Wikipedia talk:Proposed adminship: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Tony Sidaway (talk | contribs) →What does this solve?: Lack of community distrust in an editor with a reasonable amount of experience implies community trust, because we operate a policy of Wikipedia:assume good faith. |
|||
Line 413:
::What about the issues in point #2, a prodded article can be "oops undeleted", and admin cannot be "oops desysoped". And the fact that the demonstration of the lack of distrust does not equal a demonstration of trust has also not been addressed. It seems these points are being avoiding like land mines. I think this will result in a lack of confidence in the community trust in admins promoted this way, as the admin never demonstrated community trust, never answered any of the questions, does not have a page of users showing support for them. Lack of objection is not enough, I want admins to have support as well.
::I still don't think this is going to solve any of the problems with RfA which I am still not even sure exist.
::: As I think someone has already observed, most if not all of our problem administrators who have had to be desysopped had had very successful [[Wikipedia:requests for adminship|requests for adminship]]. The current process is not a good measure of trustworthiness.
::: Trust here has two components: trust in an editor's good faith, and trust in his competence. Lack of community distrust in the good faith of an editor with a reasonable amount of experience implies community trust, because we operate a policy of [[Wikipedia:assume good faith|assume good faith]] leavened by commonsense based on observation. The other component, competence, is easily demonstrated: if you're not confident that a candidate is experienced enough to do a good job as administrator, or you feel that his judgement is not to be trusted, just remove his tag and no questions asked. Thus a candidate who makes it through this process is so trusted by the community that not one person has serious doubts about his good faith nor his competence. --[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway]] 14:15, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
| |||