Adminship is a privilege and responsibility, not a right; as it was granted by the community based on all of my previous edits and actions, it may be revoked by the community based on any of my subsequent edits or actions.[1] This page outlines one potential avenue for that process,[2] and may also be applied to any other user group.
Definitions edit
- An editor in good standing has been registered and actively contributing in a meaningful and consistent fashion for at least three months, has at least 500 mainspace edits, and has not been blocked or banned in any fashion, or otherwise restrained, during that time.
- An administrator in good standing has met the above requirements for at least six months, has at least 5,000 edits, and has been a sysop uninterrupted for at least three months.
- A quorum is at least nine participants meeting one of the above two conditions, wherein:
- At least two are non-admin editors.
- At least three are sysops, at least one of which is in CAT:AOTR.
- If the user group in question is something other than sysop, at least one participant must also have that group.
Process edit
First, approach me, ideally on my talk page. Seriously. I'm a fairly laid-back person, so odds are any dispute can be neatly solved by talking it out together. Present your reasoned argument/opinion and ask me in a civil, non-accusatory manner for my rationale and/or reversal (if possible); this process is not available to any attempt that fails to take this step with the intent of success.[3]
If the above conversation has failed or left you dissatisfied, there are a number of different avenues you may pursue, although if you favor ease, simplicity, and a lack of drama, I suggest continuing with this process.
Step one edit
Ask yourself the following questions:
- Have I been editing free of blocks or other editing restraints for at least 42 days?
- Is my edit count above 133?[4]
If you can answer Yes
to both of these questions, continue to step two. Those without an eligible account or unwishing/unable to register one may freely shop around for an editor to file on their behalf.
Step two edit
- Create User:Amorymeltzer/recall/Petition. I have it watchlisted but please notify me nonetheless.
- Present any and all arguments, supporting your reasoning with diffs, logs, or any other evidence.
- Restate, don't copy, what you initially wrote on my talk page.
- It would be nice if you provided a neutral summary at the top of the page. If you don't, I will.
- State what outcome(s) you would like to see occur.[5][3]
Step three edit
After I present my thoughts, I will make a note on both my User and User talk pages announcing that I am undergoing Recall, requesting discussion and !votes from editors in good standing.[6] The opining process will last for no less than seven days, during which neither myself nor the filer may !vote. If after that period a quorum has not been reached, the filer may opt to either extend the petition, up to and including an additional 48 hours,[7] or to have it closed as unsuccessful. If a quorum has been reached, the petition will be concluded and Wikipedia:Administrators open to recall/Past requests may be updated.
Results edit
Obvious support edit
With two-thirds supporting the petition, the Community has spoken, and I will do what has been asked.[8][9]
Outcome oppose edit
With two-thirds opposing the petition, the Community has spoken, and no action is warranted.[9]
Non-obvious result edit
If neither of these has occurred, an uninvolved sysop and an uninvolved rollbacker[10] will discuss the appropriate outcome on the petition's talk page. No consensus is a return to the status quo before the filing of this petition.[8][9]
Notes edit
- ^ That being said, edits or actions performed in a capacity relevant to the user group in question will likely carry more weight here.
- ^ This process was inspired by EVula, who is always right
- ^ a b If your reasoning is sound, and you ask for it, I may decide to resign the right at this step. Depending on the circumstances, I may or may not consider this as having occurred under a cloud; others are invited to disagree with me and I will consult them first should I consider re-requesting the right.
- ^ 7x13+42
- ^ Reconfirmation RfA, removal of rights, banhammer, etc.
- ^ Others are of course encouraged to join the discussion.
- ^ Limit two per customer.
- ^ a b If rights have been removed and no other removal process was invoked, I will consider this as under a cloud and will not re-request the right for at least three months.
- ^ a b c The specific issue at hand will be considered stale (inapplicable for another recall petition) for four months, barring any newly raised evidence (after discussion on my talk page of course).
- ^ Meets the editor in good standing criteria, has had the rollback right uninterrupted for at least 42 days, but has never been granted admin rights and is not currently undergoing an RfA.