back then. The majority of the time, no one else thought it was offensive; only you. The remainder is where you hit it dead-on.
  • 1. Your edits are also contributive, it's just that a lot of them are minor. With other admins, they are varied most of the time. Your edits have good quality too, but they're mostly minor and aren't very significant. 2. That's what you said. You said blocking, protecting, and deleting, which is something other admins can easily do. 3. (this was actually number 4, but since we've resolved the last one, I've moved them up). I get what you mean, but you mostly get answers within an hour or so. The current admin team is usually on time, and they o it correctly and efficiently. 4. (used to be 5) I thought it was also offensive and immature of you to do that. I just never said it. Basically, stuff like this isn't really admin behavior.  DanzxvFan8275 (MCUE)Giphy (1).gif  00:53, July 22, 2017 (UTC) 

  • 2. I said I wouldn't often use those tools; more often, I will use the status to address issues on the wiki that don't require the tools, but are not allowed from non-admins. 3. The current admin team is good; but why ignore the "Sysop rights . . . any time."? And, when they are not on time, I could be there, couldn't I? Besides, I think Sitb would rather I didn't ask him about everything—something he can support or deny. 4. I don't know what "that," which is offensive and immature of me, is; so I will continue from my previous response: a good number of them were not considered to be offensive until you said they were. When I write to other users, I am not writing to you; I am writing to them. They accept it, so I think what I wrote was acceptable. However, when I write to you, I more often than not fail to structure it non-offensively. Those are the instances where I think your claim is entirely correct. But now, I must leave for three hours for real-world concerns.SLScool (message wall) 01:11, July 22, 2017 (UTC)
  • 3. I know that. But, that doesn't mean that if you request any time, it will be accepted and there won't be any concerns. Specifically about the number of admins, and needed admins. If you were to request some other time when the wiki was under complete danger and was a target of excessive and consistent vandalism, then I could see why more admins would be needed. But, to be honest, there hasn't been any of this lately. There haven't been users needing warnings and to be blocked, and again, the other admins are handling it before you come when there is. 4. I said a few were offensive, and when they are offensive, it's an issue. When you have questionable comments, they're usually unnecessary, rude, or both. Which, is already not good for a user who is requesting sysop rights. Also, whether you're writing to me, or another user, an unnecessary or rude comment is the same. It is not admin behavior, and admins are usually supposed to be calm and civil when messaging users, and assuming good faith. Now, not to say you haven't done this. I've seen times where you have done this, messaging users about rollbacked edits or other questionable things you can notify them about. But then again, the rude comments have been questionable, and I really wonder if this is going to change or not. You're not rude all the time, and most of your comments or replies are useful and helpful, I must admit. But, my concerns are still standing, and I'm going to stick with them for now.  DanzxvFan8275 (MCUE)Giphy (1).gif  01:25, July 22, 2017 (UTC) 
  • I'm going to leave this until the morning (for the Pacific Time Zone; 10 hours or so), partially because I want to see the other users' perspectives and partially because I'd rather be more mentally awake like the Boy Scout I am (or should be right now). Your last reply, though—I find it your best written reply. I have no comment about that status.SLScool (message wall) 04:48, July 22, 2017 (UTC)


You have been a consistent presence here on the wiki for several months now, which as you mentioned yourself, is something that only a select few users can claim. During this time, you have been very helpful in pointing out aspects of our community guidelines which weren't as clear as they could have been. As a direct result, our community policies/guidelines have improved since your arrival. You appear to be intimately familiar with the guidelines of this wiki, as well as those of Fandom. You have also offered a wide variety of suggestions for template, categorization, and other formatting and housekeeping improvements, the majority of which have now been adopted by our wiki. The creation of your bot, which can perform repetetive improvement tasks on the wiki, is something the wiki could really use, and isn't something that anyone else has really taken the initiative to pursue. Your contributions are often minor, but not always, and just because an edit is minor, does not mean it is of lower quality. Any improvement is a positive thing.

You aren't wrong in claiming you could save time and effort if, rather than contacting administrators when there are issues which need attention, you could fix them immediately yourself. I don't have any issue with how often you contact me of course, but it would certainly save you a lot of work, if you had the ability/permission to deal with these things yourself. Skipping the go-between step, could free you up to perform more meaningful improvements to the wiki.

You constantly engage with members of the community, whether they are new users with just a few contributions, or our administrators. This is definitely a plus, as community engagement is necessary for the long-term health of any wiki.

I am well aware of the previous exchanges between you and Phillydan25, and I expected this would be part of the discussion surrounding your application. I agree there have been a few occasions in the past, where some of your exchanges with users could have been approached with a little more tact and worded differently, as to avoid the risk of someone interpreting your words in a way which may offend. However, it is important for me to consider that you have also shown humility in admitting your own faults, and improved the way you handle these types of exchanges, since the time you first began contributing to the wiki. I believe this is far more important than the select few situations where a user happened to be offended by something you said. As you said, this has really only ever caused issues with one other user on this wiki, so I actually disagree with the claim that you are some sort of problem user. It is equally important for anyone reading your exchanges to consider the fact that you probably were not "trying" to be offensive in any way. Nobody is perfect (myself included), and I expect you will continue trying to better yourself, as we all should strive to do.

Keeping all of these things in mind (especially the last point), I think you have the potential to be a welcome addition to this wiki's team of administrators. Barring any other major objections from established members of the community, I offer my support for your request. Beginning tomorrow, I will likely be absent for a few days, so we can leave your request up here so others can join the discussion if they wish, and I can review the discussion again at the beginning of August.

-Sitb (talk) 15:04, July 22, 2017 (UTC)

  • I need to debate the point "this has really only ever caused issues with one other user on this wiki." It has actually been more than that. Other users, just to name one: NinjaDogDB, has also been annoyed at SLScool before. And, even when said user is not annoyed, SLScool still sends unnecessary and questionable messages, such as this one, where he bragged about having more badge points than another user. There are other examples, too, you can find them here. Also, even if it did offend and annoy one user, that's still a user, and it's still rude, no matter how many users it was directed towards.  DanzxvFan8275 (MCUE)Giphy (1).gif  15:22, July 22, 2017 (UTC) 
  • The "I'm a Higher Badge Rank than You": I meant it to be humorous, and NinjaDogDB took it as humorous (he said "XD"); he was only annoyed in that thread at this comment, and perhaps this one. I did offend NinjaDogDB once, though, in Congrats!, and to a smaller extent, A quick note on capitalization. I cannot think of other threads where I have offended other users—I lack the patience to load up every message, and I lack the technicality to look at them via SLSbot (which loads up the text and nothing else).SLScool (message wall) 17:51, July 22, 2017 (UTC)
  • It doesn't matter that he wasn't annoyed at the first message, he was annoyed at the replies. Anyway, I'm done arguing with this. I just hope users understand my concerns and think this over.  DanzxvFan8275 (MCUE)Giphy (1).gif  18:13, July 22, 2017 (UTC) 

  • I know this is basically reviving an old conversation, but I want to point out to you guys that SLScool didn't really annoy me in the thread "A quick note on capitalization." In fact in that thread I was pointing out that SLScool's reply was confusing to me. It did not annoy me, but it did confuse me. Also those replies that Phillydan25 claims that I am annoyed by are not, in fact, annoying me at all. I like getting to know people most of the time, so your replies actually help me get to know your personality better. I am just pointing these facts out because I am trying to correct the wrong assumptions you guys have assumed about how SLScool has "annoyed" me in the past. NinjaDogDB (talk) 18:58, August 9, 2017 (UTC)

I am well aware of that conversation between those two, as well as the fact that they have been able to have civilized conversations with one another since that discussion. It is not your place to argue on behalf of other users, they can offer their own input in this thread themselves (and I am sure NinjaDogDB eventually will). In that particular discussion you are referring to, no one expressed they had been offended until you showed up and said so yourself (in a way, you kind of hi-jacked a private conversation, which didn't really have anything to do with you).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I can remember, you are the only user who has ever expressed concern to an admin about SLScool. This in itself isn't a problem. However, over the past while, you seem to have put more effort into criticizing this single user on various occasions, than making contributions of comparable size to actual articles on this wiki. This ends up looking worse for you, than it does for SLScool, who has shown a higher level of activity, and more investment into improving this wiki, than the majority of users here. In a way, it makes it seem like you go out of your way to target SLScool when you see him post something which someone might remotely be interpreted as offensive (even when it doesn't necessarily concern you). I understand expressing concern when it is warranted, but you seem oddly focused on SLScool in particular, and not much else. At some point, it would be nice if you could move on, and shift your efforts to more constructive projects, which will actually benefit the wiki.

Thank you for expressing your concerns, as any feedback is helpful. However, I make a point to investigate the full contribution history of each user who applies to be an administrator. I am already aware of each of the examples you provided, and was actually monitoring each exchange on the day they occurred. However, in the majority of cases, I actually disagree with your interpretation of the intent of what was said.
-Sitb (talk) 18:57, July 22, 2017 (UTC)

"It is not your place to argue on behalf of other users."

Honestly, I should have the right to do that, as an administrator is a trusted user who can access matinence tools to keep a wiki in order. If SLScool has done this to other users, I can bring that to th table and use that for my 5th concern.

"In a way, you kind of hi-jacked a private conversation."

So I can be put in the wrong for doing that, but when SLScool and other users do that all the time, they're off the hook?

'Which didn't really have anything to do with you."

Like I said above, even if it had nothing to with me, it's still questionable and concerns me.

"You are the only user who has ever expressed concern to an admin about SLScool"

That is technically correct.

"However, over the past while, you seem to have put more effort into criticizing this single user on various occasions, than making contributions of comparable size to actual articles on this wiki."

Honestly, this, right here, is outrageous and false. Yes, I haven't made many main namespace contributions, but on a wiki like this, I'm now struggling to find something to edit. Now, that's not supposed to excuse the other part of that, don't get me wrong. But, I made maybe a few messages about said user, and I've been kind of annoyed by him. This was a few examples. The way you put it made it seem like that's what all of my contributions have centered around. That is not true. Also, that is pretty hypocritical of you to say, since you have critisized me in numerous times.

"This ends up looking worse for you."

All I'm doing is expressing my honest concerns. I am basically being ridiculed for having a different opinion than anyone else.

"Who has shown a higher level of activity."

When it comes to administrators, I center most of my opinion around their social behavior rather than their contributions on articles. Of course, that's still a big part, but behavior is usually more important in my opinion. Also, why are you comparing him to me? I'm not requesting for administrator, and I'm not planning to.

"In a way, it makes it seem like you go out of your way to target SLScool when you see him post something which someone might remotely be interpreted as offensive."

Again, that is completely untrue.

"I understand expressing concern when it is warranted, but you seem oddly focused on SLScool in particular, and not much else."

Same as before.

"At some point, it would be nice if you could move on, and shift your efforts to more constructive projects, which will actually benefit the wiki."

The user is requesting for adminship, this is the time I should be able to express my full opinions. Also, techincally, this is benefitting the wiki, as I am telling the community what I have against this user, and why they are not totally fit for adminship. Also, this message is basically you telling me that I have no actually contributive edits on articles. This is insulting and outrageous.

"However, I make a point to investigate the full contribution history of each user who applies to be an administrator."

Exactly what I do, and what I said here shows that I dug in deeper than other users would typically do.

"However, in the majority of cases, I actually disagree with your interpretation of the intent of what was said."

I'm interested: why do you disagree? In a moderate amount of these, SLScool is sending unnecessary replies.  DanzxvFan8275 (MCUE)Giphy (1).gif  19:52, July 22, 2017 (UTC) 

I am not trying to compare SLScool to you, or any other particular user. His application will be evaluated on his own contribution history, not in relation to the contributions of another user. I mentioned his level of activity compared to " the norm", to stress how much he has contributed to the improvement of this wiki over the past few months (which I am not sure you are aware of). Although he may not have made the improvements himself, he suggested, or initiated many of them to begin with. In some cases, these improvements could have easily been done by SLScool himself, if he had administrator permissions.
I have no desire to ridicule you or anyone else, I am simply providing an observation of your editing activity, as it relates to your criticisms of this application. You cannot expect to criticise another user, while being immune to those who disagree with you.
You have expressed your concerns, and your interpretation of this user's contributions. I have reviewed all of the information, and responded with a different point of view. It is important for me to convey that I have recognized a pattern in your contributions, where you seem to initiate conflict more often than the typical user, and time and again, it is directed solely at SLScool. It also seems like you often take offence, when no one else has. The history of "conflict" (if you can call it that) betwen the two of you, creates a heavily-biased account, which it would be irresponsible for me to ignore, or mention. In a way, this lessens the gravity of your accusations against SLScool, because it is nothing out of the ordinary for you to butt heads with him.
Your opinion of what is an "unnecessary reply" is entirely objective, and I disagree with some examples you have pointed out in the past. In the future, I would suggest you simply ignore edits of this kind. If a comment seems seriously innapropriate to you, you may bring them to the attention of an administrator, rather than confronting the user yourself.
-Sitb (talk) 23:26, July 22, 2017 (UTC)
(Also written before the previous commenter published)
Then set it on the table and let the directly affected users (e.g., NinjaDogDB) share their feelings; although, it will take some time for him to come as he has college to prepare for. Sitb has vacation. With an admin and a bureaucrat semi-active for some time, wouldn't it be good to have another admin who is active? Not very strong reasoning, but I'm going for it.
I'll say nothing of the privacy of conversations, or cases of "allowed" joining, but I'll say this: hijacking involves steering it in a different direction; like with the Badge thread.
. . .
Technically, since only two out of five of your claims were about my contributions (40%), "most of [your] opinion [is centered] around their social behavior rather than their contributions on articles."
. . .
Definitely yes to the first sentence; yes, and I am telling why I am fit; this is Sitb, so that's definitely not the meaning, although you could be doing "more constructive projects" (not considering your other wikis here); so should Sitb's statements "have been approached with a little more tact and worded differently, as to avoid the risk of someone interpreting your words in a way which may offend," or would my previous statement explain this (or both)?
Most of the investigating and digging is remembering encounters with users, as opposed to looking at Special:Contributions. How accurate is that statement?
But yes, many of the replies I've given in the past were unnecessary; however, most of them were fun, to one degree or another.SLScool (message wall) 23:29, July 22, 2017 (UTC)

If you expect a response from me, I will be at a summer camp—I'll be back in 164 hours, give or take.SLScool (message wall) 04:19, July 23, 2017 (UTC)

  • Alright, I'm done with this posting on this request. Sitb, SLScool, or anyone who has any questions or wants to talk about this - feel free to message me.  DanzxvFan8275 (MCUE)Giphy (1).gif  22:17, July 23, 2017 (UTC) 
SLScool, I think you would make a great administrator on this wiki. I have gotten to know you a lot better, and I have seen that you have shown more than enough initiative to help this wiki grow. There is one thing I would like to point out in a humorous way about your request. In your third paragraph, during the seventh sentence of that paragraph, you typed "filtering"; however, the correct usage would be "filter" in the context of that sentence. I thought it was funny how you accidentally used incorrect grammar when most of your edits are extremely grammar related. But besides that I have seen you help this wiki in a lot of ways. I know that you don't always address Sitb though. You have, in the past, come to me with your own reasons such as telling me what I have been doing wrong. I think you would become a great help to this wiki in the future, so I will support this request. -NinjaDogDB (talk) 16:59, July 26, 2017 (UTC)

It seems the main argument against my adminship is my interaction with other users being substandard; the main counter-argument is that it is limited to one user. I already have the support of three admins; if TheGamingMaster approves of my promotion, then I'll probably receive the adminship. Any other comments?SLScool (message wall) 16:05, July 30, 2017 (UTC)

  • I know there are support from 75% of administrators so far, but I feel like administrative votes should have as much value as regular users. Yes, they are administrators, and it makes sense, because this is an administrator request, but this just makes it so they have power than they actually need. In my opinion, users and administrators should have the same vote strength in these requests.  DanzxvFan8275 (MCUE)Giphy (1).gif  16:12, July 30, 2017 (UTC) 

A little over three weeks have passed since you submitted this request, and all but one of the administrators have weighed in and offered their support. There is no indication that TheGamingMaster will be back from holidays soon. In the meantime, administrator permissions could help you accomplish the template overhauls you are currently working on. You have continued these type of wiki-improvement initiatives over the last while, so I still feel confidant in granting your request, and think you will make a good addition to the team. Consider your admin request approved. I will add your account to the Sysop user rights group shortly.
-Sitb (talk) 10:40, August 12, 2017 (UTC)

DiseaseMaster7 (Passed)

  • I would like to request administrator rights (specifically sysop). I would use the powers of a sysop to delete unwanted pages and potentially block repeat or severe offenders. I have prior experience as a rollback (having possessed the role since October 2nd, 2016), and I frequently check the Recent Wikia Activity tab to see if there are any pages recently edited by users I haven't seen before. This has allowed me to find pages that have had large sections removed (Commands is a recent example). Also, I am either on this site daily or every other day, and I have done much to contribute to this Wikia, including the uploading (and proper labeling) of various screenshots. This is why I wish to be made a sysop. -DiseaseMaster7
  • Don't know you much, but based on your amazing contributions, I feel like you'd be a great fit.  DanzxvFan8275 (MCUE)Giphy (1).gif  23:03, November 20, 2017 (UTC) 
  • I second the motion. Why? I will leave that information on the Discord, but I do support DiseaseMaster7's request.SLScool (message wall) 23:32, November 20, 2017 (UTC)
  • You've been around the wiki now for quite a while, and are typically the very first user to notice when someone has performed vandalism, or broken other guidelines we have for the wiki. I can recall many times where you have notified administrators of things that need attention on the wiki shortly after they occur, which has helped us resolve issues in a timely manner. I have always appreciated these messages, but it would also be really handy if you were able to resolve issues such as these yourself. It would certainly help to have another administrator on this wiki who is as active as yourself, and you appear to be well-versed in our editing policies, so I offer my support for your application. SmileySmall.png
    Sitb (talk) 11:16, November 21, 2017 (UTC)
TheGamingMaster, as Uladog, said the following on the Discord (#wiki-member channel):

"Sorry, was writing a psych paper. I approve of Diseasemaster being an administrator, as he has shown effort in helping the wiki (and even has more edits than me)"

  • As stated by others above, I don't really see any counterarguments towards not being responsible for admin rights. - Comrade SS
  • NinjaDogDB went on the Discord and approved.

All of the administrators have given input, plus DanzxvFan8275. ComradeSS, you know what to do at this very moment.SLScool (message wall) 23:52, December 5, 2017 (UTC)

SLSbot (Passed)

SLSbot I would like Administrator on this wiki because I can help my owner clean up vandalism. Recently we suffered malicious attacks from eight different users and SLScool spent twenty minutes cleaning it up. I could get that done in a fraction of the time. So please.

Consider your requirements:
  • You have experience on this wiki, although your activity on other wikis is solely with testing your own features.
  • You have no Rollback rights here.
  • You have rarely demonstrated command of our editing policies and manual of style; you most just replace invalid phrases with valid ones.
  • You contributions are quantity over quality when the reverse is preferred.
  • You have provided poor reasoning.
I would say you have failed 3 2/2 of the five requirements. Yet, I still give a yes vote.SLScool (message wall) 03:41, October 1, 2018 (UTC)
Even though the bot doesn't enough of the prerequisites, it is your bot and since you yourself are an admin, I'm sure it can be trusted. I give it a support. - Comrade SS
Naturally, at this point I completely trust you as an administrator on the wiki (and subsequently your bot as well), so I don't necessarily take issue with granting admin permissions to your bot. However, I am curious what your plans are for the bot. I am sure you have a good reason for requesting enhanced access for it, but could you explain what automated procedure(s) you have in mind for the bot, which would require admin permissions? -Sitb (talk) 16:48, October 5, 2018 (UTC)
I might, in the future, get some more automated software. But, at present, I am not planning to do that. Currently, I only need the rights for moving, protecting, and deleting pages—useful for undoing vandalism, as my bot said.SLScool (message wall) 19:36, October 5, 2018 (UTC)
Fair enough, I can see situations where SLSbot could make the process of removing spam en-masse go a lot quicker and efficiently. You are more experienced with bots than I, so I trust your judgement. If you are confident the bot won't go haywire and start accidentally deleting legitimate wiki content, then you have my support. I will grant enhanced permissions to your bot now. -Sitb (talk) 14:12, October 6, 2018 (UTC)

Intellicraft (Passed)

Hello, I am Intellicraft and I would like to request Admin rights. My reasons are: I am very active, would like to edit the achievements by adding pictures to them, I am already a Rollback, most of the admins here are going inactive I would like the ability to delete spam pages, and would like the ability to block users who are spamming etc. I have also taken the time to study the Manuel of Style and Editing Policies. I am also a Bureaucrat on 2 wikis I have created and have tested around with the Admin Dashboard. (Edit) To answer your question about why I really need Admin rights, The time from me reporting users to admins and having them respond is usually around 2 hours. In that time, it would be less of a hassle to just have the rights to block or warn them then and there. Also, it is always nice to have another admin to help this wiki. If you still find this vague, I say we should put this request on hold until I can come up with more reasons. -Intellicraft (talk) 14:58, December 31, 2018 (UTC)

First, consider how well you meet your requirements:
  • Currently, you have 460 article edits, which is 315 more than when you applied for the Rollback role and is 60 more than the recommended number of edits for that role. However, you do have almost a thousand other contributions (comments, editing templates, etc.), and another fourteen hundred contributions across the rest of FANDOM. I would say you are very well experienced on this wiki and on other wikis.
  • You have possessed Rollback rights on this wiki for four months, and you have reverted vandalism a couple dozen times since them. I would say you meet all expectations for the second requirement.
  • I rarely, if ever, correct your contributions over a violation of the rules. You do a great job of following the policy and manual.
  • Your edits are very far from seeming like badge-farming. Even when they are small, your edits are beneficial (as opposed to being neutral—neither helpful nor harmful). You are good at editing with quality over quantity.
  • The final requirement is the most distinct one. The other four are based on your contributions leading up to this point; what you write in your application is different from all of that. I agree when you say that you are active, and I agree you need the rights to block vandals and delete spam. Experience in administrator tools is useful, but although the community central help pages do provide all necessary information on the tools. The activity of the other administrators (or the lack thereof, as you think to be the case) is not as relevant as the other requirements are. Needing the ability to edit the achievement pictures is an interesting one: currently, you can help out by submitting your pictures to an administrator, such as myself. You can help out without the user rights.
It is without a doubt that your contributions are great. You possess much experience with wikis and rollback rights, and your qualitative edits align with our Policy and Manual of Style. Your application, though, does not reflect as well upon that. You provide a couple basic reasons on why you would be a good administrator and why you require the tools. However, we already know the basic reasons. The application is a place for you to be considerate and thoughtful about why you qualify and why we should choose you. This is not a competition (where you would have to write better than somebody else), but writing only five lines does not demonstrate much effort or thought.
I am one person, and my beliefs on your qualifications and applications may not be the same as the other administrators' and bureaucrats'. If they think that you qualify, then I will be convinced. Otherwise, for my vote, I want you to answer this question: why do you really need the rights? You can very easily just ask us to do the administrative tasks. There are a number of good answers to this question, but I want to hear what you think. I want you to demonstrate some effort and thought when you answer this.
Until I am convinced by either you or the other administrators, I will give a no vote. SLScool (message wall) 18:09, December 31, 2018 (UTC)

I have given more reasons for why I should be an admin. -Intellicraft (talk) 18:55, December 31, 2018 (UTC)

Now that you have put in more effort and thought into your application, I will vote yes. If you want to know what other users put in the past, all you have to do is open up the history of this page (if you have not done so already). -SLScool (message wall) 21:13, December 31, 2018 (UTC)

Thank You. -Intellicraft (talk) 02:13, January 1, 2019 (UTC)

As per SLS, there's practically no reason that suggests your incapable of having admin rights. You have quality edits, are active and in general, a good user. I have no opposition to this. - Comrade SS

Hey Intellicraft, I am happy you stuck around to continue contributing to the wiki after originally asking about the admin tools a while ago. I am now confident that you are genuinely interested in this community. I have noticed your positive attitude toward others, including messages welcoming and encouraging new users on the wiki. It is a nice touch, which I don't see very often in wiki communities. I also appreciate your habit of flagging articles that are in need of cleanup. It will certainly help to focus the improvement work that is needed on this wiki, for any users who want to focus their cleanup efforts.

Just to provide balance to my response, I will offer one or two pieces of constructive criticism: Try not to focus too much on the competetive aspect of contributing to a wiki. Rollback and administrator roles aren't really "ranks" or a hierarchy, they are simply toolsets for maintenance. Similarly, Fandom's achievement/badge system is a depreciated and highly-flawed feature which may not be around forever (we've actually had a discussion on our wiki's discord about possibly removing the system from our wiki, I would encourage you to check it out).

In any case, I am in agreement with the others' responses thus far. You've been one of the most active users on the wiki for the past 6 months or so, and your contributions have been helpful. I agree that it could be useful to have an additional admin around to help deal with vandals. So far, it looks like there is a general support for your request, but we should keep your application open for a bit to see if anyone else in the community has anything to add. Personally, I don't see much harm in adding you to the sysop user group, so you have my vote! SmileySmall.png
- Sitb (talk) 13:12, January 1, 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, and I even I admit sometimes I am a bit competitive. I will watch myself.
-Intellicraft (talk) 16:23, January 1, 2019 (UTC)

I agree with Sitb and SLScool. Your edits have always been of good quality. I believe you would be a good addition to the Administration team.
- DiseaseMaster7 1:31, January 2, 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your vote.
-Intellicraft (talk) 19:18, January 2, 2019 (UTC)

I also agree with Sitb and SLScool . You have been very active on this wikia as long as you've been here, and you have been quick to address vandalizing and other problems with users that requires an admin's attention. I agree that it does take a while for one of the current admins to respond once you've addressed it, and I do agree that it would be easier and much faster if you were able to address these issues directly instead of waiting for an admin to comply. You have made good edits, and you have shown good interest in helping the wiki. All in all I believe you will be a welcome addition to the administrating team.
- NinjaDogDB (talk) 14:17, January 7, 2019 (UTC)

Your application has been open for a week, all but one of our current administrators have responded, and no one has voiced any objections so far. Looks like your request is approved! I will add you to the sysop usergroup now.SmileySmall.png
-Sitb (talk) 22:31, January 7, 2019 (UTC)

QuickWhitt7 (Passed)

I would like to become a sysop/admin. I have experience with both this wiki and many other wikis, a couple of which I own. I possess rollback rights, and do my absolute best to adhere to the Manual of Style and editing policies. I have almost 500 edits under my belt, a large portion of which are minor edits that correct grammatical errors or formatting bugs. I would be an excellent administrator for this wiki because I will not only improve and cleanup the templates, infoboxes, and articles/guides, but I will also to the best of my ability protect the wiki from vandals and trolls.

Thank you for your consideration. QuickWhitt7 (Talk | Contribs) 00:38, May 7, 2019 (UTC)

Hi QuickWhitt7,
Between your current account and your old account, you've now been contributing to this wiki for about 3 1/2 years, with over 1000 contributions, and I cannot recall ever seeing negative changes made with either of your accounts. You've invested considerable time into organizing a few different categories of articles across the wiki that normally don't get much attention, and it seems you are always diligent with your research. I also know you to be a very technical person, which is an incredibly useful trait for an admin. By looking around at some of your other activity across Fandom, I can see that you not only have experience with Fandom's admin tools, but also some knowledge of coding in general.
I personally have no issue approving your admin request. However, as is standard, we can leave your request open for at least a few days, to give others a chance to speak on the matter.
-Sitb (talk) 13:11, May 7, 2019 (UTC)

As what Sitb is saying, you do have a great contribution history, and with the fact that your specific reason for being an admin is that you want to cleanup infoboxes, templates etc., I think you would make a great a great addition to the administrative team. I will give a Yes vote. Intellicraft (talk) 19:58, May 12, 2019 (UTC).

It looks like no one is opposed, so I'll be granting you Sysop permissions shortly. SmileySmall.png
- Sitb latest?cb=20190519141753 (Message wall / Talk page) 17:20, May 19, 2019 (UTC)

Banana.spread10 (Passed)

Yes please, I want to be an admin, because I want to strengthen the security of the wiki. I can fix all articles and always be up to date with new information. Right now I have reached 1000+ edits and I have done it patiently and sincerely and I already had Rollback role. I keep eye this wiki so that no troll can mess up this wiki. That's from me, thank you SmileySmall.png. -Banana.spread10 (talk) 06:39, April 19, 2019 (UTC)

You meet the requirements for editing (the first four out of the five). However, you have said nothing for the fifth requirement. SLScool (message wall) 23:04, April 19, 2019 (UTC)
The reason I'm an admin is I want to add more articles and clean up articles. I have seen other active admins who can delete bad articles (which are usually done by vandals), I also want to be able to do that SmileySmall.png. -Banana.spread10 (talk) 00:25, April 20, 2019 (UTC)
Hi Banana.spread10,
I am happy that you care about the security of the wiki, have an interest in cleaning up after vandals, and want to keep articles up to date with information. Your edits on the wiki have been largely helpful since you arrived here 3 1/2 months ago, and I hope you plan to stick around as a part of the community. However, as far as your desire to "add more articles and clean up articles" is concerned, you have always had the ability to do this without any of the admin tools, so that isn't really the best reason to request admin tools. Unless I am mistaken, you haven't attempted to add new articles to the wiki until about a month ago, and as I advised you at the time, the pages you added were complete copy/pastes from another wiki. You did say you regretted your actions, and would try not to do it again (and thankfully, I haven't noticed any blatant copying since), but the fact that it happened so recently, and it's something clearly stated in the wiki's editing policies makes me nervous that you don't fully understand the wiki's rules/style yet. All admins on the wiki are required to be intimately familiar with these rules, and help guide other users through leading by example. So, it is important that anyone who requests admin permissions has a proven track-record of following the rules for an extended period of time (several months, at least). For this reason, I would personally prefer if you spent more time contributing to the wiki, proving you can follow the wiki's policies and be a good example for other users in the long-term, before you are granted administrator rights.
You mentioned a desire to deal with vandals, but you are already able to undo most types of vandalism using the Rollback tool that you were given access to a little over a month ago. The only specific admin-related tool you have mentioned you wanted access to, is the ability to delete articles. Spam articles like that typically only appear on the wiki less than 5 times each month, and are usually deleted within an hour by one of the 5-or-so existing active admins (if the page hasn't already been flagged for deletion by another user). Our ability to remove content like that in a timely manner hasn't really been an issue on this wiki over past year.
There are a wide variety of tools/duties that an admin is expected to use in their role, but as SLScool mentioned above, you haven't said much about whether you have experience using these types of tools, or what you plan do to with admin tools if you had them. For example: have there been tasks on the wiki that you would like to have worked on recently, but couldn't because they require administrator tools/access? Beyond the simple ability to delete articles, how can you see administrator tools enhancing your ability to contribute to the wiki?
-Sitb (talk) 11:36, April 22, 2019 (UTC)
I actually have one wiki and already be a bureaucrat role, and I know the admin tool, so I can learn more about admin tools and make me know all tools. Then, I can block the destroyer (before, I'll warn them for the first change). -Banana.spread10 (talk) 12:03, April 22, 2019 (UTC)
You have been quite active on the wiki, and you have shown that you want to help the wiki as much as you can. In regards to what you said in response to Sitb and SLScool about what you plan to do with the administrator tools and your experience with them, I see that you haven't had much experience with the admin tools, but that doesn't mean you can't learn how to use them. However, I do agree with Sitb in that it would be a good idea to familiarize yourself with the editing policies and the Manual of Style a bit more first.
-NinjaDogDB (talk) 18:16, April 29, 2019 (UTC)
But, I need admin because I can fix css code and I already understand the editing policies and the Manual of Style SmileySmall.png. -Banana.spread10 (contact) 15:23, April 30, 2019 (UTC)
I need admin because I can fix css code -Banana.spread10

That is a good reason to request sysop permissions. However, you haven't really given us much details about that. The admin request policy asks that you provide reasoning - specific examples would really help us make a decision. So, if you are serious about fixing/modifying the wiki's CSS in the future, what are a few ideas you have for fixing it? You seem to be passionate enough about the admin tools that you feel you really need them to perform your desired tasks, so presumably you have thought a lot about this, and should have no difficulty providing examples. I'm not sure you have ever really discussed the back-end maintenance and design of the wiki in the past, so I'm just trying to get an idea of where you're going with this.
-Sitb (talk) 18:10, April 30, 2019 (UTC)

Many things I can fix it, especially for the cursors, I need to change link, visited, hover, and active. But I'll keep Diamond sword to body. And the important thing I need to block vandals who ignored a warn, and I notice some admins little bit inactive, thanksSmileySmall.png. -Banana.spread10 (contact) 12:09, May 2, 2019 (UTC)

Personally, I do think you would make a good admin, but I do agree with the other admins about your specific reasons for being an admin and wiki policies. For now, I will give a No vote. Intellicraft (talk) 14:05, May 11, 2019 (UTC).

At this point, I think you've proven your dedication and usefulness to the wiki. Recently, you've even been taking part in discussions about the overhaul of some of the wiki's templates on Discord. You're also interested in possibly doing more work with the wiki's CSS. Also, I no longer have the same concerns as I expressed in my original response, you seem to be following all of the wiki's guidelines. So, I'll be granting you Sysop permissions shortly. SmileySmall.png
- Sitb latest?cb=20190519141753 (Message wall / Talk page) 17:20, May 19, 2019 (UTC)

Intellicraft (Postponed)

Hello there. I would like to request for bureaucrat as my contributions across everywhere on this wiki are very good and I am also already an admin. I am always looking for ways to help manage the wiki (such as checking reported posts on discussions), am trusted by many users, I am very active, and am ready to help the wiki to the fullest extent I can. If you vote no because you think my request is a bit short, then I understand. Intellicraft (talk) 15:24, August 31, 2019 (UTC).

As the notice at the top of this article mentions, the wiki is not currently accepting requests for bureaucrats, because we already have three. There are no enhanced tools, powers, or hierarchy that a bureaucrat has beyond that of a sysop admin like yourself, other than one simple tool used to modify certain user rights. That's really the only reason a wiki needs an active bureaucrat. Since we have three bureaucrats, who typically reply to messages in less than 24 hours, there isn't really a need for any more.
- Sitb (Message wall / Talk page) 15:41, August 31, 2019 (UTC)

Alright, I understand. I will postpone this request. Just keep me updated when a Bureaucrat goes inactive for a long period of time. Intellicraft (talk) 20:14, August 31, 2019 (UTC).

AzCoy7 (Passed)

Hello, as you may know, I am AzCoy7. I am currently a discussions moderator and rollback on the wiki, and I am enjoying my time so far. Here are some reasons I would like to be an administrator:

- I have 2,000+ edits (if that's enough)

- I already have rollback rights

- I was the first and currently I am the only user with moderator and/or moderator-related rights, so I do have some experience being (kind of) a staff member.

- I am active 24/7 (not literally)

- I have thoroughly read the Manual of Style, Editing Policy and Discussions Guidelines.

If you reject this request, that will be fine, but please give me feedback. If you have any questions, please reply to this.

Thank you for considering this,

- AzCoy7 😉 [Rollback and Discussions Moderator] (talk) 23:35, September 17, 2019 (UTC)

Dont interpret this as a negative response or anything, but the admin request guidelines mention:
"You must provide reasoning why you would be a good administrator, and why you require the enhanced tools."
Could you expand your application a bit to comment on that aspect of being an administrator?
- Sitb (Message wall / Talk page) 18:36, September 19, 2019 (UTC)
- Sorry about that! Here is my reason:
I think I would be a good/suitable administrator for this wiki because recently, I have reverted vandalism, helped out some users with technical issues, and have carefully moderated the discussions everyday. These are my three key reasons why I may become a good administrator.
I think I may require enhanced tools because I'd like to use them to block vandals, instead of manually having to contact an administrator and/or bureaucrat. 
Sitb, if you need more application, please feel free to ask.
- AzCoy7 😉 [Rollback and Discussions Moderator] (talk) 02:25, September 21, 2019 (UTC)
Administrators will occasionally have to talk to other users, whether it is because the user is doing something wrong or because we need to plan a new feature. As I see it, the "provide reasoning why you would be a good administrator" requirement is based on that point, although there are numerous other ways to see it (and I am happy to explain a lot more on my stance, but not on this application page). However, having read some of the positve and constructive posts you have made, I do not need to see you provide reasoning in this application beyond the basics. I say you are qualified for the job, and you have a yes vote from me. SLScool (message wall) 05:41, September 21, 2019 (UTC)
Reply by AzCoy7 - Thank you, SLScool]
Man, it would be cool if you were an admin. I’m on your support. Travjt (talk) 08:08, September 22, 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, Travjt! - AzCoy7 😉 [Rollback and Discussions Moderator] (talk) 16:47, September 22, 2019 (UTC)

Just thought I would give my input. I support you becoming an admin. ~ where have I been? 17:55, September 22, 2019 (UTC)
Now that you have provided the specific reasons, I most definitely vote Yes!

Intellicraft (talk) 19:33, September 22, 2019 (UTC).

Thank you everyone! I really appreciate the support. - AzCoy7 😉 [Rollback and Discussions Moderator] (talk) 04:49, September 23, 2019 (UTC)
Like I said before, I realized about the quick time for the admin rights, because I have the admin on 3 months.
And, I read all your reason to be admin. So now, I vote yes to you SmileySmall.png. - Banana.spread10 (contact/contribs) 09:48, September 23, 2019 (UTC)

You've got a "Yes" vote from me. It could help having another active user like yourself to help out with admin duties. 😁
- Sitb (Message wall / Talk page) 15:08, September 23, 2019 (UTC)

We all seem to be in favor of your being an administrator, so consider your application passed. SLScool (message wall) 23:24, September 23, 2019 (UTC)

Cheers! ➤ AzCoy7 ➤ (talk) 06:02, October 11, 2020 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.