This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Administrators page. |
|
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
The project page associated with this talk page is an official policy on Wiki English. Policies have wide acceptance among editors and are considered a standard for all users to follow. Please review policy editing recommendations before making any substantive change to this page. Always remember to keep cool when editing, and don't panic. |
NOTE: This talk page is not the place to post questions for administrators.
|
NOTE: This talk page is not the place to request access to administrator user rights. For requests for adminship, see WP:RfA. |
This page has been cited as a source by a notable professional or academic publication: Stvilia, B. et al. Information Quality Discussions in Wiki. University of Illinois U-C. |
Index |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
External videos | |
---|---|
Wheel warring |
How to become an administrator? Mood segregate (talk) 14:33, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
caveat: Bishonen is shown as an example but this post isn't about him/her
I've had a few encounters with admins over the past 6 weeks and though the end result was managed well, I found the initial notice to be unclear. The use of vague language and casual tone make it ambiguous as to how the accused is meant to respond. This goes against the Care & Judgement guidance for admins
Tonymetz 💬 18:14, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
For cultural reasons we choose not to make who admins are super obvious.
If you are using the alternate account as an account that you will use to edit on public computers, please indicate so. If it is a doppelganger, no edits should be made from that accountand only added the template to your user page. As your usernames were Tonymet and Tonymetz at that time, it could cause a lot of confusion. I thought it was probably a WP:DOPPELGANGER, but you kept editing from both accounts. Now, arguably the block wasn't needed, so this is bad on my part, but it did help alleviate the confusion one may have from those usernames by unblocking after you have renamed your account to TonymetzAlt. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 00:45, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
For your information, there are many WP:RFA2024 RFCs that recently closed that affect administrators. You may wish to examine these in more detail at Wiki: Requests for adminship/2024 review#Phase I. A quick summary:
Today I edited this policy page to reflect proposals 14 and 25 since those look straightforward. Will hold off on editing in the other proposals for various reasons (only approved for trial, needs a follow-up RFC to flesh out details, etc.) –Novem Linguae (talk) 09:11, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
I think we should add something about not logging administrative actions. There was a recent case where a semi-active editor was desysopped because they made a controversial reverse of a block after not logging any administrative actions for years.
I think if a user has logged zero administrative actions within 2 years (including editing protected pages, deleting pages, protecting pages, blocking editors, but not rollback, new pages patrol, or moving pages without leaving a redirect), excluding admin actions that have been self reverted, then the user should have their rights removed, with reversal at BNB for up to 3 years after removal. We need to find a way to handle the gaming where administrators try to maintain a level of activity just to keep the tools, even as they slowly lose touch with changing community expectations for the tools. There is no point in having admin access with users that won't use it; in fact it can do more harm especially as such accounts can be broken into and compromised. Awesome Aasim 02:19, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
they go and make 99 minor or copy edits to articles- that sounds like they're improving Wikipedia, which is what they should be doing. I find it rather unlikely that someone would get the "you're about to be desysopped" notice, panic and make 100 edits really quickly, and then disappear again for another two years; if one gets motivated by the warning, they'll stick around for a bit. Primefac (talk) 11:20, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
This article uses material from the Wikipedia English article Wikipedia talk:Administrators, which is released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license ("CC BY-SA 3.0"); additional terms may apply (view authors). Content is available under CC BY-SA 4.0 unless otherwise noted. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
®Wikipedia is a registered trademark of the Wiki Foundation, Inc. Wiki English (DUHOCTRUNGQUOC.VN) is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wiki Foundation.