Andrew Lih:
This is quite contrary to Wikipedia's policy to "be bold"
Before instituting these hard metrics to de-admin someone, one
should have hard metrics indicating this is truly a problem. It's not clear it is.
Wikipedia's policy to "be bold" only applies for non-admin actions. Deletions, bannings and other admin privilegied actions aren't included. Not even reversions part of "be bold" anymore I think. :)
Is this truly a problem? I don't know and it is impossible for someone without adminship to ever find out. But considering the number of mailing list posts that pop up it seem to be a problem.
It isn't. It's yet another example of a small extremist group (why is it that our inclusionists are so much more extremist than our deletionists?) who can't seem to gather consensus on VFD or VFU, and so attempt to change the policies to get around this.
Behave.
Allan Crossman
Unfair; sysops who do a lot of speedy deletions are more likely to be awarded "points". It's the ratio of mistakes to good actions that counts, not the number of mistakes.
When someone goes to a trial IRL, he or she can't say "But look! I gave the children presents! Doesn't that make up for I robbed a bank?"
Or to put it in Wikipedia terms; A productive writer will be banned just as fast as a non-productive one if both continue to personal attack their peers.
Ideally, the system maybe should include good deeds too. But that would make it way to complicated. Besides, the number of points needed for de-adminship would have to be so sufficently large that it would only affect those admins that repeatedly have failed and not learnt from their mistakes.
csherlock:
Firstly, deleted articles are not permanently deleted. We can retrieve them. See [[Wikipedia:Undeletion policy]]. Secondly, if an admin is making consistent deletions and not listening to others, they can be de'sysoped after a request from other wikipedia editors. Just go talk to the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee]]. See also [[Wikipedia:Administrators#Administrator_abuse]].
Ok. Lets talk about reality. :) Will something happen to the admin who deleted http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geno%27s_steaks that Anthony DiPierro mentioned? A reprimand even? Or what about the unjust deletions that Charles Matthews spotted? Does anyone even know which admins did the deletions?
I'm not bloodthirsty, just think that something has to be done. In this case someone should tell the admins "You really shouldn't do that.". So that it stops.
To those who realise too speedy deletions is a problem, but do not like my proposal: Do you have a better idea?
_________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.com/