Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Archive 25

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by UninvitedCompany (talk | contribs) at 14:48, 19 November 2004 (archive). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Older talk

  • Archive 1: June-August 2003
  • Archive 2: August-December 2003
  • Archive 3: Discussion in December 2003 about time people should wait before making request and a note
  • Archive 4: Some January 2004 discussion
  • Archive 5: Discussion on January 8, 2004 about distributing the task of making other admins
  • Archive 6: (Greenmountainboy's claim about being attacked on this page (January 8-9, 2004))
  • Archive 7: Complaint against tannin (January 24-25, 2004)
  • Archive 8: Abuse of de-sysop area (January 30-31, 2004)
  • Archive 9: Discussion on January 31, 2004 about how to deal with misuse of admin privileges
  • Archive 10: Recent discussion archived in advance (February 2004)
  • Archive 11: Policy on Anons and this page (February 9, 2004)
  • Archive 12: Discussion on 19-25 February, 2004 about who can vote and how bureaucrats should be appointed
  • Archive 13: Discussion of what consensus is needed for a request (February-March 2004)
  • Archive 14: Polls on making all admins bureaucrats, and on possible minimum requirements for adminship (February-March 2004)
  • Archive 15: Discussion of nominators, self-nominations, and nominating procedures (March 2004)
  • Archive 16: Possible minimum requirements for voting, discussion and poll about bureaucrats exercising individual judgment in determining consensus (March-April 2004)
  • Archive 17: TOC tallies, relative merits of a firm 80% threshold compared to "bureaucrat" judgement, creeping upwards of requirements for support of adminship, possible periodic renewal of adminship, issues regarding specific nominations (March 4-May 20 2004. No discussion May 20-June 1)
  • Archive 18: Questions about adminship, Lst27, JediMaster16, this page needs an image...
  • Archive 19: Discussion and poll about early removal of nominations, possible timelags between re-nominations (July 2004)
  • Archive 20: Sockpuppets and qualifications for voting (August 2004)
  • Archive 21: Edit counting, subpages, boilerplate questions and more (September 2004)
  • Archive 22: Promotions to bureaucrat (October 2004)
  • Archive 23: October/November 2004

Nominees not accepting or rejecting

We currently have four nominations, one overdue, who have neither accepted nor rejected their nominations. The RfA page states:

Note: Nominations have to be accepted by the user in question. If you nominate a user, please also leave a message on their talk page and ask them to reply here if they accept the nomination.

and the instructions for promotion say:

  1. If [the nomination] is not a self-request, check the user has accepted the nomination

I believe seven days is sufficient time for a nominee to be aware of, and express an opinion on, his or her own nomination. I extended Jeronimo's nomination for a day to give the user time to respond. Beyond this please be aware nominees will not be promoted. This is a matter of the simple rules, but also a simple courtesy to the community for someone who will be entrusted with some extra responsibilities and the trust of the community.

Please, if you nominate someone, make sure they are aware they must accept or reject their nominations on the RfA page. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 01:17, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship/Archive_25&oldid=7647007"