Board Thread:Wiki Running/@comment-3225604-20150812013021/@comment-5617649-20150814042207

But I'm accidentally continuing the massive texting, because I have to give my stances on some parts of this idea. Sorry if this is a bit too long, but:

Wildoneshelper wrote:


 * There will be a voting round if the administrator candidate has submitted the application before the voting day. The voting round starts from every 1, 8, 15 and 22 of the month.
 * The voting period will last for 1 week, enough for users to make their support to other users.

I think the period is much more reasonable. Now in the voting round, I also see the lack of normal users voting, especially for one of our candidates here. In the future, this could be a problem which will lead to the candidate of not being an administrator. Therefore:


 * The user must at least receive 7 normal user votes.

I personally see this as a good idea. 1 week would be a good amount of time for enough users to come and support, and promote the user to the admin status. 7 normal user votes is also a good enough requirement, at least for me.

Wildoneshelper wrote: For the nomination round, I do think the prerequisites are reasonable enough. They can weed out novices and avoid administrators or other powerful users from other wikis being an administrator here at the fastest speed. The latter may cause problems like still not quite fitting in the community and not knowing much about Candy Crush Saga, which may lead to reverting edits which is misunderstood as vandalism.

Great to see we're going to avoid novices/newbies from reaching admin status. They are pretty inexperienced and don't really have what it takes to be an admin here on this wiki. But those who are admin or very experienced on other Wikia sites would probably join this wiki with good experience already, like knowing what is or what's not vandalism, but they'll only lack experience in the Candy Crush game and all the elements, features, levels, etc. that compose the game, and thus would hesitate to edit and help out the CCSW articles.

Wildoneshelper wrote: I would also clarify one thing is that administrator candidates do not need to necessarily write a blog post and ask for support for other users. They can also ask for support of other users by posting on their message walls stating why you want to be an admin, and what qualifies of you to be an admin. Of course, blog post is still acceptable. I think as long as the blog post has received more than 4 supports, you can just stop replying.

I would be good with both blog posts and message walls as a way to express yourself on why you want to become an admin. With both methods, we could receive some support from other users, but blog posts are more favorable for multiple supports from other users. Message Walls are more like for asking a particular person to support you and help promote you towards admin status.

I agree with most of the other ideas you put into this proposal. But I think I should ponder this a little:

Wildoneshelper wrote: Bureaucrats can nominate users to be an admin. If a user is nominated, it has to be approved by all bureaucrats. The user must also say that he has no problem with being an administrator. After that, the voting round will start like the voting round of the first method.

What if a bureaucrat forgets about you or something like that? There's a chance you could be one of the best contributors here and a bureaucrat still forgets to nominate you as a candidate, so I would be better off nominating yourself in the form of a blog post or maybe on message walls.

Overall, I this idea. It's great you're thinking of a better way to promote admins here, and I think it's a great idea. However, I'm on the bureaucrat nominating you for adminship idea.