The Elder Scrolls Wiki:Administrators

 Administrators  or  Sysops  are editors with extended rights that help them contribute to and modify the site. Voted into their position based on community consensus, Administrators or  Admins  for short, are granted their additional tools by a Bureaucrat. They are normally promoted for life, although they have the right to decline their tools or resign at any time. Administrators are expected to help other users when necessary and guide or correct them when necessary. Alongside their added tools and abilities, administrators are held to the same editing standards as other editors and are expected to follow the same guidelines and standards of style as everyone else. Because of this, administrators are not beyond the rules of the wiki and can be demoted from their position if consensus deems it necessary.

Bureaucrats, colloquially called Crats or BCrats , are administrators with the added ability to grant access rights to other users, based on consensus. In addition to this tool, Bureaucrats have access to all of the same functions and tools as administrators. Other duties facilitated by Bureaucrats include the crafting of policy and help pages and contributing to the skeletal structure behind the scenes of the wiki, such as the editing of the MediaWiki namespace. As with administrators, Bureaucrats are elected by the community. Unlike administrators, which can be removed from their user rights groups by a Bureaucrat, the tools of a Bureaucrat can only be removed by Wikia Staff.

Prerequisites
Nominees may not nominate themselves. To earn the endorsement of an admin, a user must:


 * 1) Have a minimum of 1,000 main space edits. This does not include: forums, blog, talk, or user pages.
 * 2) The user must have a thorough knowledge of the Elder Scrolls series. Alternatively, this requirement can be fulfilled by having an astounding knowledge (above any other user on the wiki) on a major aspect or section of the series.
 * 3) The user must be familiar with all the functional aspects of a wiki, e.g. editing, creating templates, organizing, and categorizing pages.
 * 4) The user must serve as a role model to the other users on the wiki, being alert to any profanity and insuring that the chat and talk pages remain a friendly environment for those wishing to discuss The Elder Scrolls.
 * 5) The user must lend a guiding hand to those users who are only just beginning to edit pages, this means answering any questions they have, helping them make edits at times, informing them when they have made a mistake, and showing them the right way to do something when they do it incorrectly.
 * 6) Finally, if the user is lacking in one of the above sections, an exception can be made for a user who has shown any traits, abilities, or actions that prove him fit for the position.

Duties
Administrative functions include:
 * Deleting and un-deleting pages, page histories, and uploaded files.
 * Locking (protecting) a page so it cannot be edited or renamed by users without admin rights or autoconfirmed status.
 * Blocking IP addresses or user names from editing; and very quick "rollback" of undesirable edits.
 * Editing the interface by changing system messages and skins.
 * Demonstrate good editing standards in formatting and content.

Pages administrators should keep an eye on

 * Deletion Candidates - If a page has been on there for over 7 days, without any opposition, it should be deleted. It cannot be deleted by the person who proposed it for deletion.
 * Uncategorized Pages - All pages on the wiki should be categorized.
 * Orphaned Pages - All pages on the wiki should be linked by something else on the wiki.
 * Other Maintenance Pages

How do I use administrator tools?
See Help:Administrators' how-to guide for a guide on using admin functions.

Staff
Wikia staff members have full access to all Wikia. They will be shown in Special:Listusers/staff on any wiki. Please use Special:Contact to contact Wikia staff.

Nominations
break=yes prefix=Project:Administrators/ preload=Template:AdminNomRequest buttonlabel=Nominate a user


 * Nomination archive

Nominations
Re evaluations of admins are now open, '''please give your reasoning for the vote you cast. without it, it will not be counted.'''

Insert one of the four templates below to cast a vote.
 * VoteSupport - adds a supportive vote
 * VoteOppose - adds an opposition
 * VoteNeutral - adds a neutral viewpoint
 * VoteComment - adds a comment

Flightmare
Existing sysop 22:12, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Support
One of the best we have here, a good guy & our best coder no reason to remove him. Ȼǿᵰᵮẽᵲ ₲ħǿśᵵ Ⱥᵰᵾᵬĭᵴ  Đẽẽᵭᵴ 22:50, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

The wiki needs Flightmare as he is very experienced in coding. Without Flightmare, it'd be hard to maintain the wiki's backend coding, nor would we be able to get working chat bots. So, Flightmare has full support from me. --SuperSajuuk Talk Page 23:02, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Flight is a great programmer, and is good to the regular users. He helps with problems, focuses on every part of the site, etc. I think he is awesome. — Walter White Walker  Say My Name     23:12, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

He is on very often and I have even seen him on chat. I have seen his name on the side editing things and all in all helping the wiki.

-Still active on the wiki, and still contributes regularity. Still has my support.-Cheatcodechamp (talk) 01:56, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Has always been a productive member of this wiki, and is extremely helpful. Easily one of the administrators I support the most here.  Some Assembly Required! 02:06, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Flight is one of the few who can make dem' proper backstage edits, mostly dealing with coding. Don't think any benefit will have from taking his rights. 02:15, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Neutral
I see him in chat and that's rare, but that is the only place I really see him. I don't know if I am looking in the right place, but I just don't see his work or him being on often.  revolveGirl God's Army 00:44, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Elchzard
Existing sysop 22:12, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose
Rarely edits or does anything worthy of being an Administrator here, I gave him the benefit of the doubt before but he has since proved me wrong. Ȼǿᵰᵮẽᵲ ₲ħǿśᵵ Ⱥᵰᵾᵬĭᵴ  Đẽẽᵭᵴ 22:50, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Elchzard does nothing, is very inactive and frankly started a lot of drama when he came back from a long time of inactivity previously. His first duty was to join chat and threaten to remove my flags just for disagreeing with him (this was back when I was still a chat moderator). He was active for a while, but has gone back to being non-existent. In the past, he also threatened to completely leave the wiki when a user he disliked was not revoked of the sysop flag. He barely has any mainspace edits and despite his claims that he sticks to rule making and mediawiki namespaces, he barely makes any edits in any such areas that actually work. There is no reason for him to be a sysop or even a crat any longer. --SuperSajuuk Talk Page 23:02, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Hardly seen him edit, answer questions on Forums, etc, and seems to go inactive often. We shouldn't have Admins who hardly fit the job qualifications and have extremely unpredictable activity, in addition when he did try to be an Admin, he caused a ton of drama in the whole entire community. — Walter White Walker  Say My Name     23:12, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

His literal FIRST DAY back, he insulted, lied, framed, made up stuff, and caused drama. We don't need or want him. To Hell With God (talk) 23:14, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

I see him on chat, but I see nothing else from him and when he is in chat, he is normally away.  revolveGirl God's Army 00:44, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Elch is a cool guy, and he seemed to return a while back, but since then he faded into inactivity once again, just like he was for the past year. 02:16, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Neutral
-While inactive, I dont feel it is my place to oppose when I was gone for six months. It would take more then a few months for me to say he is done with the wiki and should be demoted. However, most of his more recent edits are on TP's and he hasn't been in chat or on the main-page for awhile.-Cheatcodechamp (talk) 01:56, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

A dedicated member that I have had the privilege to work with back in the day. His inactivity is the only reason why I am voting neutral.  Some Assembly Required! 02:06, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Deyvid Petteys
Existing sysop 22:12, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose
A good Administrator no doubt, however he's largely inactive & has been disrespectful to some of the users here, we need more sysops & more active ones. Ȼǿᵰᵮẽᵲ ₲ħǿśᵵ Ⱥᵰᵾᵬĭᵴ  Đẽẽᵭᵴ 22:50, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Deyvid is very inactive. He just comes around for a week or so and then goes into Oblivion for months on end. The vast majority of his edits are just in forum ct's or user talkpages, despite him constantly preaching that users should edit the mainspace. He also is a large draw of a specific user's vandalism to the wiki, so him losing his rights may deter vandalism, but there's no reason for Deyvid to be a sysop/crat here longer. --SuperSajuuk Talk Page 23:02, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

His actions as an Admin are decent, but it doesn't matter since he goes completely inactive so often and seems to only return for short periods, does he really need the Admin tools when he is hardly on? — Walter White Walker  Say My Name     23:16, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

He really made a great job as an administrator but, i think that, he dont need his admin tools anymore.-- 23:44, September 12, 2014 (UTC)~

Deyvid hardly does any work as of December last year. I really wish he was here to help run things, as he was the one to teach me how to deal with bad edits, but he's not, and that doesn't help the wiki. 02:18, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Neutral
- Like I said on Elch's, I don't feel right dismissing his past work and calling to demote him because of two months of inactivity. He was been inactive for awhile however, And we do need active admins to be present and assist the wiki. I can't comment to opposing him, but I cant say he should stay.-Cheatcodechamp (talk) 01:56, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

To be perfectly frank, I know almost nothing about this user, even after all of the years that I have been a part of the community. I wish I could make an objective vote - but since I cannot, I am voting neutral.  Some Assembly Required! 02:06, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Kennyannydenny
Existing sysop 22:12, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Support
Not as active as I would like, but he does come around the wiki to edit sometimes, & is doing things behind the scenes as well, I think he should remain an Administrator. Ȼǿᵰᵮẽᵲ ₲ħǿśᵵ Ⱥᵰᵾᵬĭᵴ  Đẽẽᵭᵴ 22:50, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

A very good editor, and one that has proven their dedication towards Wikia in general. Slight inactivity does not put me off from the benefits he provides.  Some Assembly Required! 02:10, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

If i recall the block logs correctly, Kenny still makes some periodical blocking and some other unseen work. I'm not amused at his overall inacivity, but I don't feel taking away his tools right now would help anything. 02:20, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose
Seems to not go on anymore, I didn't see him really help out around the site too often either, I mean, I don't think he is awful, but, is he really someone who should be a Sysop here? — Walter White Walker  Say My Name     23:16, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Neutral
His activity is patchy, but he does do useful stuff as a sysop, so I'll stay neutral on Kenny. --SuperSajuuk Talk Page 23:02, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Kroq-gar78
Existing sysop 22:12, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose
Largely inactive, last I saw him was him blocking Jigsaw but only for a week despite me telling him who he really is, rarely edits & doesn't do Administrator tasks. Same as Deyvid, we need more admins & more active ones. Ȼǿᵰᵮẽᵲ ₲ħǿśᵵ Ⱥᵰᵾᵬĭᵴ  Đẽẽᵭᵴ 22:50, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Kroq does not do anything as a sysop. He makes about one or two edits whenever he feels like it and, as Ghost pointed out, he blocked Jigsaw for a week, despite him being told whom he was. His last meaningful edit was in July, there's little reason for Kroq to be a sysop any more. --SuperSajuuk Talk Page 23:02, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Has not edited frequently since 2013, he has therefor been inactive past the time, and therefor should be de-modded. Considering rules — Walter White Walker  Say My Name     23:16, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

- Kroq's edits have been far and few between, and more patchy then others, and for an admin this is harder to defend. It may be time for Kroq to return or step down.-Cheatcodechamp (talk) 01:56, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Even back when this user first rose to a position of power, I hardly ever saw anything coming from this user except when it came to checking vandalism reports. I see absolutely nothing special about this user, which added to his inactivity, means I find myself voting against them.  Some Assembly Required! 02:10, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Kroq has provided no estimates to when his work will get less demanding so he can return to the wiki, and thus I don't think such a time even exists. Eternal absence isn't really appealing... 02:22, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

TombRaiser
Existing sysop 22:12, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Support
TombRaiser is a great person, edited here for two years straight is one of our best editors here, has put in a ton of work here & decided to go semi-active & I don't think it's worthy of removing her rights she deserves her position. Ȼǿᵰᵮẽᵲ ₲ħǿśᵵ Ⱥᵰᵾᵬĭᵴ  Đẽẽᵭᵴ 22:50, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Tomb is awesome. She's one of the wiki's best editors and there is no reason anyone can come up with for her to be demoted. --SuperSajuuk Talk Page 23:02, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

-I can think of nothing that would say we should demote her, and a dozen why I trust her without question.-Cheatcodechamp (talk) 01:56, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

One of the best administrators, in my opinion. All that really needs to be said, I think.  Some Assembly Required! 02:10, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

No reason to demote here, Tomb did not leave the wiki entirely, and her work is Certified Awesome. 02:23, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Neutral
She is a good Sysop who has helped the site. But, she seems to have randomly stopped coming as often, which is questionable, but I do not think she should be removed of the tools, right now however — Walter White Walker  Say My Name     23:21, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Mbjones90
Inactive sysop 22:12, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose
Largely inactive, does next to nothing, hasn't done much since getting the position, I don't believe he should remain an Administrator. Ȼǿᵰᵮẽᵲ ₲ħǿśᵵ Ⱥᵰᵾᵬĭᵴ  Đẽẽᵭᵴ 22:50, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Was only made a sysop during the time when the various TES wiki's (OblivioWiki for example) were merged into this one. After that, he disappeared, there is zero reason he continues to have a flag, he shows no vested interested in this wiki. --SuperSajuuk Talk Page 23:02, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Another inactive Admin, it's pointless to have Admins who have not edited for large periods to time, to keep the tools. The site doesn't gain anything. — Walter White Walker  Say My Name     23:21, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Inactive since 2011, no point in keeping admin rights. 00:20, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Three years of inactivity says he is done, he can talk about getting he rights back should he return.-Cheatcodechamp (talk) 01:56, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Same reasons as those above me.  Some Assembly Required! 02:13, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Such a long inactive period. No point in dressing the skeletons with armor if they aren't coming back to life, is there? 02:25, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Annonnimus
Inactive sysop 22:12, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose
Largely inactive, does next to nothing, hasn't done much since getting the position, I don't believe he should remain an Administrator. Ȼǿᵰᵮẽᵲ ₲ħǿśᵵ Ⱥᵰᵾᵬĭᵴ  Đẽẽᵭᵴ 22:50, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Despite the log in showing he keeps logging into Wikia, he does not edit here and there is no reason for him to continue being a sysop on the wiki if he can't be bothered to come here. --SuperSajuuk Talk Page 23:02, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Inactive, we don't need these users with tools. — Walter White Walker  Say My Name     23:21, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Inactive since 2012, no point in keeping admin rights. 00:20, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

two years of inactivity says he is done, he can talk about getting he rights back should he return.-Cheatcodechamp (talk) 01:56, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Same reasons as those above me.  Some Assembly Required! 02:13, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

HaLo2FrEeEk
Inactive sysop 22:12, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose
Largely inactive, does next to nothing, hasn't done much since getting the position, I don't believe he should remain an Administrator. Ȼǿᵰᵮẽᵲ ₲ħǿśᵵ Ⱥᵰᵾᵬĭᵴ  Đẽẽᵭᵴ 22:50, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Is mostly inactive, doesn't do anything to the wiki, no reason for him to be a sysop. --SuperSajuuk Talk Page 23:02, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Been inactive for too long, doesn't need to be an Admin on here, as with the others. — Walter White Walker  Say My Name     23:21, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Inactive since 2012, no point in keeping admin rights. 00:20, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

two years of inactivity says he is done, he can talk about getting he rights back should he return.-Cheatcodechamp (talk) 01:56, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Same reasons as those above me.  Some Assembly Required! 02:13, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

It is time to unfit the fossils from the Merethic Era, long gone and slumbering. 02:52, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Zluhcs
Inactive sysop 22:12, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose
Largely inactive, does next to nothing, hasn't done much since getting the position, I don't believe he should remain an Administrator. Ȼǿᵰᵮẽᵲ ₲ħǿśᵵ Ⱥᵰᵾᵬĭᵴ  Đẽẽᵭᵴ 22:50, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

He made a random edit to his userpage a few days ago, but that won't save him from the fact he does not do a thing for this wiki, no reason he should be a sysop any longer. --SuperSajuuk Talk Page 23:02, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Has been inactive since 2013, has one edit in this whole year. No point in keeping the admin flag. 00:20, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Same reasons as those above me.  Some Assembly Required! 02:13, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Neutral
He is inactive, but I heard he is in the Navy now, so I might not want to be in support of his rights being removed just right now. — Walter White Walker  Say My Name     23:21, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Like Grams, Schulz has real life matters getting in front of his online life. It wouldn't be nice to return after some crappy years serving then finding out your work was forsaken because of it. 02:54, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Comment
-Before I say yes or no, can we confirm if he is currently deployed? I would hate to say no while he is gone.Cheatcodechamp (talk) 02:42, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

GramsJ
Inactive sysop 22:12, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Support
In light of this user's situation, he/she deserves the right to be inactive to deal with said issue. Leniensy is given from me, and should be from all you To Hell With God (talk) 23:15, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

This user is sick, and therefor I feel doesn't deserve to get there rights removed. — Walter White Walker  Say My Name     23:21, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

She has more important things to concern herself with then this wiki, & I won't be holding that against her for it. Unlike Harold I'm not a heartless prick, & I understand that editing on a wiki isn't the most important thing in life, so she has my full support. Note: As if Harold can judge anybody, he only spams the RP board & his 800 edits are all completely minor, where Grams J here has done more then Harold ever has & ever will despite her being inactive for two years. Ȼǿᵰᵮẽᵲ ₲ħǿśᵵ Ⱥᵰᵾᵬĭᵴ  Đẽẽᵭᵴ 00:25, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

GramsJ has cancer, it would be insulting and very rude to remove her rights because of that. --SuperSajuuk Talk Page 00:29, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Cancer is tough to deal with. This user and admin has been inactive probably due to fighting a tough battle.She should be able to keep her rights. When she returns I am sure she will get back into the swing of things. I say let her keep her rights until we know for sure if she is going to return or not.  revolveGirl God's Army 00:37, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

It would obviously make sense for her to be inactive due to the fact that she has cancer. Once she comes back, it would be a nice thing for her to see she still has her rights, and that she would continue doing her job. topkek (talk) 01:18, September 13, 2014 (UTC) I never saw her editing but, if she was an admin of thie wikia, it iis obviously because she deserves it. And, if we could at least do something to support her, it would be the least to do by letting her keeping her right.-- Emperor Jarjarkine    Senate Hall  01:45, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

I have always said real life comes first, I cannot oppose when real world issues are keeping them away.-Cheatcodechamp (talk) 01:56, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

I understand where Harold is coming from, but I genuinely believe this is one of those unique exceptions that should always take priority. Life does come first before Wikia, and her hard work and dedication should be recognized as we give her a chance to come back to our community. All I can do is wish a speedy recovery.  Some Assembly Required! 02:13, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose
This user being sick or not is irrelevant, she hasn't edited in almost two whole years. If she hasn't come back till now there is nothing pointing to her doing so in the near future. Therefore she doesn't need nor should have the admin flag. If you want to do something nice and show her you care and support her fight against the disease leave a message on her talk page or make a userbox on her profile. However, if in the future she does come back and contributes then we can give her back the admin position. 00:16, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Neutral
I don't really feel like supporting her holding the rights just because she has cancer (yes, call me a heartless n'wah), but this also means she can make a comeback anytime, now. My ambivalence flourishes at those moments and I'm not sure I want to judge Gram's fate. 02:36, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Comment
Harold, you are the most insensitive user I have ever seen, would you like it if you had cancer and had your rights taken because of a re-evaluation? Of course not, show some respect to those who aren't so fortunate. --SuperSajuuk Talk Page 00:29, September 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * You don't know me Sajuuk, neither does Anubis. My grandfather had to fight two cancers for the past five years. I visited him in the hospital whenever I could before heading off to college. He beat both of them, but still suffers from severe diabetes. And for the record if I was in GramsJ's position I would be too busy dealing with my illness to care if I still had admin rights on a specific wiki or not, but that is just me. Like above this is my opinion and I am entitled to it like everyone else is.  01:15, September 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * Point being, if the user wants to come back, it might be insulting if we removed her rights because of something out of her control completely. So, that is why we think she deserves to keep her Sysop Tools on the wiki. — Walter White Walker  Say My Name   ''' 01:38, September 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * I hardly think that removing her rights, especially if we leave a heartfelt support message on her profile/talkpage, would cause her to be insulted. Though I didn't know her personally, but then again neither did a bunch of other users that voted above.  02:01, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

it:The_Elder_Scrolls_Wiki:Amministratori