Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/ShadowBallX 2

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful permissions request. Please do not modify it.

ShadowBallX

ShadowBallX (talk · contribs · count)
RfA of ShadowBallX
Previous RfAs: 1 2
global contribs · pie chart · edit count · list user · blocklog ·contribs · deleted
Last comment by: Chenzw.

End date: 06:03, 4 December 2025 (UTC)


To be honest, I've considered doing this for nearly a month now, but I think now's the time to bite the bullet.

For those who don't know who I am, I joined SEWP back in late 2020, edited semi-regularly until late 2022, then took a full break from editing until August 2024, and since then, I've been back to editing regularly. I've also done a previous RfA for myself back in March 2021, which I ended up withdrawing (had I not, I very likely would've failed it either way). For the most part, I tend to stick with editing/creating football articles/templates/categories, although I do also help with fighting vandalism as well.

Now, as for why I'm doing this RfA. Something I've started noticing more recently is the lack of active admins during the regular hours that I edit (~10pm–2am EST). I know there's already been 8 people promoted to admins this year, but I don't think another one would hurt. ShadowBallX (talk) 06:03, 27 November 2025 (UTC)

Candidate's acceptance: Self Nomination

Support

  1. Support active user who is already a patroller and makes frequent requests/reports. I think they will be net positive for the project as an admin.--BRP ever 12:05, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
  2. Support I don’t see why not Plutus 💬 🎄 — Fortune favours the curious 02:24, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support, seems very helpful. BigKrow (talk) 02:31, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
  4. Support Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk | changes) 02:42, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
  5. Support fr33kman 23:16, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
  6. Support The response to Ferien's question has alleviated any concerns I had.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 11:35, 29 November 2025 (UTC)
  7. Support --Saroj (talk) 13:37, 29 November 2025 (UTC)
  8. Support - I appreciate Ferien's conern below regarding the A4 repsonse, but I feel granting adminship would be an overall net positive to the project. CountryANDWestern (talk) 03:30, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Oppose. BZPN (talk) 06:45, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
    Can I ask why you're opposing? ShadowBallX (talk) 06:56, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
    I don't think you have enough experience/engagement in some areas yet. You don't hold rollback, and using it properly as sysop requires at least some familiarity with this tool; without that background, it’s hard to assess readiness for stronger tools. The same applies to TAIV - you need a solid understanding of how those tools work and as far as I know you haven't had the opportunity to use it yet. I also see very limited work in e.g. user talk (vandals) and almost no presence in discussions (ST), RfDs and PGAs - see , compare to e.g. . Patrol work alone isn't enough for me to be confident at this stage. BZPN (talk) 09:12, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
  2. Weak oppose I am afraid I must oppose again, albeit weakly still, per the answer to Q1. With your previous RfA, the opposes were based on the answer to my Q5, which I tried to ask again (with a slight rewording) to try and easily move on from those concerns last time, but the response was unfortunately identical. As Djsasso said on that RfA, it would be a clearly incorrect use of A4 that quite a few people have been trying to shut down and is still very much an issue today. A4 claims don't need references to verify, and being famous is a claim, as was addressed last time. That being said, I want to distance myself far from the oppose vote above, ShadowBallX definitely does not have minimal interaction at these venues, as for the concerns at PGA he is nominating an article for very good status which is more than a few admins are doing (me included)! ShadowBallX is certainly an active and trusted member of the community and I hope my oppose vote doesn't put that into question. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 12:55, 29 November 2025 (UTC)

Comments

Questions from Ferien
  • Hi ShadowBallX, thank you for volunteering again - kinda wild it is coming up to almost 5(!!?) years since your last RfA (Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/ShadowBallX). I would like to repeat a question I asked at your last RfA as well as another separate question I did not ask last time - looking back, 5 is somewhat evil so I will just ask 2! Of course, as per usual, you don't have to answer them, but I would really appreciate if you did.
    1. A page reads "John Doe is a very famous singer." No references exist to verify the claim. Could the page be deleted under A4?
    2. Which admin tasks do you intend to be least active in and why? This is an open-ended question.
  • Thanks and good luck with this RfA :) --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 12:16, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
    Honestly agree, it has been a while. But at the same time, I did scale back my editing after the initial RfA, and didn't really get back to that previous level of editing until a bit over a year ago. As for the questions:
    1. Seeing as it's only claims he's a "very famous singer" without backing up why exactly he's very famous (either in the form of references or additional explanation), then yeah, it does qualifies for A4.
    2. In terms of where I intend to be the least active, I'd honestly say importing pages. I completely understand it's purpose (bringing pages and their edit history over from other wikis), but it's more down to personal preference, as I prefer to just simply copy/paste something, even if it means it takes a bit longer. Does that mean I'd never use it? Probably not, but it's somewhere that I don't see myself really using at this very moment. Additionally, I don't see really myself getting involved with user rights management immediately, mainly cause I'd prefer to learn how the tools to do it work beforehand.
    Thanks again for the questions! ShadowBallX (talk) 22:45, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
Questions from Raayaan9911

I have a questions for you:

  • Q1: If you see any users are vandalizing for the first time. Would you block them or leave a warning message?
  • Q2: If you see RfD nominations that are AI-generated contents and have no votes in 7 days. Would you close as delete outcome or close as keep outcome?
  • Q3: If you see honset users have asked for met minimum of rollbackers or patrollers requirements and actually met them. Would you grant or decline?
  • Q4: If user is abusing their rollbackers or patrollers. Would you revoke or leave the warning message?

I hope my questions are good and you can answer these appropriately. Raayaan9911 11:21, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the questions!
1. In most situations, I'd give them at least one warning message. Should they continue immediately afterwards, then I'd block them as a vandalism-only account.
2. This one is interesting, as I haven't really thought much about this until now (mostly because of QD A7). Should there be no votes, I'd close it as a SOFTDELETE.
3. I'm not going to answer this one, as I'm confused what exactly you mean by "met them"?
4. Personally, I'd give them a warning message first, and should they continue abusing it, then I'd revoke it.
ShadowBallX (talk) 19:19, 3 December 2025 (UTC)
@ShadowBallX Just a follow up for q1, how long would you block them and what do you mean by immediately afterwards (like 1 more edit, that is vandalism, or more)? Plutus 💬 🎄 — Fortune favours the curious 02:07, 4 December 2025 (UTC)
The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.