Forum:Special circumstances for giving B'crat rights

Hi, I'm an administrator over on The Sims Wiki and I have sort of an interesting question regarding bureaucrats and adoption. We have one devoted bureaucrat who is one of the most active users on the wiki. However, we have another administrator who is, for whatever reason, continually asking to be bumped up to bureaucrat. Our wiki is currently in the process of approving Bureaucrat selection proceedings, so applications for bureaucrat status aren't being accepted at the moment by our active 'crat. This administrator, however, continues to apply and I and another admin continue to tell him that it's the active Bureaucrat's prerogative whether or not she wants to add another bureaucrat. He responded that he would come here to request a Bureaucrat appointment, to which I responded that that would be impossible, since the Wiki still has an active bureaucrat and a large group of active administrators.

Now we get to the question he brought up, and one which I can't find the answer to. According to the adoption page, a wiki has to be inactive before it can be adopted. But, if a wiki is continually active including administrators, but the bureaucrats are inactive, thus meaning that no new rollbackers or administrators can be added, can an administrator from that wiki come here to request bureaucrat status for that wiki?

Here are some relevant links to pages on our wiki, regarding selection processes: w:c:Sims:The Sims Wiki:Administrators

w:c:Sims:The Sims Wiki:Requests for bureaucratship

w:c:Sims:The Sims Wiki talk:Requests for bureaucratship

Since we have an active bureaucrat, this should be a non-issue, but I'd rather wrap this up once and for all, so the aforementioned administrator doesn't decide to try and go over the bureaucrat's or the community's heads on this matter. Thanks! -- Patrick (LostInRiverview) (talk)(blog)(random page) 06:02, August 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * If there are no active bureaucrats but active admins, you must ask the other admins who should become the bureaucrat. Then you can ask on the adoption page for bureaucrat rights. I know this as I have done it previously. ☆ The   Solar   Dragon  ☆ 07:38, August 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * Damm edit conflicts :P. —Manyman (talk) 07:41, August 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * The only real extra power of a bureaucrat is to appoint/remove administrators, which if the wiki has an active bureaucrat(s) and a system in place for the community agreeing on new admins then there is no real reason to have more. Only wikia Staff can remove Bureaucrats, so there is no easy recall if they are unsuitable in my opinion (but that stops them removing each other in disputes). I think the User is too keen and perhaps sees it as a power/rank thing ! (as do alot of other wikia users when mistakenly offering adminship as a 'reward'). But I'm not on the wiki in question to see their edit style and dispute handling skills and diplomacy, but as they keep insisting on nominating themselves when it has been explained that there is an ongoing discussion on setting a nomination / request policy they have in effect ruled themselves out in my eyes as unsuitable as they have not accepted the communities current opinion on the matter. !!! But the community should actually decide if more bureaucrats are even needed first as is being discussed !!


 * Note The Community Forum is made up mainly of active Users (not Wikia Staff) who have no admin powers on wikis (other than members of the spam task force with special access to clean wikis up of spam/vandalism). Any request to become a bureaucrat would have to be made direct to Wikia Staff by special:contact or the adoption procedure link. Staff do not generally intervene in a active wiki except in special cases of a rouge admin causing problems and the other Admins failing to act or Admins acting against Wikia policy. (Opinion based on previous cases discussed here on the forum). - BulldozerD11 11:01, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

I feel offended because y'all are talking bad about me:'(-- Danny (Monster2821) (talk)(random page) 11:28, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks all, you've pretty much confirmed what I had already suspected regarding this situation. Granted, it's all hypothetical since we do have an active bureaucrat. As for what Bulldozer said, I would tend to agree, as I see patience as a virtue and a very important trait in any leadership or selected position, in real life or not; I won't go any further into that, for obvious reasons. Thanks again. -- Patrick (LostInRiverview) (talk)(blog)(random page) 14:06, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

The adoption page states quite clearly the prerequisite that admins have been inactive for 60 days. It is my experience that Wikia staff are looking for a demonstration that the active admins have discussed this and come to a conclusion before promoting somebody as a bureaucrat on a wiki with active adminship. (Pretty much the same goes for Bureaucrat demotions.) So the threat to go directly to Wikia to outflank a wiki community unwilling to promote some user to bureaucrat status is quite empty. The only time I have ever seen Wikia act against this principle was when most of a wiki's community was moving to a different server, and Wikia considered the admins "gone" for their purposes, although some of them still held the fort on Wikia while they were already editing on the new server; Wikia then concluded that they wouldn't care for the wiki properly any more, demoted them, and promoted people it felt would care better. (Note that this is very much simplified, and it happened in 2008.) -- ◄mendel► 18:23, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

Blog closed
this blog is closed-- Danny (Monster2821) (talk)(random page) 23:21, September 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * This isn't a blog - and conversation has stopped for about a week - normally meaning the thread has died -- Random Time  01:35, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * oops,meant forum.-- Danny (Monster2821) (talk)(random page) 02:21, September 5, 2010 (UTC)