There are currently
Please apply below if you are interested.
Rollback (called Patrollers) can revert disruptive edits, monitor and ban users from the Wiki's chat and can remove forum posts. If a patroller spots vandalism, they report it to an admin. A user will also gain Chat and Discussion Moderator abilities if their Rollback request is successful.
Requirements for Patroller:
- Be in good standing with the wiki with no blocks within the past month on your record.
- Have a minimum of 500 edits.
- Have been active on the wiki for at least one month.
Administrators (admins) have the same abilities of a patroller, as well as the ability to block users. They can also ban users from the chat and have more editing capabilities, such as changing the Wiki's theme or accessing internal files on the wiki.
Requirements for Administrator:
- Must already have Rollback abilities.
- Have a minimum of 1000 edits.
- Have been active on the wiki for at least 2 months.
Bureaucrats are the most elite members on the Wiki. They have all the abilities of all other staff members combined, they can promote and demote users. Upon a user's request for Bureaucrat, a Bureaucrat-only vote will ensue which will stay open one week. All of the Staff and the community are barred from voting but are allowed to leave a comment.
Requirements for Bureaucrat:
- Must be an Administrator.
- Have a minimum of 1,500 edits.
- Have been active regularly on the wiki for at least 6 months, but 1 year is preferred.
How to Apply
To Request for Promotion, simply edit this page and place your request under the Active Requests Heading. Take a look at some of the previous Requests under the Archive Heading to get an idea on how to format and present your case.
All requests remain active one week for voting and will be closed as inactive after said time. A request may be closed early if more than half of the staff has cast a vote and there is a clear answer. There may be only one vote per user. If a request fails, that user cannot apply again until a month has passed. A user who applies may not vote for themselves. Votes are counted at face value and are not subject to a percentage. This insures all get a fair say. You may also not delete your request in the active nor inactive sections.
To vote or file a promotion/demotion request, you must have at least 100 edits, have been active for one month, and be in good standing with no blocks within the past month on your record. This isn't to discourage users from voting, it's to prevent Sockpuppetry, Meatpuppetry and ensure that Revenge Demotions are avoided.
Staff Positions Available
The GTA Myths Wiki has set limits to the number of users that may hold various staff positions on the wiki at one time. The current limits imposed are as follows:
- Bureaucrats - N/A
- Administrators - five (5) users at one time.
- Patrollers - six (6) users at one time.
Mantiix - Demotion
After serious consideration, I have posted this request. Mantiix is an active editor on the wiki, no doubt, but he does not deserve the Administrator rights that have been given to him. In just the single month he's been an admin, he's shown blatant disregard for the everything on the wiki, from its policies to the users here.
- Mantiix doesn't understand how blocks work on the wiki. He sees them as a way to punish users he personally doesn't like rather than a way to stop immediate disruption on the wiki. He also doesn't understand how infinite bans should be handled. In the past few days alone, Mantiix has said he would permanently ban users for... advertising another wiki (source) and he even told me in chat that he was considering permanently banning Andrey for this.
- On a related note, Mantiix believes that everything is a personal attack against him. Adding a citation needed template? Personal attack. Adding a delete template? Personal attack! (claiming that other users are planning to destroy the wiki is somehow not an attack, however.) Adding a cleanup template? Personal attack. Leaving a comment saying an article is stupid? Personal attack. And so on. Is someone this out of tune with policy really deserving of admin?
- Mantiix has a special way of dealing with vandals: accuse everyone on the wiki of being that vandal. Whenever a vandal comes onto the wiki, he consistently blames someone here (usually Slash or Andrey) and refuses to accept any evidence to the contrary. If a user is willing to give permanent bans based on hearsay, do they really deserve admin?
- The biggest reason I posted this request: Mantiix engages in constant petty edit wars. As said above, he truly believes that adding any notice templates at all is a personal attack against him. That's why he has consistently reverted both mine and MH007's edits adding these templates, of course without any edit summary given at all.
- Barber Shop Ghost, Demented Police Department (this one is also Pointsgaming as he reverted my edit and then made the exact same addition I had done before,) Bikers, Grove Street Elegy, Jizzy B, just to name a few.
- Mantiix believes that nobody is allowed to touch his pages without his permission, undermining the basic concept of what a wiki even is. When Grove Street Elegy was nominated for deletion, he said "No deletion without BOV and my permission." When Myth hunter 007 added some pages for deletion, Maniitx harassed him on Facebook with quotes like "I don't care what you think." and "Before deleting an article, talk with me." Very professional behavior for an admin...
- Mantiix uses his power to shut down debates all the time. By abusing the "Assume Good Faith" policy, he claims that any opinion that gets in his way should be deleted or blocked. Whenever someone disagrees with him on any thread, he just repeatedly deletes replies and closes the thread. He also enforces policies that don't even exist. When I nominated Grove Street Elegy for deletion, he said I was "promoting anti-myth policy." When Mantiix doesn't want to delete something, he demands other users do it for him: that's why he got Boomer to take down the Elegy deletion talk page.
- Mantiix's admin actions are not based on what is best for the wiki, but instead for his own "Eye for an eye" type philosophy. He has a very "injustice collector" type of personality: constantly talking about "getting revenge" or "getting equal" with the people who have wronged him in the past. He directed a message towards me on Facebook claiming that one of his needless reverts was so he could "get equal" with me for doing the same to him some time ago. In his quest to do this, he's edit warred on multiple different pages as listed above. If a user overreacts this much to one single incident and retaliates without caring for the wiki, do they really deserve admin?
- Beyond his staff abuse, Mant's article creation skills are just as lacking. Look at the first revision of any of his recently created articles and you'll notice they lack even the most basic features. Navboxes and templates are often missing, text isn't bolded or italicized, references aren't done properly, and so on. While normally this isn't a concern, Mantiix has been pumping out these pages ridiculously quickly (almost 20 in 1 day) with zero regard for the quality. Administrators need to be put up to a higher standard if we are going to parade them as the elite editors of the wiki.
- Mant's behavior is literally damaging the wiki. As a result of his actions, at least three users have quit the wiki: Monkeypolice188, Andrey, and Slash. More, like MH007 and myself, are considering leaving because of his attitude as well. Having an authoritarian admin makes a website extremely unpopular and its effects are starting to show here on GMW.
- In the past, Mantiix has had a history of extreme admin abuse and unfair blocks. Sadly, he hasn't changed in the time since. In the past, Mantiix held a philosophy of "I am the ruler of GMW." Sadly, nothing has changed here either.
- No - Boomer8 (Contact) 02:12, May 11, 2018 (UTC)
- No--Sasquatch101 *talk) 04:44, May 11, 2018 (UTC)
- Yes - Slash (MSG) (CTB) 13:55, May 12, 2018 (UTC)
- No - Indep (Wanna map?|Wat I'm doing?) 14:20, May 12, 2018 (UTC)
- No - 15:00, May 12, 2018 (UTC)
- I don't want to argue but this is just posting offsite out of context comments to put me out. I have been constantly contributing to the wiki and so are others. Those pointing editing mistakes are infact doing a good job but some of them are taking the mistakes as a pawn that is now being used as a "revenge" for the events happened during the goatman and elegy saga. As the staff has assured you time to time, any kind of disruption won't be tolerated, it is time that you tone down a bit and act less aggressive and downplay your extremely pessimistic view point on those favoring Goatman. - Mantiix (talk) 21:28, May 10, 2018 (UTC)
- I have not seen any behavior exhibited from Mantiix that qualifies for a demotion.
Starting with your first bulletin, I can agree with Mantiix that spamming users to go to a rival myth website is not in the best interests of the GTA MW. Furthermore, I think that forum was put up to bait Mantiix and cause further drama. And Andrey was breaking the policy in the chat, so Mantiix banned him for a week. Mantiix should look more into what qualifies as Incivility and Personal Attacks, however a demotion is certainly not necessary as punishment.
As for your second bulletin, some of those are good findings, but they should probably be merged with other pages (the police one for example). Even if all of them were terrible findings, that doesn't qualify Mantiix for a demolition. The GTAMW encourages users to report new findings. See no problem with telling someone not to delete a page without discussing it with themselves or the community. Additionally, many FB screenshots can be taken out of context.
For your third one, like I said previously about the Personal Attacks, Mantiix should look into the Assume Good Faith policy more. He wasn't enforcing "anti myth policy" - a policy that doesn't exist. He was expressing his dissatisfaction that you are urging users to delete and downgrade existence labels on pages. And he didn't "get me" to take down anything. I reviewed the page and it matched the standards of the wiki so I moved it to Existence Status Requests.
For your fourth and fifth bulletins, I think FB screenshots can be taken out of context like I previously stated, so I'm not inclined to analyze that much further. And critiquing his editing skills is just grasping for straws and in no way qualifies him for a demotion.
As for the rest, I believe this recent drama is a direct result of off-site chatrooms and cliques. Monkeypolice does not care about the interests of the GTA MW and as for the others, I believe they tie into my previous statement about cliques on this wiki. I urge the users of this wiki to read over my comment and reevaluate the use of offsite communication with the users of this site, as it usually leads to chaos. Boomer8 (Contact) 02:12, May 11, 2018 (UTC)
- Boomer's analysis sums it up. The cliques and offsite drama on facebook have now carried over to the Wiki. Mantiix isn't perfect, but nobody is. He is, in my opinion, a very good editor and does his best performing admin duties. There is no major mistakes he's made, so I don't see the point in this request. Moreover, regarding users that have left, or threaten to leave the Wiki, that is their prerogative. Monk, for example, is a very good editor as shown by his accomplishments on GTA Wiki. However his knowledge of GTA isn't always applicable when dealing with myths. His frustrations in wanting a definitive answer on a myths existence is a perfect example. A myths existence isn't a simple yes or no answer. I don't know why other users you've mentioned decided to leave, but I do know there are always new users joining and its the duty of Staff to look out for the best interests of the Wiki, not cater and bend over backwards to hypersensitive editors.--Sasquatch101 (talk) 04:44, May 11, 2018 (UTC)
- Check the Wiki Activity... And you'll see the epic admin skills of enganging in edit words over not being able to understand basic English phrases.... Slash (MSG) (CTB) 13:55, May 12, 2018 (UTC)