On 10/10/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
That principle would be flawed on a number of levels. You can undo the fact that someone has been blocked. Most editors can't undo deletions. Screwing up certain things in the mediawiki namespace is bad. The amount of damage an editor can do is the for the most part minimal. The amount of damage an admin can do both to wikipedia and other editors is rather more significant.
We do try to give our admins a basic sanity screen, and peer pressure works better than I'd have expected.
(Although I've been going 'wtf' at some of the more ridiculous RFA requirements^Wrecommendations, I must admit you're probably right when all other systems are anticipated to be worse. If we can get the shrubbery requesters to calm down ... as far as I can tell, having x featured articles has *nothing* to do with admin-worthy stability levels, either way.)
[1] Principle is my word for basic policies, as the word "policy" has been tainted.
Has anyone got around to creating a wikipediaese to English dictionary yet?
I thought we were going to redefine English usage to match our jargon, much as the word "Wiki" in casual conversation (with an implied capital, as far as I can tell) now means Wikipedia.
- d.