Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Nominate

message: Note: It is considered good form to sound out the prospective nominee first before you create the RfA subpage, as if the nominee really wants to wait or doesn't want to be an admin, creating the page may be a bit awkward for them. So please consider checking first. 
as we have had several situations lately of people being nominated that didn't want to be nominated yet and it caused some unneeded stress. ++Lar: t/c 22:50, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

message: I think "Finally, once the nomination has been accepted and the questions answered, any editor (including the nominator or the nominee) can link it to the RfA page." needs to be changed to "Finally, once the nomination has been accepted and the questions answered, the nominee should transclude it on the RfA page when they are ready for the RfA to begin. Alternatively, the candidate may ask the nominator to do so." This would save any confusion about whether or not the candidate is ready to begin the RFA- sometimes the candidate might want to hold back till a particular day/time before starting it, and this is not possible if 'any editor' does the adding of the RFA to the main page. Petros471 12:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That seems to me to be reasonable, and also to be in line with Lar's point above. --Guinnog 13:11, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. --Rory096 13:39, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Rory, good change. ++Lar: t/c 15:17, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Any editor'? 

message: I've tried to clarify this in the instructions for acceptance. Changing it to the current time would be wrong. Is this clearer, or have I misunderstood the instruction myself? Tim Vickers 18:28, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Time instruction

message: Do I have to make the description like the one I edited in the user page? Or is it can I make my own description of the user? TobytheTramEngine 17:39, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Your description of the user 

message: I've been wanting to run for RFA again and I've already ran in the past (but failed), and there is already a page about my run 7 months ago. What do I do if I want to run again? HyperSonicBoom] 18:21, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have rewrote most of the RFA and will write the rest of the instructions later, but I included information on how to handle multple RFA's, more cleary.  If you had been previously nominated, or previously nominated yourself.  You add a space 1 on the second time, space 2 if it's your third, space 3 if it's your fourth.
Just reflect those changes when you transclude as well. -- businessman332211 17:27, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another nomination 

message: I would like to throw my hat in the ring and say that I think I'm both ready and willing for the responsibility and privilege of adminship. I'm aware I could nominate myself, however I think self-nomination should be discouraged but should instead come from two or more current admins who think an editor is ready for the full Rfa process. - Stillwaterising (talk) 21:13, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree, because some potential admins aren't monitored by other users.Jasper Deng (talk) 04:07, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Self-nomination 

message: Could there be the bureaucratship request nomination instructions here?  ~~EBE123~~ talkContribs 18:41, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: If someone can't figure it out by themselves, they probably should not be nominating themselves or someone else to be a bureaucrat. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 14:50, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bureaucrat? 

message: To quote the first part under "To nominate yourself":
"While there is no minimum requirement, self-nominated candidates with fewer than 2,000 edits and three months of active editing often see their RfAs closed per WP:SNOW or Wikipedia:Not Now shortly after adding them."
Perhaps the numbers should be upped a bit. These days, it's more like 5,000 edits and six months. Guoguo12--Talk--  22:28, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update information? 

message: I need help for Adminship.
Aftab Banoori 09:57, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Admiship 

message: What instructions in the heading source code?--that annoying guy who shows up sometimes because he's bored, and has absolutely, positutely nothing else to do, whatsoever. (talk) 06:17, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timing 

message: I've added an RFA nom, but there is read message asking me to do something with a time parser subst that I can't see in the instructions. Please help Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:31, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Malformed

message: Does this still apply after the edit counter opt-in was removed? and would wmf:Privacy policy be the best updated link? That's where the tool labs page's privacy policy redirects. czar ♔ 16:42, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Privacy policy 

message: Somewhere in this expr:

it's picking up a [ character, which is causing a massive "Expression error: Unrecognized punctuation character "["." message in the actual text. Could someone who knows how these things work figure it out? Thanks, ansh666 00:23, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Still there.  Any objection to replacing that with "a significant percentage" until it gets fixed?  Lesser Cartographies (talk) 08:24, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  error with expr in self-nom section 

message: I would like to nominate a user for admin, yet the instructions are just as intimidating that I might break something or save the page with errors, potentially affecting the outcome of the request. Particularly, the preview of the page says "All you need to do now is substitute the time parser function (it isn't as scary as it sounds, edit the page and inline comments will guide you)."
Yet, there are not comments in the code itself: 
Is it possible to request another editor experienced in this complex process to nominate the candidate I am thinking of nominating> –Sanglahi86 (talk) 13:09, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request nomination 

message: Point 1 of the instructions mentions a nonexistent form. 83.9.213.181 (talk) 14:33, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Point 1 

message: Where can an editor go to get a rough idea of one's chances to be elected an administrator. This would prevent a wasted effort, if one were to seek administratorship, with little chance of succeeding. GoodDay (talk) 17:33, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Straw polling