Staff Nominations

The Requests for Adminship and Requests for Rollback page (Often abbrivated RfA's (Adminship) or RfR's (Rollback)) is used to nominate users for a position on the administrative team. Users (as the name implies) may request the flags, or self-nominate. New administrators are often needed as the community at the Cats of the Clans Wiki expands. They also may be needed to take the place of formerly active administrators who no longer contribute to the wiki.

Requests are generally closed two weeks after the nomination, and are decided. However, if the nominator or nominee chooses to withdraw the nomination or the nominee declines, it may be closed immediately.

Thanks to Satsujin for creating this page, and Nightshine to making the voting templates.

Conditions for Nominations

 * 1) Must have over 1,000 edits
 * 2) Must have had either a Leader, Deputy, Medicine Cat (In any clan, Including the Tribe and BloodClan; Current or Past)
 * 3) Not have a record of severe rule breaking and/or multiple bans
 * 4) Must be an active user
 * 5) Must have 2 Admin Votes in either Support/Oppose to Approve/Decline
 * 6) Must have 6 or Over Rollback/Normal User Votes in either Support/Oppose to Approve/Decline
 * Keep your cool. RfAs have been known to host some nasty flame wars. If another user disagrees with you and gives you trouble, just keep your cool and don't fight back. That may sound "cowardly", but if you fight back, you could receive a block, and/or make the flame war escalate.
 * New users can't vote. Sorry, but that's the way it is. Someone can easily make a bunch of dummy accounts, all vote for their friend to be an admin, and unfairly turn the tide of the vote. For this reason, new users cannot vote for the possibility of being a sockpuppet. Anyone trying to use sockpuppets will be blocked. New Users must have over 300 edits to vote.
 * Be descriptive. Though you don't have to, it's a lot easier for a discussion if you say why you're voting what you're voting. If you just say " Support — Example 06:24, 27 March 2011 (UTC)", you're not really saying why the candidate should be an admin, and your vote may be excluded and strikethroughed. It's not just for supports, but for all votes.
 * No Self-Support. Nominators may only support the nominee if they are not one-in-the-same.

Glossary for vote titles
Not just the standard "Support" and "Oppose"s are used in RfAs. This subsection lists most vote types.
 * Support - a supporting vote
 * Strong Support - A very positive vote.
 * Weak Support - A positive vote, but the voter has not ruled out oppose.
 * Neutral - A vote saying that the voter is unsure about the nominee/between supporting and opposing.
 * Neutral leaning towards Support - A neutral vote, but closer to support than oppose.
 * Neutral leaning towards Oppose - A neutral vote, but closer to oppose than support.
 * Pending - Vote not yet decided; essentially the same as neutral.
 * Oppose - an opposing vote
 * Strong Oppose - A very negative vote.
 * Weak Oppose - A negative vote, but the voter has not ruled out support.
 * Not yet - A negative vote saying that the nominee has not been around long enough, but would be admin material if they had been around for a longer time.
 * Comment - A comment.
 * - a comment made in response to another comment can simply be indented.
 * Question - A sort of comment that asks a question. (Ex. What would you do with your tools?)
 * Question - A sort of comment that asks a question. (Ex. What would you do with your tools?)

To Support, type:

To Oppose, type:

To Comment type:

To state you are Neutral, simply type:

Nominations for Adminship
Type for a yes vote, and type  for a no vote.

User Nominated and Reason

 * Hawkey - Hawkey's had her rights taken and given back! I mean, she should be an admin! She was one of the first users here, she works very hard and is just a blast to roleplay with!  Sky star   ♥  23:36, March 27, 2011 (UTC)

Support
Type for a yes vote; type  for a question

Oppose
Type for a no vote; type  for a question


 * Oppose — I am sorry, Hawk, but I do not believe yuo should have admin status. You had it in the past and it was taken away because you left the wiki - multiple times. I agree with Ice's below vote. 我愛羅 As long as theres others to kill the world is wonderful  00:04, March 28, 2011 (UTC)

Neutral
Type for a neutral vote; type  for a question

Admin Votes

 * Oppose — Not admin status, Echo. Rollabck. I vote for rollback, but not admins. We have plenty as it is. Hawk deserves rollback because ---


 * She is active.
 * She has had a deputy.
 * Over 300 edits.
 * Extremely devoted and helpful.


 * User:Icestorm123/Sig 23:42, March 27, 2011 (UTC)

Nominations for Rollback
Type for a yes vote, and type  for a no vote.

User Nominated and Reason

 * Satsu - I would like to nominate Satsu for rollback status. She is extremely helpful and active on the IRC channel, and comes up with brilliant ideas. She has been around for quite some time now. Satsu qualifies in all the conditions above, and I believe she'll make a great rollback, and perhaps admin someday.  HA WK FI RE98  23:11, March 27, 2011 (UTC)

Support
Type for a yes vote; type  for a question

Oppose
Type for a no vote; type  for a question

Neutral
Type for neutral; type  for a question.