Talk:Admin activity review/Local inactivity policies

Add topic
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Latest comment: 1 month ago by Liuxinyu970226 in topic Vague entries


The current page lists the admin and bureaucrat policies, but not the patroller ones. So even if it's called "Admin activity review", I would like to know if it would be OK to add this group to the automatic reviews please. JackPotte (talk) 21:15, 12 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

@JackPotte: But this is not under the scope of AAR or the Stewards policy because administrators can remove that right. --Rschen7754 00:16, 13 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
Actually that's not the case anymore on the French Wiktionary for a few years. And anyway on the other wikis, the administrators doesn't get any automatic review, so the task is quite tedious for a very small result (it's not motivating at all). I think that if a script can provide any pain removal, it should do it. JackPotte (talk) 07:42, 13 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
Bureaucrats can remove that right though. --Rschen7754 14:51, 13 April 2017 (UTC)Reply


The problem is the same for the bots. JackPotte (talk) 22:21, 1 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

Wikis with their own activity review processes[edit]

What if the wiki decides on the case-by-case basis? E.g., global rules can be easily circumvented by one edit in two years and so on indefinitely.
The bad power user can avoid unpopular, fatiguing and boring actions in regular maintaining processes, and on the other hand, engage in wheel wars.
Therefore, removing the rights to such power users is not just procedural. Kubura (talk) 03:42, 28 December 2018 (UTC)Reply


Hi, minwikipedia local policy on admin removal as passed by community consensus in October 2018 do not have any inactivity clause; admins can only be removed by resignation or for abuse of power. However, in February 2022, @Stanglavine: removed the adminship status of @Iwan Novirion: as part of the 2021 AAR. Is there any way to rectify this? dwadieff 19:17, 26 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

@David Wadie Fisher-Freberg: Hi, they could open a new vote, as usual. After a week, please make a request on SRP and the rights will be granted if the request was successful. As a good practice, we do not reinstate rights removed years ago. stanglavine msg 18:14, 6 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Vague entries[edit]

Not sure whether should I also post this thread at SN.

In this list, I can see these entries said either vague "policy" (regareless linked or not), or said something without links (Meta-Wiki not counted):

For unlinked entries, where can we see the relevant links? For those just said "policy", are there useful summaries instead of just one vague word available? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:20, 21 April 2024 (UTC)Reply