I've checked around this site, and it seems that the current administrators have been inactive for over a year now. I think it's time this wiki receives a new administrator that'll be active, so I posted this with hopes of nominating some potential candidates.
However, please note that not just anyone can be up for the job. Usually, when it comes to administration, someone who has contributed heavily to the wiki would be one of the most trustworthy candidates. Additionally, the user must be familiar with the local policies on the wiki, so they can keep it organized. And, of course, make sure the nominee has been active recently, so someone who's inactive isn't nominated by accident. Please keep these in minds before nominating anyone. Arrancar109 (Talk) 21:14, February 2, 2012 (UTC)
- Hi. I was indeed inactive, a situation I somewhat predicted here (I saw this nomination due to email alert). Anyway, I fully support the proposed appointment of a new admin. Since I wasn't active for some time though, I have no idea about current user activity/trustworthiness and I don't want to judge based on years old impressions, so I won't nominate or vote for/against anybody. Let the active editors choose... --Azaghal 04:28, February 4, 2012 (UTC)
I think I messaged everyone who could possibly care, so I guess I'll just throw my name up. EGGS 15:43, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
- I just casually come by here every now and then, but EGGS seems to be pretty on the ball with editing and moderating this place. I actually didn't know he wasn't already an admin until recently. I second his nomination, I suppose.--Otherarrow 15:46, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
I am voting for EGGS. It is obvious that the wiki improved a lot since EGGS joined.
Oh wow, need to check my mail more often. Well I'm not well versed enough in this stuff to be an admin so I'm not even gonna try, just promise to help however I can. Given the support I guess I'll vote for EGGS too. Hawkeye2701 06:20, February 14, 2012 (UTC)