From MHWiki


This page is the second page to the Sandbox of Eepeng. It contains a raw example of a feature of the wiki that has not been implemented. It is merely a page to practice wiki use where work will generally not be viewed by the public. This page in no way relates to how the MouseHunt wiki is run, it is simply a practice.

Requests for adminship (RfA) is the process by which the MouseHunt community decides who should be an administrator (or sysop). Administrators have access to a few technical features that help with maintenance. A user may submit his own request for adminship (a self-nomination) or may be nominated by another user.

Current nominations


Vote here (0/6/0) ending 03:55 October 19th, 2008 (UTC)

Test – Test is a user who loves to make pages of hunters/hunter's groups and other pages such as Closed Ringed Flags. A user who likes fixing mistakes by other users and adviseing the right "thing" to fix their own mistakes to the user if repeatative. A user who would like to see no red links on any page. A user with 4 years game experience, 2 month active MouseHunt wiki experience and 500 edits. Test 22:37, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept.



  1. Failed to properly submit RfA.-- Test(t/c) 03:40, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
  2. Didn't completely follow directions for the RfA (the fact that the Vote here link does not work properly should say something). Also numerous spelling errors lower the quality of the RfA. Pestering existing admins to do things that aren't urgently needed is yet another reason I have for opposing. --Test 04:28, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
  3. Aside from all of the things mentioned above, most of the reasons for becoming an admin are things that this user doesn't do well, nor would require being an admin to do well. --test (talk) 04:50, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
  4. Strongly oppose. Beyond the things mentioned above, this editor does not have the demeanor and tact needed to be an administrator. --Test 05:17, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
  5. Oppose. Echoing all aforementioned statements above. User:Test 23:14, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
  6. Strongly oppose. Candidate doesn't need to be an admin to perform the edits they've been doing nor create pages which need to be made (candidate did not qualify what constitutes need). Some of the errors the candidate brought to the attention of other editors were very minor or weren't even errors. -- Test 03:50, 14 October 2008 (UTC)



Questions for the candidate
A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? (Please read the page about MHWiki:administrators|administrators and the MHWiki:administrators' reading list|administrators' reading list.)
A. I would like to fix pages if they have problems. I would also like to make pages which "need" to be made. Introduct new MHWiki users (if needed) on how to make a page and show them their sandbox (also if needed). Block any users if they need to be blocked. Revert vandalism, protect pages which need protection... (not many I believe).
2. Of your articles or contributions to MHWiki, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. I am pleased with all of my articles, I believe that every article deserves the same amount of attention.

Add new requests at the top of this section

Nominations must be accepted by the user in question. If you nominate a user, leave a message on their talk page and ask them to reply here if they accept the nomination.

Please remember to update the vote-tallies in the headers when voting

Current time is 07:52, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Purge page cache if nominations haven't updated.

Requests for bureaucratship

Bureaucrats are administrators with the additional ability to make other users admins or bureaucrats, based on community decisions reached here. The process for bureaucrats is similar to that for adminship above, but is generally only by request of the wiki Administrator. The expectation for bureaucratship is higher than for admin, in terms of numbers of votes, ability to engage voters and candidates, and significant disqualifications. Candidates might consider initiating a discussion here of the prevailing consensus about the need for additional bureaucrats before nominating themselves.