On 5/12/13 8:26 PM, Thehelpfulone wrote:
On 12 May 2013 18:47, Florence Devouard <anthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Alternatively, it might be good to really move as much as possible of the
Wikimedia Foundation Wiki to meta (where at least, the community is in
charge of who is admin and who is not).
Mostly in charge, there are a few exceptions where adminship has been
granted by WMF staff for their work without going through any formal
community procedures:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meta:Administrators#Temporary_adminship_or_adminship_by_decree
I do not see that as a really problematic issue. Unfortunate, but not
really problematic. As long as the appointed admin behave within
community rules and does "good", there is only damage to our pride and
disrespect to the rules. But ... results over rules. Result is what
matters. Rules is only a way to get there.
A serious problem would be
* IF the staff was the one deciding who is admin generally
* IF the staff was boldly removing admin access to volunteers
Still, if you want to be a bit pointy, you should probably mention that
it is unclear why
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Smazeland still
needs to be an admin
Flo
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
