[Foundation-l] Emergency on Wiktionary

Sat Aug 12 21:32:04 UTC 2006

I can imagine that it works well for a lot of wiki's. As I understood
also WiktionaryZ is very easy on the behalf of making someone sysop.
And other wiki's are as well. It is very like "adminship is no big
deal". And maybe it shouldn't. But then deamminship shouldn't be a big
deal either i think. Because when someone is adminned easely, the
chance that you grab someone who doesn't fit the profile is easier,
and deadminning should be easier, so you can fix it quick as well.
I've seen little misuse of people with adminship, apart from things
like easier blocking etc. But that is something the community can and
should solve anyway. You will have the same issues on that behalf when
s.o. is after a hard procedure admin.
And regarding bureaucrat, that shouldn't be a big deal either maybe.
Because a sysop is supposed to be trusted, the bureaucrat is as well.
As long as you watch closely what each bc is doing.

greetings, Lodewijk

2006/8/12, Filip Maljkovic <dungodung at gmail.com>:
> geni wrote:
> > On 8/12/06, James Hare <messedrocker at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> 40 admins, 25 are bureaucrats? Yikes! I thought having 42 admins with 4
> >> bureaucrats was a lot!
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Certian projects tend to promote people to bureaucrat rather than
> > admin. Species for one.
> >
> In Serbian Wikipedia, on the other hand, there was a lax policy
> regarding admin/bureau. promotions. Namely, after 1 month of active
> contributions, you could become an admin and after 1 more month, a
> bureaucrat. That has changed in the past half a year or so. Now, with
> regards to some recent situations, I wouldn't be surprised if the policy
> becomes ever so restrictive. I, for example, became an admin in 11 days
> (fastest in sr: wikipedia). :) But that was more than a year ago...
>
> Filip
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>