- Must be a self-nomination. Please do not nominate another user. If you think that the user would serve as a good sysop for the Wiki, convince them on their talk page to nominate themselves.
- All nominees must place their request under a three level header (===Username===), followed by why they think they should become a sysop on the wiki. Also, please put a link to your contributions under your reasons why you think you would make a good sysop ([[Special:Contributions/Username]]). Nominees must have at least 500 (five hundred) edits, which can be checked at Special:Editcount. Any contributors with less will automatically be rejected. Also, a majority of the edits must be in either of these namespaces: Main or Template. The edits also must have some substance; not tons of short, rapid edits. These three editing requirements will be checked.
- Users voting will do so underneath the user requesting adminship. Any votes anywhere else will not be counted, will be removed, and you will have to vote again, in the correct place. Votes will be cast using bolded words (words surrounded by three apostrophes on either side '''like this'''). The correct voting terms are Support, Oppose, or Comment. Any other votes will be ignored, and will not count.
- After three weeks of discussion and voting, or until the discussion has died down, the vote will be closed, and if the vote decided that the user should be made a sysop, then either Eu or Kitsufox will take action, and raise the user to sysop status. If the request was failed, no action will be taken. After two weeks have passed since the close of the vote, the request will be archived using this form of link: [[Warriors Wiki:Requests for Adminship/Username]], and will be placed under the archives section.
I believe that I could be a good admin here because I have been trusted as a rollback member and have used that to help the community, and, according to Warriors Wiki:Administrators, "The ideal admin is just someone who is trusted to have a few extra buttons and to use them for the benefit of the Wikia community." Having the extra admin buttons would allow for multiple active admins on the site, and, therefore, allow one to take a vacation for a bit and not leave the site unattended by an admin.
A second part of being an admin is editing pages. As seen from my Edit Count, I have many edits above the requirement, and over 350 edits in the main namespace, again, many over the requirement. On a side note, if you removed my edits to User talk and Forum namespaces, I would still have 500 edits.
I chose to request adminship today for a reason. It is the 2nd aniversary of the founding of the Wiki. This is the first request taken on this page. Please, at least vote, even if you are voting against me, but voting in favor of me becoming an admin is preferred. Thanks, *swifty* 13:14, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Voting will be open from 21 June to 12 July 2008
Support– *swifty* is a huge help to me, and I believe that he definitely could be trusted with a few extra buttons :)--Eu(Talk!Contribs) 15:02, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Support FireWolf787 20:05, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
SupportWolfstar13 20:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC)Wolfstar13
Support Swifty's cool. He' dmake a good sysop. Eaglebranch 21:41, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Support Sure cool =)Cloudtail48 08:34, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Support Definetly, swifty is dedicated and deserves it!! --Mousefire 15:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Support He deserves it :) --Snowdrop 15:39, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Support GO SWIFTY GO SWIFTY!!!!!! you totally deserve it! --Shadowstream101 15:47, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Oppose Swifty, I know I haven't been pulling my weight (getting married does that to a girl. I'll be back after the wedding, FINALLY), but I think you have the powers you need to attend to the duties that need attending to, and are doing a great job with it. I think the Warriors Wiki staff is pretty solid where it is, with 1 active admin, one LOA Admin intending to return mid-july (Sorry about not updating everyone on matters more) and 3 rollbacks. Fox's Den 20:24, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
SupportDon't we need more? Yes! Go swifty! [No Signature, Vote will not be tallied. Fox's Den 20:16, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Support I think swifty will make a great addition. Swifty is dedicated and great help on role playing sites. --Shimmerpool 16:54, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Support Go Swifty, you saved me from being permanently banned and you are very diligent in your edits and respect the wiki's rules very well. --Riasto 0:34, 27 June 2008 (UTC)Created a forum post verbally abusing Kitsu. As a result, vote will not count.
Comment The vote from Littlewhisker1235 should be dis-aloud, as the account is new as of 24 June 2008. User:meowthekitten doesn't even actually against, and thus that vote should DEFINITELY be deemed a troll vote and unfair conduct. I would like to remind people: This will NOT just be a matter of counting votes. Votes WILL be verified before something this important is finalized. Fox's Den 20:16, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
SupportO.K., go for it! Ilovegraystripe 02:58, 2 July 2008 (UTC) 02:58, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
SupportSwifty is a good candidate for adminship, I never seen anyone who put efforts in here(other than Eu, of course!)Unsigned. Doesn't count.
Support Kitsofox your being unfair. GO SWIFTY! You deserve it much more than Kitsofox anyways... 14:45, 5 July 2008 (UTC)Already voted, one vote per user.
SupportI support swifty he is awesome! GO SWIFTY.... oh and IMPEACH KITSOFOX! mtb27No account, attack on Kitsu, looks a lot like Riasto meatpuppet...
Comment "Umm, Bluefur...There are a lot of users who edit a lot, and make tons of effort to help. Swifty and I aren't the only contributors."--Eu
comment Yeah you are! mtb27 No,they aren't.I do,they do,and the featued users are the ones who edit the most.Pretty much.Yeah,and you don't even have a user page. Should the vote count? --JayfeatherTalk 02:05, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
- comment I don't think so. Between the user's attack on me (Which if they'd like to argue against me, I'd love to see them try, as I don't do things that aren't in the best interest of the Wiki. I believe their are processes on the Central Wikia that they would more appropriately be a place to air Anti-Kitsufox views... Also, it would help their case immensely if they had more than 'I don't think we need another Sysop' against me...) And I agree, it's likely a Riasto Meatpuppet. This is part of why we need a stricter voting policy before we take an Admin Request seriously. This as turned into little more than a pointless popularity contests. I don't care what merits swifty does or doesn't have at this point. This system needs to be re-tooled and fine tuned. This sham of a vote, that's littered with solicited votes and (likely) more meatpuppets than we've identified can't be addressed with any level of seriousness. Fox's Den 14:01, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Support I think swifty would be a good admin. --User:Thorntail