I don't think that it is something for which the stewards would collectively endorse or disendorse, as it is outside our area of remit. Billinghurst sDrewth 09:52 , (UTC) Thanks. Don't be overly restricting. Hindustanilanguage ( talk ) 10:26, (UTC). Ningauble ( talk ) 20:33, (UTC) Support as the sole active admin and crat on Mori Wikipedia.- Gadfium ( talk ) 20:57, (UTC) Support As a member of Thai Wikipedia ArbCom, we had gone through a similar policy/process before. Clearing out those who are not on the job is justified, IMO, by the need to get the job done. Vogone talk 20:00, (UTC) Agreed.- Nurunnaby Chowdhury Hasive talk 09:19, (UTC) Disagree. A local roster full of inactive persons prevents them from assisting in cases where in effect there are no locally authorized people who are actually available. I'll add a link at the top for those who want to see. If things work out perfectly, stewards will send notices, all communities will respond that their inactive admin right holders are now active and nothing else. Billinghurst sDrewth 10:04, (UTC) Checkuser wikis have been notified.
Obecné novinky Horizont 2020 Rámcov program pro vzkum
If I now understand correctly there is a need for global admins to know if there are any active local admins or not. We need exceptions to the two-year rule proposed.- Aschmidt ( talk ) 12:14, (UTC) Please refer to point 3 of the proposal. Holder ( talk ) 10:08, (UTC) Two years looks fine. Just imagine, twenty years from now, to have more inactive than active. P PiRSquared17 ( talk ) 19:24, (UTC) Updated version. Averater ( talk ) 09:35, (UTC) Oppose Why should such a rule apply to perfectly healthy projects such as English Wiktionary? If not, I'll try to notify some places on Meta. In how to write a proposal for administrative services other words: Users announcing a prolonged absence should have their rights revoked, but should be able to regain them faitly easily upon return. It is rare to get even.1 of them to comment on an admin. The reason is that the circumstances are widely different for different WP's, and what is a good idea in some of them isn't in some others. Edinwiki ( talk ) 08:19, (UTC) Since this is about adminship, it does not make any sense to measure edit activity (unless the method I proposed in #Time period of activity applies). Billinghurst sDrewth 06:38, (UTC) I understand.
Rs chen 7754 22:51, (UTC) A global message notification went out to the community today. Dereckson ( talk ) 14:09, (UTC) Support Racconish Tk 17:16, (UTC) - MF-W 17:20, (UTC) Definitely support this proposal. WhatamIdoing ( talk ) 18:49, (UTC) Nobody said it would only be in the local language, or only in English. 1 billinghurst sDrewth 05:28, (UTC) If you update /Summary I'll re-mark it for translation. The stewards recommend that a maximum time period of two years 2 of inactivity be allowed for holders of advanced administrative rights, where this activity would be classed as zero edits, and zero administrative actions on the wiki where the rights are maintained. If the zhWP situation falls outside of the policy statement, and you believe that it should fall within, what suggested change would you recommend. What if the user continues to edit actively, but there's no sysop action to do on his small wiki?
Personal opinion is an admin has self-blocked and it is for an extended period, then that community should review that circumstance. As said in the #Comment section I would predict that a list of excluded wikis would be built afterwards and be a schedule to the guide, but not form part of the policy. Quentinv57 (talk) 13:57, (UTC) Support Peter (Southwood) (talk) : 16:46, (UTC) Support inactive local bureaucrats have always been a problem. 09:58, (UTC) one year - Sasakubo1717 ( talk ) 14:37, (UTC) Two years-will embrace most local rules, if local projects wish to adopt a shorter period then that's fine too.- KTo288 ( talk ) 13:05, (UTC). Averater ( talk ) 20:12, (UTC) But don't you think that in two years, he will find an opportunity to make one edit or log action then? In cases where stewards do not receive such a suitable reply, after approximately one month they will evaluate the responses and will either refer a decision back to local communities for their comment and review, or proceed to remove advanced administrative rights.
Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative
A1 ( talk ) 13:34, (UTC) Support But we should count, not edits but only sysop actions.- Anatoliy ( talk ) 18:34, (UTC) Support - Milad A380 ( talk ) 14:00, (UTC) Support It does not harm. As has been expressed through the body of this proposal how to write a proposal for administrative services we seek improvement and clarifications, the purpose here is to inform and empower each community. Going forward, which should we use? The aim here is to encourage communities to have an active review process and where they have the rights granted to remove rights of inactive people; where they do not have the rights to remove, they will come to stewards and request the requisite removals. You must practice this kind of essay writing for a solution to understand. Following a community's discussion, if the community then wishes to keep some, or all, of these notified rights, they should contact the stewards at Steward requests/Permissions, and in that contact the user should point to the discussion raised at their. Second point, with respect to your point view,I beg to differ, can it be revisited? What You Should Do to Find Out About Buy Research Paper Proposal Online Before Youre Left Behind. This is why an inflexible term of two years does not make sense for all Wikimedia projects. 06:36, (UTC) Stewards cannot merge accounts. Note: I come from a small wiki, so I have that view.
Proposed, state, administrative, regulations
You would certainly be impressed at just how much money may be increased through this. ( talk ) 06:06, (UTC) Agreed.- Beko ( talk ) 06:29, (UTC) Agreed. What are the how to write a proposal for administrative services motivating factors? If on a given wiki you get 10 edits / day this is fundamentally less than one that gets 100 or 1000 edits a day. Quentinv57 (talk) 13:51, (UTC) The text in the proposal is specific about activity being to the local wiki, added text here to help the example. We don't have any hurry! . Policy may not remain permanent, usually loss is a loss, and loss remains cubation of a sysop with proper wiki values is a long term this proposal existing non active sysops could have been deactivated.
This cleanup will make lots of global processes far easier and faster. PiRSquared17 ( talk ) 17:38, (UTC) Agreed. If certain weakess is not pointed out, some one else gets an opportunity; but this issue can be discussed latter separately, here I was making a brief note for future purposes. See Requests for comment/Minimum voting requirements. And all this local projects are not doing on their own but a meta proposal is being pushed through their nose.(Sorry this strong language does not intend to offend any one) Including my project some projects have such sysops. By this reasoning we should remove the ability to edit user who does not edit. Ningauble ( talk ) 20:53, (UTC) Six months in case of edits but no administrative actions. Edinwiki ( talk ) 08:16, (UTC) 6 months without any activity, 1 year without any logged admin activity (to approach how to write a proposal for administrative services to the conservative opinions above, however, I'd personally go for 6 months only at all - see the following text).
Právnická fakulta - Novinky
It does not eliminate experienced people; it only temporarily suspends an unused right in an unused account. Our local policy that after one year of inactivity an admin will first be contacted before finally requesting removal of admin rights) on grounds that it is alledgedly not 'active'. Bishnu Saikia 20:07, (UTC) One year is more than enough. It's just littering the landscape with pointless bureaucracy. Projects who only have temporary user-rights (like svwp) or already have an own inactivity-policy and can maintain it, can be ignored by our Stewards. Additional information edit The general topic has been discussed by stewards for a number of months. Part of the recommendation is in light of the low traffic levels of some of the small wikis. KKoolstra ( talk ) 08:12, (UTC) @KKoolstra. Especially since sysops still need the trust of the community, also from a completely new community which was developed during the long period of inactivity. 21 06:37, (UTC) Support Many times when "total number" of admins is sufficient, there is no new request for admin rights. The intent is very firmly for the communities to continue to have the decision-making authority, though with their "eyes wide open". Moreover, you also receive plenty of advantages in the event that you obtain research documents at a trusted custom made paper solutions. User A is identified in the next review due to continued inactivity.
Let us get the first iteration done, and it should be the heaviest, then we will have a clue. I would not like to see stewards overriding local policies (e.g. Then in my next, 'once in blue moon visit if, I get to know some problem, I won't have sysop rights, any more, and I am expected to run behind at global sysops or some one. Even list of how to write a proposal for administrative services oppose vote comes chronologically in second number so it is more unlikely that an oppose/a caution voice will be heard before a positive vote is made. ref name"amendment1" Amending clarification made br / * Initial statement: 'To define a period of time for maximum inactivity.' * Amended statement: 'To define a period of time for maximum inactivity without community review' as part of the request for comment consultation.
(But feel free to do so anyway.) - Bencmq ( talk ) 06:24, (UTC) Moving the list to the talk page as it is ancilliary to the proposal. Remember that we are talking inactive admins for a period of? The proposal currently has the following status: closed. The process for research begins with the choice of an interest which is appropriate for your class or purpose. LauraHale ( talk ) 11:35, (UTC) Oppose I have never agreed with removing privileges based solely on inactivity. Conversely a rights holder who is dead will not login, will not say anything, and the community will later get the opportunity to consider what they want to do about the inactive rights holder. I'm not aware of any such policies how to write a proposal for administrative services for admins, but if a wiki adopted such a policy, we aren't harmed by respecting. To make it easier for the stewards, one could imagine three or four such procedures per year, ending on specific dates (1/1,1,5,1/9, or 1/1 1/4,1/7,1/10). Yosri ( talk ) 05:36, (UTC) Warning of impending loss of sysop rights edit As written, the policy doesn't include any warning to the user that sysop rights will be lost. Six months with zero admin action should then have similar effect. For example, you might have a policy that inactive sysops are removed only after five years of inactivity on all WMF projects. They can decide on their own what they want, and don't need outside people to mess with the project in ways not supported by local consensus.
Texas Prep Sports Academy
Bill william compton ( talk ) 01:18, (UTC) Only sysop actions should be counted.- Anatoliy ( talk ) 10:57, (UTC) Agree with Quentinv57. Andyrom75 ( talk ) 06:44, (UTC) The purpose of the proposal is attempting to set a model standard with a maximum period of inactivity; yet give space for communities to set their activity appropriately. Stewards inform the user and local community who indicate that they wish to maintain User A's rights at least for the time being or perhaps as long as indefinitely. Billinghurst sDrewth 07:05, (UTC) It seems likely that there will be a migration period simply because, as a practical matter, the stewards aren't likely to perform the first audit the day after this is approved. whym ( talk ) 21:48, (UTC) This is not about any punitive action, nor a requirement for admins to do more than assist in the management of their communities; we are clearly trying to identify accounts that. Billinghurst sDrewth 07:10, (UTC) As I understand it, even if the community holds a vote and decides to not demote inactive administrators (and there are good reasons for that this proposal will simply override the local community's consensus. Thanks for supporting my comment Mahitgar (He who knows,wants to know and and loves to keep others informed) ( talk ) 09:28, (UTC) Not all projects are having trouble recruiting sysops. We would appreciate your points of view on these. As far as I can tell, this is purely ad hoc,.e., a user randomly noticing an inactive admin and proposing de-adminship, without any written policy behind. Commons ; or special wikis as determined by Wikimedia Foundation which includes private wikis and wikis operated by chapters. Possibly that you run the selling by organizing a substantial situation, or give them individually to your buddies, family members, coworkers, etc Another among those tiresome tasks on weekend, specially for people that have a really tremendous how to write a proposal for administrative services property.
Pyfisch ( how to write a proposal for administrative services talk ) 15:37, (UTC) Support - DJ EV ( talk ) 16:22, (UTC) Support Jklamo ( talk ) 20:59, (UTC) Support NickK ( talk ) 22:24, (UTC) Support Jos? Luiz talk 22:50, (UTC) Support - Ignacio. If there is general agreement in the community, the points that we especially would like feedback from the community are with regard to suggested time period of activity suggested measure of activity suggested methodology of contact to inactive rights holders. The communities can have a yardstick to reflect upon what they want, and decide how they wish to move forward. Billinghurst sDrewth 14:47, (UTC) This should include a requirement to send an e-mail to admins who are about to lose their rights, if they have e-mail enabled. Why not make it like commons:Template:Welcome, and let each reader pick whichever language the reader wants? If there are inactive admins, or, worse, crats there, getting a flag becomes a nightmare, since they would never show up, and stewards at best would give a temporary flag after at least a week waiting.
Develop and Maintain a UB Policy
Beyond that, you're not supporting the community anymore and are more of a risk than a benefit. Pyfisch ( talk ) 19:01, (UTC) Length of this RFC edit (initially suggested as how to write a proposal for administrative services closing ) As indicated at the bottom around circulation of a global message, the suggestion has been made to circulate, and as there are some. Wikipedia its a big problem- DJ EV ( talk ) 16:21, (UTC) I basically disagree: The number of edits is independent of the activity level on a given wiki, the number of admin actions is tied to the activity level. Trijnstel talk 20:14, (UTC) I'm with Quentinv57 on this one. WhatamIdoing ( talk ) 16:27, (UTC) because we do not wish to require that other projects do things the way that Sorry my freinds, with all due respect, I failed to understand this part of the above statement. There are active sysops, but both 'crats are completely inactive (more than two years gone). It is well appreciated! Pyb ( talk ) 12:17, (UTC) #Background lists some of the problems. Definitely agree with this proposal.- Alperen ( talk ) 06:43, (UTC) Support - Kolega2357 ( talk ) 07:12, (UTC) Support - 16 - ( talk ) 07:45, (UTC) Support - Xabier Armendaritz ( talk ) 08:17, (UTC) Support some accounts. WhatamIdoing ( talk ) 20:11, (UTC) It probably isn't.
TO To define a period of time for maximum inactivity without community review ref name"amendment1. Presumably security is the primary reason but that word isn't mentioned in this RfC even once. Taweetha ( talk ) 12:53, (UTC) Support Good idea! Toolserver accounts for example - a month before expiration you are noticed to prolong your account. If the proposal passes, I would think that any explanatory information as you indicate could be added to the text being compiled on the talk page. There is an assortment of sites from where you have the ability to obtain Dissertation help. You can find many topics where its likely that you try your reflective writing abilities. Billinghurst sDrewth 04:59, (UTC) Support edit I support this. Pi zero ( talk ) 13:15, (UTC) Interesting. Protecting an article becomes a real problem. Jtneill - Talk 13:54, (UTC) - MarcoAurelio ( talk ) 14:14, (UTC) Support An administrator must not remain passive more than ONE year. Statement 1 is modified according to the purple text. Chelin ( talk ) 16:45, (UTC) Agreed.
Talk: Administrative divisions of Taiwan - Wikipedia
Rámcového programu Evropské unie pro vzkum a inovace Horizon Europe. So basically the only reason why admins become inactive is that they left (or took wikibreak). It is suggested that the audit will be either an annual, or semi-annual process, determined by each current set of stewards. I would suspect that it would be an annual audit, or maybe semi-annual, would need to get through the first and major rendition. Rs chen 7754 06:34, (UTC) Further global sysops and stewards refrain from certain tasks where admins and crats are present. It will either have a link to the other translations, or to the English version. Inactive admins should however not prevent a wiki from having global sysops. Trijnstel talk 20:14, (UTC) Agreed. Regards, Vogone talk 16:35, (UTC) Support PiRSquared17 ( talk ) 18:05, (UTC) Support Bishnu Saikia 20:01, (UTC) Support. . If you don't agree with the delay, you should refer to the #Time_period_of_activity section above. Nurunnaby Chowdhury Hasive talk 09:07, (UTC) 360 days!
It how to write a proposal for administrative services sounds very ironic: only active users will say their opinion here. . On ojects we have six months without sysop action, after this period is user noticed. Edgefield ( talk ) 01:45, (UTC) - Arjunaraoc ( talk ) 03:44, (UTC) Support - Edinwiki ( talk ) 08:25, (UTC) Support - Metsavend ( talk ) 12:37, (UTC) Support I strongly support this. Comment edit, for the purpose of clarity, holders of advanced administrative rights in this document are defined as administrators bureaucrats oversight checkusers stewards, some WMF communities already have processes to review holders of advanced administrative rights. We are not here solely for more rules, let me promise you that. So if you don't want. Simon Shek ( talk ) 13:41, (UTC) Cytuno/agreed. 1 Year is a very short time, and people needs sometimes a sabbatical year.
MF-W 17:20, (UTC) Two years. Chelin ( talk ) 16:44, (UTC) One year, in case of no edits, and two years, in case of edits but no administrative actions. Billinghurst sDrewth 06:53, (UTC) Auto reminder edit I support that the deactivation is automate, preferable after 6 month inactive, a monthly reminder be send out and admin right revoked how to write a proposal for administrative services afer 6 reminders. But communities evolve and a year is fair enough. Others simply allow it to be easy that you write in an assortment of topics. Rs chen 7754 10:16, (UTC) The proposal says that a list of affected wikis will need to be created. Care becomes a large matter. This has been presenting clear issues in the management of rights promotions, renames, and the like. On a small wiki with 0-2 active users per week, it is hard to be nominated again. Could it be possible to merge the two accounts in such a case instead of delete after two years and lose 50 of sysops on ln?