Red Dead Wiki:Requests for Promotion

Welcome to Red Dead Wiki: Requests for Promotion.

On this page, you may apply for a Rollback tool, Discord moderation position, Moderator rights or Administrator privileges on this noticeboard. To do so, you must meet the prerequisites, and then state what position you are looking for and why you think you need the rollback and/or administrator tools.

Overview

Patrollers

Patrollers are the first stage in the staff hierarchy, granted the Rollback tool which multiple acts of vandalism by the same user to be reverted with a single click.

To qualify for Patrollership, the requesting editors:

• Must have been active members of the wiki for at least 45 days.
• Have at least 100 mainspace edits.

Editors who have been noted to actively revert and report acts of vandalism to Content Moderators, Moderators, Admins and Bureaucrats will be favored. For a Patroller request to pass, the nominated editor should have 60% 'yes' percentage.

Moderators

Moderators are a wide class of experienced or trustworthy users and editors who form the second, third and forth stages in the staff hierarchy.

For a Discord/Discussion/Content Moderator request to pass, the nominated editor should have 65% 'yes' percentage. For a Chief Moderator request to pass, the nominated editor should have 70% 'yes' percentage.

Chat/Discord Moderators

Chat Moderators, also known as Discord Moderators, are a special group of community members that have proven themselves reliable and trustworthy in maintaining peace and civility in the wiki's Discord server. They are capable of kicking and banning users of the Discord who have disturbed the community.

To qualify for chat moderation, the requesting users:

• Have a clean history on the server for the past two months.
• Noted to keep in-chat conversations calm and good-natured and not hit disputes.
• Have a user account on Wikia and at least 25 edits.

Users who were noted to stay civil in heated conversations and inform Moderators or Admins regarding uncivil or hostile incidents will be favored.

Discussion Moderators

Discussion Moderators are editors and users who were noted to be trustworthy and mature enough to take care of the wiki's forums and blogs, serving as peacekeepers and dispute breakers of "conversation areas" outside the mainspace and Discord areas. Their rights allow them to edit/remove comments made on threads and blogs, as well as close or reopen threads.

To qualify for discussion management, the requesting users:

• Must have been on the wiki for at least two months.
• Must have at least 50 Discussion/forum edits.
• Have a history of maintaining civil behavior in Discussions.

Users with a history of cooling down heated discussions will be favored.

Content Moderators

Content Moderators are experienced editors deemed suitable for maintenance of the mainspace area of the wiki. Aside from having the Rollback tool, they can also protect pages and delete/undelete pages and files. They can also rename files and protected pages.

To qualify for mainspace content moderation, the requesting editors:

• Must have been active contributors of the wiki for at least three months.
• Must have a mainspace edit count of at least 300 edits.

Under most circumstances, the editor is required to have been a Patroller first, unless decided otherwise by the wiki's senior staff members.

Moderators

Moderators, also known as Chief Moderators are the highest non-admin ranked editors and users of the Red Dead Wiki. They possess rights belonging to both Content and Discussions Mods, as well as Discord Mods. It's a sparsely used right group given to the most experienced and trustworthy Moderators the wiki has, and as such they act as direct overseers of the other Moderator groups.

To qualify for overall moderation and overseeing position, the requested editors must have already been a Content Moderator.

Administrators

Administrators, shortened to Admins and also referred to as SysOps, are senior and extremely experienced editors who have proven themselves to be trustworthy enough with a wide-scale maintenance and overseeing of the Red Dead Wiki. They possess all abilities and rights granted to Patrollers and Moderators, but can also issue blocks to misbehaving users or vandals, or alternatively unblock them. They can also promote other users to Discussion Moderators.

To qualify for adminship, the requested editors:

• Must have a mainspace edit count of at least 400 edits.
• Have been active on the wiki for at least four months.
• Have not been blocked in the past two months.

Under most circumstances, editors who wish to become Admins should already be members of the wiki staff, preferably Content Moderators or overall Moderators, unless decided otherwise by a Bureaucrat. For an Admin request to pass, the nominated editor should have 70% 'yes' percentage.

Bureaucrats

Bureaucrats are the most senior editors of the wiki; chief-administrators who oversee the entire wiki, its mainspace area, Discussions, Forums and Discord. They possess all rights granted to Admins, but can also grant all local-level rights to users, as well as demote any other local-level right except for Bureaucratship itself.

To qualify for chief-adminship, the requested editors:

• Must have a mainspace edit count of at least 1000 edits.
• Must already be an Admin, at least six months in role.
• Have been active for at least ten months.

Bureaucrat is a limited-used right and should only be requested when the wiki is in dire need of Bureaucrats. When such nominations are brought up, the nominated editor should have 75% 'yes' percentage.

Voting Process

When applying for promotion, a community vote will take place. Voting lasts 7 days, although it may be allowed to run shorter (in the case of an obvious pass/fail) or longer (in the case of a very close vote) at bureaucrat discretion. Only bureaucrats should close votes.

Application users who are caught tampering with other users' votes, such as changing a 'no' to a 'yes', will have their request closed immediately.

Voting can be participated by members of the community. For editing/leadership-related positions, the voter must have at least 25 mainspace edits and have been a member of the community for a month. For chat/discussion positions, the voter must be an active member of either the Discord server (in case of Chat Moderation), or the Discussions area (in case of Discussions Moderation).

When voting, users must place their votes under the "Votes" header, while stating their reasoning behind their vote. Users who fail to state their reasons for their votes will have their vote disqualified from the request's final verdict.

Please submit your requests at the top of the "Active requests" page subsection.

Archive

• Requests pre-adoption of July 2016
• 2018 requests

Active Requests

User:LudwigHolyBlade - Discussions Moderator

Hi. I'm LudwigHolyBlade, and I am requesting the discussions moderator position.

I have been on the wiki for a while now and in that time I've amassed 180 posts/replies. I am still highly active on the discussions board so I think I'd be able to monitor it capably. I have past experience with this role so I know what it consists of. I believe I meet the criteria and currently Argonian is our only discussions moderator.

Thank you for your time.

Votes

• yes You've been here just slightly under a month. In that time I have kept an eye on your edits and have noticed that while your contributions to the discussions don't exactly have a large amount of effort put into them, they are, however, informative and helpful to say the very least. As well as this, you have proven yourself to be an outgoing individual. I say that it's possible you do have a future on our team. Linus Spacehead ^{(Complaint Department)} 21:40, November 22, 2018 (UTC)
• no - I'd say maybe in another month or two, but for now, I feel it's too early for you to apply to Discussions Mod. You are very active, but your replies on different threads are not particularly as high-effort as they could be, and I may have missed them, but I haven't really seen any threads or discussions initiated by you; I would love seeing some, and if you have difficulties with that, feel free to ask Argo regarding tips. Give another month or two, and I say you can apply again. -- User:Raziel Reaper (Talk To Me • Edits ) 13:54, November 23, 2018 (UTC)
• no I'm afraid I have to say no. You can on occasion he helpful and you are informative, and it's great to see active users on Discussions. However, I do not feel that you would be a suitable candidate for this particular wiki. We have high standards on Discussions but the fact is you don't meet them. Just recently, for example, you spoiled Red Dead Redemption II for me and no doubt others. If you were a new user this would be understandable, but not only have you been here a while, you read the post in which I gave instructions to the community for what to do with spoilers, and commented your approval. This may seem like a minor issue, but a Discussions Moderator must set an example for other users, and ignoring the spoiler policy is not a good example to set. Furthermore, your comments rarely seem to have enough effort put in them, and you very rarely post. I don't doubt that you are a competent Discussions Moderator on the Rick and Morty Wiki, but the Discussions community here is different, and I don't think you would be an appropriate choice for Discussions Moderator. I hope you take on board some of this advice and I look forward to seeing more of you on Discussions.--The Supreme Argonian (talk) 20:34, November 23, 2018 (UTC)

User:ProudToBePizza - Patroller

Hey, I am ProudToBePizza, and I would like to request the role of Patroller.

A little over two weeks ago, I made my first edit to this wiki. I soon fell in love with it, and found myself wanting to do anything I could to contribute to it. I got right to work, and soon had amassed almost 150 edits, with many being relatively significant. The launch of Red Dead Redemption 2 has given this wiki a great opportunity, to both expand the wiki, and give newer editors (like me) a chance to make a name for themselves. However, there are always people who want to ruin it for others. People will surely arrive with the hope of griefing the wiki, and I would like to help prevent this from happening.

Votes

• yes You're a good user who makes significant edits and you seem to know what you're doing. Steven James (talk) 16:11, November 22, 2018 (UTC)
• yes The user has made few but substantial edits despite being a relatively recent addition to the wiki. Furthermore, he seems both reasonable and thoughtful whether it's in regards to edits or his general behavior on the page itself. Kitchi Machk (talk) 16:36, November 22, 2018 (UTC)
• yes Your edits are outstanding, you definitely have a future on this wiki. Linus Spacehead ^{(Complaint Department)} 16:54, November 22, 2018 (UTC)
• yes - Normally I'm against voting for a relatively new editor without giving them at least one month on the wiki, but I have reviewed some of your edits and I'm pretty impressed; solid writing, decent contributions, and from the little I saw, you also possess a calm and nice demeanor which is important for Patrollers when dealing with troublesome editors. -- User:Raziel Reaper (Talk To Me • Edits ) 13:54, November 23, 2018 (UTC)
• yes I'm not a big editor at the moment, but I know from my conversations with staff that we lack in frequent editors, even among the staff. And from what I've seen of you on Discord, you seem to be friendly and helpful. I think you'll make an excellent addition to the staff. --The Supreme Argonian (talk) 20:37, November 23, 2018 (UTC)

Inactive Requests

Declined - RedDeadLover985

- Hello, my user is RedDeadLover985. I would like to request the role of deputy, as I edit articles almost daily, as I see most articles that get vandalized I try to revert them to the natural form. My goal is to try and ban vandalizing users from this great Wikia, I also hope to edit and proofread any article and be honest and fair with my editing. If possible I can rename pages to either be brief and better, if you'll accept me as one of your deputies I will try my best to succeed.

Votes

no Since you haven't been active here for that long of a time I would say, no. Your edits are great, always good to have some assistance, but as an admin I don't see that giving you a promotion would be needed since you have only been active around here for 3 days. Be active here for a little while longer, I'd say a few weeks, then you can go for it again. Note that this is just my personal opinion and that it is in the end up to the Bureaucrats to make the final decision. Other people may also vote during this time. Best regards JackiBackiBoy 17:12, March 13, 2018 (UTC)

no Same as above. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 19:55, March 16, 2018 (UTC)

Comment

• I see some potential having you as a staff member, but when it comes to vandalism, any user can revert edits by clicking the "undo" button. We can't end vandalism, but we can certainly ban users when they do it. Current staff members are active and perform this role well. A user doesn't have to be staff to make great edits, and in my opinion, most pages don't need to be renamed. I see potential, and I'm sure you'll make a great addition, but I'm somewhat mixed on whether to accept this or not. I'll leave that vote up to the other staff. The Smartest Smark (talk) 03:10, March 13, 2018 (UTC)

Declined - Emen383

I am requesting the administrator position.I have experience helping mods and admins on other sites, and I have the confidence that I can handle the admin role. Emen383(talk) 18:17, July 8, 2018 (UTC)

Votes

no You have just started editing here, and your first edits ever were nominating yourself to adminship. Please, make a few hundreds of edits, clean pages up, revert vandalism if you see some etc etc, before asking straight for admin rights. -- User:Raziel Reaper (Talk To Me • Edits ) 19:32, July 8, 2018 (UTC)

no Same reason as Raziel. Steven James (talk) 21:57, July 8, 2018 (UTC)

no First of all, you do not meet up with the requirements for even requesting the role of administrator. As seen HERE, the requirements for requesting adminship are as follows: "To qualify for administrator rights, editors must have been active Patrollers for four months with no rule violations. Administrators must receive a 70% 'yes' percentage to be promoted.". As of the 9 of July, 2018, you have made 4 edits. All of them being on the requests for promotion and adminship pages. That will be a no if you ask me. JackiBackiBoy 10:33, July 9, 2018 (UTC)

Declined - Linus Spacehead

Well, here it is, we all knew this day would come eventually and of course, the admins are already well aware of who I am, the infamous Linus Spacehead, the only deputy on this wiki at the moment. I'm sure that by now you're all aware of my capabilities and what I can bring to the table, I've tested the waters for a little while and now I feel that I'm ready to jump in, therefore I am making my request to become an administrator. I feel that as an administrator, I should be ready to enforce the rules of the wiki at all times, rather than ignoring it and allowing it to continue. An administrator should be able to set an example to their peers instead of being a bully something that I believe I am more than capable of doing, I believe that I would uphold the rules as well as I possibly can. I'm already very well acquainted with the current marshal JackiBackiBoy and sheriff Raziel Reaper and I sincerely hope that I can rely on their support as I make my request for promotion.

Linus Spacehead ^{(Complaint Department)} 08:47, July 12, 2018 (UTC)

Votes

1. yes In my book you meet the requirements for administrator rights. You can edit in source editor (pure wikitext) and you have some knowledge of CSS, both of which are big cornerstones of the wiki. You a very active in chat which allows for a better maintained chat. You have proven to show dedication for the wiki by helping me out with projects and suggesting new additions to the wiki. Even though you haven't been active that many months and haven't gained that much of an editcount, I still think that the quality of edits should outweigh the quantity. I would like to see you follow this pattern and grow as an editor in the process. It's a clear yes for me. Best regards, JackiBackiBoy 08:57, July 12, 2018 (UTC)
2. no There are numerous reasons, which anyone in the Discord server knows, why you aren't yet fit to be a Sheriff. You're to immature, and can't take being accused of playing a joke. Not only that, the wording of this RFP is nothing more than a poke at your opinion of me and my ability as a staff member, which might as well be more immature than your actions. I admit that I'm human, and every human has a few problems that they are trying to work out. I overstep my boundaries sometimes, but I'm working to fix that. As for these screenshots, they are simply my proof that you're not fit yet for the role of sheriff. In a few months, I might vote yes. Steven James (talk) 15:53, July 12, 2018 (UTC)
3. no Well, I've been thinking over this nomination for the last day, but eventually, I'll have to go with no for now.
   Looking at the edits, Linus has helped with cleaning up grammatical mistakes and reverting questionable edits or vandalism, but nothing beyond that. His edits are often pretty minor imo; I'd like to see him doing more significant edits (re-organizing pages that look messy, re-write thin sections or poorly written segments, upload better quality images in case pages need it, etc) before I can call his edits admin-quality. I also haven't seen much of his Wikitext and CSS skills put into action, so for now, it is nothing but informed ability in my eyes.
   Secondly - and more importantly - it's his attitude. Linus is often friendly and out-going, but can be temperamental, impatient or immature. This was best seen during his time on the Discord; While I can understand and sympathize with him, the way he handled it - including leaving the discord server TWICE over a day, his general hostile behavior towards a fellow user and just continuing with the subject even after it was done with (though it wasn't dealt with properly), shows me that right now, Linus is unfit for the position as of now. -- User:Raziel Reaper (Talk To Me • Edits ) 15:11, July 13, 2018 (UTC)

Comments

• Personally, I wasn't blown away by this nomination. In my opinion, a nomination needs to be humbly-written, polite, professional, describing your skills, abilities and past experience. That one felt like a bad job interview, one that didn't convince me of Linus' worth as a potential admin. Those not so subtle jabs at a fellow staff member also didn't do him much favor in my eyes. As was the name-dropping of my and JackiBackiBoy in hopes we'll vote for him. I will say right now, if a user wishes to be an admin, then they need to act mature and level-headed. In my opinion this request came up way too soon, and he should have worked for at least two more months on expanding his edit count AND improving his behavior, not to mention that the entire situation on Discord is still fresh in my mind. -- User:Raziel Reaper (Talk To Me • Edits ) 15:11, July 13, 2018 (UTC)
• After reviewing the events that have happened over this past week, I do agree with the current decision on my promotion, my behaviour has been absolutely appalling, I am completely ashamed of myself and am currently working to make amends. I don't believe that I am fit for the position until after I have worked on my behaviour. Linus Spacehead ^{(Complaint Department)} 16:12, July 15, 2018 (UTC) 

Result

no - Due to a minority voting yes, Linus's bad behaviour and Linus's resignation I have come to the conclusion that the result of the promotion is a 'No.' Sincerely, JackiBackiBoy 16:13, July 14, 2018 (UTC)

Approved - Linus Spacehead (II)

To start this request, I just want to point out that I'm honestly terrible at writing these so I'm just going to state the reasons why I believe that I should be promoted to Content Moderator. The first reason is the most obvious reason being that my role as a Discussions moderator just doesn't really affect how I contribute to the wiki in any way, it only really affects the Discussions board, which I rarely even use other than to lock or delete threads that have either gotten out of hand or hold no relevance being there. As a patroller, I believe that I have proved that I can handle having the rights that I am currently requesting, whether it be in the form of reverting vandalism that pops up on the wiki, cleaning up older articles on the wiki, or creating new templates, the rights that I am requesting will almost certainly provide me with the tools to further my editing experience. I hope that the staff take my qualities as an editor into consideration and approve of my promotion to a content moderator.

Linus Spacehead ^{(Complaint Department)} 23:02, August 24, 2018 (UTC)

Votes

1. yes Steven James (talk) 23:09, August 24, 2018 (UTC)
2. yes In your last request for adminship (which got declined) I voted yes, howver as you know I later on changed my vote on that request. Now it has been some time since then and I have no doubt in my mind that you will fit as a content moderator. You have grown as an editor, gained experience from being a chat mod and patroller too. Especially in the field of stopping certain situations that could've gone out of hand. From my point of view I find that you know the rules well and adapt your work towards them. It's a clear yes for me. JackiBackiBoy 11:06, August 25, 2018 (UTC)
3. Weak yes - I've been thinking on Matt's request for the past day, and eventually I've settled with a faint yes. Matt has improved since his last request, and the slightly lower position of a moderator makes it easier to shy away from several requirements I personally believe an admin should have. However, I do have trust in Matt's ability and skills, and full Moderation rights are not out of question ATM. - User:Raziel Reaper (Talk To Me • Edits ) 15:04, August 25, 2018 (UTC)

Result

yes - All active members of the staff team voted yes, giving you a 100% yes vote. I think the results are clear, I will hereby grant you the content mod rights, may them serve you well. I hope to see you continue to grow as an editor and staff member. Best regards, JackiBackiBoy 21:17, August 30, 2018 (UTC)

The Supreme Argonian - Approved

Hello, I'm Supreme, and I'd like to apply for the position of Discussions Moderator. I wasn't planning on applying just yet, but I was informed that the staff believe I'm ready to apply now, so here I am.

To start, I'd like to say that I've been on FANDOM since late 2016, and in that time I've visited a fair few wikis and seen a lot of varying quality in the Discussions. When I joined this wiki not long ago, I soon noticed that the Discussions was not properly moderated, and so many of the posts were not of a quality that one would expect on a Discussions board. I like to think that I know what constitutes a good post, and I feel I would be able to maintain a high standard without just deleting everything.

Then there's the fact that I haven't just downloaded an app and asked for a staff position. I'm no pro editor, although I do know the basics; but more importantly, I'm aware that there is more to a wiki, more to FANDOM, than just the Discussions, and I find that many Discussions users, not just on this wiki, don't even know what a wiki is. As a Discussions moderator, I would be able to promote editing and educate Discussions users so that they can have a greater understanding of the Red Dead Wiki and FANDOM as a whole; in fact, I recently made a post to introduce Discussions users to the wider wiki.

I think we can all agree that the Discussions is generally a rejected part of the wiki, and that's the case for many wikis. From my conversations with the staff, it seems they would like Discussions to be largely separate from the rest of the wiki, but that doesn't mean Discussions can't thrive. Some of the staff weren't even aware that apps existed for both FANDOM and the Red Dead Wiki, but I use both mobile and web fairly often, so I would be able to moderate fairly often, which means rule-breaking or low-quality posts would be quickly dealt with. I believe this would not only maintain the standards we expect for Discussions, but would also show Discussions users that there are rules and that they must be followed, and that there are consequences for those who choose not to.

To finish, I want you all to know that I'm fully aware that I haven't been here long and that I haven't really made a name for myself, but as I said, the staff believe I'm ready, so I believe it too. Furthermore, with the upcoming release of Red Dead Redemption II, it is highly probable that the Discussions will see an influx of new, curious users and a rise in posts, and I believe that having someone solely dedicated to the Discussions will prevent it from becoming chaotic. Let's make it a place where people feel welcome and where thought-provoking discussions are the norm, and not a social space for people who happen to like the Red Dead series.

Thank you for hearing me out. I look forward to working with you all in the future. The Supreme Argonian (talk) 22:56, September 28, 2018 (UTC)

Votes

• yes -- User:Raziel Reaper (Talk To Me • Edits ) 07:31, September 29, 2018 (UTC)
• yes -- User:VikingCat32 (Talk To Me • Edits ) 07:50, September 29, 2018 (UTC)
• yes - LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 11:21, September 29, 2018 (UTC)
• yes - Linus Spacehead ^{(Complaint Department)} 15:23, September 29, 2018 (UTC)
• yes - Steven James (talk) 18:15, September 29, 2018 (UTC)

Comments

• Argo is currently both the most active person on Discussions and its most mature participant, almost always replying in a calm and elaborate manner. While he hasn't been on here for too long, I believe that he already made quite the mark, both on Discussions and slowly on the mainspace area. And of course, we are in need of Discussions Mods as the day grows nearer and the amount of users there steadily grow, and Argo is definitely the best candidate by a large margin. And so, I support his promotion to Discussions Mod. -- User:Raziel Reaper (Talk To Me • Edits ) 07:31, September 29, 2018 (UTC)
• I've noticed Argo has been very active in his short time here on the wiki and within the Discord. I'm exited to learn more about the discussions side of the wiki, and I beleive with the dedication Argo has shown so far that we can expect the discussions to be properly moderated so the best content can be displayed and discussd with the growing community. -- User:VikingCat32 (Talk To Me • Edits ) 07:58, September 29, 2018 (UTC)