Creepypasta Wiki:Requests for Bureaucrat/Princess Callie

Yep. I've decided to do this sooner rather than later. What's the worst that could happen? I get told no.

Do I meet the prereqs? No. But, as Guy stated on his app and Likferd made a point of on his, those are to show you know what you're doing and you've made a good contribution to the wiki. I believe I have.

• I wrote the drafts for the Quality Standards.
• I wrote the Vandalism Policy.
• I removed the Complete and Nazi categories, as they were not needed and had very few articles in them.
• I enacted the Project:Inactivity Guidelines that Sloshed forgot about.
• I proposed the first successful chat shutdown.
• I proposed the riddance of the User Submissions pages, as well as the Death category.
• I have three writing advice blogs, and more underway when I have access to a good computer.
• I helped with Deletion Appeal upon recieving administrator rights, something which was quite needed at the time.
• I have given a good number of critiques ranging from short and sweet to fully in depth.

Why I should be a crat:

• I have never been a person who gives support on the basis of personal feeling. If I feel I will be biased, I do not vote.
• I give honest opinions to right applications.
• I have experience from Spinpasta as a crat.
• I have assisted in Policy making whenever I can.
• I always take a careful look at proposals I read.
• I am not easily offended, at least, not anymore.
• I feel I could better assist the wiki as a crat.

Why I want crat:

• I would like to better assist in policy. For example, the vandalism policy should have been able to be enacted immediately. But, being that I am only an admin, I didn't feel it was my place to do so.
• I believe that when Guy gets crat, we will still need another crat to ensure that there is always more than one active crat, in the event Skelly ends up inactive. Sloshed and Cleric are semi active at best.
• I full well enjoy being an administrator. It only seems logical I attempt the next step up.

I may not have reached the prereqs or have as much a contribution as Guy or others, but I haven't done absolutely nothing either. Have I been less active than needed at times? Yes, but I have tried hard to stay active somehow, and have announced my inactivity, not just dropped off the face of the earth.

I suppose that's it for the moment. Thanks for taking the time to read, and please leave a reason behind your vote.

EDIT: Since two people have opposed, I will go ahead and address these issues. Did I deny your help because I needed the edits? Yes. Could I have stopped you? No.

I did not show favouritism to Chao. He and I compromised; he apologized to people he hurt and I closed the thread to prevent further drama. We held up on our bargain.

The reason I go inactive as far as music is due to that being the closest thing I have to a job. It's something kind of important to me, yes.

The slenderman incident was me PMSing, which is something I will never allow to happen again.

Streve, my advice blogs came before Nooth's, and I fail to see how they're carbon copies of Guy's. Similar format, yes. But not the same topics.

And who says I can't make factual decisions on the fly? I have before and can do so again.

I usually attempt to be active in some way. When I was not editing, I was moderating chat. Even then, I usually attempt to keep an eye on the wiki. Activity isn't soley editing.

EDIT 2: Let me ask two things, and then I will address again. 1. Is doing your job not what makes you eligible for promotion? I seem to be seeing "You do your job good as is, you don't need to go a step up." Correct me if I am wrong though. 2. What can I do to prove to you that I am a good candidate for the job?

Fatal, again, that was one time. But also, that kind of formatting is something that we generally shouldn't have to deal with. Same with every other thing, we practically scream to use Source mode. But yes, that was one time, and since that time I haven't attempted that again, nor do I intend to.

As my music is one reason I was attempting inactivity, I shall clarify. It is something that I was doing in order to make a little money. Even in that event, I was not totally inactive.

When I show my app, it is an attempt to let people know it exists. I don't show as often as I get told I do (it doesn't just pop up every ten minutes. When I was going for mod? Sure. But not as often now, and I usually slow down after a bit.

EDIT 3: Alot of reasoning seems to be my erratic activity. That's something I've been resolving. There isn't anything going on right now that could render me inactive.

I've never resigned or made a dramatic exit and even when I said that I didn't think the wiki could survive I still stayed loyal to it. That's definitely changed for the better, and I want to help keep it that way.

Again, I never actually been entirely inactive. Even when I said I would end up that way, I still attempted to get on and do something. I've not just dropped off the face of the Earth for no apparent reason.

As for the blogs, I admit, yes I've covered points Guy has. I have also covered other elements, and I also have another blog explaining the use of paragraphs. The only reason it isn't in the Project page is because I didn't feel it was good enough to be there.

I have decision making skills, and I fail to see how exactly I lack the values of a leader.

I genuinely and truly want the position. I think I could be of better use to the wiki as a crat.

 Support -

{{Support}}

 Neutral -

{{Neutral}}

 Oppose -

{{Oppose}}

Please sign your replies!

---

 Support - SOMEGUY123 ^(talk) 16:53, June 30, 2014 (UTC)

 Support - because you are awesome Animefan9999 (talk) 16:54, June 30, 2014 (UTC)

 Support - After some thought, my accusations being corrected, and a private talk with the user (where I have asked her why she deserves the right, what were some things that she had done with the wiki, asking her if she would go back into inactivity, and asking her to do her part on the wiki's she has rights on), I am officially changing my vote from a strong oppose to a strong support. I know the user has capability, and experience with the right. The user has strong leadership and decision skills, which would benefit for the wiki -- which she has showed on Spinpasta and here with the policies, updates, and the QS revision. Her inactivity would probably be a problem still, but I do trust that she would not leave the site completely without explaining why she's going to lapse into inactivity (like her reasons for lapsing into inactivity for music, the death of a family member/animal, or technology issues/sisters not sharing her computer). Now, onto the reasons with both users talk page. To what I have seen, it's not really mandatory for administrators to review the Writer's Workshop all the time. There are some administrators who do not review the articles, such as SG, Nick, Sloshed, and Skelly -- the user who made the Writer's Workshop board after being urged by ImGonnaBeThatGuy after numerous of times. And we have her responses on Mystreve's reasonings for opposing, which she has been helpful over here. I can now believe that she is capable for this right, and can tame the animal over here. Do you hear that? That's the grape roaring 04:29, July 1, 2014 (UTC)

 Oppose - This has nothing to do with any disagreements you and I might've had in the past, Callie. Although we've had our share, I still like and respect you. This isn't anything personal. It's based solely on how I don't think you're quite right for the job. Just wanted to clarify this before I continue. Anyway...

I see only three solid reasons that you stated up there that could warrant any validity to your app - Quality Standards Draft, Vandalism Policy, and the Chat Shutdown. All of these were very beneficial to the site, and I applaud your efforts with them.

The rest, to me, just seem like tasks an administrator should be doing already anyway. And as well-intentioned as your writing advice stuff is, they just seem like carbon copies of points that people like Guy and Nooth have already covered.

I think a bureaucrat needs to be able to make factual decisions on the fly, and have tremendous leadership abilities. They need to frequently think "outside the box" when needed, and also need to be active. If I'm going to put my support behind a bureaucrat vote, the person needs to demonstrate all of these abiities to me rather consistently, if not regularly.

Although you stated plainly in your blogs that you have other things going on (don't we all), I simply don't think you're active enough on here. It seems like you'll have these bursts of activity, then just kind of vanish for a while; content with what you did during that time. That's not good.

Anyway, I think you're fine where you're at right now on the site. Mystreve (talk) 17:39, June 30, 2014 (UTC)

 Neutral - I really have no idea. I don't know how to explain, but, I really cannot decide. I may actually know why, but, saying it here or even saying it all isn't actually worth it, I believe. Sorry. Jacket Mike|Leave your hate here. 20:56, June 30, 2014 (UTC)

 Oppose - sorry but i dont think you are cut out for it The Plank Will Kill You ^(Talk) 20:56, July 1, 2014 (UTC)

Elaborate, please. Dashie ~20% Cooler~ 20:58, July 1, 2014 (UTC)

 Oppose - one of a few reasons are the way you often handle situations. There is a noticeable bias in the way policies and the discussion of implementation of those said policies proceed, and you happen to be one of the handful of people who often share this...bias. I do not deny the amount of work you do for the wiki, nor do I deny the situations you have handled well, so I have nothing against or promoting you as an admin. I do, however, not support you as a bureaucrat with higher influence.

(P.S. This is unprofessional and messy. Couldn't you have just used the forums?) The Cthulhu Cultist - Scorch933 21:18, July 1, 2014 (UTC)