Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Archive 4: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 17:40, 4 February 2023

This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:Requests for adminship. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

→

After too fast, we have too slow

Quite a few users have been here too long. They need to be made sysops. Most have unanimous support and have been here for at least a week, (i think) Green Mountain 23:00, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)

A week is not long enough. --mav 23:17, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I have seen users become sysops after being listed for less than 2 days. Green Mountain 19:11, 4 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Tim explains

Please check the discussion above. I was chastised for doing it after 2 days, now I do it after a week. Also, I don't have time to do it every day, so some people may have to wait more than a week. -- Tim Starling 01:57, Jan 8, 2004 (UTC)

Should I apply?

I have been here for more than a month. I have a couple thousand contributions. I don't know if I should apply for adminship. Can someone tell me if I should? Green Mountain 01:20, 8 Jan 2004 (UTC)

You shouldn't. --Wik 01:44, Jan 8, 2004 (UTC)

Asking "should I ask" is unnecessary. People won't hate you for asking too early, they'll just be really nice about it and tell you to come back later. Lots of people have been made sysops on the second attempt. I say go for it. -- Tim Starling 01:57, Jan 8, 2004 (UTC)

Although you have to consider Alex... -- Tim Starling 02:00, Jan 8, 2004 (UTC)

There's no harm in asking. Give it a go and see what happens. --Camembert 02:32, 8 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Criteria

Being a sysop is more about being a trusted member of the community rather than about how many edits you've made, and you can't expect to have gained this in less than a week. People need to see how you handle various situations, etc. --Angela, quoted (and seconded) by Uncle Ed 22:26, 8 Jan 2004 (UTC)

One of those situations clearly being "how do you act when you don't get your own way". Which this would appear to be. -- Finlay McWalter 23:13, 8 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Yes, thats a very good idea. Green Mountain 23:21, 8 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I just wanted to say that I got sysop status after only a bit more than a month and maybe 300/400 edits, but most of the edits were useful instead of "added a period" or "spelling correction".

I'm not Attacking anyone who does that, but 300 minor edits is a whole different thing than 300 full-paragraph (or at least fact) additions...

--Ilyanep 16:38, 25 Jan 2004 (UTC)

New rule

It seems the new rule at this so-called open source project is that anyone with a sysop key can ban any user, or attempt to block any IP at any time. So much for the e-mail, discussion and what not. All it requires is a rope and a few willing allies. In this case, the vigilante action seems to have been to protect other sysops from criticism. --172.192.87.172 00:26, 25 Jan 2004

I will be happy to discuss these matters further with you, but not on the wiki itself. You can email me at cyanonym at hotmail dot com. -- Cyan 02:26, 25 Jan 2004 (UTC)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+{{aan}}
 ==After too fast, we have too slow==
-Quite a few users have been here too long.  They need to be made sysops.  Most have unanimous support and have been here for at least a week, (i think) [[User:Greenmountainboy|<font color=#008000>Green</font>'' ]][[User_talk:greenmountainboy|Mountain'']] 23:00, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)
+Quite a few users have been here too long.  They need to be made sysops.  Most have unanimous support and have been here for at least a week, (i think) [[User:Greenmountainboy|<span style="color:#008000;">Green</span>'' ]][[User_talk:greenmountainboy|Mountain'']] 23:00, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 :A week is not long enough. --[[User:Maveric149|mav]] 23:17, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)
-:I have seen users become sysops after being listed for less than 2 days. [[User:Greenmountainboy|<font color=#008000>Green</font>'' ]][[User_talk:greenmountainboy|Mountain'']] 19:11, 4 Jan 2004 (UTC)
+:I have seen users become sysops after being listed for less than 2 days. [[User:Greenmountainboy|<span style="color:#008000;">Green</span>'' ]][[User_talk:greenmountainboy|Mountain'']] 19:11, 4 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 ===Tim explains===
@@ Line 14: / Line 16: @@
 ==Should I apply?==
-I have been here for more than a month.  I have a couple thousand contributions.   I don't know if I should apply for adminship.  Can someone tell me if I should? [[User:Greenmountainboy|<font color=#008000>Green</font>'' ]][[User_talk:greenmountainboy|Mountain'']] 01:20, 8 Jan 2004 (UTC)
+I have been here for more than a month.  I have a couple thousand contributions.   I don't know if I should apply for adminship.  Can someone tell me if I should? [[User:Greenmountainboy|<span style="color:#008000;">Green</span>'' ]][[User_talk:greenmountainboy|Mountain'']] 01:20, 8 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 :You shouldn't. --[[User:Wik|Wik]] 01:44, Jan 8, 2004 (UTC)
@@ Line 25: / Line 27: @@
 ----
+==Criteria==
-==Tim wants to distribute the task of making admins==
+Being a sysop is more about being a trusted member of the community rather than about how many edits you've made, and you can't expect to have gained this in less than a week. People need to see how you handle various situations, etc. --Angela, quoted (and seconded) by [[User:Ed Poor|Uncle Ed]] 22:26, 8 Jan 2004 (UTC)
+: One of those situations clearly being "how do you act when you don't get your own way". Which this would appear to be.  -- [[User:Finlay McWalter|Finlay McWalter]] 23:13, 8 Jan 2004 (UTC)
+:: Yes, thats a very good idea.  [[User:Greenmountainboy|<span style="color:#008000;">Green</span>'' ]][[User_talk:greenmountainboy|Mountain'']] 23:21, 8 Jan 2004 (UTC)
+I just wanted to say that I got sysop status after only a bit more than a month and maybe 300/400 edits, but most of the edits were ''useful'' instead of "added a period" or "spelling correction".
+I'm not Attacking anyone who does that, but 300 minor edits is a whole different thing than 300 full-paragraph (or at least fact) additions...
+--[[User:Ilyanep|Ilyanep]] 16:38, 25 Jan 2004 (UTC)
+==New rule==
-I have half a mind to do away with this task, it gets tiresome after a while. Does anyone have any ideas on how the power to create sysops can be distributed to the user level? Say, with a quorum and a vote? -- [[User:Tim Starling|Tim Starling]] 02:41, Jan 8, 2004 (UTC)
+It seems the new rule at this so-called open source project is that anyone with a sysop key can ban any user, or attempt to block any IP at any time. So much for the e-mail, discussion and what not. All it requires is a [[lynching|rope]] and a few willing allies. In this case, the vigilante action seems to have been to protect other sysops from criticism. --[[User:172.192.87.172|172.192.87.172]] 00:26, 25 Jan 2004
-===Automation suggested===
+:I will be happy to discuss these matters further with you, but not on the wiki itself. You can email me at cyanonym at hotmail dot com. -- [[User:Cyan|Cyan]] 02:26, 25 Jan 2004 (UTC)
-:Automate the process. Give them a request form where they enter the reason they want to become a sysop. Have seperate voting form which lists how long they have been here, their number of edits, and what reason they give. After exactly 2 weeks, if someone has less than a general consensus (let's say 80%) of the vote, they become a sysop.  --[[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 02:49, 8 Jan 2004 (UTC)