AVID:Requests for Permissions

=Active requests for adminship=

Comments

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Closing as invalid, as user did not meet requirements for adminship and has since been blocked. HibiscusCrown20 (talk) 04:14, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Oppose

 * While good in alerting others in files and articles suggested for review as well as sockpuppets, the reason why I oppose is due to your poor grammar, the fact you were only around for a month, your EXTENSIVE history of sockpuppetry on Logopedia, and overall not being a very constructive editor with your creation of stub pages and plagiarizing/duplicating other articles including this site and Logopedia. Camenati (talk) 22:51, 12 August 2022 (UTC)


 * You only have 344 edits and you joined June 2022. Maybe wait a little while. DHX Cookie Jar Fanatic (talk to me) 17:28, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
 * He's already blocked last month.  Logohub   (talk) 09:49, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Closing as ✅. Congratulations, SuperMax124!  Logohub   (talk) 19:09, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Support
Definite support here. Would love to work with SuperMax as an admin. It would also be good to have another Aussie admin around, especially when I'm not as available during my semesters and when other IRL stuff is happening. Talk ·&#32;Edits 08:27, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Per Hb1290. HibiscusCrown20 (talk) 15:23, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Per everyone else.  Logohub   (talk) 09:51, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * for some one that has so many edits and helped the wiki so much i think you could me it G23M08 (talk) 16:18, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Closing as ✅. Congratulations, Jeffersonkendric!  Logohub   (talk) 03:51, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Support
 Logohub   (talk) 06:45, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Talk ·&#32;Edits 05:03, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Well, he's an Admin on the Company Bumpers Wiki, so I think it's safe to say, he needs to here as well. Television Bois (Wanna chat?) 16:41, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Comments
User was promoted on Company Bumpers in the last couple of months. They're doing a good job so far dealing with sockpuppets and cleaning up their mess. They've also done some good work in the MediaWiki namespace with some of the interface messages to the point that I've ported some of his additions over here. Talk ·&#32;Edits 05:07, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

I won't support or oppose. And here's my reasoning. It has nothing to do with the user. Seems like a good guy. But right now, am planning a bit of an overhaul of CLG administrators. Just plan to cut out ones who aren't really cutting it anymore. So I will ask to hold off on any promotions until further notice, so we can get everything straightened out. That's all I have to say MatthewLMayfield (talk) 13:30, 12 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Are there any updates regarding this administrator overhaul? While I still have some ways to go to meet the criteria, I do want to look into becoming an administrator, mainly to help with the sockpuppet problem on the wiki. HibiscusCrown20 (talk) 01:00, 11 January 2022 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Closing as invalid, as user does not meet requirements for adminship. HibiscusCrown20 (talk) 04:14, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) You need to have been editing for a full year in order to request adminship; you have only been editing for six months. --CooleyBoy10 (talk) 00:29, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  Not just yet, given this warning from a former Steward for engaging in deceptive sockpuppetry 8 months prior to this request. Wait for at least another 6 to 9 more months, then we can talk business (even if I'm just a local non-Counter Vandalism Team member myself). --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) 12:19, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments
I would suggest you read the "Note to Requesters" part of this page first. Given the circumstances, I don't suppose you qualify for this position even in the slightest yet. --PM pinter (talk) 19:11, 14 December 2021 (UTC)


 * I have read the note to Requesters. Poocian (talk) 20:30, 14 December 2021 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Support
TVB

Comments
Any other detail you need besides that? TVB (talk) 20:16, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Also, remember to put a signature by using the characters " ~ " LMgamer36 (talk) 08:17, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

I have edited for a least one year, had more than 100 edits, and communicates in a near-native fluency of English. LMgamer36 (talk) 01:32, 24 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Oh, i meant 1000 LMgamer36 (talk) 03:49, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Come on, where is everybody? LMgamer36 (2020, 2022-present).webp (Visit my talk page!) 08:33, 11 August 2022 (UTC)


 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * User is promoted as an administrator and now bureaucrat.  Logohub   (talk) 16:11, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Support
-Definitely. They're always on top of sockpuppets and alerts us on Discord. We could use one more good person to keep up shop. AnimeTVLogos (talk) 03:31, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Definitely a strong candidate for admin. HC has been instrumental in alerting myself and the other admins to a number of vandals and sockpuppets. They've also been in involved in alerting the stewards to LTA accounts in need of Global Locking. I'd be more than happy to work with them as an admin. sig.png Talk ·&#32;Edits 23:30, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I have to agree TVB (talk) 23:38, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Comments

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Closing as invalid, as user has since been blocked for vandalism and profanity usage. HibiscusCrown20 (talk) 04:14, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1)  I generally doubt seeing that as a chance. And I speak for everyone when I say why that is. Doctorine Dark (talk) 15:47, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Support

 * User is active at adding content and reporting vandals. Sure he can be a bit cynical to vandals sometimes but IMO he's pretty harmless (as long as he stops the cynical behavior once he becomes an admin).  Logohub   (talk) 16:55, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * This user works hard on this Wiki, per Logohub's description. The cynical behaviour would need to stop, but I can see that he has already acknowledged this so hopefully it won't be anything to worry about. Thus, he has my support. Luke2505 (talk) 10:01, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Comments

 * I'm in the middle of the fence here. While you're a good editor and have a decent track record of responding to violators, I think your behavior needs more working, particularly with the occasional use of strong profanity on the site (does censored profanity really count?) and a rather cynical attitude towards violators, including people who are mostly in good faith. Camenati (talk) 23:41, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Hmmm... Fair point. I never really thought of that, so, that's somewhat a surprise? Woah.
 * You're right! PM pinter (talk) 03:05, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Requests for Bureaucrat

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Closing as ✅ and marking as ✅ per overwhelming consensus. Congratulations! Agent Isai (talk) 03:22, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

User:Hb1290
talk · contribs · editcount · [ logs] · [ block log] · [ rights log]
 * Well hasn't this been a journey? And now it's finally time to move forward into a new era, which is something that I'd be glad to help with as part of the bureaucrat team. I believe in an inclusive, consensus driven community where all big decisions are discussed and voted on by the community not just between a few people behind closed doors. Exciting times are on the horizon for us and I'd love to be a part of that. sig.png Talk ·&#32;Edits 00:39, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Support

 * A strong candidate for bureaucrat, as shown by his useful contributions to the wiki in stopping rule breakers, improving and fixing several elements of the wiki, and a considerate attitude towards the community. Camenati (talk) 00:45, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Slam dunk/home run/whatever you want to call it. Thatvhstapeguy (talk) 00:47, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't it be obvious why I support them so much? They are fantastic, and are a great choice for Bureaucrat. Dreamcast99 (talk) 00:53, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * This person was bureaucrat previously IIRC, and is a good candidate. Daemonspudguy (talk) 00:58, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Nah, I was just an admin before. sig.png Talk ·&#32;Edits 01:15, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Your the perfect guy to look after the rebrand. BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 01:34, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * This user's been a very active member of the Wiki for as long as I can remember, and I believe they demonstrate the necessary maturity as well as moderation skills to be able to handle the role of bureaucrat. Luke2505 (talk) 01:47, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Per everyone else's reasoning! HibiscusCrown20 (talk) 02:18, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Excellent choice. Highly recommended. Snelfu (talk) 08:39, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * He definitely deserves to be a bureaucrat for reasons already stated. --DisneyInternationalFan (talk) 13:11, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * What else is there to say that hasn't been said? --AnimeTVLogos (talk) 20:57, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * As per everyone else.  Logohub   (talk) 03:47, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * As with what Everyone else has said. When I think of reliable admins, HB's one of the first that comes to mind. MinistrycraftEntertainment (talk) 12:33, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Closing as ✅ and marking as ✅ per overwhelming consensus. Congratulations! Agent Isai (talk) 03:22, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

User:HibiscusCrown20
talk · contribs · editcount · [ logs] · [ block log] · [ rights log]
 * Wasn't this quite a ride? As a bit of background, prior to this huge round of drama that started with me and a few other admins being briefly demoted before Agent Isai of Miraheze's stewards stepped in, I was promoted to admin by Miraheze stewards in the absence of the Board of Directors after my Request for Adminship proved successful, this also being in the wake of a growing sockpuppet and other troublesome user problem. I've always wanted to join the admin team of the wiki to help out with these areas, and I have always dreamed of helping this wiki along in becoming a more welcoming and accepting place for editors who'll be able to have a say in the direction that this wiki goes, whether it be rule changes, rebrands, you name it, and not the oligarchic state the BoD brought that imposed rules on this community with no prior public communication with this wiki's community and also effectively attempted to censor any criticism of these decisions. I admittedly may not be proficient in the more techy side of MediaWiki, but I'm still hoping that I'll be able to help pull this wiki out of the state that it's been in under the BoD and help make this community feel safe and welcomed. HibiscusCrown20 (talk) 02:22, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Support

 * Proven herself to be an excellent admin so far and a great force for good in this community. sig.png Talk ·&#32;Edits 02:26, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Admin for only around 1 month, but really demonstrated her capabilities of keeping the wiki safe from sockpuppeteers as well as alerting others of rule violations. She is an active admin in the wiki who listens to what the community wants and delivers fair punishments to persistent rule violaters. A worthy bureaucrat for sure. Camenati (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Great contributor to the wiki. Clearly a good choice. Snelfu (talk) 08:39, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * This user has been very active in the short period she's held admin for, and has been especially helpful in keeping the Wiki in check and free from vandalism and sockpuppets, as has been stated by others. She definitely holds the right levels of maturity and moderation skills to be a worthy candidate for bureaucrat. Luke2505 (talk) 14:48, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * In the short time she's been an admin, she's proven herself to be a strong leader, knowing the site inside and out (better than me even), dealing with spammers and sockpuppets beautifully, etc. She's more than worthy of being a bureaucrat. --AnimeTVLogos (talk) 21:03, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Very helpful admin, she's been blocking vandals and socks left and right, and has been doing a lot of help in spite of her only being promoted just a a month ago. ` Logohub   (talk) 03:47, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * No consensus to promote. Agent Isai (talk) 03:22, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Support

 * Definitely a good candidate. Their long experience in particular makes them a very worthy choice. sig.png Talk ·&#32;Edits 05:46, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Oppose

 * Very good editor, but does not seem to fit the admin role very well, let alone a bureaucrat. You are not that active on this site and do nothing to respond to vandals or sockpuppeteers. However, if you get promoted to either role, I will not be upset about it. Camenati (talk) 07:46, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * While they've been with the wiki for a long time, I haven't seen enough action from them that would warrant a bureaucrat position. --AnimeTVLogos (talk) 21:42, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * While I note the very small amount of supports, there are no opposes so this request is declared ✅. Congratulations! Agent Isai (talk) 02:51, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

 Logohub   (talk) 03:47, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Support

 * A great admin who’s been instrumental in some of the best changes and ideas we’ve had. sig.png Talk ·&#32;Edits 05:46, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Per Hb. --AnimeTVLogos (talk) 21:36, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Per Hb. HibiscusCrown20 (talk) 03:42, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Speedy closing as invalid due to user not meeting the requirements for Bureaucrat. Agent Isai (talk) 02:51, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

NancerCLG (talk) 22:19, 29 September 2022 (GMT+1)

Oppose

 * Way far off the 1000 edit minimum, not to mention you do not edit too much on the wiki. Some of your cynical behavior also gives me doubt, not being the best for either admin or bureaucrat roles. And recently, you just voted on an already closed discussion so that gives serious doubt about your knowledge of the site's rules and what follows in wikis in general. Camenati (talk) 21:24, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * While you have taken the initiative to create and run the new AVID Discord server and I have noticed that you've become more receptive to criticism in the way the server is run recently, I cannot say you are ready for Bureaucrat at this time. You are currently a Registered User on this Wiki and have not even held an Admin position yet, and as has been said, currently you don't meet the minimum amount of edits. I won't comment on your recent behaviour as you have been taking steps in order to better it, which is a positive on your part. I feel like maybe you can learn the rules of the Wiki inside out and gain the moderation skills by continuing to run the Discord, while doing this you should step up your editing presence on the Wiki. Then perhaps apply for Admin (or Moderator, if it ends up being introduced) instead of trying to jump straight to Bureaucrat. I feel like you could absolutely become a Bureaucrat eventually, but not at the moment. Luke2505 (talk) 09:47, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Per everyone. Doctorine Dark (talk) 01:37, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Comments

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.