Talk:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Compiled list of wikis with admin review processes[edit]


Special provision rights[edit]

Multilingual projects[edit]

Wikibooks[edit]

  • cs.wikibooks policy: removal after 6 months without logged action
  • en.wikibooks - Expectations (permissions for administrators, bureaucrats, and checkusers may be removed when minimum activity expectations are not met, one month after notifying the person and the community. Inactive bots may have permissions removed at bureaucrats discretion)
  • es.wikibooks - Inactivity policy (any administrator, bureaucrat, checkuser or oversighter which has gone inactive for a continued period of two years will have all permissions removed. Inactivity is no edits and no log actions for that 2 years period)
  • ja.wikibooks - annual reconfirmations (policy)
  • nl.wikibooks - Inactief, policy: removal procedure starts after 12 months of inactivity
  • sv.wikibooks - Inactivity policy, one year.
  • vi.wikibooks has a recall process for inactive administrators. However, only one user has ever been given permanent rights; the rest are given temporary rights by Meta stewards.

Wikinews[edit]

  • Wikinewses with Arbitration Committees: currently only en
  • zh.wikinews has inactivity removal policy for administrators and bureaucrats inactive for 6 months, and continued to be absent 1 month after notification.
  • cs.wikinews policy: removal after 6 months without logged action
  • it.wikinews policy: annual vote for confirmation plus removal after six months of inactivity, but it's quite unapplied
  • ru.wikinews policy: a warning is issued if no logged actions in 6 months, removal after 3 months of inactivity after the warning
  • fr.wikinews policy: a warning is issued if not logged actions in 12 months, removal after 3 months of inactivity after the warning.
  • ja.wikinews checks by another discussion. We do the will your administrator of inactivity about more than a year. Or, administrator of inactivity for more than two years will apply for removal of administrator flag. Please look at checklist.

Wikipedias[edit]

Wikiquotes[edit]

Wikisources[edit]

  • cs.wikisource policy: removal after 6 months without logged action
  • en.wikisource annual confirmation process s:en:Wikisource:Restricted access policy
  • it.wikisource policy: removal after 1 year without any logged edit.
  • pl.wikisource removal after 12 months of inactivity s:pl:Wikiźródła:Odbieranie uprawnień
  • sv.wikisource has a continous procedure (a bot is every week updating a page) for all local userrights, bots and autopatrollers are included.

Wikiversities[edit]

  • de.wikiversity Loss of rights after one year with under 10 edits. Inactivity rules

Wikivoyages[edit]

  • en.wikivoyage has automatic removal by bureaucrats after 2 years. voy:en:Wikivoyage:Administrators
  • es.wikivoyage has inactivity removal policy after 1 year. Inactivity is no edits and no log actions (policy link).

Wiktionaries[edit]

  • cs.wiktionary policy: removal after 6 months without logged action
  • fr.wiktionary policy: automatic removal after 2 years without any activity (policy)
  • ja.wiktionary Administrators are re-elected or de-sysop'ed annually (policy). Automatic removal may take place after 3-month inactivity with no local edits, though it is rarely enforced (policy).
  • pt.wiktionary inactive administrators lose their rights after 6 months with less than 10 edits per month. The user can request their tools back without the need of a new vote if they wish to return to activity (policy).
  • zh.wiktionary policy: removal by vote. (policy)

Compiled list of wikis without admin review processes[edit]

Multilingual projects[edit]

  • outreach has no inactivity policy, though bureaucrats can desysop.
  • testwiki had an inactivity policy, but it was repealed. Although testwiki and test2wiki are technically under the aegis of the stewards, they most likely should not be affected by a global inactivity policy.

Wikibooks[edit]

  • de.wikibooks - has a list of inactive admins, but doesn't de-sysop; a vote regarding an individual is possible, though.
  • fa.wikibooks has no inactivity policy
  • bg.wikibooks has no inactivity policy

Wikinews[edit]

  • fa.wikinews has no inactivity policy
  • el.wikinews no policy so far with no inactive sysops either.
  • bg.wikinews has no inactivity policy

Wikipedias[edit]

  • Most or all of the very small Wikipedias
  • bg.wikipedia - policy has been only under discussion, but never voted and so far has no inactivity policy. All purposes of removing the rights of unactive admins were rejected by the community.
  • et.wikipedia – desysopping due to inactivity has been discussed several times, e.g here, here and lately here, but no consensus has been reached on whether inactivity is a sufficient reason for desysopping or not.
  • fo.wikipedia - has no such policy, but it is being discussed now.
  • hsb.wikipedia - has no such policy
  • lb.wikipedia - has no such policy but the community discussed the global policy and approved it. You find the archived discussion here
  • nds.wikipedia
  • pfl.wikipedia
  • te.wikipedia - no policy has been arrived at though discussions have been attempted. As the very active editor count is only around 10-20, the English language policy may be adopted, as is the practice in general.

Wikiquotes[edit]

  • ca.wikiquote has no inactivity policy
  • en.wikiquote has no inactivity policy, but has a Vote of Confidence process.
  • es.wikiquote has no deadminship process nor tracking of activity.
  • fa.wikiquote has no inactivity policy
  • nl.wikiquote has no inactivity policy; no review process; no formal de-admin process
  • bg.wikiquote has no inactivity policy

Wikisources[edit]

  • fa.wikisource has no inactivity policy
  • bg.wikisource has no inactivity policy

Wiktionaries[edit]

  • de.wiktionary has no inactivity policy
  • en.wiktionary policy: any admin can be removed by vote, but these votes don't happen systematically for inactive admins and therefore do not meet the requirements.
  • es.wiktionary policy: agreed to be part of this removal process at wikt:es:Wikcionario:Café#Request for comment on inactive administrators.
  • fa.wiktionary has no inactivity policy
  • vi.wiktionary has no formal removal process. Administrators are tracked by last edit.
  • bg.wiktionary has no inactivity policy

Wikiversities[edit]

  • en.wikiversity has no inactivity policy
  • ja.wikiversity has no review processes yet
  • pt.wikiversity tolerates admin inactivity but has no formal policy, is moving to make it explicit in response to this RfC.

Wikivoyages[edit]

  • ru.wikivoyage has no inactivity policy

Mark for translation[edit]

I'd like to mark some of this page (at least the "Proposal" section) for translation. It would help more people to understand what is being proposed. Any objections? PiRSquared17 (talk) 19:05, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Maybe on a subpage? Marking a page for translation which is also edited constantly in other (the comment) sections is a bit annoying, IMHO, because the page will then always have a notice of having been changed etc. --MF-W 19:23, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
Good idea. I'll try to do that. PiRSquared17 (talk) 19:23, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Activity checking tools[edit]

Next steps[edit]

I'd suggest creating a page called something like Admin inactivity with content based on the proposal. I'd also suggest drafting a message for admins, and getting it translated. Then we should develop tables of inactive admin by wiki with relevant stats, but don't include wikis with admin review policies (we'll need to check every wiki perhaps). PiRSquared17 (talk) 04:27, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

First of all we need a list of wikis. :) --Rschen7754 06:08, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
A list of wikis? No problem, here you go. Vogone talk 12:00, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
Maybe the page can be arranged in such a way that the /Summary translations can be re-used (if we think there are enough that it's worth to bother).
I created a script to check the inactivities and display them in a stylish format [1]. Naturally it should only be run by stewards, as they undertake the review process :P I notice I forgot to upload the list of wikis, but that is easy to create anyway. Of course "all public wikis" should be checked, but some will not be notified if they have users meeting the criteria. --MF-W 17:05, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
Here I now created a page: Admin activity review. It would be very nice if nobody would fuss around with the translation while I figure out for which parts translations can be stolen from /Summary. However, other edits and improvements are of course welcome. I'm thinking that we could plan conducting the first round on Admin activity review/2013, including drafting notifications etc. --MF-W 17:20, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

I have created a script which looks for inactive users based on the rules of this RFC. It provides an online view of inactive advanced administrative rights holders, so everyone can see who will lose his rights on his project. See for example: User:FischBot/inactive/wikibooks/de --Pyfisch (talk) 18:45, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

The columns don't line up correctly in that example, but I'm not sure how to fix it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:53, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Maybe we should continue discussion on Talk:Admin activity review? PiRSquared17 (talk) 17:45, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Oppose[edit]

I would have opposed this idea and I still do. I'm admin on some low activity wikipedias and I'm happy to work on them at times or jump in when needed (which could be once every 5 years) but this is another one of those unneeded rules that makes me unhappy about Wikipedia. Guaka (talk) 21:14, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

It's already been implemented (see AAR for the result). PiRSquared17 (talk) 21:15, 3 May 2014 (UTC)