Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Promotion guidelines

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

I actually agree with much of this, even though my oppose votes are generally "made by someone who is pursing a policy agenda of stricter standards" (though I don't agree with the "furthering a campaign" bit... because I'm not really campaigning; I just simply feel that 90% of the time, users with <2000 edits are not ready).

Thanks for all the history and analysis, it was a good read.

While I think coming to a consensus on promotion standards is a nice idea, I think it's impossible. There is too great a variety in the opinions of users on the matter. Some users would not have a problem supporting a candidate with 1200 edits. However, to some users that would be unthinkable. Same for time periods. I know some users that would probably support someone with six weeks under his/her belt, while I know others that won't support anyone with less than three months (or longer).

I would not oppose a "probationary period" for new admins, though I would oppose any such period longer than three months. Six months is unnecessary, IMO. I would also oppose not allowing "probationary" admins to block users. Blocks can be easily undone. If the community votes to give a user adminship, then he should have all the powers/abilities entailed. blankfaze | (беседа!) 16:07, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Most of this is a solution in search of a problem, it seems. The other part is unenforceable. While I'd like to see RfA made less of a popularity contest (like the ridiculous attempt to strike down a nomination on the grounds of the user's deletionist principles), I don't see any way to enforce common sense on people. Ambi 08:26, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Agree with Ambi. Admins are no perfect (especially including me!), but overall they're pretty good and I haven't seen any major problems yet. I occasionally read that de-adminship is near impossible, but I think the very few de-adminships so far are not a sign of a difficult de-adminship but a sign of good admins. -- Chris 73 Talk 08:36, Oct 14, 2004 (UTC)

Start a discussion about improving the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Promotion guidelines page

Start a discussion