Battlestar Wiki:Requests for bureaucratship/Shane

From Battlestar Wiki, the free, open content Battlestar Galactica encyclopedia and episode guide
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for bureaucratship. Please do not modify it.



  • Current Count: (6/0/0)
  • Current Date/Time: Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 17:07 (UTC)
  • RFB Ending: Monday, April 16, 2007 at 12:00 (UTC)

Shane (talkcontribsedit countpage movesblock userblock log) – I have helped out the Battlestar Wiki tirelessly to help maintain the site and servres. I beleive that you, the users of Battlestar Wiki, can entrust me with enforcing the rules of the Wiki at a higher level now. Helping create policy has now been my strong point with the user of the Think Tank and other tools that we have created. People see me as a leader and I respect that.

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept. :-) Shane (T - C - E) 15:21, 9 April 2007 (CDT)


  1. Support. This is a de facto vote to me. Shane's Jedi-like wiki skills as well as hardware and software support make this one obvious to me. As with all of us, it's still important to watch how you phrase things at the right time, but other than that, Shane's work on the wiki merits this tiny extra bit of responsibility (and spreads the power of the Squeegee). --Spencerian 16:45, 9 April 2007 (CDT)
  2. Support Aye. He's basically already an uber-boss. --Serenity 17:06, 9 April 2007 (CDT)
  3. Support Clear dedication to the wiki both as an editor and also all the stuff behind the scenes that keeps everything running hunky dory. --Mercifull (Talk/Contribs) 03:08, 10 April 2007 (CDT)
  4. Support I am shocked Shane is not a bureaucrat yet, as he pretty much looks like Joe's second-in-command to me. But apart from that, he's worthy of the job. --Catrope(Talk to me or e-mail me) 09:36, 10 April 2007 (CDT)
  5. Support Has demonstrated tremendous amounts of dedication, willingness to listen and collaborate, and vision. I don't know what the B-crat to admin ratio ought to be, and I'd trust anybody I've voted in as a sysop as a B-crat, but Shane is clearly an outstanding candidate. --Steelviper 10:10, 10 April 2007 (CDT)
  6. Support What can I add that everyone else hasn't already said? A very worthy candidate. JubalHarshaw 10:13, 10 April 2007 (CDT)




Questions for the candidate[edit]

1. Have you read the discussions on when to promote and not promote? What do you understand the criteria for promotion to be?
A. Yes. A sysop has to have not only a firm standing on the polices of the wiki, but able to know when he/she must do the right thing.
2. How would you deal with contentious nominations where a decision to promote or not promote might be criticized?
A. I would remind people that voting for sysops is not a popularity contest and it's seen as one's ability to help with wiki be maintained.
3. Battlestar Wiki expect Bureaucrats to adhere to high standards of fairness, knowledge of policy and the ability to engage others in the community. Why do you feel you meet those standards?
A. I am involved without a lot of the policy discusstions already and engage myself in the Think tank debates when I think it's needed.
4. If you become a bureaucrat, will you pledge not to discuss promotion or non-promotion of potential admins on any other forum during the course of nominations and especially when making a decision? And to discuss issues of promotion or non-promotion only with other bureaucrats, in their talk, where such discussion would be transparent?
A. Yes. Showing favoritism is not good.
5. Do you have the time and do you have the desire to visit BW:RFA on a regular basis to see to the promotion or delisting of candidates in a timely manner?
A. Yes. I watch that page closely already. ;-)

Voting has ended[edit]

User:Shane has been successfully accepted as a bureaucrat of Battlestar Wiki. --Spencerian 12:30, 16 April 2007 (CDT)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.